Current State of OUR Club

the debate isn’t about collins at the moment, it’s about whether mccall gets a free ride from people.. bringing the discussion back to collins just shows that people can’t isolate mccalls performance and seem to need to get away from discussing his limitations.

 

What is wrong with your logic? Why are you drawing so many ridiculous conclusions. How does taking a job out of love for the club equate to:

- Believing you are bigger than the club?
- having an inkling that things were going to go wrong?
- believing he will get minimaal blame?

What the fck are you talking about?

 

Thing with this is, if the three amigos all sat round a table and decided to sign that crock of shite it means two of amigos are still here with an active input into player recruitment. That is worrying.

 

Who is giving him a free ride? You seem to be the one on some kind of crusade. Your thesis seems to be 'McCall has got away without any blame so I'm going to set the record straight'. Sorry to say but you don't need this agenda. Plenty have criticised McCall. You're the one that seems to be claiming that the owners need to be given more credence because of McCall's involvement.

 

Development squad starlet sales Nick as now

 

because taking a job for the love of the club when your head is telling you no but your heart is telling you yes, when you have reservations about the role and your job spec - is not the best way to start a new job.

if you can’t separate between emotion and reality then one clouds the other and taking a job knowing that if things go wrong you can walk away (first time) or get sacked (second time) but because of your ifinity with the club the supporters won’t lay any responsibility at your door and will blame everything or everyone else apart from yourself screams of an arrogance saying “i can do what i want here and get away scott free” hence, being bigger than the club.

 

Apologies in advance as I know people have already responded to this but I just want too add my say.

Good idea in theory, but not practice unfortunately. I doubt we have anywhere near 10,000 adult fans who could afford to spunk £1000 on a football club, people have house holds to keep, mouths to feed, bills to pay, there are far more important things in life than football even for those who can technically can afford it. A fair amount of our fan base is made up of young children and elderly people who will be living off a pension, not too mention Bradford is one of the poorer areas of the country. I also saw someone say we'd only need 2000 fans to pay £3000, again I think that's a massive stretch, realistically only people with high paid jobs and business men and women could afford that on top of the cost of living, I doubt we have 2000 who fall into this category.

Then there's running costs of the club if a bid were successful, we are running at nearly a million deficit at the moment and that equates to a mid table budget, another massive overlay per season for people to have to fork out for. Portsmouth had too sell to progress eventually to a billionaire.

The only way I could see something like this having a chance is if say 20% of the club was sold of to the fans with rich business men making up the 80%.

 

I know and I'm still bloody worried about that. I'm just saying that the third amigo doesn't get off Scot free.

I accepted the Walsall example you suggested earlier by the way but since the 2 players you mentioned only combined to play 26 minutes of league football I'm not sure they are the best example. I take the general point though.

 

I have tried to consider a more eloquent response but all I can muster up is 'utter bollocks'. How about this: 'I have reservations but my passion for the club will put me in a position where I can give it my absolute best'. If you think McCall was thinking he would take the job because he would get an easy ride then I suggest you never saw him play, heard him speak or know anything whatsoever about the man. In trying to assert your standpoint that McCall has been given preferential treaatment you have jumped to the other extreme and then run with it to the point of sounding utterly ridiculous.

 

didn’t mccall say that he knew and had an input on every first team player that walked through the door but yes, he wasn’t aware of all the development players that did?

the problem is that, when there are so many injuries to the first team squad the matchday squad has to be subsidised by the development squad (when the players weren’t good enough for first team football).

if you look back at both first team squads under mccall’s 18 months, the number of ‘senior pros’ probably wasn’t that much different (quality is another discussion) but the difference was the first year hardly had an injury or suspension whereas the second year had up to 8 (?) first team squad injuries at the same time and therefore we had to use development players all at the same time. if there had been 8 injuries in the first year we’d probably have struggled just as much as in the second when all the injuries happened together as the youth / development players weren’t good enough.

unfortunately at this level you can’t afford to run a first team squad of 25 senior pros because the finances won’t allow it and eventually someone’s nose is put out of place because they want to be playing.

 

You actually explain why Stuart didn't leave (his love for the club outweighed his feelings about the way the club was being run), and placing this alongside the fact that Stuart couldn't affect ANYTHING from outside the club, it's clear why Stuart continued his employment at Bradford City. If you love a club that's being badly run, your best bet is to work from the inside where you can actually have a degree of impact.

I'm not quite sure, therefore, why you're inferring that he was happy with the model and things were relatively fine.

If you want to dismiss ALL TALK coming from fans or indeed current or former employees, then you really don't have a valid part in the debate. You're effectively skirting around it, while trying to present a skewed view (while claiming everybody else's view is skewed).

 

Imagine if he’d have spent £750k on Dack and kept Meredith. Where do you think City would be now?

 

i understand your need to defend him to the hilt and believe the man can do no wrong but he is not a saint you know.

like i’ve said in a previous post i’ve had the pleasure to meet, talk and taken part in numerous coaching sessions with mccall, and i like the man but i’m not blind enough not to realise his flaws.

 

I don't think you will shut up until everyone chants 'McCall was sh*t and ruined our club'! Would that be enough? Are you a bit slow? Read very carefully 'McCall was not without faults'.

Lets make this a bit more simple. I like to quantify things. What would you give McCall out of ten for his second spell here as manager?

 

Injuries do play a big part in lower league football but we did have injuries in McCalls first 12 months. The big difference we had 4 or 5 players of quality that moved on at the end of the season (the club had no real choice in any of them leaving) and were not adequately replaced. Even now we are about 3 decent players away from being a decent side. Thats workable, unfortunately two of those are in centre midfield. One quality central midfielder and a decent foil for Doyle, say a championship striker currently kicking his heels, and this team has a good shot at the playoffs. Our recruitment looks poor and disjointed again leaving us with a weak squad and no cover for our one decent striker. You want success? you cannot do it on the cheap.

 

You keep banging on about people not realising his flaws as a manager? Where has anyone said he didn't have flaws? Name me one manager outside the top two or three who doesn't have flaws in their management? Jose Mourinho, most successful manager currently in the premiership, you could pull his game apart if you wanted to. Simon Grayson, best league 1 record around, his style of football stank the place out and his methods look outdated. No one, even @Ricc who worships the man, has said McCall doesn't have flaws.

 

I'm sure I seem to remember @brisbanebantams being a relatively sensible poster. I'm not sure why he is playing silly beggars with this line of approach. He doesn't seem to be listening to this line of reasoning. Apparently if you have anything positive to say about McCall it equates to 'defending him to the hilt'.

 

Those who are perplexed why Rahic comes in for more criticism than McCall even though both played their part in last seasons shambles are missing the obvious.

Even if McCall was 90% responsible for our failure last season, he's gone, he's irrelevant and has no bearing on the future of our club.

Rahic on the other hand played his part in last seasons failure, he's played his part in this years failure (to date) and will play his part in many more to come if he carries on as he's doing.

It doesn't take a genius to work out why Rahic is the main focus point and why McCall gets an easier ride in comparison.

 

I wasn't even that bothered when McCall was sacked. The red flag was the appointment of Collins for me. Would it be blinkered to suggest that McCall didn't have anything to do with that?

 

I certainly won't back McCall blindly, i thought he made some poor decisions at times, his substitutions were uninspiring and he worried far too much about the opposition. But taking all mitigating circumstances into account, he got us to a playoff final and had us in the playoffs when he was sacked. Thats why i stand up for him, nothing to do with him being a legend of the club, its the fact that his second spell of manager warranted respect, it seems some don't want give him that.