We could have had Neeld!

[Bornadog]

Re: We could have had Neeld!

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]

Re: We could have had Neeld!

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]

Re: We could have had Neeld!

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]

Re: We could have had Neeld!

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]

Re: We could have had Neeld!

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]

Re: We could have had Neeld!

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]

Re: We could have had Neeld!

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]

Re: We could have had Neeld!

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]

Re: We could have had Neeld!

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]

Re: We could have had Neeld!

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]

Re: We could have had Neeld!

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]

Re: We could have had Neeld!

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]

Re: We could have had Neeld!

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]

Re: We could have had Neeld!

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]

Re: We could have had Neeld!

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.