Neeld not to blame for Demon woes

It's a small thing.....but I noticed when Neeld spoke to the team at quarter time against Collingwood he was not wearing his glasses. The team all seemed to be paying rapt attention - they probably thought it was a new guy. Somehow, Neeld and his glasses just do not look inspiring - like a bank clerk who's suddenly left to coach the team while the real coach goes for a coffee. Neeld actually is part of the problem. But so are the board and the football department. Clubs have cycles, or most do. Some cycles, however, are longer for some teams than others. Collingwood is always there or thereabouts. So is Hawthorn, Geelong, West Coast (usually), Sydney, Essendon, Carlton etc. Sure there are down years, even a couple, but these teams rise up again. They don't always win premierships but they make finals, regularly. Melbourne just wallow, unable to rise, unable to improve. Why is it so? They're in the draft every year, their salary cap not greatly worse than the rest - yet still they struggle. All the time. Like Richmond for thirty years. Like the Saints often. Like the Bulldogs often. Footy department budget? Who knows, but whatever it is, Melbourne has it in spades. Some teams never fall to the extent that Melbourne has. Melbourne isn't just a rubbish team, it's a rubbish club - and that's the problem.

These are the kinds of players, from successful clubs (Dawes, Byrnes, Rodan, was he there during the premiership years?) who can teach the new brood of Demons kids how to play. Not only will they be a good example on the training track and field, but they're essentially assistant coaches brought in to set a standard. It's no good following the same mistakes of Bailey and losing by only 30 points for 2 years. Better to lose by 70 this year and perhaps win a game or two next year with some leadership. Sacking Neeld would simply be sacking another leader.

What about our other recruits? Dawes, Toumpas, Viney, Jones and Terlich have been good this year and have showed a lot of promise (or in Dawes' case, good leadership). Rodan was our best on ground against Hawthorn, and Pedersen and Byrnes haven't been too bad this year. Putting a 'broom' through our club will only set us back again. And we are sick of setbacks. Hopefully, if Neeld survives the trial-by-media, we can move forward as a club, which will be refreshing. I think that the only people who should go are the development coaching staff, because, clearly, Jack Watts is a long way behind Nic Naitanui. A couple of fresh faces on the board might be nice too. Yes, recruitment may have been poor over the last couple of years. We need a good midfield. But we can only work with what we have, and make the best of it.

Exactly. Short term pain, vs long term ache. Like ripping a bandaid off.

Neeld needs to be singled out. You talk about him inheriting a putrid list.....yet he makes it worse by signing garbage recycled players well past their use by date like Rodan, Petersen & Byrnes. He gave away 1st round draft picks to get some this "recycling". Not good enough. And certainly should be held accountable. I heard a very good suggestion....They should put a broom through the whole place. Adminstrators, coaches, recruiters & Players and start fresh!

I completely agree with this article. I couldn't care less about the Dees, but can't stand the way Neeld is being singled out. Not only did he inherit a putrid list, but his long-term plan is to develop a new style with young players. Given those facts, this team is like an expansion team with one difference: less salary cap & draft concessions. I believe that a coach must be given 3-5 years to prove his worth, otherwise the club will never have a chance to progress.

Is Rodney Eade the answer to the problems? Could he be a good coach for Melbourne to recruit? Anyway fixing Melbourne is not rocked science. What you do is you sack all the personnel responsble with recuiting players and you bring in new personnel. Then you recruit recycled players that are still good but unable top fit in another club's salary cap. Then after 2-3 years Melbourne actually startes winning matches.

yes he is...

I agree with your comments. Indeed they need a solid setup and time to develop. But they also need inspiration and leadership. The woes of the past decade (and the ongoing rubble) are symptomatic of a poor culture and administration. Yes, Neeld is not to solely blame, but the club needs a change of administration and a couch who inspires and demands respect. A coach who prepares players to go out, work together, shut down their opponent and chase the ball till it hurts. I'm not convinced Kennett is the right person to take over the club, but he would certainly create a structured, lean administration that would set a new course. And then an inspiring coach with a long term plan (and the time to develop it). In some ways this is a similar situation to that at the Tigers. The chopped and changed coaches, brought in 'band-aid' coaches who tried to buy a team (Terry Wallace?) and had a poor club culture. Hardwick seems to be doing the job, and being given the time. More time for Neeld to develop? DingoGray mentioned some of the coaches that have had the time and haven't produced, simply because they aren't elite coaches. Good, but not great. Voss, Laidley, Ratten & Bailey. Add Neeld to that list. No length of time given to him will produce results. I've heard Matthew Knights name bandied around in relation to Melbourne. He's another coach that won't work. More pain for the Demons and their fans, but they can either prolong the pain by staying with Neeld and the current administration, or commence a clear-out and 'real' rebuilding.

I'm sorry Mac but I can't buy this....... The list Dean Bailey had was only slightly better than what Neeld has now and there results are absolutely pathetic in comparison. At team that averaging 70 points per loss this season (Imagine if they hadn't played GWS & Brisbane) As Steve points out, Melbourne list are clearly not responding to Neeld's philosophies. They are playing insipid uninspired football. The unfortunate facts are Neeld is not a Senior Coach! (He's certainly not alone....Ratten, Voss, Bailey & Laidley all similar vain

While Neeld may not be to blame for the situation the Demons currently find themselves in, he is certainly not the coach they need to lead the club out of the wilderness. And he is not alone. There needs to be a clean-out from the top, a change in culture and administration. Unfortunately Neeld is simply not a head-coach. He may be a fabulous assistant, as he seemed to be well regarded at Collingwood, but having seen his pre-match talk on television a month or two ago, he is about as inspiring as a dead fish and as charismatic as a used tea-bag. It's obvious the players don't respect him, it's obvious they are not inspired by him, and they certainly don't look to him as a leader. The Demons started well against Collingwood, bu couldn't get the score on the board. In pressure situations they looked lost and lifeless, and when they gained possession of the ball (most of the time in the first quarter), they didn't know what to do with it and panicked. This is a young team (rebuilding the rebuilding the rebuilding, anyone) and they obviously haven't been coached and drilled into a single unit that reacts instinctively and with assertion. I agree, Neeld is not to blame, but he sure isn't part of the solution. (Oh, and I'm a Bombers fan)