We could have had Neeld!

[Ghost Dog]

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/deecision-on-the-run-20120521-1z1di.html


MELBOURNE has admitted it rushed to appoint Mark Neeld in the face of perceived competition from rival clubs. The Demons have also defended their decision not to psychologically profile their embattled coach after their worst loss yet in a crisis-ridden season.

While club chiefs Don McLardy and Cameron Schwab continued yesterday to emphatically back their senior coach, it has also emerged that Melbourne was the only club of the four headhunting new men late last year that did not use personality-profiling methods as part of its search.

Melbourne offered Neeld the job just three days after his first serious interview with the club, with Neeld informing both the Demons and Adelaide he would take the first position offered to him. The Crows, who profiled all their final four candidates, had virtually decided by then on Brenton Sanderson and appointed him 48 hours after Melbourne's announcement.

http://images.theage.com.au/2012/05/21/3314602/art-svNEELD-420x0.jpg
Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/deecision-on-the-run-20120521-1z1di.html#ixzz1vZHUfskZ

[bornadog]

GD, you may want to learn how to use the link button to post these. Go to the Dog trainer thread here (http://www.woof.net.au/forum/showthread.php?t=375):)

[Remi Moses]

I actually feel sorry for Mark Neeld.
The players at Melbourne run their own show( senior ones)
They get smashed and there's Colin Sylvia having a chuckle with a Swans opponent!
Big clear out, you'd imagine

[bornadog]

The OP's heading - I say, no because we did our due diligence unlike Melbourne.

[Ghost Dog]

Sorry, was Sylvia having a laugh with one of the Swans as they walked off the ground? Can imagine the club loving that!

[Remi Moses]

Sorry, was Sylvia having a laugh with one of the Swans as they walked off the ground? Can imagine the club loving that!

After the siren.Personally a handshake should suffice but having a chuckle when you've been pantsed is a shocking look.Heard The Ox say that Sylvia doesn't prepare himself properly to be a quality Player, then there's Moloney's manager talking free agency. Demons need to bulldoze and start again.

[BulldogBelle]

After the siren.Personally a handshake should suffice but having a chuckle when you've been pantsed is a shocking look.Heard The Ox say that Sylvia doesn't prepare himself properly to be a quality Player, then there's Moloney's manager talking free agency. Demons need to bulldoze and start again.



Another 3+ years at the bottom for them

The Dee's have made some simply woeful decisions in the past 5 years

Tanking, getting rid of senior and respected players like McDonald and Miller, simply playing 'kids' at the expense of winning matches and not having a balanced side has been their folly

[Desipura]

Another 3+ years at the bottom for them

The Dee's have made some simply woeful decisions in the past 5 years

Tanking, getting rid of senior and respected players like McDonald and Miller, simply playing 'kids' at the expense of winning matches and not having a balanced side has been their folly
To be fair, Miller was given a lifeline.

[azabob]

To be fair, Miller was given a lifeline.

Even though he was given a lifeline he still is playing a role for Richmond, the exact same role he could be playing at Melbourne.

[GVGjr]

Neeld was a fine candidate with a good pedigree and it's way too early to make a call on him. He's got plenty of talent on the playing list but it was never going to be a quick fix.

[Ozza]

Even though he was given a lifeline he still is playing a role for Richmond, the exact same role he could be playing at Melbourne.

On probably a 5th of the pay!

[Desipura]

Even though he was given a lifeline he still is playing a role for Richmond, the exact same role he could be playing at Melbourne.

My point being, no one else was going to pick him up. Im not too sure Melbourne will be losing too much sleep over delisting Miller (other than Pia Miller not being at the after game functions).

[azabob]

My point being, no one else was going to pick him up. Im not too sure Melbourne will be losing too much sleep over delisting Miller (other than Pia Miller not being at the after game functions).

You are right, the wouldn't be losing sleep. Just like we are not losing sleep about losing Harbrow or Ray, but they are handy players that can play a role for the team until a better player comes along.

[Ghost Dog]

Neeld was a fine candidate with a good pedigree and it's way too early to make a call on him. He's got plenty of talent on the playing list but it was never going to be a quick fix.

Well said. I really dislike the way the media have started on him already.

[Desipura]

You are right, the wouldn't be losing sleep. Just like we are not losing sleep about losing Harbrow or Ray, but they are handy players that can play a role for the team until a better player comes along.
Are you serious? I wish Harbrow was still with us, I was disappointed to lose his run and carry out of the backline.
Harbrow was more than just handy.

[bornadog]

Neeld was a fine candidate with a good pedigree and it's way too early to make a call on him. He's got plenty of talent on the playing list but it was never going to be a quick fix.

Supporters would have expected at least a couple of wins. Also the losses have been huge and the players seemingly have shown no heart.

Personally, I think Neeld has a game plan/style that he wants the players to play, but he doesn't have the type of players to suit that game plan.

If you look at Macca, he has emphasized contested possession from the start, ie you have to get your own ball, which wasn't a problem at the Bulldogs with players like Boyd, Cross etc. However, he has worked on other players who have not been known to get their own ball, such as Sherman, Grant, Higgins and turned those guys around a bit and also made the team more defensive.

What does Neeld do now? Does he change the game plan abit to suit the players or get rid of those players that can't execute his instructions?

[chef]

Are you serious? I wish Harbrow was still with us, I was disappointed to lose his run and carry out of the backline.
Harbrow was more than just handy.

Yep, he is a very good player and I miss his input to the team too.

[azabob]

Are you serious? I wish Harbrow was still with us, I was disappointed to lose his run and carry out of the backline.
Harbrow was more than just handy.

Im not fussed about losing Harbrow. If he were still at our club we'd still be four and four.

Agree he provided great run and carry but his downs sides for me were, wasn't great one on one and his disposal is questionable.

Probably not the best example I could've used, as I'd prefer he was still with us.

[Maddog37]

Neeld just looks out of control. He looks ready to have a nervous breakdown, he has a nervous eye twitch and doesn't convey confidence or a sense of calm.

Early days no doubt but he needs to address his public persona a touch.

[Remi Moses]

Im not fussed about losing Harbrow. If he were still at our club we'd still be four and four.

Agree he provided great run and carry but his downs sides for me were, wasn't great one on one and his disposal is questionable.

Probably not the best example I could've used, as I'd prefer he was still with us.

Plays a bit on his own terms with a lack of accountability.
Seems to fit the GC recruiting mantra.
The downside is we miss his run and carry

[Mofra]

Tanking, getting rid of senior and respected players like McDonald and Miller, simply playing 'kids' at the expense of winning matches and not having a balanced side has been their folly
Something to keep in mind when we get fanciful suggestions here of trading out players like Cross

[Desipura]

Something to keep in mind when we get fanciful suggestions here of trading out players like Cross
Delisting and trading players are two seperate things.

[Bulldog Joe]

Delisting and trading players are two seperate things.

Really!

Both methods result in loss of experience and undermine the fabric of the club.
Melbourne are suffering badly for their folly of youth is everything. Games for players who are also overpaid, to meet minimum salary cap requirements.

Losing has been no problem for Melbourne and they have just infrained a losing culture.

Still with all the noise going round I expect Melbourne to put up their best effort of the year this week.

[Desipura]

Really!

Both methods result in loss of experience and undermine the fabric of the club.
Melbourne are suffering badly for their folly of youth is everything. Games for players who are also overpaid, to meet minimum salary cap requirements.

Losing has been no problem for Melbourne and they have just infrained a losing culture.

Still with all the noise going round I expect Melbourne to put up their best effort of the year this week.

So let's continue to keep players passed their use by date?
Or are you happy to give loyal servants an extra
2 years and risk them playing for willi in year 2?

[Sockeye Salmon]

So let's continue to keep players passed their use by date?
Or are you happy to give loyal servants an extra
2 years and risk them playing for willi in year 2?

I was going to write the same thing Bulldog Joe wrote but didn't because I knew this was precisely how you would respond.

Of course you can't afford player to be kept on too long (hello Matthew Croft & Mitch Hahn) but Melbourne got rid of McDonald when he still had plenty to offer.

I think Moffra's analogy of comparing sacking McDonald to trading out Cross is relevant.

[ledge]

So let's continue to keep players passed their use by date?
Or are you happy to give loyal servants an extra
2 years and risk them playing for willi in year 2?

It all depends on your list and the quality of older player as a clubman.
If you bring in a lot of kids you have to keep a decent older player or two to show the young ones whats expected, needed etc.

I remember an interview of a Richmond player on radio last year about Richmond and Whale Roberts I think it was, apparently Roberts was so respected by players that when he was traded all the players felt the club was disrespectful to a player who meant so much and the club went downhill the next year, when they were premiership favourites.

His point was a great club man is worth gold to a club, my opinion is Miller might have been this kind of person.

[Nuggety Back Pocket]

Neeld was a fine candidate with a good pedigree and it's way too early to make a call on him. He's got plenty of talent on the playing list but it was never going to be a quick fix.

This makes a lot of sense to me. If you have a look at the backgrounds of BMcC and Neeld they are not that dis-similar. I think given time that Neeld will be good. He needs a stronger buy in from his more senior players like BMcC is getting from the likes of Griffen, Boyd, Cross, Murphy, Lake and Minson. I also fancy that the legacy of Jim Synes has been a big setback at Melbourne. I like the stronger team approach being seen by the Bulldogs, which would seem in contrast to the Demons, where they have been relying on spasmodic individual efforts.

[bornadog]

I was going to write the same thing Bulldog Joe wrote but didn't because I knew this was precisely how you would respond.

Of course you can't afford player to be kept on too long (hello Matthew Croft & Mitch Hahn) but Melbourne got rid of McDonald when he still had plenty to offer.

I think Moffra's analogy of comparing sacking McDonald to trading out Cross is relevant.

How many times have we read on this forum about getting rid of Cross, Gia, Hargrave and others over the years.

[Cyberdoggie]

Neeld was a fine candidate with a good pedigree and it's way too early to make a call on him. He's got plenty of talent on the playing list but it was never going to be a quick fix.

That is true, but it does appear on the outside that he has handled things less than ideally.

In particular his ranting and raving in the coaches box, in post match interviews etc.
After the first game when they lost to lions after the emotional build up, he got stuck into the players very heavily, and hasn't really stopped.
Also add the promotion of inexperienced captains (voted by the players, surely the coach has the final say?), senior players on the outer, huge player turnover from week to week, public name and shaming, the list goes on.

Perhaps what the players need is someone to pat them on the back from time to time rather than a red hot poker up the behind.

There could be a huge firesale of players out of Melbourne during trading week this year.
Not sure that i can see any bargains for us.

[Ghost Dog]

That is true, but it does appear on the outside that he has handled things less than ideally.

In particular his ranting and raving in the coaches box, in post match interviews etc.
After the first game when they lost to lions after the emotional build up, he got stuck into the players very heavily, and hasn't really stopped.
Also add the promotion of inexperienced captains (voted by the players, surely the coach has the final say?), senior players on the outer, huge player turnover from week to week, public name and shaming, the list goes on.

Perhaps what the players need is someone to pat them on the back from time to time rather than a red hot poker up the behind.

There could be a huge firesale of players out of Melbourne during trading week this year.
Not sure that i can see any bargains for us.

Some great points Cyberdog. His facial expressions! Looks ready to burst out in spasm.
I suppose they tried that with the last bloke they had. Something seems not quite right.

[ledge]

That is true, but it does appear on the outside that he has handled things less than ideally.

In particular his ranting and raving in the coaches box, in post match interviews etc.
After the first game when they lost to lions after the emotional build up, he got stuck into the players very heavily, and hasn't really stopped.
Also add the promotion of inexperienced captains (voted by the players, surely the coach has the final say?), senior players on the outer, huge player turnover from week to week, public name and shaming, the list goes on.

Perhaps what the players need is someone to pat them on the back from time to time rather than a red hot poker up the behind.

There could be a huge firesale of players out of Melbourne during trading week this year.
Not sure that i can see any bargains for us.

Mathew Bate?

[Ghost Dog]

Mathew Bate?

I'd take that bald guy with the tatts, but he's the only decent player they have: suspect they will be hanging on to him.

[azabob]

I'd take that bald guy with the tatts, but he's the only decent player they have: suspect they will be hanging on to him.

Nathan Jones - has a dip and always honest. Not great by foot, not sure how quick he is either but he gives 100%.

[ledge]

I think they have a lot of good players if you give them a new club with a better environment and direction.
If they were to lose a lot at end of year I think you would get huge bargains.

[ledge]

Personally looking from outside I think Neeld has gone in thinking all players will respond to being hard at them, all players are different.
Our new coach is a peoples person, known for getting to know every player individually, family life etc
thus looks like he cares and also works for him in working out each players head space.

[Twodogs]

You are right, the wouldn't be losing sleep. Just like we are not losing sleep about losing Harbrow or Ray, but they are handy players that can play a role for the team until a better player comes along.


Plays a bit on his own terms with a lack of accountability.
Seems to fit the GC recruiting mantra.
The downside is we miss his run and carry


Harbrow and Lake made a greater contribution than the sum of their individual parts. One just seemed to complement the other. It's a real shame he went. He's not half the player at GC he was with us.

It was a good financial decision for him but a lousy football one.

[Ghost Dog]

Personally looking from outside I think Neeld has gone in thinking all players will respond to being hard at them, all players are different.
Our new coach is a peoples person, known for getting to know every player individually, family life etc
thus looks like he cares and also works for him in working out each players head space.

Above all, three things are vital to grow motivation towards success in a team. self-confidence, experiencing success and satisfaction, and good player coach relationships as well as relationships between team mates.
Neeld's first address to the players was televised and it was jackboot stuff. I'm not sure if that's what they show on the TV only but it's a far cry from BMac's style. At the end of the day, I know who I would rather play under. Then again, Neeld may get it done. Bit early to tell.

[jeemak]

Something to keep in mind when we get fanciful suggestions here of trading out players like Cross

I've been as big a critic of Cross over the last year or so as anyone else. While he has played some good, if not excellent games of late I still think we erred in awarding him a 2 year deal rather than a one year deal.

While I might have been a little disappointed if he was moved on at the end of last year, mainly due to the inconsistent form of Wallis and the potential for Liberatore to suffer from 2nd year blues, I still think he's a good chance to be phased out towards the end of the season and early next season as these guys come through.

Delisting or trading players because they're old or slowing down isn't the way to go, particularly if you decide to do it en mass, though I think you need to be pragmatic about your list management and be very tight with the type of contracts you offer your senior players. Particularly if they have some potential replacements awaiting a chance to step up. The reality is, each of the alternatives I've mentioned is a very good chance to take a significant step forward over the next twelve months, and there's some other players on our list that might be well placed to change the look of our side over that period if they experience a solid run injury free (Tutt, Howard, DJ, Vesz, Wood etc).

Melbourne's approach was a bit off though, and any decision to release a player shouldn't be done solely on age.

I'm pretty confident Neeld isn't the only one to blame for Melbourne's predicament, though I don't think the media or broader football public (let alone the MFC) will be very forgiving with him. He's inherited a young list that has players who's heads would be extremely jumbled right now with mixed messages from a vast range of senior and middle rankes coaches and support staff. It's little wonder they're playing like they are at the moment.

No leadership, a change in message just at the time a previous one would likely to have been setting in plust the death of their club icon and president would make that club a hard one to play with right now.

[Remi Moses]

Trading cross or retiring him would be a massive mistake.
The blokes the heartbeat of the side, and he'll know when it's time as he is a selfless type.

[Bulldog Joe]

So let's continue to keep players passed their use by date?
Or are you happy to give loyal servants an extra
2 years and risk them playing for willi in year 2?

Problem is that there is no defined age that constitutes the "use by date" so how do you really know when it occurs. It is a delicate exercise and I favour caution. I absolutely am happy if they end up at Williamstown due to form issues before they are retired.
It is important to also value experience and the older players need to be retained to pass on that experience to the younger group.
That is not to say that senior players should be retaned until they wish to go.
I strongly supported the forced retirement of Scott West whenit occurred.
At the end of last year I would have retired Gilbee and Hargrave. Hargrave has been vital this year.

Melbourne just got rid of the older players without regard for the needs of the group.
You only need to look at the development at GWS to see that having a group of players assessed as being PAST the USE by DATE has been of benefit in the teaching aspect.

[Mofra]

I'd take that bald guy with the tatts, but he's the only decent player they have: suspect they will be hanging on to him.


Nathan Jones - has a dip and always honest. Not great by foot, not sure how quick he is either but he gives 100%.
Arguably been their best this season, and I'm pretty sure he's a FA.
Didn't want to go to Melbourne in the first place IIRC when traded from Geelong.

[Mofra]

Trading cross or retiring him would be a massive mistake.
The blokes the heartbeat of the side, and he'll know when it's time as he is a selfless type.
I think it's pretty easy to miss what guys bring to the table as a total package - leadership, an example of meticulous preparation - a kid who is assigned Cross as a mentor would have the perfect model for off-field professionalism. When the shit hits the fan on field, it's teh expereince of the leadership group that rally the troops and remind them to stick to the task at hand, positioning, gameplan, etc. If I was playing and looked across to see Cross pushing himself to absolute exhaustion, I'd have incentive to find that extra 1% to get to a contest I wasn't sure I'd make.

It's important to note the old leadership principle of "morale is a force multiplier" proven countless times in the military sense - trading out someone so impotant to the group is bound to effect the players as a whole. I wonder if Hahn's re-rookieing and coaching appointment at Willy was part of this strategy.

It's also very hard to preach loyalty to a club that shows no loyalty to senior players.

I think cutting McDonald was a mistake from Melbourne's point of view and at times their kids have looked lost but that's an obvious example. Ask how many North fans at upset at Brad Scott's "throw the kids in the deep end" approach to his midfield. They have drafted a group of inside mids who are right now getting smashed at contested ball & centre clearances. Leadership & experience matter.

[azabob]

Arguably been their best this season, and I'm pretty sure he's a FA.
Didn't want to go to Melbourne in the first place IIRC when traded from Geelong.

Jones was a first round selection drafted by Melbourne.

You are thinking of Maloney who didn't want to go to Melbourne as part of the Ottens trade.

[Maddog37]

Cross has been one of our best this year. If he continues to play the way he is now he can go as long as his body holds up.

I have suggested in the past that his time was coming to an end but if he becomes a role player in a broader system like he seems to be at present then his strengths can outweigh his weakness'. (I hope I have used that apostrophe correctly!)

[Murphy'sLore]

Cross has been one of our best this year. If he continues to play the way he is now he can go as long as his body holds up.

I have suggested in the past that his time was coming to an end but if he becomes a role player in a broader system like he seems to be at present then his strengths can outweigh his weakness'. (I hope I have used that apostrophe correctly!)

weaknesses :)

No apostrophe necessary for a plural.

[Maddog37]

Dagnamit. I always stuff them up!!

[Mofra]

Jones was a first round selection drafted by Melbourne.

You are thinking of Maloney who didn't want to go to Melbourne as part of the Ottens trade.
You're right, my bad. Maloney is the free agent I was thinking of.

[GVGjr]

I'd stay away from Maloney. His best seasons are when the ruckman gives him first use of the ball.

[Twodogs]

I've been wondering why Neeld/Melbourne appointed co-captains this year? What do yu guys think of the co-captaincy model? I've never been in favour of it myself.

I have a strong belief that you need a consistant example and message from the top and the more voices you add to that mix the more confused the message becomes. I just dont know why you'd want to dilute the authority of the official team leader. The main message should come the senior coach and the example from the captain. You dont see a team with co-coaches, why co-captains?

I've got no problem with appointing a young captain and letting him develop with a young team. It can be a good strategy. But I dont know you'd appoint two 20 year olds.

[jeemak]

Agreed Twodogs.

I like the idea of shared responsibility throughout the leadership and broader playing group, though I think you need a single conduit between the coaching pane and the playing group is the way to go. If there's a breakdown in message, it's easier to determine where it has occurred.

The single captain needs to be a good delegator these days. AFL is too involved to have only one person covering all players.

[bornadog]

Two Captains

http://i1135.photobucket.com/albums/m631/steve_taylorca/1336194762198.gif

[jeemak]

Two Captains

http://i1135.photobucket.com/albums/m631/steve_taylorca/1336194762198.gif

If you watch that movie backwards it's about a zombie that gets more and more racist.

[Mofra]

I've got no problem with appointing a young captain and letting him develop with a young team. It can be a good strategy. But I dont know you'd appoint two 20 year olds.
I prefer a single captain model, although multiple captains did work for Sydney.

The two 20 year olds is a good point - doesn't seem to make much sense to me. Neeld does seem to have a fair bit of work to do to take the heat off him.

[Twodogs]

I like the idea of shared responsibility throughout the leadership and broader playing group, though I think you need a single conduit between the coaching pane and the playing group is the way to go. If there's a breakdown in message, it's easier to determine where it has occurred.

The single captain needs to be a good delegator these days. AFL is too involved to have only one person covering all players.


I prefer a single captain model, although multiple captains did work for Sydney.

The two 20 year olds is a good point - doesn't seem to make much sense to me. Neeld does seem to have a fair bit of work to do to take the heat off him.

I think that the only worse idea than co-captains was that idiotic rotating of the captaincy that Grant Thomas used at St Kilda,

[LostDoggy]

Well said. I really dislike the way the media have started on him already.

With few sex scandals going on, they need something to write about. The real issue is the length clubs are going to at the moment to satisfy the media. I'm not for a closed shop, but McLardy and co. should've come out firing, on the attack, instead of just circling wagons. As soon as the word "process" gets rolled out instead, in any context, you know something is amiss.


Supporters would have expected at least a couple of wins. Also the losses have been huge and the players seemingly have shown no heart.

Personally, I think Neeld has a game plan/style that he wants the players to play, but he doesn't have the type of players to suit that game plan.

If you look at Macca, he has emphasized contested possession from the start, ie you have to get your own ball, which wasn't a problem at the Bulldogs with players like Boyd, Cross etc. However, he has worked on other players who have not been known to get their own ball, such as Sherman, Grant, Higgins and turned those guys around a bit and also made the team more defensive.

What does Neeld do now? Does he change the game plan abit to suit the players or get rid of those players that can't execute his instructions?

He really has no choice. You can't implement a game plan and expect buy-in when you turn around in the next minute and say, "I'd better adjust this to Colin Sylvia's requirements." He's not an elected representative in a democracy — he's the senior coach, and it's his way or the highway.

Macca didn't just emphasize contested possession, he made it absolutely clear it's a non-negotiable. You want to play in red, white and blue, you buy in to the game plan and execute it. Simple.

Neeld dropping those players this week is the best move he's made in his time there. He can't just bring them back next week though, he must ensure that they buy in to the game plan, and prove it at Casey, before he even thinks about bringing them back. That's the only way to do it.

Unfortunately for Neeld, Melbourne's inept handling of this issue so far has somewhat undermined his authority to deliver that strong stance in any way other than at selection. Will be an interesting year for the Dees.


I'd take that bald guy with the tatts, but he's the only decent player they have: suspect they will be hanging on to him.

Actually, with Melbourne's decision-making form so far, you never know…


Personally looking from outside I think Neeld has gone in thinking all players will respond to being hard at them, all players are different.
Our new coach is a peoples person, known for getting to know every player individually, family life etc
thus looks like he cares and also works for him in working out each players head space.

Great point!

[Happy Days]

I've been wondering why Neeld/Melbourne appointed co-captains this year? What do yu guys think of the co-captaincy model? I've never been in favour of it myself.



I took it as them wanting to pick Jack Grimes, but not having enough faith in his body holding up, so placed a bet each way.

Co-captaincy is an absolute cop out and a recipe for disaster if there is any difference of opinion at the top end.

[KT31]

I took it as them wanting to pick Jack Grimes, but not having enough faith in his body holding up, so placed a bet each way.

Co-captaincy is an absolute cop out and a recipe for disaster if there is any difference of opinion at the top end.

Co-captaincy is about appointing one who deserves it and one who you are afraid to upset an lose.