Craig Mackail-Smith says ex-Peterborough strike partner Aaron Mclean could be a fans' favourite at Bradford City

GOAL MACHINES: Aaron McLean, left, with Craig Mackail-Smith during their time together at Peterborough, when the prolific pair blasted 96 goals between them in just two seasons

GOAL MACHINES: Aaron McLean, left, with Craig Mackail-Smith during their time together at Peterborough, when the prolific pair blasted 96 goals between them in just two seasons

First published in Sport
Last updated
Bradford Telegraph and Argus: Photograph of the Author by , Bradford City Reporter

City target Aaron Mclean is tipped to become a big hit with the Valley Parade faithful if he signs.

The Bantams are still mulling over whether to take the plunge on the Hull striker as they line up a replacement for Nahki Wells.

As revealed yesterday, the Telegraph & Argus understands that terms have been agreed but no final decision has been made to sanction a potentially significant financial commitment.

There are other targets also being considered and, with the transfer window only halfway through, the club may choose to take their time.

Mclean bagged goals for fun in the lower divisions but has found it tougher going in recent seasons at a higher level.

But supporters would have no need to fear on that score, according to his former strike partner Craig Mackail-Smith.

The pair formed a lethal partnership at Peterborough as they powered to back-to-back promotions.

And Mackail-Smith is convinced that Mclean could rediscover that form.

He told the T&A: “Aaron would be a top signing. I’ve no doubt at all that he will hit the ground running and start scoring goals straight away. He is a very confident lad.

“He believes in his own ability and I think he can do it.

“Bradford are a fantastic club to sign for with great supporters and I know the fans would get right behind him.

“It’s been very difficult for him the last few seasons but give him the opportunity again and he will become a big fans’ favourite.

“He’s 30 now and just wants to be playing. You don’t want to be sat on the bench just coming on for five or ten minutes here and there.

“Going to a club the size of Bradford would be a fantastic opportunity.”

Mclean and Mackail-Smith enjoyed two prolific seasons together as Posh breezed through the bottom two divisions in 2008 and 2009, scoring 96 goals between them.

Mclean won the League Two golden boot with 29 – 33 in all competitions – and Mackail-Smith led the charts the following season with 26.

Mackail-Smith, who now plays for Brighton, said: “A few people thought we wouldn’t work together because we were pretty similar but we hit it off brilliantly.

“We got on really well off the pitch as well as on it which really helped. We were never greedy, we wanted each other to score.

“Aaron is very strong, sharp and a very good finisher. He’s also unbelievable in the air – he has a fantastic leap for a small guy.

“He was top League Two goalscorer and then got a lot for us when we went up again.

“He was doing really well at Peterborough but then went to Hull and was in and out the team. He never got the chance to build up that momentum you need to go on a scoring run.

“It’s a little bit more difficult to step up. He’s not had those opportunities in the last couple of years and the chance to play regular football week in, week out.

“But he’s proved himself at this level and I know he will get back to how he is capable of playing.”

Comments (64)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:14am Tue 14 Jan 14

silverbantam says...

The longer this drags on the less likely it is to happen.

I think Lawn named McClean on Saturday as a bone for fans to chew on, to take our minds off Nahki signing for our local rivals.
The longer this drags on the less likely it is to happen. I think Lawn named McClean on Saturday as a bone for fans to chew on, to take our minds off Nahki signing for our local rivals. silverbantam
  • Score: 11

7:31am Tue 14 Jan 14

Lancashire Bantam says...

It would be a great signing BUT we need that right wing taking care of if he is that good in the air, if city can pull this off and with Davies on the way back things are not looking as black as they were on Friday. Keep the faith, in Parky we trust.
It would be a great signing BUT we need that right wing taking care of if he is that good in the air, if city can pull this off and with Davies on the way back things are not looking as black as they were on Friday. Keep the faith, in Parky we trust. Lancashire Bantam
  • Score: 19

7:36am Tue 14 Jan 14

Bantam sthn Ellatha says...

Stop messing about City and get the lad signed up. No need to dilly dally.
Stop messing about City and get the lad signed up. No need to dilly dally. Bantam sthn Ellatha
  • Score: 13

7:41am Tue 14 Jan 14

Plastic Bantam says...

Lancashire Bantam wrote:
It would be a great signing BUT we need that right wing taking care of if he is that good in the air, if city can pull this off and with Davies on the way back things are not looking as black as they were on Friday. Keep the faith, in Parky we trust.
Well hopefully the lad from Villa will start playing. Their fans rave about him. This signing needs to happen.. If we want to achieve things sometimes we have to take risks.. This is nowhere near the risk we took in 2001. I presume we can afford it, it will just take a large chunk of the budget... Come on ML, JR & PP This is just the kind of signing the fans want to see!!
[quote][p][bold]Lancashire Bantam[/bold] wrote: It would be a great signing BUT we need that right wing taking care of if he is that good in the air, if city can pull this off and with Davies on the way back things are not looking as black as they were on Friday. Keep the faith, in Parky we trust.[/p][/quote]Well hopefully the lad from Villa will start playing. Their fans rave about him. This signing needs to happen.. If we want to achieve things sometimes we have to take risks.. This is nowhere near the risk we took in 2001. I presume we can afford it, it will just take a large chunk of the budget... Come on ML, JR & PP This is just the kind of signing the fans want to see!! Plastic Bantam
  • Score: 12

9:46am Tue 14 Jan 14

bantam10 says...

Why??? Rhys Murphy sounds so much better and he is only 23!
Read about Murphy and go on daggers local newspapers.
Why sign a 30 year old who is only gonna get worse with age and will be demanding a high wage.
Does not make sense to me at all.
Why??? Rhys Murphy sounds so much better and he is only 23! Read about Murphy and go on daggers local newspapers. Why sign a 30 year old who is only gonna get worse with age and will be demanding a high wage. Does not make sense to me at all. bantam10
  • Score: 4

9:57am Tue 14 Jan 14

bwwb says...

The longer this goes on the more it feels like the Paul Benson saga of a couple of years ago
All talk and no action
The longer this goes on the more it feels like the Paul Benson saga of a couple of years ago All talk and no action bwwb
  • Score: 7

10:12am Tue 14 Jan 14

Peter300 says...

silverbantam wrote:
The longer this drags on the less likely it is to happen.

I think Lawn named McClean on Saturday as a bone for fans to chew on, to take our minds off Nahki signing for our local rivals.
It's McLean. You are getting your players mixed up.
[quote][p][bold]silverbantam[/bold] wrote: The longer this drags on the less likely it is to happen. I think Lawn named McClean on Saturday as a bone for fans to chew on, to take our minds off Nahki signing for our local rivals.[/p][/quote]It's McLean. You are getting your players mixed up. Peter300
  • Score: -10

10:14am Tue 14 Jan 14

Peter300 says...

Lancashire Bantam wrote:
It would be a great signing BUT we need that right wing taking care of if he is that good in the air, if city can pull this off and with Davies on the way back things are not looking as black as they were on Friday. Keep the faith, in Parky we trust.
Yes, well make sure you do. Your track record in that department is not good.
[quote][p][bold]Lancashire Bantam[/bold] wrote: It would be a great signing BUT we need that right wing taking care of if he is that good in the air, if city can pull this off and with Davies on the way back things are not looking as black as they were on Friday. Keep the faith, in Parky we trust.[/p][/quote]Yes, well make sure you do. Your track record in that department is not good. Peter300
  • Score: -7

10:18am Tue 14 Jan 14

Peter300 says...

Bantam sthn Ellatha wrote:
Stop messing about City and get the lad signed up. No need to dilly dally.
You said that before City signed John McGinlay. I think City are right to take their time and try to bring the right player in. Also the fans who said City would only sign a loan player appear to be completely wrong. Not for the first time either.
[quote][p][bold]Bantam sthn Ellatha[/bold] wrote: Stop messing about City and get the lad signed up. No need to dilly dally.[/p][/quote]You said that before City signed John McGinlay. I think City are right to take their time and try to bring the right player in. Also the fans who said City would only sign a loan player appear to be completely wrong. Not for the first time either. Peter300
  • Score: -10

10:20am Tue 14 Jan 14

pudseykid says...

silverbantam wrote:
The longer this drags on the less likely it is to happen.

I think Lawn named McClean on Saturday as a bone for fans to chew on, to take our minds off Nahki signing for our local rivals.
IF! could U print FACTS please...not just IF buts Maybes....every footballer who moves clubs has to prove himself...when the deal is do (IF) then the real work starts
[quote][p][bold]silverbantam[/bold] wrote: The longer this drags on the less likely it is to happen. I think Lawn named McClean on Saturday as a bone for fans to chew on, to take our minds off Nahki signing for our local rivals.[/p][/quote]IF! could U print FACTS please...not just IF buts Maybes....every footballer who moves clubs has to prove himself...when the deal is do (IF) then the real work starts pudseykid
  • Score: -3

10:22am Tue 14 Jan 14

Peter300 says...

Plastic Bantam wrote:
Lancashire Bantam wrote:
It would be a great signing BUT we need that right wing taking care of if he is that good in the air, if city can pull this off and with Davies on the way back things are not looking as black as they were on Friday. Keep the faith, in Parky we trust.
Well hopefully the lad from Villa will start playing. Their fans rave about him. This signing needs to happen.. If we want to achieve things sometimes we have to take risks.. This is nowhere near the risk we took in 2001. I presume we can afford it, it will just take a large chunk of the budget... Come on ML, JR & PP This is just the kind of signing the fans want to see!!
Yes, but you will be the first to criticise the chairmen and manager if the signing does not deliver on expectations. There are other players around, though everyone wants a striker who can score a few goals. With clubs signing players it means others become available, so the situation is never static.
[quote][p][bold]Plastic Bantam[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lancashire Bantam[/bold] wrote: It would be a great signing BUT we need that right wing taking care of if he is that good in the air, if city can pull this off and with Davies on the way back things are not looking as black as they were on Friday. Keep the faith, in Parky we trust.[/p][/quote]Well hopefully the lad from Villa will start playing. Their fans rave about him. This signing needs to happen.. If we want to achieve things sometimes we have to take risks.. This is nowhere near the risk we took in 2001. I presume we can afford it, it will just take a large chunk of the budget... Come on ML, JR & PP This is just the kind of signing the fans want to see!![/p][/quote]Yes, but you will be the first to criticise the chairmen and manager if the signing does not deliver on expectations. There are other players around, though everyone wants a striker who can score a few goals. With clubs signing players it means others become available, so the situation is never static. Peter300
  • Score: -6

10:24am Tue 14 Jan 14

Peter300 says...

bantam10 wrote:
Why??? Rhys Murphy sounds so much better and he is only 23!
Read about Murphy and go on daggers local newspapers.
Why sign a 30 year old who is only gonna get worse with age and will be demanding a high wage.
Does not make sense to me at all.
You know this player? A lot of football matters would probably not make much sense to you. I take it you strongly objected to the signing of Gary Jones?
[quote][p][bold]bantam10[/bold] wrote: Why??? Rhys Murphy sounds so much better and he is only 23! Read about Murphy and go on daggers local newspapers. Why sign a 30 year old who is only gonna get worse with age and will be demanding a high wage. Does not make sense to me at all.[/p][/quote]You know this player? A lot of football matters would probably not make much sense to you. I take it you strongly objected to the signing of Gary Jones? Peter300
  • Score: -2

10:25am Tue 14 Jan 14

Lancashire Bantam says...

Peter300 wrote:
Lancashire Bantam wrote: It would be a great signing BUT we need that right wing taking care of if he is that good in the air, if city can pull this off and with Davies on the way back things are not looking as black as they were on Friday. Keep the faith, in Parky we trust.
Yes, well make sure you do. Your track record in that department is not good.
Crawl back under your stone troll.
[quote][p][bold]Peter300[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lancashire Bantam[/bold] wrote: It would be a great signing BUT we need that right wing taking care of if he is that good in the air, if city can pull this off and with Davies on the way back things are not looking as black as they were on Friday. Keep the faith, in Parky we trust.[/p][/quote]Yes, well make sure you do. Your track record in that department is not good.[/p][/quote]Crawl back under your stone troll. Lancashire Bantam
  • Score: 0

10:28am Tue 14 Jan 14

lawsonio123 says...

McClean I do not think it is going to happen Directors finding cost to much We will have to settle for someone from a lower division maybe more than one player now. But we do need someone who can cut the Mustard not a couple of Maybe they will Maybe they will not. Whatever just hope Parky is getting a fair amount of the cash and he is not being mucked about and having to get by on Peanuts Come on City give us the GOODS
McClean I do not think it is going to happen Directors finding cost to much We will have to settle for someone from a lower division maybe more than one player now. But we do need someone who can cut the Mustard not a couple of Maybe they will Maybe they will not. Whatever just hope Parky is getting a fair amount of the cash and he is not being mucked about and having to get by on Peanuts Come on City give us the GOODS lawsonio123
  • Score: 2

10:29am Tue 14 Jan 14

Peter300 says...

bwwb wrote:
The longer this goes on the more it feels like the Paul Benson saga of a couple of years ago
All talk and no action
I thought the player did not want to move up north. Your observation is based on ignorance. For all you know there may have been a lot of constructive talk, but in the end it was decided that signing Benson would not be a good fit. I hope the projected signing of McLean receives similar careful scrutiny, so both parties are as happy as they can be. If not, look elsewhere.
[quote][p][bold]bwwb[/bold] wrote: The longer this goes on the more it feels like the Paul Benson saga of a couple of years ago All talk and no action[/p][/quote]I thought the player did not want to move up north. Your observation is based on ignorance. For all you know there may have been a lot of constructive talk, but in the end it was decided that signing Benson would not be a good fit. I hope the projected signing of McLean receives similar careful scrutiny, so both parties are as happy as they can be. If not, look elsewhere. Peter300
  • Score: 3

10:34am Tue 14 Jan 14

fatbloke says...

Forget medium or long term future with regards to their age. I would have taken McLean to start our next game over Wells everyday of the week. This is based on his record alone because I can not claim to have watched enough to comment on his all round game, unlike Wells.

I think I am probably with the minority as for some reason some people thought Wells was like the next Pele!!

I was bored of watching Wells (and the rest of the team) as it was getting really boing and predictable. Haven't been since boxing day, but this signing could excite me enough to want check him out.
Forget medium or long term future with regards to their age. I would have taken McLean to start our next game over Wells everyday of the week. This is based on his record alone because I can not claim to have watched enough to comment on his all round game, unlike Wells. I think I am probably with the minority as for some reason some people thought Wells was like the next Pele!! I was bored of watching Wells (and the rest of the team) as it was getting really boing and predictable. Haven't been since boxing day, but this signing could excite me enough to want check him out. fatbloke
  • Score: 11

10:34am Tue 14 Jan 14

bcfc1903 says...

As is alluded to in the T&A piece above, BCFC should not rush into any signing. This month is crucial, a couple of quality signings and we could be pushing for a top six finish come May. Make sure the club are not paying through the nose for mediocrity as was the case in the summer and before with Gray.
As is alluded to in the T&A piece above, BCFC should not rush into any signing. This month is crucial, a couple of quality signings and we could be pushing for a top six finish come May. Make sure the club are not paying through the nose for mediocrity as was the case in the summer and before with Gray. bcfc1903
  • Score: 6

10:52am Tue 14 Jan 14

whisky1 says...

They may have been alerted to other options I see Goodwillie is available again on loan. A punt on Murphy and a loan? There is no need to rush a crucial decision
They may have been alerted to other options I see Goodwillie is available again on loan. A punt on Murphy and a loan? There is no need to rush a crucial decision whisky1
  • Score: 3

10:57am Tue 14 Jan 14

BCFCBoothy1 says...

Peter300 wrote:
bwwb wrote:
The longer this goes on the more it feels like the Paul Benson saga of a couple of years ago
All talk and no action
I thought the player did not want to move up north. Your observation is based on ignorance. For all you know there may have been a lot of constructive talk, but in the end it was decided that signing Benson would not be a good fit. I hope the projected signing of McLean receives similar careful scrutiny, so both parties are as happy as they can be. If not, look elsewhere.
Actually Peter300 you are incorrect, the medical showed a problem with his ankle, it was suggested that it was historic damage and should not be a problem, but our board and manager decided it was a risk not worth taking!

Swindon decided it was a risk worth taking, or didn't see it as a problem and it turns out with the wonderful benefit of hindsight that he was fine and did fairly well and helped them to win the title that season.

Just saying.

CTID
[quote][p][bold]Peter300[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bwwb[/bold] wrote: The longer this goes on the more it feels like the Paul Benson saga of a couple of years ago All talk and no action[/p][/quote]I thought the player did not want to move up north. Your observation is based on ignorance. For all you know there may have been a lot of constructive talk, but in the end it was decided that signing Benson would not be a good fit. I hope the projected signing of McLean receives similar careful scrutiny, so both parties are as happy as they can be. If not, look elsewhere.[/p][/quote]Actually Peter300 you are incorrect, the medical showed a problem with his ankle, it was suggested that it was historic damage and should not be a problem, but our board and manager decided it was a risk not worth taking! Swindon decided it was a risk worth taking, or didn't see it as a problem and it turns out with the wonderful benefit of hindsight that he was fine and did fairly well and helped them to win the title that season. Just saying. CTID BCFCBoothy1
  • Score: 8

11:06am Tue 14 Jan 14

BCFCBoothy1 says...

Peter300 wrote:
Bantam sthn Ellatha wrote:
Stop messing about City and get the lad signed up. No need to dilly dally.
You said that before City signed John McGinlay. I think City are right to take their time and try to bring the right player in. Also the fans who said City would only sign a loan player appear to be completely wrong. Not for the first time either.
Seriously Peter, were you taking notes of who said what even before message boards existed in 1997??? Which is when John McGinlay joined City.

Oh dear if so!

CTID
[quote][p][bold]Peter300[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bantam sthn Ellatha[/bold] wrote: Stop messing about City and get the lad signed up. No need to dilly dally.[/p][/quote]You said that before City signed John McGinlay. I think City are right to take their time and try to bring the right player in. Also the fans who said City would only sign a loan player appear to be completely wrong. Not for the first time either.[/p][/quote]Seriously Peter, were you taking notes of who said what even before message boards existed in 1997??? Which is when John McGinlay joined City. Oh dear if so! CTID BCFCBoothy1
  • Score: 15

11:07am Tue 14 Jan 14

whisky1 says...

BCFCBoothy1 wrote:
Peter300 wrote:
bwwb wrote:
The longer this goes on the more it feels like the Paul Benson saga of a couple of years ago
All talk and no action
I thought the player did not want to move up north. Your observation is based on ignorance. For all you know there may have been a lot of constructive talk, but in the end it was decided that signing Benson would not be a good fit. I hope the projected signing of McLean receives similar careful scrutiny, so both parties are as happy as they can be. If not, look elsewhere.
Actually Peter300 you are incorrect, the medical showed a problem with his ankle, it was suggested that it was historic damage and should not be a problem, but our board and manager decided it was a risk not worth taking!

Swindon decided it was a risk worth taking, or didn't see it as a problem and it turns out with the wonderful benefit of hindsight that he was fine and did fairly well and helped them to win the title that season.

Just saying.

CTID
He is also now plying his trade in the Conference so he has hardly pulled up any trees since that time.
[quote][p][bold]BCFCBoothy1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Peter300[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bwwb[/bold] wrote: The longer this goes on the more it feels like the Paul Benson saga of a couple of years ago All talk and no action[/p][/quote]I thought the player did not want to move up north. Your observation is based on ignorance. For all you know there may have been a lot of constructive talk, but in the end it was decided that signing Benson would not be a good fit. I hope the projected signing of McLean receives similar careful scrutiny, so both parties are as happy as they can be. If not, look elsewhere.[/p][/quote]Actually Peter300 you are incorrect, the medical showed a problem with his ankle, it was suggested that it was historic damage and should not be a problem, but our board and manager decided it was a risk not worth taking! Swindon decided it was a risk worth taking, or didn't see it as a problem and it turns out with the wonderful benefit of hindsight that he was fine and did fairly well and helped them to win the title that season. Just saying. CTID[/p][/quote]He is also now plying his trade in the Conference so he has hardly pulled up any trees since that time. whisky1
  • Score: 4

11:32am Tue 14 Jan 14

BCFCBoothy1 says...

whisky1 wrote:
BCFCBoothy1 wrote:
Peter300 wrote:
bwwb wrote:
The longer this goes on the more it feels like the Paul Benson saga of a couple of years ago
All talk and no action
I thought the player did not want to move up north. Your observation is based on ignorance. For all you know there may have been a lot of constructive talk, but in the end it was decided that signing Benson would not be a good fit. I hope the projected signing of McLean receives similar careful scrutiny, so both parties are as happy as they can be. If not, look elsewhere.
Actually Peter300 you are incorrect, the medical showed a problem with his ankle, it was suggested that it was historic damage and should not be a problem, but our board and manager decided it was a risk not worth taking!

Swindon decided it was a risk worth taking, or didn't see it as a problem and it turns out with the wonderful benefit of hindsight that he was fine and did fairly well and helped them to win the title that season.

Just saying.

CTID
He is also now plying his trade in the Conference so he has hardly pulled up any trees since that time.
Yeah, it was pretty much downhill since then.

CTID
[quote][p][bold]whisky1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BCFCBoothy1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Peter300[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bwwb[/bold] wrote: The longer this goes on the more it feels like the Paul Benson saga of a couple of years ago All talk and no action[/p][/quote]I thought the player did not want to move up north. Your observation is based on ignorance. For all you know there may have been a lot of constructive talk, but in the end it was decided that signing Benson would not be a good fit. I hope the projected signing of McLean receives similar careful scrutiny, so both parties are as happy as they can be. If not, look elsewhere.[/p][/quote]Actually Peter300 you are incorrect, the medical showed a problem with his ankle, it was suggested that it was historic damage and should not be a problem, but our board and manager decided it was a risk not worth taking! Swindon decided it was a risk worth taking, or didn't see it as a problem and it turns out with the wonderful benefit of hindsight that he was fine and did fairly well and helped them to win the title that season. Just saying. CTID[/p][/quote]He is also now plying his trade in the Conference so he has hardly pulled up any trees since that time.[/p][/quote]Yeah, it was pretty much downhill since then. CTID BCFCBoothy1
  • Score: 2

11:36am Tue 14 Jan 14

Bradford Lad BD9 says...

What the hell are the club waiting for, Do they want someone else to come in and take him, Get mclean signed up as he is proven at this level, is murphy or gregory the answer is NO, why take a risk with them, like we did with hannah and nielson.
What the hell are the club waiting for, Do they want someone else to come in and take him, Get mclean signed up as he is proven at this level, is murphy or gregory the answer is NO, why take a risk with them, like we did with hannah and nielson. Bradford Lad BD9
  • Score: 3

11:53am Tue 14 Jan 14

whisky1 says...

Bradford Lad BD9 wrote:
What the hell are the club waiting for, Do they want someone else to come in and take him, Get mclean signed up as he is proven at this level, is murphy or gregory the answer is NO, why take a risk with them, like we did with hannah and nielson.
We also took a punt on Syers Nakhi and McLaughlin. Daggers have a history of unearthing gems.
[quote][p][bold]Bradford Lad BD9[/bold] wrote: What the hell are the club waiting for, Do they want someone else to come in and take him, Get mclean signed up as he is proven at this level, is murphy or gregory the answer is NO, why take a risk with them, like we did with hannah and nielson.[/p][/quote]We also took a punt on Syers Nakhi and McLaughlin. Daggers have a history of unearthing gems. whisky1
  • Score: 5

12:22pm Tue 14 Jan 14

jamiejoe says...

whisky1 wrote:
They may have been alerted to other options I see Goodwillie is available again on loan. A punt on Murphy and a loan? There is no need to rush a crucial decision
Why was there a rush to move Wells on in that case then??
[quote][p][bold]whisky1[/bold] wrote: They may have been alerted to other options I see Goodwillie is available again on loan. A punt on Murphy and a loan? There is no need to rush a crucial decision[/p][/quote]Why was there a rush to move Wells on in that case then?? jamiejoe
  • Score: 5

12:29pm Tue 14 Jan 14

KnightMcCall says...

whisky1 wrote:
Bradford Lad BD9 wrote:
What the hell are the club waiting for, Do they want someone else to come in and take him, Get mclean signed up as he is proven at this level, is murphy or gregory the answer is NO, why take a risk with them, like we did with hannah and nielson.
We also took a punt on Syers Nakhi and McLaughlin. Daggers have a history of unearthing gems.
Whover we sign it is a "punt". Some transferswork out and some don't. The only thing worth learning from previous transfers is if they are unaffordable then don't do it.

We can all look at signings from various scenarios that worked and signings from similar scenarios that didn't work. It means nothing. Old or Young, experienced or inexperienced, non-league or higher divisions...these are not the things to base decisions on.

Gordon Watson and Lee Power were great signings that turned sour thanks to injury /illness. McGinley should have been a banker for goals but wasn't. Wells was signed along with Stewart, and Chris Mitchell and a host of others but only Wells turned out to be a good signing; we have had non-league success with McLaughlin and Hanson but also signed Ross Hannah.

Nothing will guarantee success so just make sure that the financial impact of any signings are not a threat to the future of the club. Don't blow too much budget on one player either. I would urge the board to think well beyond the next five months when signing any new players....i never want to have to watch League 2 football again!
[quote][p][bold]whisky1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bradford Lad BD9[/bold] wrote: What the hell are the club waiting for, Do they want someone else to come in and take him, Get mclean signed up as he is proven at this level, is murphy or gregory the answer is NO, why take a risk with them, like we did with hannah and nielson.[/p][/quote]We also took a punt on Syers Nakhi and McLaughlin. Daggers have a history of unearthing gems.[/p][/quote]Whover we sign it is a "punt". Some transferswork out and some don't. The only thing worth learning from previous transfers is if they are unaffordable then don't do it. We can all look at signings from various scenarios that worked and signings from similar scenarios that didn't work. It means nothing. Old or Young, experienced or inexperienced, non-league or higher divisions...these are not the things to base decisions on. Gordon Watson and Lee Power were great signings that turned sour thanks to injury /illness. McGinley should have been a banker for goals but wasn't. Wells was signed along with Stewart, and Chris Mitchell and a host of others but only Wells turned out to be a good signing; we have had non-league success with McLaughlin and Hanson but also signed Ross Hannah. Nothing will guarantee success so just make sure that the financial impact of any signings are not a threat to the future of the club. Don't blow too much budget on one player either. I would urge the board to think well beyond the next five months when signing any new players....i never want to have to watch League 2 football again! KnightMcCall
  • Score: 15

12:37pm Tue 14 Jan 14

PHILISAN says...

The Club know what is needed to improve on the squad and regain some momentum.Maybe they just are waiting on certain players leaving to free up resources.
The Club know what is needed to improve on the squad and regain some momentum.Maybe they just are waiting on certain players leaving to free up resources. PHILISAN
  • Score: 6

12:46pm Tue 14 Jan 14

whisky1 says...

jamiejoe wrote:
whisky1 wrote:
They may have been alerted to other options I see Goodwillie is available again on loan. A punt on Murphy and a loan? There is no need to rush a crucial decision
Why was there a rush to move Wells on in that case then??
Because they wanted TIME to bring in a replacement and because NWs head had gone (see Hans comments today) and he did not want to play for us anymore( he told the ML he wasn't fit then miraculously recovered to come of the bench for the TBs) Keep up
[quote][p][bold]jamiejoe[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]whisky1[/bold] wrote: They may have been alerted to other options I see Goodwillie is available again on loan. A punt on Murphy and a loan? There is no need to rush a crucial decision[/p][/quote]Why was there a rush to move Wells on in that case then??[/p][/quote]Because they wanted TIME to bring in a replacement and because NWs head had gone (see Hans comments today) and he did not want to play for us anymore( he told the ML he wasn't fit then miraculously recovered to come of the bench for the TBs) Keep up whisky1
  • Score: 3

12:46pm Tue 14 Jan 14

Farsley Bantam says...

KnightMcCall wrote:
whisky1 wrote:
Bradford Lad BD9 wrote: What the hell are the club waiting for, Do they want someone else to come in and take him, Get mclean signed up as he is proven at this level, is murphy or gregory the answer is NO, why take a risk with them, like we did with hannah and nielson.
We also took a punt on Syers Nakhi and McLaughlin. Daggers have a history of unearthing gems.
Whover we sign it is a "punt". Some transferswork out and some don't. The only thing worth learning from previous transfers is if they are unaffordable then don't do it. We can all look at signings from various scenarios that worked and signings from similar scenarios that didn't work. It means nothing. Old or Young, experienced or inexperienced, non-league or higher divisions...these are not the things to base decisions on. Gordon Watson and Lee Power were great signings that turned sour thanks to injury /illness. McGinley should have been a banker for goals but wasn't. Wells was signed along with Stewart, and Chris Mitchell and a host of others but only Wells turned out to be a good signing; we have had non-league success with McLaughlin and Hanson but also signed Ross Hannah. Nothing will guarantee success so just make sure that the financial impact of any signings are not a threat to the future of the club. Don't blow too much budget on one player either. I would urge the board to think well beyond the next five months when signing any new players....i never want to have to watch League 2 football again!
Well put KM. My thoughts exactly and put better than I could have done.
As you say there is no magic formula for buying successful players and every player we have bought could be used to prove/disprove some of the 'rules' posted on here.
The truth is that there are so many variables in football that it is literally impossible to determine if anyone will be a success of failure before a ball has been kicked.
[quote][p][bold]KnightMcCall[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]whisky1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bradford Lad BD9[/bold] wrote: What the hell are the club waiting for, Do they want someone else to come in and take him, Get mclean signed up as he is proven at this level, is murphy or gregory the answer is NO, why take a risk with them, like we did with hannah and nielson.[/p][/quote]We also took a punt on Syers Nakhi and McLaughlin. Daggers have a history of unearthing gems.[/p][/quote]Whover we sign it is a "punt". Some transferswork out and some don't. The only thing worth learning from previous transfers is if they are unaffordable then don't do it. We can all look at signings from various scenarios that worked and signings from similar scenarios that didn't work. It means nothing. Old or Young, experienced or inexperienced, non-league or higher divisions...these are not the things to base decisions on. Gordon Watson and Lee Power were great signings that turned sour thanks to injury /illness. McGinley should have been a banker for goals but wasn't. Wells was signed along with Stewart, and Chris Mitchell and a host of others but only Wells turned out to be a good signing; we have had non-league success with McLaughlin and Hanson but also signed Ross Hannah. Nothing will guarantee success so just make sure that the financial impact of any signings are not a threat to the future of the club. Don't blow too much budget on one player either. I would urge the board to think well beyond the next five months when signing any new players....i never want to have to watch League 2 football again![/p][/quote]Well put KM. My thoughts exactly and put better than I could have done. As you say there is no magic formula for buying successful players and every player we have bought could be used to prove/disprove some of the 'rules' posted on here. The truth is that there are so many variables in football that it is literally impossible to determine if anyone will be a success of failure before a ball has been kicked. Farsley Bantam
  • Score: 5

1:12pm Tue 14 Jan 14

jamiejoe says...

whisky1 wrote:
jamiejoe wrote:
whisky1 wrote: They may have been alerted to other options I see Goodwillie is available again on loan. A punt on Murphy and a loan? There is no need to rush a crucial decision
Why was there a rush to move Wells on in that case then??
Because they wanted TIME to bring in a replacement and because NWs head had gone (see Hans comments today) and he did not want to play for us anymore( he told the ML he wasn't fit then miraculously recovered to come of the bench for the TBs) Keep up
We know that Wells wanted the transfer, we know that players play games close to the crunch. We did not have to play ball in such a way - we could conduct our business better for the benefit of the club.

It looks like McLean's wages are closer to £10k and we were paying Wells £1,250 a week ... so 8 times more. Okay - Wells is up to around £7k now and would not stay at City for £5k. I only hope we don't have to pay a silly amount to get a replacement in ...

Get back to your xbox!!
[quote][p][bold]whisky1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jamiejoe[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]whisky1[/bold] wrote: They may have been alerted to other options I see Goodwillie is available again on loan. A punt on Murphy and a loan? There is no need to rush a crucial decision[/p][/quote]Why was there a rush to move Wells on in that case then??[/p][/quote]Because they wanted TIME to bring in a replacement and because NWs head had gone (see Hans comments today) and he did not want to play for us anymore( he told the ML he wasn't fit then miraculously recovered to come of the bench for the TBs) Keep up[/p][/quote]We know that Wells wanted the transfer, we know that players play games close to the crunch. We did not have to play ball in such a way - we could conduct our business better for the benefit of the club. It looks like McLean's wages are closer to £10k and we were paying Wells £1,250 a week ... so 8 times more. Okay - Wells is up to around £7k now and would not stay at City for £5k. I only hope we don't have to pay a silly amount to get a replacement in ... Get back to your xbox!! jamiejoe
  • Score: 1

1:23pm Tue 14 Jan 14

Babbsy says...

As others have said, we either want him or we don't. There'll be over 2,000 travelling down to support the lads at Bramall Lane on Saturday - Please City, make a decision and get them signed up so we have a chance of winning a crucial game, both in terms of our league position, and in terms of pride for the fans. What would be the point in deliberating for the next two weeks, mean time losing all our games because the squad badly needs refreshing, then signing him up when we've surrendered another 9 crucial league points. Why can't we get the deal done now and give ourselves the best possible chance of addressing this awful slump in form, and hitting the New Year running?

Come on City - Give the fans something to get excited about. We've had a thoroughly miserable last couple of months.
As others have said, we either want him or we don't. There'll be over 2,000 travelling down to support the lads at Bramall Lane on Saturday - Please City, make a decision and get them signed up so we have a chance of winning a crucial game, both in terms of our league position, and in terms of pride for the fans. What would be the point in deliberating for the next two weeks, mean time losing all our games because the squad badly needs refreshing, then signing him up when we've surrendered another 9 crucial league points. Why can't we get the deal done now and give ourselves the best possible chance of addressing this awful slump in form, and hitting the New Year running? Come on City - Give the fans something to get excited about. We've had a thoroughly miserable last couple of months. Babbsy
  • Score: 4

1:25pm Tue 14 Jan 14

bwwb says...

Peter300 wrote:
bwwb wrote:
The longer this goes on the more it feels like the Paul Benson saga of a couple of years ago
All talk and no action
I thought the player did not want to move up north. Your observation is based on ignorance. For all you know there may have been a lot of constructive talk, but in the end it was decided that signing Benson would not be a good fit. I hope the projected signing of McLean receives similar careful scrutiny, so both parties are as happy as they can be. If not, look elsewhere.
Disagree with me as much as you want but don't accuse me of ignorance you self opinionated little twerp.
I've forgotten more about Bradford City than you'll ever know
[quote][p][bold]Peter300[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bwwb[/bold] wrote: The longer this goes on the more it feels like the Paul Benson saga of a couple of years ago All talk and no action[/p][/quote]I thought the player did not want to move up north. Your observation is based on ignorance. For all you know there may have been a lot of constructive talk, but in the end it was decided that signing Benson would not be a good fit. I hope the projected signing of McLean receives similar careful scrutiny, so both parties are as happy as they can be. If not, look elsewhere.[/p][/quote]Disagree with me as much as you want but don't accuse me of ignorance you self opinionated little twerp. I've forgotten more about Bradford City than you'll ever know bwwb
  • Score: 1

1:27pm Tue 14 Jan 14

whisky1 says...

jamiejoe wrote:
whisky1 wrote:
jamiejoe wrote:
whisky1 wrote: They may have been alerted to other options I see Goodwillie is available again on loan. A punt on Murphy and a loan? There is no need to rush a crucial decision
Why was there a rush to move Wells on in that case then??
Because they wanted TIME to bring in a replacement and because NWs head had gone (see Hans comments today) and he did not want to play for us anymore( he told the ML he wasn't fit then miraculously recovered to come of the bench for the TBs) Keep up
We know that Wells wanted the transfer, we know that players play games close to the crunch. We did not have to play ball in such a way - we could conduct our business better for the benefit of the club.

It looks like McLean's wages are closer to £10k and we were paying Wells £1,250 a week ... so 8 times more. Okay - Wells is up to around £7k now and would not stay at City for £5k. I only hope we don't have to pay a silly amount to get a replacement in ...

Get back to your xbox!!
Pure speculation ..where do you get your information from?!. When you have achieved a fraction of what the Board and Parky have AND you have put your own time and money in your criticism might have some credibility. Personally I would wait until the end of the window( at least) before I make a judgement you no doubt will be content to stick the boot into the club now. Pathetic.
[quote][p][bold]jamiejoe[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]whisky1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jamiejoe[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]whisky1[/bold] wrote: They may have been alerted to other options I see Goodwillie is available again on loan. A punt on Murphy and a loan? There is no need to rush a crucial decision[/p][/quote]Why was there a rush to move Wells on in that case then??[/p][/quote]Because they wanted TIME to bring in a replacement and because NWs head had gone (see Hans comments today) and he did not want to play for us anymore( he told the ML he wasn't fit then miraculously recovered to come of the bench for the TBs) Keep up[/p][/quote]We know that Wells wanted the transfer, we know that players play games close to the crunch. We did not have to play ball in such a way - we could conduct our business better for the benefit of the club. It looks like McLean's wages are closer to £10k and we were paying Wells £1,250 a week ... so 8 times more. Okay - Wells is up to around £7k now and would not stay at City for £5k. I only hope we don't have to pay a silly amount to get a replacement in ... Get back to your xbox!![/p][/quote]Pure speculation ..where do you get your information from?!. When you have achieved a fraction of what the Board and Parky have AND you have put your own time and money in your criticism might have some credibility. Personally I would wait until the end of the window( at least) before I make a judgement you no doubt will be content to stick the boot into the club now. Pathetic. whisky1
  • Score: 2

1:37pm Tue 14 Jan 14

bcfc1903 says...

KnightMcCall wrote:
whisky1 wrote:
Bradford Lad BD9 wrote:
What the hell are the club waiting for, Do they want someone else to come in and take him, Get mclean signed up as he is proven at this level, is murphy or gregory the answer is NO, why take a risk with them, like we did with hannah and nielson.
We also took a punt on Syers Nakhi and McLaughlin. Daggers have a history of unearthing gems.
Whover we sign it is a "punt". Some transferswork out and some don't. The only thing worth learning from previous transfers is if they are unaffordable then don't do it.

We can all look at signings from various scenarios that worked and signings from similar scenarios that didn't work. It means nothing. Old or Young, experienced or inexperienced, non-league or higher divisions...these are not the things to base decisions on.

Gordon Watson and Lee Power were great signings that turned sour thanks to injury /illness. McGinley should have been a banker for goals but wasn't. Wells was signed along with Stewart, and Chris Mitchell and a host of others but only Wells turned out to be a good signing; we have had non-league success with McLaughlin and Hanson but also signed Ross Hannah.

Nothing will guarantee success so just make sure that the financial impact of any signings are not a threat to the future of the club. Don't blow too much budget on one player either. I would urge the board to think well beyond the next five months when signing any new players....i never want to have to watch League 2 football again!
Right on the money!!!!! Excellent post KM.
[quote][p][bold]KnightMcCall[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]whisky1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bradford Lad BD9[/bold] wrote: What the hell are the club waiting for, Do they want someone else to come in and take him, Get mclean signed up as he is proven at this level, is murphy or gregory the answer is NO, why take a risk with them, like we did with hannah and nielson.[/p][/quote]We also took a punt on Syers Nakhi and McLaughlin. Daggers have a history of unearthing gems.[/p][/quote]Whover we sign it is a "punt". Some transferswork out and some don't. The only thing worth learning from previous transfers is if they are unaffordable then don't do it. We can all look at signings from various scenarios that worked and signings from similar scenarios that didn't work. It means nothing. Old or Young, experienced or inexperienced, non-league or higher divisions...these are not the things to base decisions on. Gordon Watson and Lee Power were great signings that turned sour thanks to injury /illness. McGinley should have been a banker for goals but wasn't. Wells was signed along with Stewart, and Chris Mitchell and a host of others but only Wells turned out to be a good signing; we have had non-league success with McLaughlin and Hanson but also signed Ross Hannah. Nothing will guarantee success so just make sure that the financial impact of any signings are not a threat to the future of the club. Don't blow too much budget on one player either. I would urge the board to think well beyond the next five months when signing any new players....i never want to have to watch League 2 football again![/p][/quote]Right on the money!!!!! Excellent post KM. bcfc1903
  • Score: 4

1:49pm Tue 14 Jan 14

jamiejoe says...

whisky1 wrote:
jamiejoe wrote:
whisky1 wrote:
jamiejoe wrote:
whisky1 wrote: They may have been alerted to other options I see Goodwillie is available again on loan. A punt on Murphy and a loan? There is no need to rush a crucial decision
Why was there a rush to move Wells on in that case then??
Because they wanted TIME to bring in a replacement and because NWs head had gone (see Hans comments today) and he did not want to play for us anymore( he told the ML he wasn't fit then miraculously recovered to come of the bench for the TBs) Keep up
We know that Wells wanted the transfer, we know that players play games close to the crunch. We did not have to play ball in such a way - we could conduct our business better for the benefit of the club. It looks like McLean's wages are closer to £10k and we were paying Wells £1,250 a week ... so 8 times more. Okay - Wells is up to around £7k now and would not stay at City for £5k. I only hope we don't have to pay a silly amount to get a replacement in ... Get back to your xbox!!
Pure speculation ..where do you get your information from?!. When you have achieved a fraction of what the Board and Parky have AND you have put your own time and money in your criticism might have some credibility. Personally I would wait until the end of the window( at least) before I make a judgement you no doubt will be content to stick the boot into the club now. Pathetic.
You don't know what i have achieved in my life ...

Okay then - you've got me - i am some boring health insurance salesman taking out my frustrations on this message board with fellow fans!!

mate - take a look at yourself.

If i can't raise a few genuine questions without being slagged off by you - who is being pathetic there?

I have been fairly positive, it is you who strikes out with an attack. I just think the unseemly rush to sell our best player to one of our main rivals and having to pay out a chunk of that for a replacement is quite a risk. I am not saying we could have kept Wells, just conducted ourselves a bit better and with more measure for the benefit of the club!
[quote][p][bold]whisky1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jamiejoe[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]whisky1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jamiejoe[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]whisky1[/bold] wrote: They may have been alerted to other options I see Goodwillie is available again on loan. A punt on Murphy and a loan? There is no need to rush a crucial decision[/p][/quote]Why was there a rush to move Wells on in that case then??[/p][/quote]Because they wanted TIME to bring in a replacement and because NWs head had gone (see Hans comments today) and he did not want to play for us anymore( he told the ML he wasn't fit then miraculously recovered to come of the bench for the TBs) Keep up[/p][/quote]We know that Wells wanted the transfer, we know that players play games close to the crunch. We did not have to play ball in such a way - we could conduct our business better for the benefit of the club. It looks like McLean's wages are closer to £10k and we were paying Wells £1,250 a week ... so 8 times more. Okay - Wells is up to around £7k now and would not stay at City for £5k. I only hope we don't have to pay a silly amount to get a replacement in ... Get back to your xbox!![/p][/quote]Pure speculation ..where do you get your information from?!. When you have achieved a fraction of what the Board and Parky have AND you have put your own time and money in your criticism might have some credibility. Personally I would wait until the end of the window( at least) before I make a judgement you no doubt will be content to stick the boot into the club now. Pathetic.[/p][/quote]You don't know what i have achieved in my life ... Okay then - you've got me - i am some boring health insurance salesman taking out my frustrations on this message board with fellow fans!! mate - take a look at yourself. If i can't raise a few genuine questions without being slagged off by you - who is being pathetic there? I have been fairly positive, it is you who strikes out with an attack. I just think the unseemly rush to sell our best player to one of our main rivals and having to pay out a chunk of that for a replacement is quite a risk. I am not saying we could have kept Wells, just conducted ourselves a bit better and with more measure for the benefit of the club! jamiejoe
  • Score: 1

2:00pm Tue 14 Jan 14

whisky1 says...

jamiejoe wrote:
whisky1 wrote:
jamiejoe wrote:
whisky1 wrote:
jamiejoe wrote:
whisky1 wrote: They may have been alerted to other options I see Goodwillie is available again on loan. A punt on Murphy and a loan? There is no need to rush a crucial decision
Why was there a rush to move Wells on in that case then??
Because they wanted TIME to bring in a replacement and because NWs head had gone (see Hans comments today) and he did not want to play for us anymore( he told the ML he wasn't fit then miraculously recovered to come of the bench for the TBs) Keep up
We know that Wells wanted the transfer, we know that players play games close to the crunch. We did not have to play ball in such a way - we could conduct our business better for the benefit of the club. It looks like McLean's wages are closer to £10k and we were paying Wells £1,250 a week ... so 8 times more. Okay - Wells is up to around £7k now and would not stay at City for £5k. I only hope we don't have to pay a silly amount to get a replacement in ... Get back to your xbox!!
Pure speculation ..where do you get your information from?!. When you have achieved a fraction of what the Board and Parky have AND you have put your own time and money in your criticism might have some credibility. Personally I would wait until the end of the window( at least) before I make a judgement you no doubt will be content to stick the boot into the club now. Pathetic.
You don't know what i have achieved in my life ...

Okay then - you've got me - i am some boring health insurance salesman taking out my frustrations on this message board with fellow fans!!

mate - take a look at yourself.

If i can't raise a few genuine questions without being slagged off by you - who is being pathetic there?

I have been fairly positive, it is you who strikes out with an attack. I just think the unseemly rush to sell our best player to one of our main rivals and having to pay out a chunk of that for a replacement is quite a risk. I am not saying we could have kept Wells, just conducted ourselves a bit better and with more measure for the benefit of the club!
We are not in the same League as Town at the moment literally and financially. That is where NW wanted to go and he would not countenance speaking to other clubs. The idea that NW has been vastly under sold is fanciful and attacking the club is disrespectful to those who have put a great deal of effort into 18 months of success. Remember it was Parky who wanted to get the deal done. It has taken a decade to reverse the decline and to get some positivity back to the club. You may not mean to but posting like you do just feeds the negativity. Take a step back and support your Club ..the team and the management.
[quote][p][bold]jamiejoe[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]whisky1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jamiejoe[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]whisky1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jamiejoe[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]whisky1[/bold] wrote: They may have been alerted to other options I see Goodwillie is available again on loan. A punt on Murphy and a loan? There is no need to rush a crucial decision[/p][/quote]Why was there a rush to move Wells on in that case then??[/p][/quote]Because they wanted TIME to bring in a replacement and because NWs head had gone (see Hans comments today) and he did not want to play for us anymore( he told the ML he wasn't fit then miraculously recovered to come of the bench for the TBs) Keep up[/p][/quote]We know that Wells wanted the transfer, we know that players play games close to the crunch. We did not have to play ball in such a way - we could conduct our business better for the benefit of the club. It looks like McLean's wages are closer to £10k and we were paying Wells £1,250 a week ... so 8 times more. Okay - Wells is up to around £7k now and would not stay at City for £5k. I only hope we don't have to pay a silly amount to get a replacement in ... Get back to your xbox!![/p][/quote]Pure speculation ..where do you get your information from?!. When you have achieved a fraction of what the Board and Parky have AND you have put your own time and money in your criticism might have some credibility. Personally I would wait until the end of the window( at least) before I make a judgement you no doubt will be content to stick the boot into the club now. Pathetic.[/p][/quote]You don't know what i have achieved in my life ... Okay then - you've got me - i am some boring health insurance salesman taking out my frustrations on this message board with fellow fans!! mate - take a look at yourself. If i can't raise a few genuine questions without being slagged off by you - who is being pathetic there? I have been fairly positive, it is you who strikes out with an attack. I just think the unseemly rush to sell our best player to one of our main rivals and having to pay out a chunk of that for a replacement is quite a risk. I am not saying we could have kept Wells, just conducted ourselves a bit better and with more measure for the benefit of the club![/p][/quote]We are not in the same League as Town at the moment literally and financially. That is where NW wanted to go and he would not countenance speaking to other clubs. The idea that NW has been vastly under sold is fanciful and attacking the club is disrespectful to those who have put a great deal of effort into 18 months of success. Remember it was Parky who wanted to get the deal done. It has taken a decade to reverse the decline and to get some positivity back to the club. You may not mean to but posting like you do just feeds the negativity. Take a step back and support your Club ..the team and the management. whisky1
  • Score: 3

2:16pm Tue 14 Jan 14

jamiejoe says...

whisky1 wrote:
jamiejoe wrote:
whisky1 wrote:
jamiejoe wrote:
whisky1 wrote:
jamiejoe wrote:
whisky1 wrote: They may have been alerted to other options I see Goodwillie is available again on loan. A punt on Murphy and a loan? There is no need to rush a crucial decision
Why was there a rush to move Wells on in that case then??
Because they wanted TIME to bring in a replacement and because NWs head had gone (see Hans comments today) and he did not want to play for us anymore( he told the ML he wasn't fit then miraculously recovered to come of the bench for the TBs) Keep up
We know that Wells wanted the transfer, we know that players play games close to the crunch. We did not have to play ball in such a way - we could conduct our business better for the benefit of the club. It looks like McLean's wages are closer to £10k and we were paying Wells £1,250 a week ... so 8 times more. Okay - Wells is up to around £7k now and would not stay at City for £5k. I only hope we don't have to pay a silly amount to get a replacement in ... Get back to your xbox!!
Pure speculation ..where do you get your information from?!. When you have achieved a fraction of what the Board and Parky have AND you have put your own time and money in your criticism might have some credibility. Personally I would wait until the end of the window( at least) before I make a judgement you no doubt will be content to stick the boot into the club now. Pathetic.
You don't know what i have achieved in my life ... Okay then - you've got me - i am some boring health insurance salesman taking out my frustrations on this message board with fellow fans!! mate - take a look at yourself. If i can't raise a few genuine questions without being slagged off by you - who is being pathetic there? I have been fairly positive, it is you who strikes out with an attack. I just think the unseemly rush to sell our best player to one of our main rivals and having to pay out a chunk of that for a replacement is quite a risk. I am not saying we could have kept Wells, just conducted ourselves a bit better and with more measure for the benefit of the club!
We are not in the same League as Town at the moment literally and financially. That is where NW wanted to go and he would not countenance speaking to other clubs. The idea that NW has been vastly under sold is fanciful and attacking the club is disrespectful to those who have put a great deal of effort into 18 months of success. Remember it was Parky who wanted to get the deal done. It has taken a decade to reverse the decline and to get some positivity back to the club. You may not mean to but posting like you do just feeds the negativity. Take a step back and support your Club ..the team and the management.
You can support the club and raise questions about certain decisions or outcomes ... it's not just about blind-faith to move forward.

Maybe you should move to North Korea - you may feel more at home there?
[quote][p][bold]whisky1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jamiejoe[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]whisky1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jamiejoe[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]whisky1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jamiejoe[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]whisky1[/bold] wrote: They may have been alerted to other options I see Goodwillie is available again on loan. A punt on Murphy and a loan? There is no need to rush a crucial decision[/p][/quote]Why was there a rush to move Wells on in that case then??[/p][/quote]Because they wanted TIME to bring in a replacement and because NWs head had gone (see Hans comments today) and he did not want to play for us anymore( he told the ML he wasn't fit then miraculously recovered to come of the bench for the TBs) Keep up[/p][/quote]We know that Wells wanted the transfer, we know that players play games close to the crunch. We did not have to play ball in such a way - we could conduct our business better for the benefit of the club. It looks like McLean's wages are closer to £10k and we were paying Wells £1,250 a week ... so 8 times more. Okay - Wells is up to around £7k now and would not stay at City for £5k. I only hope we don't have to pay a silly amount to get a replacement in ... Get back to your xbox!![/p][/quote]Pure speculation ..where do you get your information from?!. When you have achieved a fraction of what the Board and Parky have AND you have put your own time and money in your criticism might have some credibility. Personally I would wait until the end of the window( at least) before I make a judgement you no doubt will be content to stick the boot into the club now. Pathetic.[/p][/quote]You don't know what i have achieved in my life ... Okay then - you've got me - i am some boring health insurance salesman taking out my frustrations on this message board with fellow fans!! mate - take a look at yourself. If i can't raise a few genuine questions without being slagged off by you - who is being pathetic there? I have been fairly positive, it is you who strikes out with an attack. I just think the unseemly rush to sell our best player to one of our main rivals and having to pay out a chunk of that for a replacement is quite a risk. I am not saying we could have kept Wells, just conducted ourselves a bit better and with more measure for the benefit of the club![/p][/quote]We are not in the same League as Town at the moment literally and financially. That is where NW wanted to go and he would not countenance speaking to other clubs. The idea that NW has been vastly under sold is fanciful and attacking the club is disrespectful to those who have put a great deal of effort into 18 months of success. Remember it was Parky who wanted to get the deal done. It has taken a decade to reverse the decline and to get some positivity back to the club. You may not mean to but posting like you do just feeds the negativity. Take a step back and support your Club ..the team and the management.[/p][/quote]You can support the club and raise questions about certain decisions or outcomes ... it's not just about blind-faith to move forward. Maybe you should move to North Korea - you may feel more at home there? jamiejoe
  • Score: -1

2:24pm Tue 14 Jan 14

whisky1 says...

Lol nice one..i have made my point take it or leave it. I think you know really what is the most productive and constructive approach
Lol nice one..i have made my point take it or leave it. I think you know really what is the most productive and constructive approach whisky1
  • Score: 1

2:26pm Tue 14 Jan 14

BCFCBoothy1 says...

Well lads, it would appear from my source (we all have a source it would seem!!!) that the McLean deal is unlikely to happen simply because it got out into the public domain and it appears that has raised the attention of clubs in the division above us so we are now in competition.

We will see though, time will tell.

CTID
Well lads, it would appear from my source (we all have a source it would seem!!!) that the McLean deal is unlikely to happen simply because it got out into the public domain and it appears that has raised the attention of clubs in the division above us so we are now in competition. We will see though, time will tell. CTID BCFCBoothy1
  • Score: -1

2:37pm Tue 14 Jan 14

macca1969 says...

Whisky its the smoke and mirrors the board play that winds up fans. Again I will say how if true were we to get Wells to sign a new deal when parky was told last summer he had to be sold in January to balance the books. Which was it,we offer Wells a new contract or we put him up for sale to balance the books. When Lawn blatantly contradicts himself of course fans start to doubt. Personally I don't think the board did all they could to keep him as they have always planned to sell him in January. So why not be honest to fans as at least we would accept the truth of the matter
Whisky its the smoke and mirrors the board play that winds up fans. Again I will say how if true were we to get Wells to sign a new deal when parky was told last summer he had to be sold in January to balance the books. Which was it,we offer Wells a new contract or we put him up for sale to balance the books. When Lawn blatantly contradicts himself of course fans start to doubt. Personally I don't think the board did all they could to keep him as they have always planned to sell him in January. So why not be honest to fans as at least we would accept the truth of the matter macca1969
  • Score: 1

3:00pm Tue 14 Jan 14

whisky1 says...

macca1969 wrote:
Whisky its the smoke and mirrors the board play that winds up fans. Again I will say how if true were we to get Wells to sign a new deal when parky was told last summer he had to be sold in January to balance the books. Which was it,we offer Wells a new contract or we put him up for sale to balance the books. When Lawn blatantly contradicts himself of course fans start to doubt. Personally I don't think the board did all they could to keep him as they have always planned to sell him in January. So why not be honest to fans as at least we would accept the truth of the matter
I don't think they had any choice financially given his depreciation moving forad..and commercially it was a no brainer. From a footy point of view his head had been turned and he wanted to go...his performances had already dipped if we had held onto him I am guessing the calculation was that it could have got worse. If they had wanted to hang on there might have been a smidge more in it but not much. Parky wanted certainty early in the window which is understandable. I don't think there has been any intentional desire to mislead fans. Mistakes are made and sometimes there may be mixed messages but they are just at the end of the day guys who have the best interests of the club at heart and deserve support for that not criticism. If they were self serving I would be the first to jump in ..but we could do A LOT worse
[quote][p][bold]macca1969[/bold] wrote: Whisky its the smoke and mirrors the board play that winds up fans. Again I will say how if true were we to get Wells to sign a new deal when parky was told last summer he had to be sold in January to balance the books. Which was it,we offer Wells a new contract or we put him up for sale to balance the books. When Lawn blatantly contradicts himself of course fans start to doubt. Personally I don't think the board did all they could to keep him as they have always planned to sell him in January. So why not be honest to fans as at least we would accept the truth of the matter[/p][/quote]I don't think they had any choice financially given his depreciation moving forad..and commercially it was a no brainer. From a footy point of view his head had been turned and he wanted to go...his performances had already dipped if we had held onto him I am guessing the calculation was that it could have got worse. If they had wanted to hang on there might have been a smidge more in it but not much. Parky wanted certainty early in the window which is understandable. I don't think there has been any intentional desire to mislead fans. Mistakes are made and sometimes there may be mixed messages but they are just at the end of the day guys who have the best interests of the club at heart and deserve support for that not criticism. If they were self serving I would be the first to jump in ..but we could do A LOT worse whisky1
  • Score: 5

4:56pm Tue 14 Jan 14

Prisoner Cell Block A says...

whisky1 wrote:
macca1969 wrote:
Whisky its the smoke and mirrors the board play that winds up fans. Again I will say how if true were we to get Wells to sign a new deal when parky was told last summer he had to be sold in January to balance the books. Which was it,we offer Wells a new contract or we put him up for sale to balance the books. When Lawn blatantly contradicts himself of course fans start to doubt. Personally I don't think the board did all they could to keep him as they have always planned to sell him in January. So why not be honest to fans as at least we would accept the truth of the matter
I don't think they had any choice financially given his depreciation moving forad..and commercially it was a no brainer. From a footy point of view his head had been turned and he wanted to go...his performances had already dipped if we had held onto him I am guessing the calculation was that it could have got worse. If they had wanted to hang on there might have been a smidge more in it but not much. Parky wanted certainty early in the window which is understandable. I don't think there has been any intentional desire to mislead fans. Mistakes are made and sometimes there may be mixed messages but they are just at the end of the day guys who have the best interests of the club at heart and deserve support for that not criticism. If they were self serving I would be the first to jump in ..but we could do A LOT worse
Would his value have depreciated though if he had broke 30 goals for the season and still had 12 month left?

Lots of IFs and Buts ....but I understand people questioning even in the current light of progression, a few bad decisions and that could soon become regression. Again.
[quote][p][bold]whisky1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]macca1969[/bold] wrote: Whisky its the smoke and mirrors the board play that winds up fans. Again I will say how if true were we to get Wells to sign a new deal when parky was told last summer he had to be sold in January to balance the books. Which was it,we offer Wells a new contract or we put him up for sale to balance the books. When Lawn blatantly contradicts himself of course fans start to doubt. Personally I don't think the board did all they could to keep him as they have always planned to sell him in January. So why not be honest to fans as at least we would accept the truth of the matter[/p][/quote]I don't think they had any choice financially given his depreciation moving forad..and commercially it was a no brainer. From a footy point of view his head had been turned and he wanted to go...his performances had already dipped if we had held onto him I am guessing the calculation was that it could have got worse. If they had wanted to hang on there might have been a smidge more in it but not much. Parky wanted certainty early in the window which is understandable. I don't think there has been any intentional desire to mislead fans. Mistakes are made and sometimes there may be mixed messages but they are just at the end of the day guys who have the best interests of the club at heart and deserve support for that not criticism. If they were self serving I would be the first to jump in ..but we could do A LOT worse[/p][/quote]Would his value have depreciated though if he had broke 30 goals for the season and still had 12 month left? Lots of IFs and Buts ....but I understand people questioning even in the current light of progression, a few bad decisions and that could soon become regression. Again. Prisoner Cell Block A
  • Score: 0

4:56pm Tue 14 Jan 14

queenyfan says...

Fact, Wells for some reason ONLY wanted to go to Town.
Fact. The club then had to get the best deal possible in the circumstances.
Fact. Only time will tell how good a transfer it was for the player and both clubs.
Fact. These transfers appear to happen overnight but there is too much money and legalities involved for that to be the case. It's probably being going on for weeks.
Fact. If we now bring in an experienced striker in on, on high money, and it does not work then the club will be criticised.
Fact. If alternatively they take a "punt" on a non league or lower league player on lower money and it does not work out then they will be criticised.
Fact. Tell me how you could handle it better knowing all the facts, which nobody outside a handful of the people running the club do, even some of the directions.
Fact, Wells for some reason ONLY wanted to go to Town. Fact. The club then had to get the best deal possible in the circumstances. Fact. Only time will tell how good a transfer it was for the player and both clubs. Fact. These transfers appear to happen overnight but there is too much money and legalities involved for that to be the case. It's probably being going on for weeks. Fact. If we now bring in an experienced striker in on, on high money, and it does not work then the club will be criticised. Fact. If alternatively they take a "punt" on a non league or lower league player on lower money and it does not work out then they will be criticised. Fact. Tell me how you could handle it better knowing all the facts, which nobody outside a handful of the people running the club do, even some of the directions. queenyfan
  • Score: 3

5:21pm Tue 14 Jan 14

shaun from richmond says...

jamiejoe wrote:
whisky1 wrote:
They may have been alerted to other options I see Goodwillie is available again on loan. A punt on Murphy and a loan? There is no need to rush a crucial decision
Why was there a rush to move Wells on in that case then??
EXACTLY!!.....Lawn/R
hodes have made a total BALLS UP of this Wells deal!!. Now we are going for a has-been striker on goodness knows how much more wages!!
A TOTAL MESS!!
[quote][p][bold]jamiejoe[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]whisky1[/bold] wrote: They may have been alerted to other options I see Goodwillie is available again on loan. A punt on Murphy and a loan? There is no need to rush a crucial decision[/p][/quote]Why was there a rush to move Wells on in that case then??[/p][/quote]EXACTLY!!.....Lawn/R hodes have made a total BALLS UP of this Wells deal!!. Now we are going for a has-been striker on goodness knows how much more wages!! A TOTAL MESS!! shaun from richmond
  • Score: 2

6:47pm Tue 14 Jan 14

Michael Clayton says...

queenyfan wrote:
Fact, Wells for some reason ONLY wanted to go to Town. Fact. The club then had to get the best deal possible in the circumstances. Fact. Only time will tell how good a transfer it was for the player and both clubs. Fact. These transfers appear to happen overnight but there is too much money and legalities involved for that to be the case. It's probably being going on for weeks. Fact. If we now bring in an experienced striker in on, on high money, and it does not work then the club will be criticised. Fact. If alternatively they take a "punt" on a non league or lower league player on lower money and it does not work out then they will be criticised. Fact. Tell me how you could handle it better knowing all the facts, which nobody outside a handful of the people running the club do, even some of the directions.
I would say that most of what you have written is based on opinion. Just because you label each point as a "Fact" does not necessarily make it as such. Nor can you make a future prediction something that is factual.

That said, I have nothing with which to doubt what you or saying and would tend to agree in terms of the points raised / outcomes predicted.
[quote][p][bold]queenyfan[/bold] wrote: Fact, Wells for some reason ONLY wanted to go to Town. Fact. The club then had to get the best deal possible in the circumstances. Fact. Only time will tell how good a transfer it was for the player and both clubs. Fact. These transfers appear to happen overnight but there is too much money and legalities involved for that to be the case. It's probably being going on for weeks. Fact. If we now bring in an experienced striker in on, on high money, and it does not work then the club will be criticised. Fact. If alternatively they take a "punt" on a non league or lower league player on lower money and it does not work out then they will be criticised. Fact. Tell me how you could handle it better knowing all the facts, which nobody outside a handful of the people running the club do, even some of the directions.[/p][/quote]I would say that most of what you have written is based on opinion. Just because you label each point as a "Fact" does not necessarily make it as such. Nor can you make a future prediction something that is factual. That said, I have nothing with which to doubt what you or saying and would tend to agree in terms of the points raised / outcomes predicted. Michael Clayton
  • Score: -3

6:48pm Tue 14 Jan 14

bcfc1903 says...

queenyfan wrote:
Fact, Wells for some reason ONLY wanted to go to Town.
Fact. The club then had to get the best deal possible in the circumstances.
Fact. Only time will tell how good a transfer it was for the player and both clubs.
Fact. These transfers appear to happen overnight but there is too much money and legalities involved for that to be the case. It's probably being going on for weeks.
Fact. If we now bring in an experienced striker in on, on high money, and it does not work then the club will be criticised.
Fact. If alternatively they take a "punt" on a non league or lower league player on lower money and it does not work out then they will be criticised.
Fact. Tell me how you could handle it better knowing all the facts, which nobody outside a handful of the people running the club do, even some of the directions.
Yes Queeny, a no win situation for BCFC.

Personally, I would have told Wells he could go in the summer to anyone bar LUFC and HTFC. Personally think we were too easily rolled over, for me looking from outside there seemed to be no spine involved in the negotiations.

Very glad BCFC are not rushing into any Wells replacement, keep cool and hopefully BCFC make the right decision. McLean could be a smokescreen.
[quote][p][bold]queenyfan[/bold] wrote: Fact, Wells for some reason ONLY wanted to go to Town. Fact. The club then had to get the best deal possible in the circumstances. Fact. Only time will tell how good a transfer it was for the player and both clubs. Fact. These transfers appear to happen overnight but there is too much money and legalities involved for that to be the case. It's probably being going on for weeks. Fact. If we now bring in an experienced striker in on, on high money, and it does not work then the club will be criticised. Fact. If alternatively they take a "punt" on a non league or lower league player on lower money and it does not work out then they will be criticised. Fact. Tell me how you could handle it better knowing all the facts, which nobody outside a handful of the people running the club do, even some of the directions.[/p][/quote]Yes Queeny, a no win situation for BCFC. Personally, I would have told Wells he could go in the summer to anyone bar LUFC and HTFC. Personally think we were too easily rolled over, for me looking from outside there seemed to be no spine involved in the negotiations. Very glad BCFC are not rushing into any Wells replacement, keep cool and hopefully BCFC make the right decision. McLean could be a smokescreen. bcfc1903
  • Score: 5

7:01pm Tue 14 Jan 14

Michael Clayton says...

Business decisions cannot be affected by emotional reactions to what is a bad situation and it is clearly a blow to pride.

However, it is of no consequence where he chose to go to. The fact is that he has gone and that is it.

And I am talking in terms of this one point rather than discussing any other aspects of the deal.
Business decisions cannot be affected by emotional reactions to what is a bad situation and it is clearly a blow to pride. However, it is of no consequence where he chose to go to. The fact is that he has gone and that is it. And I am talking in terms of this one point rather than discussing any other aspects of the deal. Michael Clayton
  • Score: -1

7:46pm Tue 14 Jan 14

Cityman23 says...

Off topic: If you can bear it at this 'raw' time for dealing with all things 'NW', the "WIDTH OF THE POST" site has got all of 'NW's goals to view in chronological order. Watching them like that highlights what a class act he was for City. Very few 'ordinary' goals amongst them and many potential 'Goal of the Month's/season's!! My personal favourite is his cut into the net from a tight angle v Carlisle this season! Pure class...at any level!
Off topic: If you can bear it at this 'raw' time for dealing with all things 'NW', the "WIDTH OF THE POST" site has got all of 'NW's goals to view in chronological order. Watching them like that highlights what a class act he was for City. Very few 'ordinary' goals amongst them and many potential 'Goal of the Month's/season's!! My personal favourite is his cut into the net from a tight angle v Carlisle this season! Pure class...at any level! Cityman23
  • Score: 2

8:37pm Tue 14 Jan 14

bantam10 says...

Peter300 wrote:
bantam10 wrote:
Why??? Rhys Murphy sounds so much better and he is only 23!
Read about Murphy and go on daggers local newspapers.
Why sign a 30 year old who is only gonna get worse with age and will be demanding a high wage.
Does not make sense to me at all.
You know this player? A lot of football matters would probably not make much sense to you. I take it you strongly objected to the signing of Gary Jones?
What a coq u are. You just come on here to wind people up.
I refuse to chat with idiots like you.
We're u abused in younger life?
[quote][p][bold]Peter300[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bantam10[/bold] wrote: Why??? Rhys Murphy sounds so much better and he is only 23! Read about Murphy and go on daggers local newspapers. Why sign a 30 year old who is only gonna get worse with age and will be demanding a high wage. Does not make sense to me at all.[/p][/quote]You know this player? A lot of football matters would probably not make much sense to you. I take it you strongly objected to the signing of Gary Jones?[/p][/quote]What a coq u are. You just come on here to wind people up. I refuse to chat with idiots like you. We're u abused in younger life? bantam10
  • Score: -1

8:58pm Tue 14 Jan 14

Papa Smurfs Wig says...

I'm in the we should get him camp and quickly. As said above others will be looking at him now and even thought terms are agreed, he might get a better offer and opportunity elsewhere so it's our loss.

Wells has gone even if most of us are not happy with where he went and we need to move on. I honestly think him and Hanson can sort out a good partnership together. And at least he's proven at this level where as a youngster might not make the grade. We have McBurnie and Clarkson to learn their trade and I'm sure when called upon they will do their upmost and maybe save City a few bob.
I'm in the we should get him camp and quickly. As said above others will be looking at him now and even thought terms are agreed, he might get a better offer and opportunity elsewhere so it's our loss. Wells has gone even if most of us are not happy with where he went and we need to move on. I honestly think him and Hanson can sort out a good partnership together. And at least he's proven at this level where as a youngster might not make the grade. We have McBurnie and Clarkson to learn their trade and I'm sure when called upon they will do their upmost and maybe save City a few bob. Papa Smurfs Wig
  • Score: 1

9:17pm Tue 14 Jan 14

Bradford Lad BD9 says...

It was reported a few days ago that mclean was parkys 1st choice stricker and that terms had been agreed
It was reported a few days ago that mclean was parkys 1st choice stricker and that terms had been agreed Bradford Lad BD9
  • Score: 1

9:23pm Tue 14 Jan 14

queenyfan says...

Michael clay ton.
Believe me they are facts, not assumptions, etc.
I can make a future prophesy become fact when I say that the fact is that only time will tell whether the transfer is good or bad for the player or the club involved. It's only in the fullness of time that this can be determined. Who knows what happens tomorrow, next week, next year?
With regard to the fact that Wells only wanted to go to Town, that is a fact, because he has said so. And City have said so, so unless you don't believe them, then it's a fact.
I personally believe, with a an admitted closer connection to the club than most fans, that the club had no choice but to ascede to the players wishes and get the best deal in the circumstances. Having once witnessed a transfer taking place whilst I was sat in Geoffrey RIchmonds office, I can tell you that they don't appen like we fans commonly believe they do. There are too many financial and legal implications plus the human side to consider, for instant or even quick transactions. The Wells deal will have had some elements of it that have taken some days, even weeks. The choice the club must make now is whether to go down the road of a costly signing with little risk, or a less costly signing with more risk. Damned if they do and damned if they don't by some fans.
Michael clay ton. Believe me they are facts, not assumptions, etc. I can make a future prophesy become fact when I say that the fact is that only time will tell whether the transfer is good or bad for the player or the club involved. It's only in the fullness of time that this can be determined. Who knows what happens tomorrow, next week, next year? With regard to the fact that Wells only wanted to go to Town, that is a fact, because he has said so. And City have said so, so unless you don't believe them, then it's a fact. I personally believe, with a an admitted closer connection to the club than most fans, that the club had no choice but to ascede to the players wishes and get the best deal in the circumstances. Having once witnessed a transfer taking place whilst I was sat in Geoffrey RIchmonds office, I can tell you that they don't appen like we fans commonly believe they do. There are too many financial and legal implications plus the human side to consider, for instant or even quick transactions. The Wells deal will have had some elements of it that have taken some days, even weeks. The choice the club must make now is whether to go down the road of a costly signing with little risk, or a less costly signing with more risk. Damned if they do and damned if they don't by some fans. queenyfan
  • Score: 2

10:06pm Tue 14 Jan 14

Wrose bantam says...

I do not really care that Wells went to Huddersfield. They do not play us (yet).

I do feel that we should have pushed harder for more money. Add ons are all well and good but they are just that, IE Not quantifiable now and not payable in the short term.

My bigger concern, and it is just a concern, is that we did not take £1.3 Million for a quick sale for a 23 Year old scoring week in week out to sign a 30 Year Old for £500K and pay wages of £7/ £10K a week. If so most of the wells money is good in one Year on one player.

I have nothing aginst Mc Clean and believe he will score goals. It is however rare to see centre forwards play long into their 30's. (Yes Peter THorne was an exception but even he had regular injuries)

We need a goal scoring midfielder and a replacement for Nahki. To me this will strengthen the side.

Whilst understanding we have increased players wages, we have bigger attendences, bigger teams in League 1 and have off loaded Zavon Hines, Turgot, Duke, ...If Wages are the issue we can not blow the transfer money on bloated wages.

A further point is that if we were approaching the 60% maximum limit, this implies that Parky and Lawn need to get rid of some players too (Eg Gray?)
I do not really care that Wells went to Huddersfield. They do not play us (yet). I do feel that we should have pushed harder for more money. Add ons are all well and good but they are just that, IE Not quantifiable now and not payable in the short term. My bigger concern, and it is just a concern, is that we did not take £1.3 Million for a quick sale for a 23 Year old scoring week in week out to sign a 30 Year Old for £500K and pay wages of £7/ £10K a week. If so most of the wells money is good in one Year on one player. I have nothing aginst Mc Clean and believe he will score goals. It is however rare to see centre forwards play long into their 30's. (Yes Peter THorne was an exception but even he had regular injuries) We need a goal scoring midfielder and a replacement for Nahki. To me this will strengthen the side. Whilst understanding we have increased players wages, we have bigger attendences, bigger teams in League 1 and have off loaded Zavon Hines, Turgot, Duke, ...If Wages are the issue we can not blow the transfer money on bloated wages. A further point is that if we were approaching the 60% maximum limit, this implies that Parky and Lawn need to get rid of some players too (Eg Gray?) Wrose bantam
  • Score: -1

3:14am Wed 15 Jan 14

Burnley_Bantam says...

bwwb wrote:
The longer this goes on the more it feels like the Paul Benson saga of a couple of years ago
All talk and no action
Absolutely
[quote][p][bold]bwwb[/bold] wrote: The longer this goes on the more it feels like the Paul Benson saga of a couple of years ago All talk and no action[/p][/quote]Absolutely Burnley_Bantam
  • Score: 0

3:17am Wed 15 Jan 14

Burnley_Bantam says...

Lancashire Bantam wrote:
Peter300 wrote:
Lancashire Bantam wrote: It would be a great signing BUT we need that right wing taking care of if he is that good in the air, if city can pull this off and with Davies on the way back things are not looking as black as they were on Friday. Keep the faith, in Parky we trust.
Yes, well make sure you do. Your track record in that department is not good.
Crawl back under your stone troll.
Well said!!
[quote][p][bold]Lancashire Bantam[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Peter300[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lancashire Bantam[/bold] wrote: It would be a great signing BUT we need that right wing taking care of if he is that good in the air, if city can pull this off and with Davies on the way back things are not looking as black as they were on Friday. Keep the faith, in Parky we trust.[/p][/quote]Yes, well make sure you do. Your track record in that department is not good.[/p][/quote]Crawl back under your stone troll.[/p][/quote]Well said!! Burnley_Bantam
  • Score: 0

3:22am Wed 15 Jan 14

Burnley_Bantam says...

bantam10 wrote:
Peter300 wrote:
bantam10 wrote:
Why??? Rhys Murphy sounds so much better and he is only 23!
Read about Murphy and go on daggers local newspapers.
Why sign a 30 year old who is only gonna get worse with age and will be demanding a high wage.
Does not make sense to me at all.
You know this player? A lot of football matters would probably not make much sense to you. I take it you strongly objected to the signing of Gary Jones?
What a coq u are. You just come on here to wind people up.
I refuse to chat with idiots like you.
We're u abused in younger life?
Certainly winds me up, just a bookworm who doesn't know where in Bradford VP is cos he's never been there.
[quote][p][bold]bantam10[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Peter300[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bantam10[/bold] wrote: Why??? Rhys Murphy sounds so much better and he is only 23! Read about Murphy and go on daggers local newspapers. Why sign a 30 year old who is only gonna get worse with age and will be demanding a high wage. Does not make sense to me at all.[/p][/quote]You know this player? A lot of football matters would probably not make much sense to you. I take it you strongly objected to the signing of Gary Jones?[/p][/quote]What a coq u are. You just come on here to wind people up. I refuse to chat with idiots like you. We're u abused in younger life?[/p][/quote]Certainly winds me up, just a bookworm who doesn't know where in Bradford VP is cos he's never been there. Burnley_Bantam
  • Score: 0

3:26am Wed 15 Jan 14

Burnley_Bantam says...

Mclean is dead wood making him a perfect Parky signing. And there's good players like Oliver and Connell who can't get a game.
Mclean is dead wood making him a perfect Parky signing. And there's good players like Oliver and Connell who can't get a game. Burnley_Bantam
  • Score: -1

3:28am Wed 15 Jan 14

Burnley_Bantam says...

bantam10 wrote:
Peter300 wrote:
bantam10 wrote:
Why??? Rhys Murphy sounds so much better and he is only 23!
Read about Murphy and go on daggers local newspapers.
Why sign a 30 year old who is only gonna get worse with age and will be demanding a high wage.
Does not make sense to me at all.
You know this player? A lot of football matters would probably not make much sense to you. I take it you strongly objected to the signing of Gary Jones?
What a coq u are. You just come on here to wind people up.
I refuse to chat with idiots like you.
We're u abused in younger life?
Agreed (apart from the last bit)
[quote][p][bold]bantam10[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Peter300[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bantam10[/bold] wrote: Why??? Rhys Murphy sounds so much better and he is only 23! Read about Murphy and go on daggers local newspapers. Why sign a 30 year old who is only gonna get worse with age and will be demanding a high wage. Does not make sense to me at all.[/p][/quote]You know this player? A lot of football matters would probably not make much sense to you. I take it you strongly objected to the signing of Gary Jones?[/p][/quote]What a coq u are. You just come on here to wind people up. I refuse to chat with idiots like you. We're u abused in younger life?[/p][/quote]Agreed (apart from the last bit) Burnley_Bantam
  • Score: 0

9:34am Wed 15 Jan 14

Prisoner Cell Block A says...

Michael Clayton wrote:
queenyfan wrote:
Fact, Wells for some reason ONLY wanted to go to Town. Fact. The club then had to get the best deal possible in the circumstances. Fact. Only time will tell how good a transfer it was for the player and both clubs. Fact. These transfers appear to happen overnight but there is too much money and legalities involved for that to be the case. It's probably being going on for weeks. Fact. If we now bring in an experienced striker in on, on high money, and it does not work then the club will be criticised. Fact. If alternatively they take a "punt" on a non league or lower league player on lower money and it does not work out then they will be criticised. Fact. Tell me how you could handle it better knowing all the facts, which nobody outside a handful of the people running the club do, even some of the directions.
I would say that most of what you have written is based on opinion. Just because you label each point as a "Fact" does not necessarily make it as such. Nor can you make a future prediction something that is factual.

That said, I have nothing with which to doubt what you or saying and would tend to agree in terms of the points raised / outcomes predicted.
Apparently the Wells situation has been ongoing for 6 weeks behind closed doors, the 'injuries' were more an attempt at forcing the club's hand and for me that has taken a lot of the gloss of the good things he did for us.

I couldn't imagine limping off any game after 15 minutes if not injured. A cowards route in my opinion.

There was nothing the board or manager could do to stop him and as such it's time to move on swiftly, he's done it once, he will do it again.
[quote][p][bold]Michael Clayton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]queenyfan[/bold] wrote: Fact, Wells for some reason ONLY wanted to go to Town. Fact. The club then had to get the best deal possible in the circumstances. Fact. Only time will tell how good a transfer it was for the player and both clubs. Fact. These transfers appear to happen overnight but there is too much money and legalities involved for that to be the case. It's probably being going on for weeks. Fact. If we now bring in an experienced striker in on, on high money, and it does not work then the club will be criticised. Fact. If alternatively they take a "punt" on a non league or lower league player on lower money and it does not work out then they will be criticised. Fact. Tell me how you could handle it better knowing all the facts, which nobody outside a handful of the people running the club do, even some of the directions.[/p][/quote]I would say that most of what you have written is based on opinion. Just because you label each point as a "Fact" does not necessarily make it as such. Nor can you make a future prediction something that is factual. That said, I have nothing with which to doubt what you or saying and would tend to agree in terms of the points raised / outcomes predicted.[/p][/quote]Apparently the Wells situation has been ongoing for 6 weeks behind closed doors, the 'injuries' were more an attempt at forcing the club's hand and for me that has taken a lot of the gloss of the good things he did for us. I couldn't imagine limping off any game after 15 minutes if not injured. A cowards route in my opinion. There was nothing the board or manager could do to stop him and as such it's time to move on swiftly, he's done it once, he will do it again. Prisoner Cell Block A
  • Score: -2

11:57am Wed 15 Jan 14

bcfc1903 says...

Shame we didn't have more financial clout, we could have told Nahki to try 18 months in our non existent reserves, I'm sure he'd have soon seen the light. No financial clout no leverage made the chairmen impudent.
Shame we didn't have more financial clout, we could have told Nahki to try 18 months in our non existent reserves, I'm sure he'd have soon seen the light. No financial clout no leverage made the chairmen impudent. bcfc1903
  • Score: 0

12:53pm Wed 15 Jan 14

Michael Clayton says...

bantam10 wrote:
Peter300 wrote:
bantam10 wrote: Why??? Rhys Murphy sounds so much better and he is only 23! Read about Murphy and go on daggers local newspapers. Why sign a 30 year old who is only gonna get worse with age and will be demanding a high wage. Does not make sense to me at all.
You know this player? A lot of football matters would probably not make much sense to you. I take it you strongly objected to the signing of Gary Jones?
What a coq u are. You just come on here to wind people up. I refuse to chat with idiots like you. We're u abused in younger life?
If you are refusing to chat with "idiots like you", why do you then ask him a question?
[quote][p][bold]bantam10[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Peter300[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bantam10[/bold] wrote: Why??? Rhys Murphy sounds so much better and he is only 23! Read about Murphy and go on daggers local newspapers. Why sign a 30 year old who is only gonna get worse with age and will be demanding a high wage. Does not make sense to me at all.[/p][/quote]You know this player? A lot of football matters would probably not make much sense to you. I take it you strongly objected to the signing of Gary Jones?[/p][/quote]What a coq u are. You just come on here to wind people up. I refuse to chat with idiots like you. We're u abused in younger life?[/p][/quote]If you are refusing to chat with "idiots like you", why do you then ask him a question? Michael Clayton
  • Score: -1

4:17pm Wed 15 Jan 14

Prisoner Cell Block A says...

Prisoner Cell Block A wrote:
Michael Clayton wrote:
queenyfan wrote:
Fact, Wells for some reason ONLY wanted to go to Town. Fact. The club then had to get the best deal possible in the circumstances. Fact. Only time will tell how good a transfer it was for the player and both clubs. Fact. These transfers appear to happen overnight but there is too much money and legalities involved for that to be the case. It's probably being going on for weeks. Fact. If we now bring in an experienced striker in on, on high money, and it does not work then the club will be criticised. Fact. If alternatively they take a "punt" on a non league or lower league player on lower money and it does not work out then they will be criticised. Fact. Tell me how you could handle it better knowing all the facts, which nobody outside a handful of the people running the club do, even some of the directions.
I would say that most of what you have written is based on opinion. Just because you label each point as a "Fact" does not necessarily make it as such. Nor can you make a future prediction something that is factual.

That said, I have nothing with which to doubt what you or saying and would tend to agree in terms of the points raised / outcomes predicted.
Apparently the Wells situation has been ongoing for 6 weeks behind closed doors, the 'injuries' were more an attempt at forcing the club's hand and for me that has taken a lot of the gloss of the good things he did for us.

I couldn't imagine limping off any game after 15 minutes if not injured. A cowards route in my opinion.

There was nothing the board or manager could do to stop him and as such it's time to move on swiftly, he's done it once, he will do it again.
I gather by the Nero signs some regard this as rubbish.

It is direct from one of the local sports journalists, it may be rubbish but given the events I tend to believe him.
[quote][p][bold]Prisoner Cell Block A[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Michael Clayton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]queenyfan[/bold] wrote: Fact, Wells for some reason ONLY wanted to go to Town. Fact. The club then had to get the best deal possible in the circumstances. Fact. Only time will tell how good a transfer it was for the player and both clubs. Fact. These transfers appear to happen overnight but there is too much money and legalities involved for that to be the case. It's probably being going on for weeks. Fact. If we now bring in an experienced striker in on, on high money, and it does not work then the club will be criticised. Fact. If alternatively they take a "punt" on a non league or lower league player on lower money and it does not work out then they will be criticised. Fact. Tell me how you could handle it better knowing all the facts, which nobody outside a handful of the people running the club do, even some of the directions.[/p][/quote]I would say that most of what you have written is based on opinion. Just because you label each point as a "Fact" does not necessarily make it as such. Nor can you make a future prediction something that is factual. That said, I have nothing with which to doubt what you or saying and would tend to agree in terms of the points raised / outcomes predicted.[/p][/quote]Apparently the Wells situation has been ongoing for 6 weeks behind closed doors, the 'injuries' were more an attempt at forcing the club's hand and for me that has taken a lot of the gloss of the good things he did for us. I couldn't imagine limping off any game after 15 minutes if not injured. A cowards route in my opinion. There was nothing the board or manager could do to stop him and as such it's time to move on swiftly, he's done it once, he will do it again.[/p][/quote]I gather by the Nero signs some regard this as rubbish. It is direct from one of the local sports journalists, it may be rubbish but given the events I tend to believe him. Prisoner Cell Block A
  • Score: 0

4:29pm Wed 15 Jan 14

shaun from richmond says...

After the NEWS that we are keeping BATES for the rest of the Season?? (Beggars Belief). Goodness knows what we are going to do next??...Over priced.. Has Been striker Looks like the next Bonkers decision!.
LETS HOPE NOT!
After the NEWS that we are keeping BATES for the rest of the Season?? (Beggars Belief). Goodness knows what we are going to do next??...Over priced.. Has Been striker Looks like the next Bonkers decision!. LETS HOPE NOT! shaun from richmond
  • Score: 0

11:13am Thu 16 Jan 14

KnightMcCall says...

BCFCBoothy1 wrote:
Well lads, it would appear from my source (we all have a source it would seem!!!) that the McLean deal is unlikely to happen simply because it got out into the public domain and it appears that has raised the attention of clubs in the division above us so we are now in competition.

We will see though, time will tell.

CTID
Your source not looking too clever this morning.
[quote][p][bold]BCFCBoothy1[/bold] wrote: Well lads, it would appear from my source (we all have a source it would seem!!!) that the McLean deal is unlikely to happen simply because it got out into the public domain and it appears that has raised the attention of clubs in the division above us so we are now in competition. We will see though, time will tell. CTID[/p][/quote]Your source not looking too clever this morning. KnightMcCall
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree