I'm still at a loss to now precisely what rebuilding means in this context. Do we have to knock everything down first, because this seems to be what is happening? Much like all this positive tendency/negative tendency - what's negative about wanting a first team that plays with pride, consistently and performs somewhere near their potential, and how exactly is it positive to hold the 'nothing can be done' (because of finances/rebuilding etc) position as crowds and league position decline.

We all know that without a financial backer with clout and a notoriously precarious walk up audience things can slide quickly. What impact do you think a second half of the season that is anywhere near the first half will have on season ticket sales, and how exactly will that be offset by some fictional rebuilding, particularly when the coach admits he doesn't know how to get the best from the players he has?

I am considering the whole picture...

2 Seasons Ago...average

Last Year...average

This season...way below average

Recruitment...in the main poor

Attendances...down

What else should I considering?

I mean I havent got access to backroom etc so all I can really go on is results and performances and what I see and Im not liking what I see.

You obviously want SM to stay, fair enough I thought the same 2 weeks ago but there has to come a time when you draw the line.

How many years should we give him?

Average? 2007? - finished a close 3rd - winning only 3 points less than the unbeaten Saints? That's "average"? Er, I don't think so. How quickly some memories fade!



In connection with that, and the question about what constitutes rebuilding, we have been blessed with a fine dynasty in SL but here's the 2005 Final squad:-

Michael Withers - GONE
Leon Pryce - GONE
Ben Harris - GONE
Shontayne Hape - GONE
Lesley Vainikolo - GONE
Iestyn Harris - GONE
Paul Deacon
Jamie Peacock - GONE
Ian Henderson - GONE
Stuart Fielden - GONE
Paul Johnson - GONE
Brad Meyers - GONE
Lee Radford - GONE

Robbie Paul - GONE
Jamie Langley
Adrian Morley - GONE
Joe Vagana - GONE

I'd just make the point, which I've made before, and no doubt will have to make again, that if you almost completely dismantle a title winning side, it's the end of an era. You need to deal with this fact.

Now, if you then go on and argue why didn't we scour the globe and buy up another title-winning squad, I'd just tell you life ain't like that. You can't buy a title. You could of course point out that all the other teams, bar Leeds, also failed to construct a team to win the title, or even challenge Leeds/Saints' current hegemony - but that would be too realistic.

You could ask, why, given that pretty much the entire title winning squad is gone, didn't McNamara just go out and replace them all, man for man, with an equally title-winning squad. I'd say anyone who thinks, or thought, that Bradford had some god-given right to always win everything, or perennially keep challenging for 1-2, was either a child or a lunatic. But that's the reason we aren't a top team any more- it's a 95% different team, and that's how it goes.

The squad we do now have should, of course, have done much better in terms of results, in terms of some games and in terms of parts of other games, but recruitment, which "in the main" has brought in players of the calibre of Morrison, Menzies, Tadulala, Worrincy, Lynch etc. may be alot of things but "poor" is just silly.

Why the squad we have got has spluttered and underachieved this year as it has is a good and valid question, but you won't be helped in looking for the answer if you overlook the facts or ignore the obvious.

If the whole picture includes dwindling crowds, embarrassing results, poor recruitment, increased apathy from the support and complete lack of confidence in the coach, then I reckon that a lot of people have done exactly that, as often gets mentioned on here.

He has also been given the credit for his work in emphasising the youth policy and we will see if that does bear fruit in time I guess.

It is also widely accepted that we are not exactly rolling in cash at the moment, Odsal is a drain on the resources and the OSV is less likely to been seen in existence than the Loch Ness Monster.

We have also been told by the Chairman that we are spending full cap so we cannot really use that as an excuse, and therefore, again this raises questions about the quality of recruitment and/or whether the money is being badly used.

I also accept that we have had injuries to the likes of Morrison, Solomona, Lynch, Nero etc but all clubs get injuries so, as unfortunate as it is, we have to deal with it and get the best out of what we have at our disposal.

Which raises another point. As we all know, I have to do my majority of watching of RL on Sky, and Bradford are obviously no exception to this. This is where I am less able to comment but the general view on here is that the effort that is getting put in is not really good enough and questions will rightly be raised about this.

So, that is my take on the situation and if there is anything else in the picture that I am not aware of, perhaps you would like to let us know?

There are 3 reasons why we haven't been able to replace those players:

1) Money - it simply cannot be the case that the current squad are being paid anything like those players, surely?

2) Youth development -that squad had strong core of Bulls developed players. We're currently paying a hefty price for the failure to sustain that from 2000 to 2006.

3) Recruitment - I do think it has generally been poor. Our success from 1997 to 2005 owed a lot to inspired recruitment of hidden gems such as Withers, Gartner, forshaw & Anderson. Of our recent sigings, only Morrison (targeted initiallly by Noble) has proved to be a consistently better player than was expected. The others have been extremely inconsistent.

The cut and thrust of it is that we have lost good players recently but we still have a good team with potential. Its just that our coach is not bringing out this potential.

We are second bottom of the league, we are lucky the franchise system was introduced otherwise we might be in danger of relegation. Although the way things are going we probably wont get a licence next time.

Buck stops with the coach im afraid.

But that's just a cliche. We all know that 99% of all coaches go, sooner or later, most having a quite short tenure, and that's basically for two reasons, first all teams sooner or later end up doing worse than the (usually unrealistic) expectations and second, in that situation they can either sack the team or sack the coach; but (obviously) you can't sack the team and that is why the "buck" always stops with the coach.

It may or may not be the coach's fault - but he will pay for it.

(In fact I'd also reckon that in most cases the "fault" is shared between the players, board and coach, but a large part is fans who put boards under pressure.)

Look at Bradford City, the other team in the city to have an ex-player called S. Mc coaching them. City ended up having an appalling season, crashing out of the playoff race like a lead weight from a plane, and played for the last couple of months like partially sighted, unfit chimps, yet McCall hasn't gone.

On the contrary, a campaign was launched to persuade him to stay! As the fans love him, and reckon it was the players let them and him down. So they clamour to keep him, despite the failure, and despite the obvious fact that when the chips were down he could hardly coach his side to kick a ball, let alone gain a point.

I don't think we have unrealistic expectations but personally I don't expect us to be second bottom and neither can it be said that we don't consider the whole picture....3 years is a long time to consider after all.

We obviously have space under the cap hence why we were able to go after Bird and yes recruitment is part of the issue of where we are now. I would however point out that i do not believe the current squad is delivering on it's potential and SM has been in charge long enough to be able to sort out signings and instill his methods.

We are not performing and haven't been for a while, people seem to be laying the blame at the fact of the squad we had and what it is now, I know we don't have a benefactor and we don't "exploit" loopholes but even so Saints have managed to keep their position. Am i saying we should still be there fighting to be number 1, of course what true fan wouldn't but in reality I except change and perhaps we are not as well off as others, but to drop so far in such a short period of time is alarming.

We seem to go in circles, we lose then people moan then a few days after when it's calmed down a bit the pro mac supporters come out again telling us that we have unrealistic expectations and we should be glad of the job he's doing, we're not considering the bigger picture and it'll all come good in the end.

You know what I hope it does, but i don't think it will unless somethings changed, as you say the only thing that can be changed short term is the manager.

We need to move forward as a club and i see no messages coming from the club about rebuilding e.t.c the only message that's being sent out at the moment is the defeats, attendances and our position in the league table. If we have a long term plan do we really have to slump to these depths to deliver it? If we do, why is the club not communicating the vision?

Excellent point.

But remember this is all part of "the plan"

It is and hopefully the fans forum will go some way to explaining this question.

A couple of other points:

1. On Saints maintenance of their position, don't forget they had a 3 year absence from OT.
Although I accept they've recovered quicker than we look to be.

2. Rebuilding is a long process and in response to some other comments, I do think there has had to be an element of tearing things down to start again.
You can't invent a good junior side, that takes an awful lot of time and energy and the absence of these players who could and would have broken the first team have seen an elevated wage bill due to the fact we've had to sign established players, players who, quite rightly, have higher salary expectations.

3. Cibaman also raises a good point re: hidden gems. Maybe if the Aus option is becoming more limited, there are some hidden gems in the NL's

Perhaps the biggest of several parts of the puzzle you are missing is the issue of "Will sacking McNamara make things better?" You treat this as a no-brainer, when the fact is that it would cause great disruption and the club would have to be very fortunate to recruit a coach of sufficient ability to counteract that. Just for example, Brian Mac's record at Quins suggests that good as he is, in the unlikely event of him taking the job, he would not meet this standard.

Agreed.

What's to say SM leaving wouldn't also see some of the top names leave too, in an uncertain environment, that would be quite possible!

A question I will be putting for the fans forum is how many juniors have they forecasted to make it through to be regular first teamers each season over the next 3 to 4 years. No need to name names, I appreciate that's impossible but they must have some idea of numbers.

I would also ask if they thought the current first team was capable of providing the right environment for young players to progress given the first team performances so far this season.

I do have a worry that we may be expecting a little too much from junior development and are possibly not recruiting from outside as well as we might. If cash is tight the temptation is there to spend more on bringing young players though as it's more economical. The risk is that will impact on the cash available to recruit from outside so we get fewer proven top class players.

Aside from occasional gluts of young players coming through every once in a while it seems to me that you can't expect more than a couple to come through each year.

While I hope this plan may pay dividands in the long term I worry that the club doesn't have the finance or support to underpin this very long term approach.

Where is the evidence that Brian Mc would not meet this standard? He has turned a mediocre team, whose survival I was concerned about, into a consistent, well-coached, top 5 team. Steve Mc has turned a top 5 team into a bottom 2 team.

No it isn't all down to Steve, and I don't think theres any true fans on here would be as unintelligent as to think it is all down to him. But the question is a valid one in that, `can he turn it around?'