Mega Thread The Mark Neeld Mega-Thread

[Geddy Lee]

Comment was made on SEN this morning, that Melbourne should be moving heaven and earth to get Stephen Wells over from Geelong, as his track record in untapping talent late in the draft has been phenomenal.

Just because you have draft picks 1, 2 4, 5 and 10 for instance, actually doesn't mean you will get the right talent for your club.

Melbourne would do well to follow the lead set by the likes of Essendon and Collingwood and going into VFL ranks and getting blokes that way.

Have a look at how many former Frankston players are now on AFL lists - or look at Sam Dwyer's cross from Port Melbourne to Collingwood.

Myles Sewell would look awesome in Melbourne's midfield next to Nathan Jones.

Whatever the BigFooty moron brigade think, Melbourne's woes all stem from our on-field performances, which all stem from our midfield, which is the poorest I've seen in over 20 years. In terms of ranking AFL teams in Offence, Midfield and Defence, I'd argue Melbourne would be:

OFF: 6-8 (Clark, Howe, Dawes, Hogan)
DEF: 8-12 (Garland, Frawley)
MID: 18 by the length of Flemington (Jones)

The next coach needs to have a proven track record with Midfields. The best I've seen Melbourne's midfield perform was under Brett Ratten. I think he would be a reasonable option once Neeld inevitably gets the sack.

 

[Mr_Moogle]

Anyone notice how they kept panning the camera over to Neil Craig coaching from the boundary? Wouldn't surprise me if he takes the Melbourne job.

I'd say the Dee's couldn't do any worse than Neeld. That said, playing under Neil Craig has it's own challenges. At the Crows, Craig's coaching style failed massively in 2010 given he lost his core of experienced players the year before. His playing style requires disciplined, experienced players and I'm not sure Melbourne would do any better with him as their coach.

They'd be better off trying to snag a coach who can develop youth without destroying them. Have Craigy handle all the fitness and sport's science stuff but keep him out of the coaches box.

 

[Yabba]

I have to say even though I want Neeld out the door it's absolutely pathetic the way this is being covered by the media. "NEELD'S JUDGEMENT DAY" "NEELD'S DEE DAY" All of them are building up the narrative for his sacking, vultures the lot of them.

Wait for the story line to change as soon as he gets the sack as well... It will be all 'he never stood a chance', 'feel for him and his family' and so on. While Neeld may or may not deserve the sack the way the media covers it, they will have blood on their hands when it happens.

 

[cymarak]

I have to say even though I want Neeld out the door it's absolutely pathetic the way this is being covered by the media. "NEELD'S JUDGEMENT DAY" "NEELD'S DEE DAY" All of them are building up the narrative for his sacking, vultures the lot of them.

This sort of thing has been the norm for a while now unfortunately, and is the media trying to create the news rather than just report on it.

Step 1 - The media creates pressure.
Step 2 - The media reports on the pressure (created by the media), which increases the pressure.
Repeat until the pressure gets someone sacked.

 

[Bluelegs]

Agreed.

The accosting of McLardy by the media pack before the meeting is an example of that.

Just the title and description are pathetic

President arrives for Neeld's judgement day

Melbourne Presidnet Don McLardy denies a decision has already been made on Mark Neeld's future

G&GF Matt Thompson, you ********.

And this: http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-06-03/dees-meet-rolling-coverage

Pathetic.

 

[Bluelegs]

This sort of thing has been the norm for a while now unfortunately, and is the media trying to create the news rather than just report on it.

Step 1 - The media creates pressure.
Step 2 - The media reports on the pressure (created by the media), which increases the pressure.
Repeat until the pressure gets someone sacked.

You forgot Step 3 - Claim sacked coach was scapegoat and needed more time.

 

[old55]

Just the title and description are pathetic



G&GF Matt Thompson, you ********.

And this: http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-06-03/dees-meet-rolling-coverage

Pathetic.

Trolling coverage.

Look Matt Thompson has got the ultimate punishment he deserves - he's Matt Thompson.

 

[GreatBradScott]

Where is Dean Laidley at nowadays, he would be a good option.

Not a bad thought. He would get them competitive again.

 

[pazza]

Trolling coverage.

Look Matt Thompson has got the ultimate punishment he deserves - he's Matt Thompson.

So Clarko was right then?

 

[feenix67]

Sheedy? No thanks. He's finished and has been for ages.

Recruitment isn't the issue, evne if you look at most of the guys who didn't pan out, they weren't bad picks at the time - conventional wisdom had most of those guys going that high at least (with the notable exceptions of Lucas Cook and Jordan Gysberts).

It's short sighted, cookie cutter crap like this that has got your club into trouble in the first place.

Have a look at Rendell's work, and tell me how many top 10's Adelaide has had during his time there? Picking the right first rounder isn't the answer.... spotting talent at mid to low draft is. You need solid contributors who will give you 150 honest games more than you need speculative picks on kids who havent finished developing yet. Go find some mature bodies who can do a job - there's plenty running around at state league level.

Regarding Sheedy... you need a marquee coach. Surround him with good people and let him drag the club back from the brink with his profile.

 

[Brown Bottle]

Comment was made on SEN this morning, that Melbourne should be moving heaven and earth to get Stephen Wells over from Geelong, as his track record in untapping talent late in the draft has been phenomenal.

Just because you have draft picks 1, 2 4, 5 and 10 for instance, actually doesn't mean you will get the right talent for your club.

Melbourne would do well to follow the lead set by the likes of Essendon and Collingwood and going into VFL ranks and getting blokes that way.

Have a look at how many former Frankston players are now on AFL lists - or look at Sam Dwyer's cross from Port Melbourne to Collingwood.

Myles Sewell would look awesome in Melbourne's midfield next to Nathan Jones.

Yeh, I heard the Wells discussion. I'm still not convinced about that...

I'm not trying to be a smartarse, but I was asking for evidence around your comment that Neeld can coach. I haven't seen it. I see a playing group without belief, which manifests into poor skills and effort. The coach must instil belief. He's had 18 months to do so...

 

[vonn]

Reading some of the AFL articles, I'm amused at how they're using such strong words like 'Dee Day' as headlines, but in the articles themselves it's pure speculation which would fool a few.

 

[pazza]

Yeh, I heard the Wells discussion. I'm still not convinced about that...

I'm not trying to be a smartarse, but I was asking for evidence around your comment that Neeld can coach. I haven't seen it. I see a playing group without belief, which manifests into poor skills and effort. The coach must instil belief. He's had 18 months to do so...

As those at Ocean Grove. 3 flags i think it was - and it's tough coaching at local level. More so than that at elite level. Particularly in terms of recruiting players and training them.

 

[ANGEL DARK]

He was overlooked and made up a fib about rejecting us to make his ego feel better. Its Sheedy, he's a liar. Essendon sacked him cause he was well and truly past it, we made the same judgement about him.

What a load of crap. If he was so far past it as you say then why did Melbourne interview him in the first place?

 

[demon21]

My theory is this.

If you love your club, you turn up if you are able to. Only work, family and distance should be your excuses. To not turn up outside of those things is pure gutlessness.

Neeld can coach, but, he's been given some of the worst cattle I have ever seen take the field.

No heart, no desire and pretty much no committment.

Simple as that.

There is no no doubt our list is poor and we have some serious holes that needs to fixed, but its not as bad as some say and shouldnt be lossing by 10 goals every week, Neeld has had over a year and i still dont know what melb game plan is.

When they sacked Bailey i like most people thought they need to bring in someone who is going to be hard on them, I think Neeld did do this but maybe he went to far cause to me it seems that alot of the playing group havent brought in to his game plan and have no trust in him. Seems the players are confused on what they are meant to do and when we do have the ball that dont spread.

Just have to go back to out first lost to BL in his first year where in his press conference tried to seperate himself from the playing group which was a bad idea.

I do feel sorry for him cause we have had so much drama off the field which wasnt his fault that happend, but if the players dont have faith in the coach the decision is pretty simple.

 

[Jarlcorbz]

but thats the thing. could almost argue the inverse.

That's probably one of their more consistent performances in terms of competitiveness and effort, and they still got done by 95 points (and it could well have been 120+ had hawthorn not butchered so many chances).

They're just so non competitive something has to change

Melbourne were 1-7-13 at one point, could have been a 60 point loss as well.

 

[feenix67]

Yeh, I heard the Wells discussion. I'm still not convinced about that...

I'm not trying to be a smartarse, but I was asking for evidence around your comment that Neeld can coach. I haven't seen it. I see a playing group without belief, which manifests into poor skills and effort. The coach must instil belief. He's had 18 months to do so...

Agree with this. Neeld should have developed a game style that was achievable with the players he had, not try and force them to play like an experienced team of confident footballers. Teach them to win dirty first, then add some finesse. You have to coach the cattle you have, and I dont think Neeld has done that.

Adelaide's first game under Craig was a 150+ belting to Brisbane. The next game we won against the Roos in an ugly, low scoring slugfest - but we won the game. Neeld needs to have an eye on development but he also has to have an eye on the scoreboard, because no group survives ongoing beltings with any sort of confidence at all.

 

[vonn]

I don't have Twitter or Facebook so will the media fronting be on AFL.com?

 

[pazza]

I don't have Twitter or Facebook so will the media fronting be on AFL.com?

All we do know is that Neeld and Craig will be speaking to the meeting this afternoon.

Going to be a long day for those at the MCG.

 

[LouisCK]

What a load of crap. If he was so far past it as you say then why did Melbourne interview him in the first place?

Cause he was very high profile and certianly worth a look in.

 

[00Stinger]

I normally do not miss our home games, but I couldn't bring myself to go yesterday as I wanted to see us put up a competitive fight, yet deep down I wanted to see us get belted so we could move Neeld on. I never wanted us to tank, so this was a weird feeling, being it was the first time ever that I didn't know if I wanted to see us put up a fight. That sums up to me my feeling of hopelessness under Neelds reign and IMO is why he needs to move on

My theory is this.

If you love your club, you turn up if you are able to. Only work, family and distance should be your excuses. To not turn up outside of those things is pure gutlessness.

Neeld can coach, but, he's been given some of the worst cattle I have ever seen take the field.

No heart, no desire and pretty much no committment.

Simple as that.

He took a young and upcoming list from 8 & 8 &1/2 wins to not being able to get within 10 goals of any team other than the expansion clubs in 12 months, someone who knows how to coach doesn't do that.

Spin it anyway you like, he has destroyed the list and the players confidence. He has no game plan, no answers in press conferences (except to say we train well), has regressed the skills of players and now makes up new stats like missed tackles to defend his strategy.

When your team is struggling all you want to see is some form of hope, whether that be kids improving, the game plan evolving, high intensity or something else. Under Bailey there was hope, the kids were improving (albeit still inconsistent), they would take the game on and back themselves, we would cop some beatings, but we would win games as well. Our last two years under him yielded 16 & 1/2 wins. He developed the list, all we needed now was a coach to take us the step further up the ladder.

In step Mark Neeld and his famous opening speech of 'We will be the hardest team to play against'. Great, we were previously too attacking, now have a coach who is going to shore up the defensive side of things. Mitch Clark signs, so now we have a KPF to kick to, something that we dearly missed in the previous seasons. Then the season starts and we get rolled by a disappointed Brisbane team by 7 goals at home and follow that up with 9 straight defeats (5 by 10+ goals and 3 by 100+ points). Finally we limp to 4 wins for the years, with the likes of Trengove, Gysberts, Petterd, Watts, Frawley, Jamar, McKenzie, Dunn, Garland ext all regressing at alarming rates.

Now fast forward another year and we have fallen further backwards with the mentioned players either regressing to non AFL standards or now playing with other AFL teams

 

[vonn]

All we do know is that Neeld and Craig will be speaking to the meeting this afternoon.

Going to be a long day for those at the MCG.

I was under the impression the meeting began at 12pm, and the press was at 2?

 

[ANGEL DARK]

Cause he was very high profile and certianly worth a look in.

So on one hand you say he was past it as coach and on another hand your saying he was worth a look in ???? He is either one or the other. Your not part of the Melbourne board by any chance are you?

 

[cymarak]

Reading some of the AFL articles, I'm amused at how they're using such strong words like 'Dee Day' as headlines, but in the articles themselves it's pure speculation which would fool a few.

I find it surprising that an official media outlet of the AFL is allowed (by the AFL) to take such a sensationalist angle on some stories.

Normally the AFL is so conservative and defensive with its PR - witness how hard it clamps down on players, coaches, etc. saying the wrong thing on twitter, blogs, etc. - that I've always expected the AFL to play it purely vanilla with media coverage.

It does seem incongruous to me to have an official media outlet of the AFL openly speculating about the potential imminent demise of a senior coach.

 

[LouisCK]

So on one hand you say he was past it as coach and on another hand your saying he was worth a look in ???? He is either one or the other. Your not part of the Melbourne board by any chance are you?

Are you actually this dumb or am I being trolled?