THERE ARE three questions Melbourne fans are still asking themselves after the weekend's debacle when Port Adelaide thrashed the Demons by 79 points:

• Why is Melbourne so bad?
• How does it fix the mess?
• Does it have the people or resources to achieve success again, ever?

In a football club all the answers have to be found under the triple spotlight applied by fans, the board, and the media.

The Demons' performance in round one was pathetic but it was nothing new.

Melbourne, amazingly, has not won in round one or two since 2005. In 15 games it has lost 14 and drawn one.

It finished 5th in 2006 and then 14th, 16th, 16th, 12th, 13th and 16th. It has never been higher than 12th going into round three in that time.

ROUND 1-2 SUCCESS RATES: 2006-2013
Win% Club G W L D
87 Geelong 15 13 2 0
67 Collingwood 15 10 5 0
67 West Coast 15 10 5 0
67 Western Bulldogs 15 10 5 0
60 Carlton 15 9 6 0
60 Essendon 15 9 6 0
60 St Kilda 15 9 6 0
53 Sydney Swans 15 8 6 1
53 Port Adelaide 15 8 7 0
53 Brisbane Lions 15 8 7 0
50 Adelaide 15 7 8 0
47 Hawthorn 15 7 8 0
40 Fremantle 15 6 9 0
27 North Melbourne 15 4 11 0
25 Gold Coast Suns 4 1 3 0
13 Richmond 2 12 1
0 GWS 3 0 3 0
0 Melbourne 15 0 14 1

So to the key questions, with answers that might give the despairing Demons some hope:

Why is Melbourne so bad?

It has made poor list management decisions over a long period.  

Since 2003 its top 10 draft picks have been Colin Sylvia, Brock McLean, Cale Morton, Jack Watts, Tom Scully, Jack Trengove and now, the first under a new regime, Jimmy Toumpas.

Sylvia has promised continually and not delivered often enough. He has 21 rounds to match his efforts at training in a game and perform consistently.

McLean left. Morton went backwards at a rate of knots and was traded to the Eagles.

Watts can't regularly win a contest but appears to be trying to develop a competitive instinct under Neil Craig's direction.

Scully left. Trengove struggled last season but works hard, has a competitive attitude and is only 21. He's also one of Melbourne's co-captains.

Toumpas could be among the club's top 15 players, already. 

Jack Viney, a father-son pick, definitely IS among its top 10. 

Melbourne also has Jesse Hogan waiting in the wings.

Consistently, in recent times, the club's best players in the opening round have been first-gamers.

Viney and Matt Jones were two of the team's best on Sunday. James Magner earned two Brownlow votes on debut in 2012 and in 2010 it was Tom Scully and Jack Trengove who were among the best in their first games.

Such evidence should be damning for the established players.

Nathan Jones has been good in that time and a few others, including Jack Grimes, can hold their heads high, but Mark Jamar and Aaron Davey (who did not play last Sunday but has been working hard) have not performed consistently in the opening rounds and other players from their generation rarely rarely have either.

James McDonald was an exception yet the club called time on his career too early. That was a previous regime's mistake. 

Cameron Bruce left and Brad Miller found a new home. The departure of those three seemed to leave a leadership void.

Too often Melbourne has stood on the runway ready to launch but a huge gust of wind (think the Brisbane Lions' demolition of them in round one, 2012) has seen the mission aborted.

The fact is too many of Melbourne's senior players have been conditional – good when the going is good, but quick to throw in the towel when they start getting beaten.

The margins – both winning and losing over the past five years – are one indication of the truth of such a statement.

It means naming a consistently strong Melbourne player over 25 years of age in recent times is difficult.

Again the conditional approach was taken on Sunday, with last year's best and fairest winner Nathan Jones admitting as much on Wednesday.

"Clearly our urgency and competitiveness wasn't up to the standard we expect, " Jones said.

Anyone who saw talented defender (and former All Australian) James Frawley jogging along the MCG Members' wing trailing his opponent Justin Westhoff in the first 10 minutes of the game would have been mortified by his lack of urgency.

He probably left the MCG more quickly on Boxing Day.

Somehow the presumption that may have been made – that no player would need firing up for round one of the season – proved erroneous.

Can you imagine a player from the Sydney Swans, Hawthorn, Geelong, Collingwood, or the West Coast Eagles accepting such an effort?

Read Daniel Hannebery's explanation to AFL.com.au as to why he backed back into a pack during last year's Grand Final: "The mark wasn't really anything special," said Hannebery. "It is expected of us, to consistently play in the side."

That sort of attitude has not been a mark of Melbourne teams in the past five or six years.

When no-one could win the ball early in the game on Sunday, most crumbled like a Weetbix hit with a hammer.

"[It's] one of the worst losses I've played in due to [the fact] I was expecting us to perform to a level that I saw [equal] to the improvement I saw in the pre-season," Jones said.

Mark Neeld understands such efforts have consequences.

"Some things happen that make players and make football clubs uneasy – that’s the way it goes. It’s not nice, but that’s the industry we’re in. It’s a fierce industry," Neeld told the Demons' website.

Unfortunately the principle Melbourne must adhere to is one most supporters are fed up with: cultural change takes time.

Last year Melbourne was outscored in the second half of games by 71.26. Last Sunday, it conceded 8.12 to 1.4 after half time, showing no improvement in an area it must have targeted over the summer.

Viney addressed the group after the round one thrashing, a fair task for a first-gamer.

That action brought back memories of Joel Selwood's arrival at Geelong in 2007 when he told the Cats' perennial under-performers he was there to win a premiership.  

His words made the talented senior players prick up their ears. But it took until round 5, 2007 after the Cats lost three of its first five games, for Geelong's Paul Chapman to tell everyone he was sick of losing.

On that pivotal day when the team lost at home to North Melbourne, Chapman and Selwood were among the Cats' best.

The Cats have not looked back since that day.

You could argue Selwood embarrassed others into action.

Perhaps such a time arrives when enough is enough.

How does Melbourne fix this mess?

It needs to believe in the people in charge, back hard decisions and hold its nerve.

But it also needs to be hard on each other. And not give people outs or excuses.

As Neil Craig said on melbournefc.com.au, the club now has to earn back the supporters' and members' trust. And it needs to understand what led to a defeat of that nature.

Having belief in each other doesn't mean the people in charge don't refine their behavior, improve in certain areas or ask difficult questions.

Melbourne has backed a coaching group to orchestrate change and drive high standards.

It will continue down that path so the choice is for players to embrace it or continue to accept mediocrity. If they don't like aspects of the teaching they need to be mature enough to raise the issue and improve, not sulk and rebel as some have in the past.

Some larrikin behavior can be tolerated as long as the job is being done.

Greater risk needs to be encouraged, as long as the basic competitiveness component is fulfilled.

Neeld needs to develop a poker face to use in trying circumstances. And still expose the care he has for his players.

Grimes said Neeld had told his players he knew they could be better than they had showed on Sunday as their training sessions had demonstrated the right level of commitment.

This is not bluff. Nowadays training efforts can be measured to assess how close they become to replicating a game.

"He's not trying to reinvent the wheel," Grimes said about Neeld's response to the loss.

Jones has no doubt as to the direction in which the Demons need to proceed.

"We need 22 players to stand up and take responsibility for their own individual performance," Jones said.

The successes must be highlighted, however small. Hope and optimism can be found even in the darkest times. Viney, Jones and Hogan have offered that already this pre-season.

Does it have the people or resources to achieve success again?

Neeld is in the toughest position imaginable. He is a person with great experience, but no obvious successes at the highest level beyond four years as an assistant under Mick Malthouse in a premiership era.

He can't point to results to quieten the more rabid voices.

That's why he needs all the voices of substance backing him. That does not mean the president. It means Neil Craig taking a higher profile, asserting confidence in the Demons' path and outlining the challenges. Craig left the Crows in good enough shape to surge back up the ladder. He knows what good coaching looks like.

David Misson has seen success at the Sydney Swans and St Kilda. Melbourne is a big challenge but his experience must be remembered when questions are raised about Neeld.

Collingwood skipper Nick Maxwell, who was coached by Neeld at the Magpies, endorsed his former line coach again this week on radio.

Part of the reason Chris Dawes joined Melbourne was the coaching group.

Of course, the margin on Sundays was not the issue. There will be wide margins again this year. It was the manner in which it got wider.

Without competitive spirit no game plan will work. With it, most game-plans are a chance.

"You can have all the game-plans in the world and all the systems in the world and all the fitness in the world but if you don't go out with that competitive spirit, it all means nothing," Grimes said.

"On the weekend…we didn't have 22 players compete with the urgency required," Jones said.

If things are to change that must stop.

There are models to follow.

And it needs trusted people in positions of authority to carry them out.