Bradford City boss Parkinson confident Wells will play ball (From Bradford Telegraph and Argus)

If Nahki wants to progress and play regular football I think he should sign as moving to another club might actually do him harm and may knock him back however I can see a clause being put in allowing to leave for a certain price if he continues to do well so its a win win situation for everybody

I hope Nahki remains with City.
*
I would like to see 'The Club' start to retain the young players
showing great potential. Plus those that will become the nucleus, of a future 'Promotion Squad'.
*
This concept may take 2-3 Seasons. However, is 'Parky' the right Manager to build a promotion squad?.
*
If not --Now is the point in time for 'The Board' to make some very bold decisions. Putting that principal into effect to both the retained Players; and most of all-to the Supporters. Whom will need to understand the Clubs' intended future objectives.
*

It wouldn't be the most sensible thing for Nakhi to get too big for his boots too soon - even if he signs, it doesn't mean he has to be here for the full term...it just ensures we will get some money for him if he decides to move on.

An increase in wages and a contractual clause that if someone offers x for a transfer he will be alloweed to go worth x per cent of that fee maybe will tempt him. Bear in mind it is his first season in a fag end teamin a fag end league having been rejected by a higher division club.

Freddy wrote:
I hope Nahki remains with City. * I would like to see 'The Club' start to retain the young players showing great potential. Plus those that will become the nucleus, of a future 'Promotion Squad'. * This concept may take 2-3 Seasons. However, is 'Parky' the right Manager to build a promotion squad?. * If not --Now is the point in time for 'The Board' to make some very bold decisions. Putting that principal into effect to both the retained Players; and most of all-to the Supporters. Whom will need to understand the Clubs' intended future objectives. *

A concept which 'may take 2-3 seasons'? All the while changing the manager? Future objectives? Unless the club have some stability i.e. don't sack the manager every few months (as some fans demand) City will always be bumping along in the lower reaches of League 2 - if not the level below.

Why are so many of you against sacking managers so soon. If I get somebody in my business who after 3 months isn't good enough then I tell them "thanks, but no thanks". This is business and it doesn't take me 3 awful seasons to know if a manager isn't right for the club. The only person who was worthy of this timescale was Stuart, but he is a one off case and I always thought he would do better higher up in the leagues with more intelligent players to work with. Sheff Wed got rid of Megson while not having a bad season but it was a bold decision as Jones added something that was lacking and got them out of L1. I suppose you need a bold Chairman and Board to make bold decisions!

Football is just not like business. The business side of it is, the playing side isn't. Clubs like to create some stabiliy as by changing manager he then wants to change playing staff, no stability, incurred costs no gaurantee of success. Same again in 6 months time. It doesn't and cannot work, certainly not at 4th division level with no spare money to throw at another manager who wants to make wholeslae changes.

Stuart should still be here, the three 'experienced' men since have taken us backwards, yet Stuart left because he couldn't take us forwards. I hope he now realises it wasn't his fault in the main as an ex-England coach and current international manager couldn't do it, neither could the respected coach and manager PP, neither could the greasy tramp(affectionately used). There are more underlying issues than we are aware of, which is more likely why the greasy tramp walked away from the fatman.

Killerwhale wrote:
Why are so many of you against sacking managers so soon. If I get somebody in my business who after 3 months isn't good enough then I tell them "thanks, but no thanks". This is business and it doesn't take me 3 awful seasons to know if a manager isn't right for the club. The only person who was worthy of this timescale was Stuart, but he is a one off case and I always thought he would do better higher up in the leagues with more intelligent players to work with. Sheff Wed got rid of Megson while not having a bad season but it was a bold decision as Jones added something that was lacking and got them out of L1. I suppose you need a bold Chairman and Board to make bold decisions!

If you need to get rid of staff after three months then it's your recruitment process that needs reviewing; not the staff!

I also suspect if that is your policy you are breaking some of the employment laws and would advise you to employ a good solicitor.

Killerwhale wrote:
Why are so many of you against sacking managers so soon. If I get somebody in my business who after 3 months isn't good enough then I tell them "thanks, but no thanks". This is business and it doesn't take me 3 awful seasons to know if a manager isn't right for the club. The only person who was worthy of this timescale was Stuart, but he is a one off case and I always thought he would do better higher up in the leagues with more intelligent players to work with. Sheff Wed got rid of Megson while not having a bad season but it was a bold decision as Jones added something that was lacking and got them out of L1. I suppose you need a bold Chairman and Board to make bold decisions!

It's obviously worked out well for Leeds and Huddersfield.

BD16 wrote:

Killerwhale wrote:
Why are so many of you against sacking managers so soon. If I get somebody in my business who after 3 months isn't good enough then I tell them "thanks, but no thanks". This is business and it doesn't take me 3 awful seasons to know if a manager isn't right for the club. The only person who was worthy of this timescale was Stuart, but he is a one off case and I always thought he would do better higher up in the leagues with more intelligent players to work with. Sheff Wed got rid of Megson while not having a bad season but it was a bold decision as Jones added something that was lacking and got them out of L1. I suppose you need a bold Chairman and Board to make bold decisions!

It's obviously worked out well for Leeds and Huddersfield.

I think that Dean Hoyle will be sweating a bit, hoping that Huddersfield still go up via the play-offs, but I can understand a little bit why he sacked Lee Clark. Although they were undefeated for 43 games I think that there were too many draws and this season they have drawn too many when being in a winning position. In defence of Dean Hoyle. Lee Clark had been there over three years and had failed twice before when taking Town to first the semi final and then last season to the final where they were favourites. I think that most of their fans felt that if Hoyle did not have any faith in Clark, he should have sacked him last year after the final.....although it has been said by fans that the decision came after Clark had apparently applied for the Leeds job. Whatever happens I don't suppose they will find out the absolute truth. I hope though, for my Son's and my Grandson's sake that they achieve promotion this year.

I hope they choke miserably again.

Anyway, does it matter how they do, according to them play-off results don't count. #notunbeatenbeatenru
n

Tinybantam wrote:

BD16 wrote:

Killerwhale wrote:
Why are so many of you against sacking managers so soon. If I get somebody in my business who after 3 months isn't good enough then I tell them "thanks, but no thanks". This is business and it doesn't take me 3 awful seasons to know if a manager isn't right for the club. The only person who was worthy of this timescale was Stuart, but he is a one off case and I always thought he would do better higher up in the leagues with more intelligent players to work with. Sheff Wed got rid of Megson while not having a bad season but it was a bold decision as Jones added something that was lacking and got them out of L1. I suppose you need a bold Chairman and Board to make bold decisions!

It's obviously worked out well for Leeds and Huddersfield.

I think that Dean Hoyle will be sweating a bit, hoping that Huddersfield still go up via the play-offs, but I can understand a little bit why he sacked Lee Clark. Although they were undefeated for 43 games I think that there were too many draws and this season they have drawn too many when being in a winning position. In defence of Dean Hoyle. Lee Clark had been there over three years and had failed twice before when taking Town to first the semi final and then last season to the final where they were favourites. I think that most of their fans felt that if Hoyle did not have any faith in Clark, he should have sacked him last year after the final.....although it has been said by fans that the decision came after Clark had apparently applied for the Leeds job. Whatever happens I don't suppose they will find out the absolute truth. I hope though, for my Son's and my Grandson's sake that they achieve promotion this year.

A change of manager really hasn't done them any favours and when they were competing with the two Sheffield clubs and Charlton, who have a higher division pedigree, I thought it unrealistic to expect Hudders to romp to automatic promotion.

As I said yesterday, I don't agree with a few of Parkinson's decisions and they include his negative-first tactics, some of his signings and the way he has treated some of our players.
.
However, I still think he is an improvement on our last 3 managers in the tactics stake. We may not agree with them, but there is no denying he has made us harder to beat, score against and generally tougher to play against. Now if he can just make the right additions, we can drastically improve on last season.
.
I just hope he gets a decent budget to be able to tie down our better players, whilst securing the signings we need to improve further.
.
Then, he just needs to work on his man-management skills....!

Waynus1971 wrote:
As I said yesterday, I don't agree with a few of Parkinson's decisions and they include his negative-first tactics, some of his signings and the way he has treated some of our players. . However, I still think he is an improvement on our last 3 managers in the tactics stake. We may not agree with them, but there is no denying he has made us harder to beat, score against and generally tougher to play against. Now if he can just make the right additions, we can drastically improve on last season. . I just hope he gets a decent budget to be able to tie down our better players, whilst securing the signings we need to improve further. . Then, he just needs to work on his man-management skills....!

I don't always agree with you Waynus but that post is pretty much spot on to me.

Waynus1971 wrote:
As I said yesterday, I don't agree with a few of Parkinson's decisions and they include his negative-first tactics, some of his signings and the way he has treated some of our players.
.
However, I still think he is an improvement on our last 3 managers in the tactics stake. We may not agree with them, but there is no denying he has made us harder to beat, score against and generally tougher to play against. Now if he can just make the right additions, we can drastically improve on last season.
.
I just hope he gets a decent budget to be able to tie down our better players, whilst securing the signings we need to improve further.
.
Then, he just needs to work on his man-management skills....!

Not too far off with that mate.

I think he is following Mark Lawn around for a few days to improve his people skills too, all in all it should work out lovely.