Richardson out

[Sutekh]

I’m happy to give LEAM time, he’s inherited a mess of a club.

One thing I will say, I know often manager interviews are pretty empty conversations but I’m not sure I’ve heard a manager waffle and use so many words to say so little before.

Apparently we lost because none of our players had played at valley parade before

Thought Adkins was bad where every interview started with him talking everyone through the match no matter what he’d been asked, now we’re told we lost as no one had played there before (overlooking the players that had of course (probably not what he meant but is the way it sounded - well I suppose that explains the Kidderminster and Eastleigh debacles but I’m now not looking forward to Plymouth on Boxing Day.

Didn’t Ince also start losing it in interviews at the end and Rodgers also couldn’t withstand the might of Tim in the end

[Snowflake Royal]

Managers are asked the same shit every interview, and every manager talks bollocks, particularly after a while or when performing badly.

[Snowflake Royal]

Also, let's be clear. His record is P5, W2,D1,L2

It's hardly awful, even if the football has been.

Now if when he gets to 10 games under his belt and we haven't got at least 4 wins, he's clearly not going to last the season beyond miraculous signings saving the day. Because the next 5 games include 3 relegation candidates. We cannot afford to lose to more than 1 of them imo. Even if we beat one of Luton or Stockport.

Beat your rivals and you'll likely be ok. Lose to them and you're fuvked. Losing to Bradford doesn't matter. Losing to Posh really did matter.

[Snowflake Royal]

On the plus side, Cambridge are woeful and they're 9th in L2.

[stealthpapes]

Also, let's be clear. His record is P5, W2,D1,L2

It's hardly awful, even if the football has been.

Now if when he gets to 10 games under his belt and we haven't got at least 4 wins, he's clearly not going to last the season beyond miraculous signings saving the day. Because the next 5 games include 3 relegation candidates. We cannot afford to lose to more than 1 of them imo. Even if we beat one of Luton or Stockport.

Beat your rivals and you'll likely be ok. Lose to them and you're fuvked. Losing to Bradford doesn't matter. Losing to Posh really did matter.

L3 no?

My gut feeling is that he'll end up with about the same record as Hunt this season (League only W3 D6 L5, with EFL cup W5 D6 L6) and that one cup defeat will stack the odds more against him than the wins.

its insane that people are already semi-seriously contemplating Leam out. Where the fuck have you been the last few seasons?

[Snowflake Royal]

Also, let's be clear. His record is P5, W2,D1,L2

It's hardly awful, even if the football has been.

Now if when he gets to 10 games under his belt and we haven't got at least 4 wins, he's clearly not going to last the season beyond miraculous signings saving the day. Because the next 5 games include 3 relegation candidates. We cannot afford to lose to more than 1 of them imo. Even if we beat one of Luton or Stockport.

Beat your rivals and you'll likely be ok. Lose to them and you're fuvked. Losing to Bradford doesn't matter. Losing to Posh really did matter.

L3 no?

My gut feeling is that he'll end up with about the same record as Hunt this season (League only W3 D6 L5, with EFL cup W5 D6 L6) and that one cup defeat will stack the odds more against him than the wins.

its insane that people are already semi-seriously contemplating Leam out. Where the fuck have you been the last few seasons?

Only if you count cup games, but that was technicaly a draw if you want to do that.

[stealthpapes]

that one cup defeat will stack the odds more against him than the wins.

but go ahead, let's pretend it was a draw.

[Snowflake Royal]

that one cup defeat will stack the odds more against him than the wins.

but go ahead, let's pretend it was a draw.

Sure fans will latch on to it to push an out agenda. But it simply doesn't matter when it comes.to league performance.

If he wins enough games to keep us safe, it’s irrelevent, if he doesn't its irrelevent.

[MR. CYNICAL]

Also, let's be clear. His record is P5, W2,D1,L2

It's hardly awful, even if the football has been.

Now if when he gets to 10 games under his belt and we haven't got at least 4 wins, he's clearly not going to last the season beyond miraculous signings saving the day. Because the next 5 games include 3 relegation candidates. We cannot afford to lose to more than 1 of them imo. Even if we beat one of Luton or Stockport.

Beat your rivals and you'll likely be ok. Lose to them and you're fuvked. Losing to Bradford doesn't matter. Losing to Posh really did matter.

L3 no?

My gut feeling is that he'll end up with about the same record as Hunt this season (League only W3 D6 L5, with EFL cup W5 D6 L6) and that one cup defeat will stack the odds more against him than the wins.

its insane that people are already semi-seriously contemplating Leam out. Where the fuck have you been the last few seasons?

To be fair, I didn't even want him in!

[Lower West]

:lol: I love the patience that is unique to football fans. He’s had a month and zero transfer windows to try and sort things out with a load of largely inexperienced youngsters and free transfer cast offs he wasn’t responsible for bringing in. He is obviously not a Mark McGhee or Alan Pardew (let alone a Brian (and things got decidedly worse under him at first) or a Steve) so it is going to take the rest of this season to get things onto whatever lines he wants to develop. Not having any money to spend is also going to be a big show stopper and delay things further.

Was easy to make Hunt the scape goat,,,,,,,,,,,,

Financial implcations for any club of relegation is now so severe. Owners resort to rolling the dice. There's no actual long term strategy.

The concern of panic buying will be contract lengths; you need players to fulfil a short term need, but they hold out for a longer contract as they know you're desperate. I already think we've seen that with Marriot and Ritchie.

If we stay up but have an uninspiring season, next season's rebuild gets harder when we have a load of mid-30s players and L1 journeymen locked into long term contracts. It's the cycle we saw with Dai in the Championship.

There's no guarantee any signing will work out. Offering a long term contract at the outset. Is fraught with it's own issues. For L1 and L2 clubs the more recent financial rules i.e. Salary cap management protocol (SCMP). Have changed the landscape. Certainly has brought about a levelling between clubs. Those get it wrong soon find themselves falling through the trapdoor even as far straight down into the National League. Bristol Rovers seemingly the latest club to take a punt and now suffering the consequences. With an inability to offload players tied into expensive contracts .

[Clyde1998]

Was easy to make Hunt the scape goat,,,,,,,,,,,,

Financial implcations for any club of relegation is now so severe. Owners resort to rolling the dice. There's no actual long term strategy.

The concern of panic buying will be contract lengths; you need players to fulfil a short term need, but they hold out for a longer contract as they know you're desperate. I already think we've seen that with Marriot and Ritchie.

If we stay up but have an uninspiring season, next season's rebuild gets harder when we have a load of mid-30s players and L1 journeymen locked into long term contracts. It's the cycle we saw with Dai in the Championship.

There's no guarantee any signing will work out. Offering a long term contract at the outset. Is fraught with it's own issues. For L1 and L2 clubs the more recent financial rules i.e. Salary cap management protocol (SCMP). Have changed the landscape. Certainly has brought about a levelling between clubs. Those get it wrong soon find themselves falling through the trapdoor even as far straight down into the National League. Bristol Rovers seemingly the latest club to take a punt and now suffering the consequences. With an inability to offload players tied into expensive contracts .

This is why I was critical of the deals given to players like Ritchie; Marriott; D Williams; etc. at the start of the season: the contract length was too long. Two year (or longer) deals don't make much sense at this level, unless they're for high potential players, and this is especially the case for older players who could see a sudden ability decline. We gave a three year deal to Jack Marriott; a four year deal to Paudie O'Connor!

1+1 deals were really what we needed to give out to older players. From the player's point of view it gives them an incentive to perform too, although they could probably find someone who'd give them the guarantee of two years minimum.

[WestYorksRoyal]

The concern of panic buying will be contract lengths; you need players to fulfil a short term need, but they hold out for a longer contract as they know you're desperate. I already think we've seen that with Marriot and Ritchie.

If we stay up but have an uninspiring season, next season's rebuild gets harder when we have a load of mid-30s players and L1 journeymen locked into long term contracts. It's the cycle we saw with Dai in the Championship.

There's no guarantee any signing will work out. Offering a long term contract at the outset. Is fraught with it's own issues. For L1 and L2 clubs the more recent financial rules i.e. Salary cap management protocol (SCMP). Have changed the landscape. Certainly has brought about a levelling between clubs. Those get it wrong soon find themselves falling through the trapdoor even as far straight down into the National League. Bristol Rovers seemingly the latest club to take a punt and now suffering the consequences. With an inability to offload players tied into expensive contracts .

This is why I was critical of the deals given to players like Ritchie; Marriott; D Williams; etc. at the start of the season: the contract length was too long. Two year (or longer) deals don't make much sense at this level, unless they're for high potential players, and this is especially the case for older players who could see a sudden ability decline. We gave a three year deal to Jack Marriott; a four year deal to Paudie O'Connor!

1+1 deals were really what we needed to give out to older players. From the player's point of view it gives them an incentive to perform too, although they could probably find someone who'd give them the guarantee of two years minimum.

O'Connor is different. He's 27, was one of the best CBs in the league for a couple of years. I was pleased to get a fixture of the team locked in, and even if it's not working yet, he must surely be one of the central planks a successful manager would build upon.

[Clyde1998]

There's no guarantee any signing will work out. Offering a long term contract at the outset. Is fraught with it's own issues. For L1 and L2 clubs the more recent financial rules i.e. Salary cap management protocol (SCMP). Have changed the landscape. Certainly has brought about a levelling between clubs. Those get it wrong soon find themselves falling through the trapdoor even as far straight down into the National League. Bristol Rovers seemingly the latest club to take a punt and now suffering the consequences. With an inability to offload players tied into expensive contracts .

This is why I was critical of the deals given to players like Ritchie; Marriott; D Williams; etc. at the start of the season: the contract length was too long. Two year (or longer) deals don't make much sense at this level, unless they're for high potential players, and this is especially the case for older players who could see a sudden ability decline. We gave a three year deal to Jack Marriott; a four year deal to Paudie O'Connor!

1+1 deals were really what we needed to give out to older players. From the player's point of view it gives them an incentive to perform too, although they could probably find someone who'd give them the guarantee of two years minimum.

O'Connor is different. He's 27, was one of the best CBs in the league for a couple of years. I was pleased to get a fixture of the team locked in, and even if it's not working yet, he must surely be one of the central planks a successful manager would build upon.

At his age, a 2+1 would make some sense. Certainly wouldn't be looking at giving anyone a definite three or four year deal aside from the brightest of young talent; O'Connor is probably one of the top earners at the club too.

IIRC, he played primarily in a three-CB system at Lincoln - which may be why we haven't seen the best of him yet, as he's having to adapt to the two-CB system we've typically been playing.

[Hound]

This is why I was critical of the deals given to players like Ritchie; Marriott; D Williams; etc. at the start of the season: the contract length was too long. Two year (or longer) deals don't make much sense at this level, unless they're for high potential players, and this is especially the case for older players who could see a sudden ability decline. We gave a three year deal to Jack Marriott; a four year deal to Paudie O'Connor!

1+1 deals were really what we needed to give out to older players. From the player's point of view it gives them an incentive to perform too, although they could probably find someone who'd give them the guarantee of two years minimum.

O'Connor is different. He's 27, was one of the best CBs in the league for a couple of years. I was pleased to get a fixture of the team locked in, and even if it's not working yet, he must surely be one of the central planks a successful manager would build upon.

At his age, a 2+1 would make some sense. Certainly wouldn't be looking at giving anyone a definite three or four year deal aside from the brightest of young talent; O'Connor is probably one of the top earners at the club too.

IIRC, he played primarily in a three-CB system at Lincoln - which may be why we haven't seen the best of him yet, as he's having to adapt to the two-CB system we've typically been playing.

Tbf to him he’s had some good games and was fundamental to our recent good run before the last 2 games

Not like he has pace to lose either. One of those CBs who may keep improving with age

I think we had our pants pulled down by agents and showed our naivety given the 2/3 year contracts to Ritchie and Marriott tbh. Done out of desperation

[AthleticoSpizz]

Managers are asked the same shit every interview, and every manager talks bollocks, particularly after a while or when performing badly.

from the brief bits that I heard, Leam was alluding to the fact that the Bradford team had been in it together for the past couple or three seasons…(hence the success that they are now enjoying through familiarity), much more than claiming our own lack of cohesion due to having “never been there before”

[Hound]

Managers are asked the same shit every interview, and every manager talks bollocks, particularly after a while or when performing badly.

from the brief bits that I heard, Leam was alluding to the fact that the Bradford team had been in it together for the past couple or three seasons…(hence the success that they are now enjoying through familiarity), much more than claiming our own lack of cohesion due to having “never been there before”

The text on the official of his interview seem fairly reasonable to me. Not exciting or interesting but basically played well first half, disappointing second. Bradford much more cohesive than we were due to evolving over a couple of years….

Maybe it’s missed out the controversial bit

[AthleticoSpizz]

….or maybe just conveniently missed out by those with their pre-conceived agendas?

[Clyde1998]

Managers are asked the same shit every interview, and every manager talks bollocks, particularly after a while or when performing badly.

from the brief bits that I heard, Leam was alluding to the fact that the Bradford team had been in it together for the past couple or three seasons…(hence the success that they are now enjoying through familiarity), much more than claiming our own lack of cohesion due to having “never been there before”

The text on the official of his interview seem fairly reasonable to me. Not exciting or interesting but basically played well first half, disappointing second. Bradford much more cohesive than we were due to evolving over a couple of years….

Maybe it’s missed out the controversial bit

It's this. He mentions it here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3eyr-GRJ1s4&t=85s

Although people have taken it out of context (as usual).