Very much enjoyed the Cox and Evans riff.

In some ways I think things have gone full circle at first team level for Hull. Two important questions now - have lessons been learned? My guess would be yes - I think Pearson's self-confidence, while high, is not at a level that will make him damagingly obdurate. If things don't turn in the next couple of months, he'll make a change. I doubt he'll worry overly about his earlier unequivocal backing of Radford - things change and with them minds. Happens all the time, especially in sport.
The second question is does he have the money to 'go again'? Moran didn't get it right first time at Wire, but he kept ploughing in the cash. He though is very wealthy and was doing it in large part for love. Even with a top coach and an improved culture, your squad probably isn't good enough to deliver on Pearson's early ambitions. To have a realistic shot at top 4 in 2016 or 2017, it looks right now like some more biggish transfer fees would be needed, even along with Abdull, Turgut, HTW et al stepping up.
To me 'culture' and good decision-making, influence where you finish in your 'group' (top 4, bottom half etc) within the league. But which group you're in is mainly down to money. Which is why it is mostly the same wealthy clubs at the top year, after year. Even when somebody like Cas last year shook things up abit, it was always going to be hard for them to back it up.
Long winded way of saying AP's still got a good chance, if he's got the cash - what a chairman saves by buying nylon suits...

Very good! And absolutely right. My worry is that Pearson has already intimated that he's put in what he can put in. This year was to have been the watershed where a moderate level of improvement , a bit of a cup run and promise for next year as his much vaunted youngsters start to catch fire get the cash registers ringing when passes go on sale. That would have given him the money to go and get some big name players to replace/supplement the likes of Ellis , Yeaman , Pryce etc as they came to the end of their careers. He would also be thinking that prospective players would be "knocking the door down" to sign and get involved in the success to come. Quite the opposite of that is now true where there will be pressure on pass sales or , God forbid , we're not even in the SL. Even if we do survive this year just retaining players will be difficult. In my view something has to happen pretty quickly but on the other hand as you say he probably has little choice but to leave it for , say , the next 3 games. I also think that he's probably got an agreement with Radford "written in" where he'll walk when asked rather than be sacked.

I would hope for a change of coach after the Widnes game unless we beat both them and Saints.

I suspect it would be easier to attract new players if we had a respected coach.

Yes, agree entirely with your assessment. It's illustrative of where AP's mind was at the time of his purchase of the club. The thing about AP is that many fans forget he is a businessman first and foremost. He didn't buy Hull FC out of any sentimental attachment, but as a business investment, to make a return.

Unfortunately his due dilligence was lacking as you describe, and he has compounded this by making some terrible decisions.

Your point about culture is an interesting one. Cultural change takes a long time, and above all else it needs to be clearly articulated from the top and cascaded down through the organisation. The most important thing to remember is that culture is changed through actions not words. I've seen many CEOs put out glossy statements about cultural change and organisational shift but then keep on with the same old behaviours. This is totally ineffective in instigating change as people quickly realise that it's just words, and quickly revert to their old behaviours.

Hull FC is a classic example of this. Lots of rousing statements of intent from AP, LR et al but the behaviours stay the same. This is why there's so much discontent at the moment. Ironically given the club strapline, lots of people don't "believe".

The ironic thing is the culture had started to change under his first 2 years tenure with the introduction of Gentle and McRae. Unfortunately, some of the advice of McRae proved flawed, and his scouting and contracting of players appears to have been cavalier. Pearson looks to have thrown the baby out with the bathwater as a result, and reverted to reliance on the same people who have dwelled inherently within our club infrastructure for years and were a constitutional part of it's culture as a result.

Ergo, the cancer was not cauterised, merely in remission, and we are where we are today. All my opinion, of course.

Think you nailed it.

I think most fans would settle for just making the 8 over the next few years providing we are showing improvements and building a better squad.

Things can also change pretty quickly when you have the right players and coaches on board. We went from 7th in 2003 to 3rd in 2004 (with injuries hampering our playoff attempt) to cup winners and Grand Finalists in 2005 & 2006. Rovers went from battling to stay up in SL to top 4 in a couple of years. Cas had an incredible year last year. Things can click in to place very quickly its just getting the right people on board that is key.

The other positive for Pearson in the cash front is that the economy is undoubtedly improving, while things are still a struggle for many fans, businesses are back spending on corporate shindigs and sponsorship again, as selling out all the hospitality for the derby weeks in advance shows. That combined with the new SKY deal and 3 extra home games should mean the club at the very least breaks even.

Things can indeed change very quickly. A bit of luck, a bit of confidence and all this negativity might seem like a huge overreaction by the middle of summer. Sometimes staying the course isn't stubbornness, it's patience.
A pedantic point but the new system will mean 1 or 2 extra home games, rather than 3. 11 before the split and 3 or 4 after, where it was previously 13. Still, it all helps. Pressure for a cap rise might start to grow though - a modest one is probably overdue, even in these low inflation times.

Agree on the last point. Competitiveness may be increasing (for most teams

) but the quality of players and particularly imports has gone backwards. Comparing Saints of 2006 to the squad that won the title last year is interesting.

Part of the problem I think is our identity. Wigan are for the want of a better word "warriors", or at least formidable/physical bruising competitors/borderline cheats (at the ruck anyway). Leeds are the modern day champions, never know when they're beaten, supplementing an endless homegrown pipeline with a sprinkling of top quality like Cuthbertson. Saints are the entertainers/comeback kings. We are the "sleeping giants" or put more crudely, the eternal disappointments.

How do you break out of that? When the chips are invariably down, the top clubs will dig deep and recall who they are and what they do, but so will we. Ellis has mentioned it before. Part of this is recruitment-led. In the pack for instance we go for professionals like Ellis and Mini, nice guys like Paea and Feka, Castleford pretty boys like Watts and Westerman (bit of licence there but you get my drift). We need a couple of borderline mental rough-as-s forwards who'll niggle and scrap all day long. Was discussing this with Mr B yesterday and since Shayne McMenemy can't remember anyone pushing the limits. Our "spark" in this department these days is limited to the competitiveness of Jordan Rankin who's probably leaving. I do think we need to be looking for some "mongrel" in the off season. And we need obviously a coach who commands respect.

A mongrel or two would be good. More importantly I'd like to see us sign winners. And leaders. I think Pryce has been a good signing so far and will hopefully bring these traits out in the youngsters.

Pryce has been class, agreed. I'd hand him responsibility for our attack and let him shape it as he wants.

I'm not sure that we can now or for the forseeable get anywhere near competing for quality players with the NRL. But if I was a SL player, I'd be asking questions of my union. 2 fewer top flight clubs (mitigated a bit by the top Championship clubs getting more cash), a longer season, a new tv deal - and yet another real terms cut in the wage budget. If the clubs are more sustainable that is some pay-off, but I'd still be wanting a bit more of the money pie.

The competitiveness thing is good for the league. But the wealthy clubs will start wanting to exploit their economic advantages more directly if things tighten up too much.

I'm very much in favour of a flat cap, but it should rise a little, occasionally.

Well,you are a Yorkie.

I'd go with koukash on his idea of 1 star player per club( 1 player not counting on cap) yes it's a bit of a gimmick, but think it would excite people, wouldn't make it unfair to the lesser clubs, and would bring some much needed publicity to our sport

I think it'll come in but I do wonder what it will do to team morale if a player comes in on big bucks and fails to perform or is injured most of the season. It would also mean 2nd best players at all clubs looking to become the marquee somewhere else. Can see it unsettling a lot of squads along the way.

I grew up in Hull, but I was born your side of the Humber

Yes possibly, but surely that's pretty much how it is now anyway, 1 player taking more of the cap than others, happens in most sports. And you'd probably find most clubs wouldn't even pay that star players wages, or not all of it anyway, the right player would attract new sponsors etc

It appeals to me because it is a simple exception to the rule. That complicated players in the England squad thing was/is impenetrable. I dunno if they sacked it off once Tomkins went to the NRL anyway.

Only a handful of clubs would sign a marquee player, as most understand the concept, I reckon. Koukash would probably sign SBW or someone. A few wouldn't be able spend more than they are now. Those in between would just discount their highest paid player from the cap and spread the saving around a handful of other senior players. It might slightly stem the flow of players to the NRL - but even of richest clubs can't sustainably compete for talent with the NRL. The dam of the cap isn't holding back a huge flood of spending - the money just isn't there.
It wouldn't make a lot of different quality wise, but after it has remained unchanged for a long time, it is one sensible way of letting the cap grow. Or they could just bung it up 5% - but that might be too simple.

I think it's the only sensible option, problem just raising the cap a little, would be it would just get shared between same player pool. We need to attract some top quality southern hemisphere players again

I honestly think it being shared around the same player pool is, with maybe 2 or 3 exceptions, what would happen with the marquee player rule. And that isn't such a bad thing. Bryn Hargreaves going off to lay paving or players being better off playing part-time and having a 'real' job, is as much a concern (well, nearly) as SL not being able to attract the best antipodeans (unless they've done something really grim).
Maybe the Willie Mason debacle puts me off - but even if he'd been good for us, one lesson definitely learned was that his name didn't add much to the gate.

I don't think we [uneed[/u to attract top NRL players, which is good because I don't we can at the moment, however the cap is set. A good game, isn't all about the quality of the play - that isn't even the most important factor imo. Fair enough, if players can't catch or run, it wouldn't be much of a spectacle - but a close, tense encounter between two indifferent teams, is more attractive to me than watching a great team blow away a merely good one.

Ha, HumBarton? Your Sixer tells me you should stick to herding sheep over Dumbarton bridge

. #stretching_yourself

The crucial thing is that whatever arrangements are made in the future it mustn't undermine the sustainability of the clubs. Sports clubs are quite different from other businesses in that owners often ignore the critical business metrics like return on capital employed and instead bid up players saleries to try to win at all costs.

One plus of having AP in charge is that I'm sure he won't put the clubs future in peril by letting things get out of hand. Even if we were to be relegated he would make sure the business survived by slashing costs on big salary players and blooding the next generation in the first team. Who knows, it may be the medicine the club needs to go down, have a clear out of the old guard and start blooding the crop of U19s we have as a unit in the championship.

Not saying I agree with this, but everything else seems to have failed.

That was a bureaucratic error!

Ah,then in that cse I stand corrected.