Autopsy Too Complicated.... ?

[ThePuppetMaster]

For this stage in the transformation of our game style... does Neeld have our players trying to do too much?

This comes after two articles in the premier newspapers of the country (the HUN and the Age in case you've been locked in a basement from birth) from two recently retired AFL players; they are virtually identical in thought and we're published on the same day.

Shane Crawford (http://www.heraldsun.com.au/afl/new-boys-trying-to-change-too-much/story-fn82yfty-1226335253629);

and Matthew Lloyd (http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/starting-over-20120421-1xe4r.html).

The underlying theme when discussing Melbourne is that the players seem to have lost some creative freedom within the game plan, whether that's the players over-correcting in an attempt to impress a coach who "respects blokes who play their role" (Quote courtesy of the great #4) or Neeldy confusing the players through an information overload; I guess the true answer has a bit of both about it.

I have two points to raise in regard to this;
- Firstly Neeld and McCarthy obviously come from highly experienced and professional outfits who I've got no doubt could significantly change a game plan from even week to week; this doesn't come so easily to young lists (even with a pre-season to work on it)
- Both these two seem to be advocating a gradual change in game plan; I'd counter (as the Devil's advocate) that while that method certainly would improve current performance, will it mean that our team would peak later?

 

[Tulip]

I like the man, but I've a feeling that as a byproduct of his determination, Neeld is too stubborn.

 

[ThePuppetMaster]

I agree, but while that could be bad for short term performance will it really affect our long term performance?

 

[d33my]

It's an interesting point. One of the Richmond posters made a good post last week about how Hardwick had gradually bought in changes to their game plan, something like focussing on tackling first, then disposal, then zones etc (that's not exactly what he did, but you get the idea).

I wonder how Neeld has gone about it? I remember reading in the Heartbeat newsletter that came out before the season that a few of the players were quoted saying stuff like 'everything's changed' and 'imagine going to your workplace and having to engage in completely new practices/routines etc) so it seemed like he went the whole hog and turned everything on it's head.

It's possible that Neeld was expecting too much from the list at first, maybe after the first couple of rounds he's pared it down to one or two key ideas that he wants us to implement? In any case, I think it's probably worth trying to stick with Neeld's ideas even if it means short term pain for some long term gain. I'm not a huge fan of putting blind faith in a coach but the people who appointed Neeld most likely know something more about footy than I do and obviously saw potential.

It's also worth considering if the players learned any 'bad habits' under Bailey and time must be taken into consideration of eradicating these, which will also affect the effectiveness of Neeld's desired gameplan.

 

[demonfan9]

It does appear that the natural playing style of the team has been completely turned on its head, so no doubt that is having a negative impact at the moment as the players don't seem to be playing on instinct, and it's also quite predictable for the opposition.

I am sure this aspect will improve over time, the players will adapt better and the coaching will probably adapt as well, but in the meantime we continue to get belted and the confidence and belief in the playing group must be getting weaker and weaker, which is obviously not a good thing either.

 

[Devastating Boris]

Yeah that's good for Richmond, they have improved each year and slowly climbing up the ladder. Neeld throws our boys in the deep end, gives them a year and a preseason to get used to it and HOPES to makes big leaps instead of small steps in future years.

Just a theory on it. Not saying its right or wrong but I reckon that's the idea.

 

[RandB]

Good area of discussion TPM.

I think information overload would have to be playing a part atm to some degree but it also comes down to self-focus as well.

Being a young group I think our players are conscious of their own development and performances (which is a good thing) and aren't yet taking the next step of using their team mates until they are confident with where they are at personlly under the new coach. This would be human-nature in such a rigorous coaching environment I would think.

Part of this would have to be a result though of the fact our guys have been completely underprepared in years leading up to the pre-season (as others have touched on) both individually and as a team.

Getting back to information overload, I think with our extended or improved coaching regime it isn't just Neeld but the conditioning and forward/mid/back coaches who would all be in the players' ears instructing them things for the first time. So it's on 2 fronts, as a team on gameday wrt strategy and personal development making up for lost time.

I'm not so sure the gameplan is too complicated per se but in fairness I don't know enough about it yet to completely rule the idea out.

wrt Hardwick working in stages, that is simply his luxury. Neeld on the other hand has to get a comprehensive idea of where our list is at and tbh he might as well throw them in the deep end rather than muck about. We don't have time (like we wasted under Bailey) to see who will come good and who won't and on top of that the AFL is cut throat so we need to get that through to the playing group.

 

[Unleash Hell]

An interesting thread and something I have been thinking about over the last few weeks.

It's obviously only guess work at the moment as we don't know the inner workings of the club and what the coaches want.

I noticed a few things from the game yesterday - lack of run and when the players got tired and the heat was on players would take the easy options (kick long withouut loooking and half efforts)

Is this coaching or a lack of ability in the playing group? At the moment I'd have to blame the playing group. Only time will tell which it is!

 

[stickman11]

our attacking style didn't get us anywhere under Bailey - fine when the heat was off but crap when the blowtorch was applied. Neeld is teaching them a more contested and defensive framework, and then I am sure he'll address the attacking side.

 

[LeverPuller]

It's an interesting point. One of the Richmond posters made a good post last week about how Hardwick had gradually bought in changes to their game plan, something like focussing on tackling first, then disposal, then zones etc (that's not exactly what he did, but you get the idea).

I wonder how Neeld has gone about it? I remember reading in the Heartbeat newsletter that came out before the season that a few of the players were quoted saying stuff like 'everything's changed' and 'imagine going to your workplace and having to engage in completely new practices/routines etc) so it seemed like he went the whole hog and turned everything on it's head.

It's possible that Neeld was expecting too much from the list at first, maybe after the first couple of rounds he's pared it down to one or two key ideas that he wants us to implement? In any case, I think it's probably worth trying to stick with Neeld's ideas even if it means short term pain for some long term gain. I'm not a huge fan of putting blind faith in a coach but the people who appointed Neeld most likely know something more about footy than I do and obviously saw potential.

It's also worth considering if the players learned any 'bad habits' under Bailey and time must be taken into consideration of eradicating these, which will also affect the effectiveness of Neeld's desired gameplan.

This is the vibe I've been getting, especially with the mention of the 1%ers and such in pressers. Neeld has both thrown them off the deep end but asked them to execute particular elements.

There are holes, but it's also about the players executing as much as anything. Bringing in outside players who are effectively a clean slate will in fact be easier to mould into the game plan than those already in place.

 

[MightyTiger]

It's an interesting point. One of the Richmond posters made a good post last week about how Hardwick had gradually bought in changes to their game plan, something like focussing on tackling first, then disposal, then zones etc (that's not exactly what he did, but you get the idea).

I wonder how Neeld has gone about it? I remember reading in the Heartbeat newsletter that came out before the season that a few of the players were quoted saying stuff like 'everything's changed' and 'imagine going to your workplace and having to engage in completely new practices/routines etc) so it seemed like he went the whole hog and turned everything on it's head.

It's possible that Neeld was expecting too much from the list at first, maybe after the first couple of rounds he's pared it down to one or two key ideas that he wants us to implement? In any case, I think it's probably worth trying to stick with Neeld's ideas even if it means short term pain for some long term gain. I'm not a huge fan of putting blind faith in a coach but the people who appointed Neeld most likely know something more about footy than I do and obviously saw potential.

It's also worth considering if the players learned any 'bad habits' under Bailey and time must be taken into consideration of eradicating these, which will also affect the effectiveness of Neeld's desired gameplan.

Without wanting to be to self indulgent and talk about the my team to much, I just wanted to post a video of Damien Hardwick in 2009 at our B&F, I believe the words he spoke on that night hold true until this day, and it fits well into what Neeld is trying to achieve at Melbourne.

http://bigpondvideo.com/AFL/209716

(If it doesn't load just change the quality down and press play it should load then)

When I made that post the other week about how Hardwick went about developing a game plan and how in my opinion I believed Neeld was slightly going about it the wrong way, the one thing I didn't take into account is that Neeld is a totally different coach to Hardwick and they will obviously have different philosophies and go about developing there game plan in a completely different way.

The only way for the Melbourne players to learn the game plan is to practice, practice, practice and then practice some more, so if it takes 5 games, 10 games, 22 games or even 2-3 years for the game plan to even start to take form, if nothing else at least feel proud about the fact that your coach and club and even players believe that what they are doing will take them down the right path.

The Melbourne FC will get there, it will take time, and there will be a lot of ups and downs, but go to the footy every week and just look out for the small things, like, the way your back line functions, or certain setups that the players are trying to implement, or style of play, and believe me you will see a gradual development and start to realise what exactly the game plan is and it will slowly start to come together.

If nothing else take heart in the fact that Richmond was compared to Fitzroy in 2010 and had articles like these written about us.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/tigers-in-dire-need-of-extra-help-from-afl-20100407-rs5g.html

Tigers in dire need of extra help from AFL

2 years later and we are pushing the reigning premiers at there home ground and mixing it with Carlton and Collingwood.

I hope to see a fit and firing Melbourne FC in the not to distant future mixing it with the big boys and hopefully both our great clubs have some hard fought clashes come finals time.

 

[Andy_Mac]

If the body has cancer you cut it out, all of it, and you do it as soon as you can. Whilst not all things under Bailey were cancerous it is still the way it has to be.

The sooner the guys start learning all of the disciplinary and structural requirements of being an elite footballer/team the sooner we'll taste sustained success. We were always going to struggle this year so I’d rather fast track the learning curve. I also think that we will improve dramatically over the course of the season.

 

[bing181]

I also think that we will improve dramatically over the course of the season.

Agree with you on that. Suspect there'll also be a couple of dramatic drop-offs along the way as well though!

Tighten your seatbelts.

 

[CowboyFromHell]

Agree with you on that. Suspect there'll also be a couple of dramatic drop-offs along the way as well though!

Tighten your seatbelts.

Absolutely. We improved this week and the challenge is to improve again next week and the week after that and so forth. We will have games where we stink it up again this season but I think things are slowly coming together.

 

[Andy_Mac]

In 4 weeks time the game plan will have bedded in and we will be able to start to develop the attacking aspects of the game plan. In addition Sylvia and Moloney will have games under there belt and Jurrah may well be back.

I'm happy with progress given we now understand the enormity of the challenge Neeld and co face. Also the massive running preseason has to be taking its toll.

This is a learning year.

 

[pizzor]

He is progressing the plan to my eyes. It was only this week that we started using the middle if players were opened there. Don't think Neeld's plan will just be to the wings.

 

[lose]

agree I noticed exactly the same thing.. the players were starting to look for the switch more often on the way forward and trying to keep possession and try to create some run with the footy.. it's a shame we have such a tough run coming up because I feel we're starting to turn the corner, and having sylvia and jurrah back will make a massive difference.. keep the faith

 

[SuburbanMe]

I was watching the 2006 elimination final against the Saints, and the play leading up to our first goal is what i believe Neeld may want from our boys.

If you have the chance - check out the play leading up to our first goal and let me know what you think.

[YOUTUBE]KHsQICxztSg[/YOUTUBE]

 

[Devastating Boris]

Geez Davey was quick. Is that the last game he possessed that kind of pace. He picked up 3 steps on flat chat baker just because he decided he'd like the breathing space.

 

[SuburbanMe]

uhh not sure what happened here - skip!

 

[SuburbanMe]

Geez Davey was quick. Is that the last game he possessed that kind of pace. He picked up 3 steps on flat chat baker just because he decided he'd like the breathing space.

Yeah he was huh! hehe - It's a good game to watch.

Aaron should maybe watch it as a reminder of what he needs to do to be awesome again - but in saying that - he's 6yrs older.

If I've said it once, I've said it a thousand times - Neale Daniher was a gun coach!