John Hendrie up front about Bantams strikers

Olly McBurnie is set to be a back-up striker for City next season but John Hendrie feels the Bantams need to boost their front line

Olly McBurnie is set to be a back-up striker for City next season but John Hendrie feels the Bantams need to boost their front line

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

City must strike in the summer market – by signing “at least one” new frontman for next season.

John Hendrie believes they cannot rely exclusively on James Hanson and Aaron Mclean to lead the line.

The Bantams have released Garry Thompson and Andy Gray to leave teenager Oliver McBurnie as the chief back-up to the front two.

Club legend Hendrie said: “Phil Par-kinson would ideally like three or four strikers to choose from but of course it’s down to the budget.

“James Hanson and Nahki Wells were the perfect combination but now the onus is on these two. But you still need that competition for places.

“With the amount of games you have, there will be suspensions, loss of form and injuries, especially bearing in mind the situation with James. You can’t just be relying on the same two strikers every week.

“Olly McBurnie is still a kid in the grand scheme of things. When you are expected to be scoring goals and creating problems, it’s a massive step up between youth team and senior football.

“The more firepower you can have the better. If you need to change things, you want to see a couple of strikers on the bench, not centre backs.

“I think Phil needs to bring in at least one, money permitting.”

City were only 14th in League One for goals scored last season with 57 – 32 less than champions Wolves. Joint-chairman Julian Rhodes has already stressed that there will be more emphasis on attack for their second season back in the division.

T&A columnist Hendrie added: “Obviously it comes down to money but the club have released the money from players like Thompson, Gary Jones and Matthew Bates to create space.

“They are trying to bring in players in attacking positions and creative ones.

“But I’m not surprised that the club are staying quiet on any targets. You’ve got to keep your counsel.

“Every team goes in for the same players and once one club declares an interest publicly, there’s nothing to stop another coming in and offering more money.”

* City have organised a friendly at League Two side Morecambe on Saturday, August 2 (2pm).

Comments (22)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

8:36am Fri 30 May 14

Freddy says...

*
JOHN---There is only Half a Million to re-negotiate current players increased demands. There is not enough money coming in according to Mr. Baldwin. Mr. Rhodes wants a more attacking squad. Releasing the three players you mention, will not cover the money needed to effect any Striker, or attacking players.
*
Rotherham have spent millions to achieve their Championship promotion. They are to spend even more.
*
DO YOU TRULY EXPECT CITY TO ADVANCE, ON A SHOE-STRING BUDGET ?????.
*
* JOHN---There is only Half a Million to re-negotiate current players increased demands. There is not enough money coming in according to Mr. Baldwin. Mr. Rhodes wants a more attacking squad. Releasing the three players you mention, will not cover the money needed to effect any Striker, or attacking players. * Rotherham have spent millions to achieve their Championship promotion. They are to spend even more. * DO YOU TRULY EXPECT CITY TO ADVANCE, ON A SHOE-STRING BUDGET ?????. * Freddy
  • Score: -24

8:55am Fri 30 May 14

whisky1 says...

Freddy wrote:
* JOHN---There is only Half a Million to re-negotiate current players increased demands. There is not enough money coming in according to Mr. Baldwin. Mr. Rhodes wants a more attacking squad. Releasing the three players you mention, will not cover the money needed to effect any Striker, or attacking players. * Rotherham have spent millions to achieve their Championship promotion. They are to spend even more. * DO YOU TRULY EXPECT CITY TO ADVANCE, ON A SHOE-STRING BUDGET ?????. *
Please be aware this email comes c/o LYNFIELD MOUNT
[quote][p][bold]Freddy[/bold] wrote: * JOHN---There is only Half a Million to re-negotiate current players increased demands. There is not enough money coming in according to Mr. Baldwin. Mr. Rhodes wants a more attacking squad. Releasing the three players you mention, will not cover the money needed to effect any Striker, or attacking players. * Rotherham have spent millions to achieve their Championship promotion. They are to spend even more. * DO YOU TRULY EXPECT CITY TO ADVANCE, ON A SHOE-STRING BUDGET ?????. *[/p][/quote]Please be aware this email comes c/o LYNFIELD MOUNT whisky1
  • Score: 15

9:22am Fri 30 May 14

Nickloza says...

Freddy wrote:
*
JOHN---There is only Half a Million to re-negotiate current players increased demands. There is not enough money coming in according to Mr. Baldwin. Mr. Rhodes wants a more attacking squad. Releasing the three players you mention, will not cover the money needed to effect any Striker, or attacking players.
*
Rotherham have spent millions to achieve their Championship promotion. They are to spend even more.
*
DO YOU TRULY EXPECT CITY TO ADVANCE, ON A SHOE-STRING BUDGET ?????.
*
Do you make it up as you go along? The budget has been reduced by 500'000, that is not the size of the budget, how many times do people have to point this out?
[quote][p][bold]Freddy[/bold] wrote: * JOHN---There is only Half a Million to re-negotiate current players increased demands. There is not enough money coming in according to Mr. Baldwin. Mr. Rhodes wants a more attacking squad. Releasing the three players you mention, will not cover the money needed to effect any Striker, or attacking players. * Rotherham have spent millions to achieve their Championship promotion. They are to spend even more. * DO YOU TRULY EXPECT CITY TO ADVANCE, ON A SHOE-STRING BUDGET ?????. *[/p][/quote]Do you make it up as you go along? The budget has been reduced by 500'000, that is not the size of the budget, how many times do people have to point this out? Nickloza
  • Score: 17

9:28am Fri 30 May 14

Farsley Bantam says...

Freddy wrote:
* JOHN---There is only Half a Million to re-negotiate current players increased demands. There is not enough money coming in according to Mr. Baldwin. Mr. Rhodes wants a more attacking squad. Releasing the three players you mention, will not cover the money needed to effect any Striker, or attacking players. * Rotherham have spent millions to achieve their Championship promotion. They are to spend even more. * DO YOU TRULY EXPECT CITY TO ADVANCE, ON A SHOE-STRING BUDGET ?????. *
The half a million figure has well and truly blown some peoples minds. To be clear the playing budget is being reduced by £500k on last year. The total budget is not £500k. This has been explained many times now by both Simon Parker and many of the posters.
Also how would releasing Gary Jones, Garry Thompson, Matthew Bates and Andy Gray (who was rumoured to be on £4k per week) not enable us to buy a single striker or attacking player? We're not talking about buying Suarez or Rooney.
The shoestring budget you speak of is fairly competitive for League 1. You don't need to spend a fortune to get out of this division though obviously cash does help.
[quote][p][bold]Freddy[/bold] wrote: * JOHN---There is only Half a Million to re-negotiate current players increased demands. There is not enough money coming in according to Mr. Baldwin. Mr. Rhodes wants a more attacking squad. Releasing the three players you mention, will not cover the money needed to effect any Striker, or attacking players. * Rotherham have spent millions to achieve their Championship promotion. They are to spend even more. * DO YOU TRULY EXPECT CITY TO ADVANCE, ON A SHOE-STRING BUDGET ?????. *[/p][/quote]The half a million figure has well and truly blown some peoples minds. To be clear the playing budget is being reduced by £500k on last year. The total budget is not £500k. This has been explained many times now by both Simon Parker and many of the posters. Also how would releasing Gary Jones, Garry Thompson, Matthew Bates and Andy Gray (who was rumoured to be on £4k per week) not enable us to buy a single striker or attacking player? We're not talking about buying Suarez or Rooney. The shoestring budget you speak of is fairly competitive for League 1. You don't need to spend a fortune to get out of this division though obviously cash does help. Farsley Bantam
  • Score: 19

10:48am Fri 30 May 14

whisky1 says...

Farsley Bantam wrote:
Freddy wrote: * JOHN---There is only Half a Million to re-negotiate current players increased demands. There is not enough money coming in according to Mr. Baldwin. Mr. Rhodes wants a more attacking squad. Releasing the three players you mention, will not cover the money needed to effect any Striker, or attacking players. * Rotherham have spent millions to achieve their Championship promotion. They are to spend even more. * DO YOU TRULY EXPECT CITY TO ADVANCE, ON A SHOE-STRING BUDGET ?????. *
The half a million figure has well and truly blown some peoples minds. To be clear the playing budget is being reduced by £500k on last year. The total budget is not £500k. This has been explained many times now by both Simon Parker and many of the posters. Also how would releasing Gary Jones, Garry Thompson, Matthew Bates and Andy Gray (who was rumoured to be on £4k per week) not enable us to buy a single striker or attacking player? We're not talking about buying Suarez or Rooney. The shoestring budget you speak of is fairly competitive for League 1. You don't need to spend a fortune to get out of this division though obviously cash does help.
Yeovil did it last year. Orient came very close. Both with budgets which will have been significantly lower than ours
[quote][p][bold]Farsley Bantam[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Freddy[/bold] wrote: * JOHN---There is only Half a Million to re-negotiate current players increased demands. There is not enough money coming in according to Mr. Baldwin. Mr. Rhodes wants a more attacking squad. Releasing the three players you mention, will not cover the money needed to effect any Striker, or attacking players. * Rotherham have spent millions to achieve their Championship promotion. They are to spend even more. * DO YOU TRULY EXPECT CITY TO ADVANCE, ON A SHOE-STRING BUDGET ?????. *[/p][/quote]The half a million figure has well and truly blown some peoples minds. To be clear the playing budget is being reduced by £500k on last year. The total budget is not £500k. This has been explained many times now by both Simon Parker and many of the posters. Also how would releasing Gary Jones, Garry Thompson, Matthew Bates and Andy Gray (who was rumoured to be on £4k per week) not enable us to buy a single striker or attacking player? We're not talking about buying Suarez or Rooney. The shoestring budget you speak of is fairly competitive for League 1. You don't need to spend a fortune to get out of this division though obviously cash does help.[/p][/quote]Yeovil did it last year. Orient came very close. Both with budgets which will have been significantly lower than ours whisky1
  • Score: 9

10:57am Fri 30 May 14

lawsonio123 says...

Looking at the teams in Division1 most would have a problem with budget City are a well run club who have some spending power but not Millions However if more people will attend games then our spending power will increase this however would only come about if the team pressed for promotion. with out a fairy godfather the onus falls on Parky to get a couple of Stars from some where let us wish him Luck in difficult situation
Looking at the teams in Division1 most would have a problem with budget City are a well run club who have some spending power but not Millions However if more people will attend games then our spending power will increase this however would only come about if the team pressed for promotion. with out a fairy godfather the onus falls on Parky to get a couple of Stars from some where let us wish him Luck in difficult situation lawsonio123
  • Score: 9

11:07am Fri 30 May 14

PARKS1DER says...

not often i post but i have to say its not the budget thats the problem it is in my humble opinion more to do with our ability to attract players who see us to an extent as unfashionable still even tho we are as ambitious as any club its always apparently been this way to players it seems
not often i post but i have to say its not the budget thats the problem it is in my humble opinion more to do with our ability to attract players who see us to an extent as unfashionable still even tho we are as ambitious as any club its always apparently been this way to players it seems PARKS1DER
  • Score: 1

11:29am Fri 30 May 14

Farsley Bantam says...

whisky1 wrote:
Farsley Bantam wrote:
Freddy wrote: * JOHN---There is only Half a Million to re-negotiate current players increased demands. There is not enough money coming in according to Mr. Baldwin. Mr. Rhodes wants a more attacking squad. Releasing the three players you mention, will not cover the money needed to effect any Striker, or attacking players. * Rotherham have spent millions to achieve their Championship promotion. They are to spend even more. * DO YOU TRULY EXPECT CITY TO ADVANCE, ON A SHOE-STRING BUDGET ?????. *
The half a million figure has well and truly blown some peoples minds. To be clear the playing budget is being reduced by £500k on last year. The total budget is not £500k. This has been explained many times now by both Simon Parker and many of the posters. Also how would releasing Gary Jones, Garry Thompson, Matthew Bates and Andy Gray (who was rumoured to be on £4k per week) not enable us to buy a single striker or attacking player? We're not talking about buying Suarez or Rooney. The shoestring budget you speak of is fairly competitive for League 1. You don't need to spend a fortune to get out of this division though obviously cash does help.
Yeovil did it last year. Orient came very close. Both with budgets which will have been significantly lower than ours
Parkinson did it with Colchester a few years ago. Colchester have about 12 fans.
[quote][p][bold]whisky1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Farsley Bantam[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Freddy[/bold] wrote: * JOHN---There is only Half a Million to re-negotiate current players increased demands. There is not enough money coming in according to Mr. Baldwin. Mr. Rhodes wants a more attacking squad. Releasing the three players you mention, will not cover the money needed to effect any Striker, or attacking players. * Rotherham have spent millions to achieve their Championship promotion. They are to spend even more. * DO YOU TRULY EXPECT CITY TO ADVANCE, ON A SHOE-STRING BUDGET ?????. *[/p][/quote]The half a million figure has well and truly blown some peoples minds. To be clear the playing budget is being reduced by £500k on last year. The total budget is not £500k. This has been explained many times now by both Simon Parker and many of the posters. Also how would releasing Gary Jones, Garry Thompson, Matthew Bates and Andy Gray (who was rumoured to be on £4k per week) not enable us to buy a single striker or attacking player? We're not talking about buying Suarez or Rooney. The shoestring budget you speak of is fairly competitive for League 1. You don't need to spend a fortune to get out of this division though obviously cash does help.[/p][/quote]Yeovil did it last year. Orient came very close. Both with budgets which will have been significantly lower than ours[/p][/quote]Parkinson did it with Colchester a few years ago. Colchester have about 12 fans. Farsley Bantam
  • Score: 3

11:44am Fri 30 May 14

realcitygent says...

I honestly think citys budget will be in top 6/7 teams in this div ,what parky really needs to do this season is if he is going to sign players just try to make sure they are better than the ones we already have on our books, To many players signed last season who were just not upto playing in div 1 or injured from the moment we signed them ie kennedy taylor de vita even gray ,we also took lot players on loan then never gave them a chance atkinson springs to mind ,parky saying when we signed him he was a goal scoring m/f but never gave him a chance ,city cant afford to sign players just to leave them sitting on bench or not good enough to make team ,at the end of the day its a business ,
I honestly think citys budget will be in top 6/7 teams in this div ,what parky really needs to do this season is if he is going to sign players just try to make sure they are better than the ones we already have on our books, To many players signed last season who were just not upto playing in div 1 or injured from the moment we signed them ie kennedy taylor de vita even gray ,we also took lot players on loan then never gave them a chance atkinson springs to mind ,parky saying when we signed him he was a goal scoring m/f but never gave him a chance ,city cant afford to sign players just to leave them sitting on bench or not good enough to make team ,at the end of the day its a business , realcitygent
  • Score: 3

11:49am Fri 30 May 14

whisky1 says...

Farsley Bantam wrote:
whisky1 wrote:
Farsley Bantam wrote:
Freddy wrote: * JOHN---There is only Half a Million to re-negotiate current players increased demands. There is not enough money coming in according to Mr. Baldwin. Mr. Rhodes wants a more attacking squad. Releasing the three players you mention, will not cover the money needed to effect any Striker, or attacking players. * Rotherham have spent millions to achieve their Championship promotion. They are to spend even more. * DO YOU TRULY EXPECT CITY TO ADVANCE, ON A SHOE-STRING BUDGET ?????. *
The half a million figure has well and truly blown some peoples minds. To be clear the playing budget is being reduced by £500k on last year. The total budget is not £500k. This has been explained many times now by both Simon Parker and many of the posters. Also how would releasing Gary Jones, Garry Thompson, Matthew Bates and Andy Gray (who was rumoured to be on £4k per week) not enable us to buy a single striker or attacking player? We're not talking about buying Suarez or Rooney. The shoestring budget you speak of is fairly competitive for League 1. You don't need to spend a fortune to get out of this division though obviously cash does help.
Yeovil did it last year. Orient came very close. Both with budgets which will have been significantly lower than ours
Parkinson did it with Colchester a few years ago. Colchester have about 12 fans.
PP will be looking in any event to getting better value for money than recruitment of summer 13. I am sure lessons have been learnt from then.
[quote][p][bold]Farsley Bantam[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]whisky1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Farsley Bantam[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Freddy[/bold] wrote: * JOHN---There is only Half a Million to re-negotiate current players increased demands. There is not enough money coming in according to Mr. Baldwin. Mr. Rhodes wants a more attacking squad. Releasing the three players you mention, will not cover the money needed to effect any Striker, or attacking players. * Rotherham have spent millions to achieve their Championship promotion. They are to spend even more. * DO YOU TRULY EXPECT CITY TO ADVANCE, ON A SHOE-STRING BUDGET ?????. *[/p][/quote]The half a million figure has well and truly blown some peoples minds. To be clear the playing budget is being reduced by £500k on last year. The total budget is not £500k. This has been explained many times now by both Simon Parker and many of the posters. Also how would releasing Gary Jones, Garry Thompson, Matthew Bates and Andy Gray (who was rumoured to be on £4k per week) not enable us to buy a single striker or attacking player? We're not talking about buying Suarez or Rooney. The shoestring budget you speak of is fairly competitive for League 1. You don't need to spend a fortune to get out of this division though obviously cash does help.[/p][/quote]Yeovil did it last year. Orient came very close. Both with budgets which will have been significantly lower than ours[/p][/quote]Parkinson did it with Colchester a few years ago. Colchester have about 12 fans.[/p][/quote]PP will be looking in any event to getting better value for money than recruitment of summer 13. I am sure lessons have been learnt from then. whisky1
  • Score: 2

12:21pm Fri 30 May 14

Farsley Bantam says...

Ross Heptenstall has just posted on Twitter that;

'Bradford City set to announce a new signing today'

Anyone heard anything?
Ross Heptenstall has just posted on Twitter that; 'Bradford City set to announce a new signing today' Anyone heard anything? Farsley Bantam
  • Score: 4

12:54pm Fri 30 May 14

Dennis Mann says...

whisky1 wrote:
Farsley Bantam wrote:
whisky1 wrote:
Farsley Bantam wrote:
Freddy wrote: * JOHN---There is only Half a Million to re-negotiate current players increased demands. There is not enough money coming in according to Mr. Baldwin. Mr. Rhodes wants a more attacking squad. Releasing the three players you mention, will not cover the money needed to effect any Striker, or attacking players. * Rotherham have spent millions to achieve their Championship promotion. They are to spend even more. * DO YOU TRULY EXPECT CITY TO ADVANCE, ON A SHOE-STRING BUDGET ?????. *
The half a million figure has well and truly blown some peoples minds. To be clear the playing budget is being reduced by £500k on last year. The total budget is not £500k. This has been explained many times now by both Simon Parker and many of the posters. Also how would releasing Gary Jones, Garry Thompson, Matthew Bates and Andy Gray (who was rumoured to be on £4k per week) not enable us to buy a single striker or attacking player? We're not talking about buying Suarez or Rooney. The shoestring budget you speak of is fairly competitive for League 1. You don't need to spend a fortune to get out of this division though obviously cash does help.
Yeovil did it last year. Orient came very close. Both with budgets which will have been significantly lower than ours
Parkinson did it with Colchester a few years ago. Colchester have about 12 fans.
PP will be looking in any event to getting better value for money than recruitment of summer 13. I am sure lessons have been learnt from then.
According to the Football League's own analysis, the club's playing budget for last season was about the 10th/11th largest in the division. I'd really like to understand how by reducing it by £500k, it will become one of the best budgets in the division. I have serious doubts about this.
[quote][p][bold]whisky1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Farsley Bantam[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]whisky1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Farsley Bantam[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Freddy[/bold] wrote: * JOHN---There is only Half a Million to re-negotiate current players increased demands. There is not enough money coming in according to Mr. Baldwin. Mr. Rhodes wants a more attacking squad. Releasing the three players you mention, will not cover the money needed to effect any Striker, or attacking players. * Rotherham have spent millions to achieve their Championship promotion. They are to spend even more. * DO YOU TRULY EXPECT CITY TO ADVANCE, ON A SHOE-STRING BUDGET ?????. *[/p][/quote]The half a million figure has well and truly blown some peoples minds. To be clear the playing budget is being reduced by £500k on last year. The total budget is not £500k. This has been explained many times now by both Simon Parker and many of the posters. Also how would releasing Gary Jones, Garry Thompson, Matthew Bates and Andy Gray (who was rumoured to be on £4k per week) not enable us to buy a single striker or attacking player? We're not talking about buying Suarez or Rooney. The shoestring budget you speak of is fairly competitive for League 1. You don't need to spend a fortune to get out of this division though obviously cash does help.[/p][/quote]Yeovil did it last year. Orient came very close. Both with budgets which will have been significantly lower than ours[/p][/quote]Parkinson did it with Colchester a few years ago. Colchester have about 12 fans.[/p][/quote]PP will be looking in any event to getting better value for money than recruitment of summer 13. I am sure lessons have been learnt from then.[/p][/quote]According to the Football League's own analysis, the club's playing budget for last season was about the 10th/11th largest in the division. I'd really like to understand how by reducing it by £500k, it will become one of the best budgets in the division. I have serious doubts about this. Dennis Mann
  • Score: 1

1:11pm Fri 30 May 14

Nickloza says...

Farsley Bantam wrote:
Ross Heptenstall has just posted on Twitter that;

'Bradford City set to announce a new signing today'

Anyone heard anything?
Seems the money is on Billy Knott
[quote][p][bold]Farsley Bantam[/bold] wrote: Ross Heptenstall has just posted on Twitter that; 'Bradford City set to announce a new signing today' Anyone heard anything?[/p][/quote]Seems the money is on Billy Knott Nickloza
  • Score: 0

1:14pm Fri 30 May 14

Farsley Bantam says...

Dennis Mann wrote:
whisky1 wrote:
Farsley Bantam wrote:
whisky1 wrote:
Farsley Bantam wrote:
Freddy wrote: * JOHN---There is only Half a Million to re-negotiate current players increased demands. There is not enough money coming in according to Mr. Baldwin. Mr. Rhodes wants a more attacking squad. Releasing the three players you mention, will not cover the money needed to effect any Striker, or attacking players. * Rotherham have spent millions to achieve their Championship promotion. They are to spend even more. * DO YOU TRULY EXPECT CITY TO ADVANCE, ON A SHOE-STRING BUDGET ?????. *
The half a million figure has well and truly blown some peoples minds. To be clear the playing budget is being reduced by £500k on last year. The total budget is not £500k. This has been explained many times now by both Simon Parker and many of the posters. Also how would releasing Gary Jones, Garry Thompson, Matthew Bates and Andy Gray (who was rumoured to be on £4k per week) not enable us to buy a single striker or attacking player? We're not talking about buying Suarez or Rooney. The shoestring budget you speak of is fairly competitive for League 1. You don't need to spend a fortune to get out of this division though obviously cash does help.
Yeovil did it last year. Orient came very close. Both with budgets which will have been significantly lower than ours
Parkinson did it with Colchester a few years ago. Colchester have about 12 fans.
PP will be looking in any event to getting better value for money than recruitment of summer 13. I am sure lessons have been learnt from then.
According to the Football League's own analysis, the club's playing budget for last season was about the 10th/11th largest in the division. I'd really like to understand how by reducing it by £500k, it will become one of the best budgets in the division. I have serious doubts about this.
I never said it was one of the best. I said it was competitive. I imagine it will be in a similare position this year. Big spenders like Wolves and Rotherham have gone and been replaced by the likes Rochdale and Chesterfield. If we are say the 10th biggest spenders it's entirely plausible for us to 'over achieve' and finish in the play offs.
Where can I find this analysis that you speak of? (I'm not questioning it's existence, I'm just genuinely interested to look at it!)
[quote][p][bold]Dennis Mann[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]whisky1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Farsley Bantam[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]whisky1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Farsley Bantam[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Freddy[/bold] wrote: * JOHN---There is only Half a Million to re-negotiate current players increased demands. There is not enough money coming in according to Mr. Baldwin. Mr. Rhodes wants a more attacking squad. Releasing the three players you mention, will not cover the money needed to effect any Striker, or attacking players. * Rotherham have spent millions to achieve their Championship promotion. They are to spend even more. * DO YOU TRULY EXPECT CITY TO ADVANCE, ON A SHOE-STRING BUDGET ?????. *[/p][/quote]The half a million figure has well and truly blown some peoples minds. To be clear the playing budget is being reduced by £500k on last year. The total budget is not £500k. This has been explained many times now by both Simon Parker and many of the posters. Also how would releasing Gary Jones, Garry Thompson, Matthew Bates and Andy Gray (who was rumoured to be on £4k per week) not enable us to buy a single striker or attacking player? We're not talking about buying Suarez or Rooney. The shoestring budget you speak of is fairly competitive for League 1. You don't need to spend a fortune to get out of this division though obviously cash does help.[/p][/quote]Yeovil did it last year. Orient came very close. Both with budgets which will have been significantly lower than ours[/p][/quote]Parkinson did it with Colchester a few years ago. Colchester have about 12 fans.[/p][/quote]PP will be looking in any event to getting better value for money than recruitment of summer 13. I am sure lessons have been learnt from then.[/p][/quote]According to the Football League's own analysis, the club's playing budget for last season was about the 10th/11th largest in the division. I'd really like to understand how by reducing it by £500k, it will become one of the best budgets in the division. I have serious doubts about this.[/p][/quote]I never said it was one of the best. I said it was competitive. I imagine it will be in a similare position this year. Big spenders like Wolves and Rotherham have gone and been replaced by the likes Rochdale and Chesterfield. If we are say the 10th biggest spenders it's entirely plausible for us to 'over achieve' and finish in the play offs. Where can I find this analysis that you speak of? (I'm not questioning it's existence, I'm just genuinely interested to look at it!) Farsley Bantam
  • Score: 1

1:16pm Fri 30 May 14

SuttonGraeme says...

Dennis Mann wrote:
whisky1 wrote:
Farsley Bantam wrote:
whisky1 wrote:
Farsley Bantam wrote:
Freddy wrote: * JOHN---There is only Half a Million to re-negotiate current players increased demands. There is not enough money coming in according to Mr. Baldwin. Mr. Rhodes wants a more attacking squad. Releasing the three players you mention, will not cover the money needed to effect any Striker, or attacking players. * Rotherham have spent millions to achieve their Championship promotion. They are to spend even more. * DO YOU TRULY EXPECT CITY TO ADVANCE, ON A SHOE-STRING BUDGET ?????. *
The half a million figure has well and truly blown some peoples minds. To be clear the playing budget is being reduced by £500k on last year. The total budget is not £500k. This has been explained many times now by both Simon Parker and many of the posters. Also how would releasing Gary Jones, Garry Thompson, Matthew Bates and Andy Gray (who was rumoured to be on £4k per week) not enable us to buy a single striker or attacking player? We're not talking about buying Suarez or Rooney. The shoestring budget you speak of is fairly competitive for League 1. You don't need to spend a fortune to get out of this division though obviously cash does help.
Yeovil did it last year. Orient came very close. Both with budgets which will have been significantly lower than ours
Parkinson did it with Colchester a few years ago. Colchester have about 12 fans.
PP will be looking in any event to getting better value for money than recruitment of summer 13. I am sure lessons have been learnt from then.
According to the Football League's own analysis, the club's playing budget for last season was about the 10th/11th largest in the division. I'd really like to understand how by reducing it by £500k, it will become one of the best budgets in the division. I have serious doubts about this.
I take your point, but I would imagine that Wolves had by far the biggest budget, I'm sure I read well over £20m, Rotherham would have spent well and that the likes of Yeovil and Donny coming down and the teams coming up won't be flashing the cash that much. I wouldn't be surprised if Gray and Jones together weren't on £350-400k between them.
[quote][p][bold]Dennis Mann[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]whisky1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Farsley Bantam[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]whisky1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Farsley Bantam[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Freddy[/bold] wrote: * JOHN---There is only Half a Million to re-negotiate current players increased demands. There is not enough money coming in according to Mr. Baldwin. Mr. Rhodes wants a more attacking squad. Releasing the three players you mention, will not cover the money needed to effect any Striker, or attacking players. * Rotherham have spent millions to achieve their Championship promotion. They are to spend even more. * DO YOU TRULY EXPECT CITY TO ADVANCE, ON A SHOE-STRING BUDGET ?????. *[/p][/quote]The half a million figure has well and truly blown some peoples minds. To be clear the playing budget is being reduced by £500k on last year. The total budget is not £500k. This has been explained many times now by both Simon Parker and many of the posters. Also how would releasing Gary Jones, Garry Thompson, Matthew Bates and Andy Gray (who was rumoured to be on £4k per week) not enable us to buy a single striker or attacking player? We're not talking about buying Suarez or Rooney. The shoestring budget you speak of is fairly competitive for League 1. You don't need to spend a fortune to get out of this division though obviously cash does help.[/p][/quote]Yeovil did it last year. Orient came very close. Both with budgets which will have been significantly lower than ours[/p][/quote]Parkinson did it with Colchester a few years ago. Colchester have about 12 fans.[/p][/quote]PP will be looking in any event to getting better value for money than recruitment of summer 13. I am sure lessons have been learnt from then.[/p][/quote]According to the Football League's own analysis, the club's playing budget for last season was about the 10th/11th largest in the division. I'd really like to understand how by reducing it by £500k, it will become one of the best budgets in the division. I have serious doubts about this.[/p][/quote]I take your point, but I would imagine that Wolves had by far the biggest budget, I'm sure I read well over £20m, Rotherham would have spent well and that the likes of Yeovil and Donny coming down and the teams coming up won't be flashing the cash that much. I wouldn't be surprised if Gray and Jones together weren't on £350-400k between them. SuttonGraeme
  • Score: 0

1:29pm Fri 30 May 14

Nickloza says...

It's official http://www.bradfordc
ityfc.co.uk/news/art
icle/billy-knott-sig
ns-1591204.aspx
It's official http://www.bradfordc ityfc.co.uk/news/art icle/billy-knott-sig ns-1591204.aspx Nickloza
  • Score: 1

1:31pm Fri 30 May 14

Farsley Bantam says...

Nickloza wrote:
Farsley Bantam wrote: Ross Heptenstall has just posted on Twitter that; 'Bradford City set to announce a new signing today' Anyone heard anything?
Seems the money is on Billy Knott
It's been confirmed now. 2 year deal with the option of a third in the clubs favour. Seems like a decent signing.
[quote][p][bold]Nickloza[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Farsley Bantam[/bold] wrote: Ross Heptenstall has just posted on Twitter that; 'Bradford City set to announce a new signing today' Anyone heard anything?[/p][/quote]Seems the money is on Billy Knott[/p][/quote]It's been confirmed now. 2 year deal with the option of a third in the clubs favour. Seems like a decent signing. Farsley Bantam
  • Score: 1

1:40pm Fri 30 May 14

karliboy says...

its billy knott m8 just released from sunderland
its billy knott m8 just released from sunderland karliboy
  • Score: 0

2:08pm Fri 30 May 14

Dennis Mann says...

Farsley Bantam wrote:
Dennis Mann wrote:
whisky1 wrote:
Farsley Bantam wrote:
whisky1 wrote:
Farsley Bantam wrote:
Freddy wrote: * JOHN---There is only Half a Million to re-negotiate current players increased demands. There is not enough money coming in according to Mr. Baldwin. Mr. Rhodes wants a more attacking squad. Releasing the three players you mention, will not cover the money needed to effect any Striker, or attacking players. * Rotherham have spent millions to achieve their Championship promotion. They are to spend even more. * DO YOU TRULY EXPECT CITY TO ADVANCE, ON A SHOE-STRING BUDGET ?????. *
The half a million figure has well and truly blown some peoples minds. To be clear the playing budget is being reduced by £500k on last year. The total budget is not £500k. This has been explained many times now by both Simon Parker and many of the posters. Also how would releasing Gary Jones, Garry Thompson, Matthew Bates and Andy Gray (who was rumoured to be on £4k per week) not enable us to buy a single striker or attacking player? We're not talking about buying Suarez or Rooney. The shoestring budget you speak of is fairly competitive for League 1. You don't need to spend a fortune to get out of this division though obviously cash does help.
Yeovil did it last year. Orient came very close. Both with budgets which will have been significantly lower than ours
Parkinson did it with Colchester a few years ago. Colchester have about 12 fans.
PP will be looking in any event to getting better value for money than recruitment of summer 13. I am sure lessons have been learnt from then.
According to the Football League's own analysis, the club's playing budget for last season was about the 10th/11th largest in the division. I'd really like to understand how by reducing it by £500k, it will become one of the best budgets in the division. I have serious doubts about this.
I never said it was one of the best. I said it was competitive. I imagine it will be in a similare position this year. Big spenders like Wolves and Rotherham have gone and been replaced by the likes Rochdale and Chesterfield. If we are say the 10th biggest spenders it's entirely plausible for us to 'over achieve' and finish in the play offs.
Where can I find this analysis that you speak of? (I'm not questioning it's existence, I'm just genuinely interested to look at it!)
Farsley

I still fail to understand how by reducing the budget by 25%, it can still be regarded as competitive when last year's much higher budget was already lower than 10 other clubs.

For your information, the analysis is provided by the FL to all clubs so I assume that City also received a copy. I don't know whether it's in the public domain or not.
[quote][p][bold]Farsley Bantam[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dennis Mann[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]whisky1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Farsley Bantam[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]whisky1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Farsley Bantam[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Freddy[/bold] wrote: * JOHN---There is only Half a Million to re-negotiate current players increased demands. There is not enough money coming in according to Mr. Baldwin. Mr. Rhodes wants a more attacking squad. Releasing the three players you mention, will not cover the money needed to effect any Striker, or attacking players. * Rotherham have spent millions to achieve their Championship promotion. They are to spend even more. * DO YOU TRULY EXPECT CITY TO ADVANCE, ON A SHOE-STRING BUDGET ?????. *[/p][/quote]The half a million figure has well and truly blown some peoples minds. To be clear the playing budget is being reduced by £500k on last year. The total budget is not £500k. This has been explained many times now by both Simon Parker and many of the posters. Also how would releasing Gary Jones, Garry Thompson, Matthew Bates and Andy Gray (who was rumoured to be on £4k per week) not enable us to buy a single striker or attacking player? We're not talking about buying Suarez or Rooney. The shoestring budget you speak of is fairly competitive for League 1. You don't need to spend a fortune to get out of this division though obviously cash does help.[/p][/quote]Yeovil did it last year. Orient came very close. Both with budgets which will have been significantly lower than ours[/p][/quote]Parkinson did it with Colchester a few years ago. Colchester have about 12 fans.[/p][/quote]PP will be looking in any event to getting better value for money than recruitment of summer 13. I am sure lessons have been learnt from then.[/p][/quote]According to the Football League's own analysis, the club's playing budget for last season was about the 10th/11th largest in the division. I'd really like to understand how by reducing it by £500k, it will become one of the best budgets in the division. I have serious doubts about this.[/p][/quote]I never said it was one of the best. I said it was competitive. I imagine it will be in a similare position this year. Big spenders like Wolves and Rotherham have gone and been replaced by the likes Rochdale and Chesterfield. If we are say the 10th biggest spenders it's entirely plausible for us to 'over achieve' and finish in the play offs. Where can I find this analysis that you speak of? (I'm not questioning it's existence, I'm just genuinely interested to look at it!)[/p][/quote]Farsley I still fail to understand how by reducing the budget by 25%, it can still be regarded as competitive when last year's much higher budget was already lower than 10 other clubs. For your information, the analysis is provided by the FL to all clubs so I assume that City also received a copy. I don't know whether it's in the public domain or not. Dennis Mann
  • Score: 0

3:57pm Fri 30 May 14

YorkshireSteel says...

I'd love City to have a go at trying to sign Dave Mooney from Leyton Orient.
I'd love City to have a go at trying to sign Dave Mooney from Leyton Orient. YorkshireSteel
  • Score: 0

4:22pm Mon 2 Jun 14

Yorkshire Windbag says...

Would anyone be happy with John Stead on a full season loan?
Would anyone be happy with John Stead on a full season loan? Yorkshire Windbag
  • Score: 0

4:09pm Tue 3 Jun 14

Michael Clayton says...

Yorkshire Windbag wrote:
Would anyone be happy with John Stead on a full season loan?
Yes.
[quote][p][bold]Yorkshire Windbag[/bold] wrote: Would anyone be happy with John Stead on a full season loan?[/p][/quote]Yes. Michael Clayton
  • Score: -1

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