: Sun Mar 15, 2009 10:01 pm  

redeverready wrote:

I think you'd be surprised the amount of interest if the job became open.

Amount or quality?

: Sun Mar 15, 2009 10:02 pm  

Cibaman wrote:

Amount or quality?

Both.

: Sun Mar 15, 2009 10:11 pm  

redeverready wrote:

Both.

Before or after they were appraised of the limited funds available for new signings?

: Sun Mar 15, 2009 10:32 pm  

Adeybull wrote:

Before or after they were appraised of the limited funds available for new signings?

And the small or negligible sum offered as a wage after Macca's compo has been paid , still I like the tooth fairy idea anyone know who their agent is or where they reside maybe we could all pop over and rattle our collection tins to see if we can get enough dosh to fulfill some of the aspirations of the loyal and faithful Bradford fans.

TBH he has got a big hole to dig us out of, his new contract and our season will probably come down to the next 10 games, but I doubt he will leave until the end of the season. I hope we get to see our team start to perform, wining the league or the cup is a big ask ATM but good entertaining committed rugby would be a good starting point.

: Sun Mar 15, 2009 10:34 pm  

Adeybull wrote:

Before or after they were appraised of the limited funds available for new signings?

Where's the proof for this same nugget what keeps cropping up. Peter Hood has said on numerous occasion's that we are spending to the full cap and the top players what come available we would still be in the market for. He's either telling the truth or lying and taking the fans for mugs.

: Sun Mar 15, 2009 10:49 pm  

redeverready wrote:

Where's the proof for this same nugget what keeps cropping up. Peter Hood has said on numerous occasion's that we are spending to the full cap and the top players what come available we would still be in the market for. He's either telling the truth or lying and taking the fans for mugs.

I said "limited".

And I'm not naive enough to believe that the sum of what players receive - at some clubs anyway - is no more than the salary cap.

But if we ARE spending to the cap this year (and that begs the question of how Bird was to be funded?) then it would logical to assume that any funds for additional signings this year must indeed be limited?

Unless we could offload players to another club - but I suspect the ones who we might wish to offload would be the very ones other clubs would not want to take, especially on current packages?

Of course, if we...sorry the player's agent...could persuade some unconnected third party to pay the player direct a large wedge for his services in e.g promoting their services or products, and as a result the player felt happy signing for Bulls at a salary well below market cos he was already earning enough, well maybe we COULD manage it? Except that in this God-forsaken city, and with no sugar daddy, where is the queue of such unconnected businesses or persons?

Next year, with so many players off contract, should be a different story. Provided of course we don't get the Morans of this world gazumping us again.

And anyway, is Hood likely to tell the supporters all the commercial realities? I fear not, although I am on record as saying I do think that the club needs to be a little more candid if they are to better carry the support with them.

: Sun Mar 15, 2009 11:04 pm  

Adeybull wrote:

But if we ARE spending to the cap this year (and that begs the question of how Bird was to be funded?) then it would logical to assume that any funds for additional signings this year must indeed be limited?

Hood said we had salary cap space left which would be used if the right player became available.

Adeybull wrote:

Next year, with so many players off contract, should be a different story. Provided of course we don't get the Morans of this world gazumping us again.

Why it was no different this year after Harris, Hape, Joe's, Evans wages came off the cap.

Adeybull wrote:

And anyway, is Hood likely to tell the supporters all the commercial realities? I fear not, although I am on record as saying I do think that the club needs to be a little more candid if they are to better carry the support with them.

There's been candid about the realities and telling barefaced porkies about everything. IMO it would be better to say nothing at all than everything is OK.

: Sun Mar 15, 2009 11:21 pm  

Fair points Red (as always). My take, FWIW:

redeverready wrote:

Hood said we had salary cap space left which would be used if the right player became available.

That bit puzzles me too...maybe that was how Bird was to be funded, or maybe - as I assumed - such funds were...limited? He HAD said earlier that the coach had been given the full salary cap to spend - which was not the same as saying it was being spent. I would really like to think we have some scope here tbh, and given the targets we missed out on in the close season maybe there IS more scope? (Does not change my argument about funds available for coaching staff etc, though).

redeverready wrote:

Why it was no different this year after Harris, Hape, Joe's, Evans wages came off the cap.

Thats been debated on here loads of times, with folk demonstrating where the money allegedly went (all 847 permutations of it, one of which might even be right...) usually including seriously uprating various existing contracts. But I really hoped people would have cottoned-on to implications of why we broke the salary cap before: primarily, payments made to players by supposed unconnected third parties were found to be not structured well enough to escape being caught by the cap IIRC? At least thats how I read the Harris image rights business and the Tetleys Sponsorship issue or whatever it was... and my point is that I doubt such opportunities are now available, in this city and given our steady fall from grace and for other reasons.

redeverready wrote:

There's been candid about the realities and telling barefaced porkies about everything. IMO it would be better to say nothing at all than everything is OK.

But then folk would be saying why is the club treating the fans with contempt and not communicating with them? I really feel the club is between a rock and a hard place on this one, and only they will be in a position to assess the pros and cons of telling more (or less).

Re: Macca... You decide!!! : Sun Mar 15, 2009 11:31 pm  

eddievan wrote:

Most of the player you state he let go went for numerous reasons and would not have sayed for any coach.

Mick Withers fantatstic as he was, was let go because he was knackered as was proved a correct decision when he had to retire a few months into a 2 year contract with wigan.

Les and Shonny were also too crocked to play RL at the level they were used to play.

Brett Ferres who I used to cheer on was so successful Wakey let him go.

Hendo, Myers, Bai and Ben Harris clearly wanted to go back to Aus. (and did)

Paul Johnson wanted a $HITLOAD OF MONEY WHICH COULD NOT BE JUSTIFIED

Feilden clearly stated he wanted to go!

Stan wanted to see his career out with KR.

So the only 2 he could have kept was I harris who most of the fans thought was ok but not worth the large salary we were paying him.

I would have liked to have kept Ryan Atkins but when he was let go we had two better centres. (I may be wrong but I thought this was under Noble)

So in most of the cases you have cited Mcnamara either made the right decision or had no sway in what the individual players chose to do.

With regards to recruitment, we dont have a great deal of dosh and so he has work in the market for the players we can afford.

It is still early doors this season and it is far from great, but I see no point at all in sacking the coach until we have someone who we feel can really make a difference, not the likes of Mcrae, Harrison and co who have done nothing.

Quality post mate but don't expect a response from the Revolutionary Court just yet. They're too busy knitting.

: Sun Mar 15, 2009 11:32 pm  

Adeybull wrote:

Fair points Red (as always). My take, FWIW:



That bit puzzles me too...maybe that was how Bird was to be funded, or maybe - as I assumed - such funds were...limited? He HAD said earlier that the coach had been given the full salary cap to spend - which was not the same as saying it was being spent. I would really like to think we have some scope here tbh, and given the targets we missed out on in the close season maybe there IS more scope? (Does not change my argument about funds available for coaching staff etc, though).



Thats been debated on here loads of times, with folk demonstrating where the money allegedly went (all 847 permutations of it, one of which might even be right...) usually including seriously uprating various existing contracts. But I really hoped people would have cottoned-on to implications of why we broke the salary cap before: primarily, payments made to players by supposed unconnected third parties were found to be not structured well enough to escape being caught by the cap IIRC? At least thats how I read the Harris image rights business and the Tetleys Sponsorship issue or whatever it was... and my point is that I doubt such opportunities are now available, in this city and given our steady fall from grace and for other reasons.



But then folk would be saying why is the club treating the fans with contempt and not communicating with them? I really feel the club is between a rock and a hard place on this one, and only they will be in a position to assess the pros and cons of telling more (or less).

While the club keeps telling us everything is OK even if it isn't all they are doing is putting increasing pressure upon on themselves by their apparent none action on everything.