the best thing FC could do now is no longer engage the media, do the talking ON THE PITCH, I have faith in Gentle, but I can't stand it when he says "the effort's there" because, in some noteable cases, it clearly bloody isn't!

fair point

Me, maybe.

Given this choice:
1) Win at Wembley, fail to make the 8 or,
2) Lose in the cup (either semi or final) and get tted again at Headingley or Craven Park in first round of play-offs

I'd prefer 1. Financially it would be much better, plus bigger profile than the play-offs and way, way more memorable than a playoff exit. It's all hypothetical anyway.

Wembley is our season now, and was always going to be anyway. We're carrying too many average players, any hopes of becoming a genuine top 4 side rest on the league dropping to 12 clubs and AP still being inclined to put his hand in his pocket, as well as getting rid of McRae.

House!

I wouldn't be happy but winning the cup would certainly offset it. Afterall you don't win anything for getting knocked out of the playoffs.

Win at Wembley was the only realistic goal this season imho. Play offs yes, but that would lead ultimately to defeat. A good draw / raising your game for 2 or 3 games in the CC is achievable as we did in 05. Give me a situation that Wire were in, in 2009 and i would be over the moon.
Then between September and November look to strengthen and move on. A cup win will bring in revenue and also raise expectations again and no doubt mean more season ticket sales next year. A marketing mans dream and all that Adam has left this season I am sorry to say.

I have always liked McRae, thinks he speaks well and does a good job of keeping FC in the media. However, the issue with his close links to a certain agent has always bothered me, and you do wonder if we have a choice between signing two players do we always opt for the one represented by said agent. Well have a look at the link below. Read the summary under client base, you would think this agent runs FC. www.howesetc.co.uk/index.php?opt ... &Itemid=27 Follow this with looking at the next link and its like the FC team sheet or players we have been linked with. www.howesetc.co.uk/index.php?opt ... &Itemid=27

I have always liked McRae, thinks he speaks well and does a good job of keeping FC in the media. However, the issue with his close links to a certain agent has always bothered me, and you do wonder if we have a choice between signing two players do we always opt for the one represented by said agent. Well have a look at the link below. Read the summary under client base, you would think this agent runs FC. www.howesetc.co.uk/index.php?opt ... &Itemid=27 Follow this with looking at the next link and its like the FC team sheet or players we have been linked with. www.howesetc.co.uk/index.php?opt ... &Itemid=27

Much as I hated to admit it in 2005 you thoroughly deserved to win the cup, beating wakefield,saints,bradford and leeds in the final.

If we do it this year I have no doubt you will feel the same. Wakey, Catalans (In France), Wire and either Broncos or Pies. It still doesn't mean anything more than raising your game (to a level that we should be consistantly playing at) for 3 or 4 games in a 30 odd game season.

This

For me I do wonder as some have already alluded too just how much influence McRae has on the signings and the fact a good chunk of our squad is with the same agent?

As Standee has pointed out we still have too many average players in the squad and the fact we are reportedly spending close to the cap the results to not compare to the outlay or come close. Yet again we are scrapping to make the play offs which even with the squad we have should have been pretty much home and hosed.

My main concern is still the big difference between our good performances and our bad ones which PG stated was one of his main priorities when he came in and here we are still seeing the same issue and basic errors.

During the course of the last 11 years we've changed the ground, shirt, coach, players and finally the owner and we still look like a heavyweight who punches like a welterweight. A Dave Boy Green masquarading as a Muhammad Ali if you will.

Clearly there are some very deep rooted problems at the club in regards to culture & mentality. Problems which may take years to address. It could be that the man who instills the right structure at our club ultimately isn't the man who reaps the rewards. An obvious example of this is Barcelona Football Club. Their success in recent years has its basis in a set-up and operation which was instigated by Johann Cryuff in the late 80's and which took 20 years to reach fruition.

It is unlikely that any SL club would require 20 years to put a masterplan in place (and even less likely to have the patience to see it through) as British RL is a considerably smaller and more enclosed sport than high level European Football, but a similar modified plan may be required if this club is ever to fulfill its potential to compete at the top year on year.

In the short term I think Gentle has reached a crossroads of sorts. A win on Sunday will probably buy him another season. Defeat in the next two games will probably see him received his papers, possibly with immediate effect. I just think Pearson will run out patience in that scenario and take action. Whether changing the coach will have any kind of effect is debatable due to the reason listed above, but I can't see Pearson merely letting things drift along aimlessly.

My own gut feeling is that Gentle will survive by the skin of his teeth and he will still be head coach come the start of next year, but he is clearly under pressure to start delivering a significant improvement over the course of the next 12 months or it is surely curtains for his time at the club.

Er, doesn't Howes also represent Gentle? There is not a single shred of evidence to support the hypothesis that the players we have signed or re-signed since Gentle joined us have been anything other than his signings. And yet we have people on a semi-regular basis suggesting that McRae is the problem, when the club have made clear that he has no direct input into first team matters. I find this odd.

This is how I see the McRae's role, could be wrong:

Gentle highlights to McRae a number of player targets, placing priority on certain ones. McRae's job is to liaise with the agents, get the players signed and deal with the contract and what not. As well as retaining surrent players. This frees up Gentle to concentrate on first team matters, rather than worry about financial constraints, agents and what not.

McRae will also oversee other parts of the Rugby side of the club, youth coaches reporting to him, signing and retaining youth, training facilities, Sirius Academy etc. He'll oversee the lot and ensure that should there be any problems, he's the man to fix them.

Then he is the 'rugby man' who speaks/advices Pearson. Pearson won't be in the offices of the KC everyday, I imagine he'll go in & get briefed by heads of dept (inc McRae).

If you look at the amount of recruitment/retention that must go on at the club at all levels, I'm quite glad the club has someone to shoulder this burden instead of Gentle. I haven't seen any evidence of McRae being involved in day-to-day first team affairs.

I may be wrong, but that's how I see his input, and I'm happy to have him at the club.