I know this may seem a bit "Doom and Gloom" .... but I wondered what people's opinions are regarding the club's immediate and long term future.
I was talking with CCNo1Fan on Sunday and whilst our opinions varied on certain matters, we seemed to agree on the following:
The move to Barton HAS to be an immediate success
The playing squad MUST be ultra competitive from the word go
The club MUST pull out all the stops to attract (and retain) new supporters to the new stadium
The new coach MUST be given total control of the playing side, and given every ounce of support from both the Directors and fans alike
The undercurrent of 'player power' within the club HAS to end Now
The coaching staff MUST instil into the players the ideology that playing for Salford is a privilege and that wearing the club shirt is an honour not just a 'means to an end'
I know this may seem a bit heavy to some, and perhaps some of the above is just plain obvious, but I personally have a strong really strong feeling that if things don't succeed from day 1 at Barton, it'll prove a monumental challenge to EVER get it right, and ultimately it may prove just too much.
Personally, and quite worryingly, I don't see the move as a new era and a new start, I see it as a final chance to save the club.
I know that some of these thoughts aren't completely original, and also that some Salford fans don't foresee any problems. Perhaps I'm being a overly pessimistic, but I just wondered what the rest of you thought.

Sadley I agree with what you say.

The move is the last chance we as club will have to be a success, make our usual balls up of this and the stable door will hit our ar$es on the way out I'm affraid.

Think we the fans have a bigger part to play in this that we realise, we need to be more vocal at the new stadium and turn it into the kind of intimidating atmosphere that Warrington at the Tesco car park stadium. We need the new coach who strikes me as being very passionate and down to earth to feed off the enthusiasm and passion we show for the club and as a result get the players feeding off it.
One thing I do think is that Wagga will be made club captain and will be a more vocal and inspiring leader on the park and think that will have big bareing on how we start next year.


Not doom and gloom but the sad and bitter truth is we stand at a cross roads with success and failiure equally within our grasp, let's hope we don't do the traditional Salford move of making a hash of it.

I agree with those sentiments. However...



What would you class as an immediate success?



What are you getting at here?

Some good points.

Although, most of the concerns can be eradicated with success on the pitch. It breeds better players, better fans, helps attract money and new fans along with everything that goes along with those things. A ball will start rolling and positivity will increase along with all the benefits that come along with that. Having the right man in charge is the most important factor as he can directly influence either directly or indirectly everything else at the Club.

Personally, I don't see it as a 'be-all-and-end-all' situation. I feel that a platform is being laid for someone to come along and kick our asses in the right direction. It may be the coach, it may be a Player, it may be an investor. It may be slow, or it may be rapid. We need, as fans, to see the bigger picture. Think more laterally. Inspire our team and Club to achieve, not to snipe and whine because we have given in to emotion. Use that passion wisely!

We can play our part, and hopefully others will play there's. Let's see our current predicament as a pointer for where we want to go and don't look back.

*steps off soapbox*

*gets on the soapbox*

The best thing about several of these posts is the acknowledgement of the important part us fans must play in the move to Barton. We need to give it our full support, to the players, to the coaches, and to those working in the background. It is us fans that have to show ourselves to be Salford's No1 asset; the singing, supporting, laughing and having fun that makes the shed a great place to be must be transfered to the new stadium. A large part of salford's success in barton is down to the fans and the atmosphere that we create.

Forgive me but I'd like to question what seems to be a growing myth about the coach not having full control of the playing side. I read comments on here regularly about the coach not being allowed to pick his own signings. To my knowledge the coach does have full control and I've never heard a Salford coach say otherwise. Is this confusion perhaps due to having a football director who is responsible for negotiating contracts with players and their agents? Do people assume that Simms picks the players just because he sorts out the deal? To me it's clear that the coach chooses the players and the football director sorts out the financial aspects of the contract. If anyone can give evidence to prove otherwise I'm all ears but if these are just fantasy rumours then I think comments like this can only be damaging and are not in the best interests of Salford City Reds.

Are we all in agreement that it isn't the coaches job to negotiate players contract terms? This isn't like a game of Football Manager on the PC or Playstation.

}
As rumoured that Simms sticks his nose in
We need Parish to arrive from day 1 and command that the ship his is and everyone else butt out. Like J.J has said it was just a little chat on a Sunday afternoon regarding us not liking the way things are going at the Willows and i personally think we are NOT giving the old lady a send off that she desrerves.

I will more or less guarantee that isn't the case mate. Simms' job has been explained many times. The only times Simms gets involved with picking the squad either for signing or for playing side of things is when he's either asked to step in by the club when we're between coaches (and his record isn't that bad) . Believe me Simms cares a lot for this club and I'm lead to believe he's very professional at his job. If Simms hadn't been a coach elsewhere before he joined the club this matter wouldn't arise.

The problem is that people want a scapegoat for everything around our club and nobody ever mentions it's the whole organisation that fails at times from the board down, but so do many private companies, but like most places we win together and we lose together so let's stop with the Simms witch hunt for at least a few weeks eh. Let's get behind the club (even after Sunday's expected hammering

) let's greet MP with an air of optimism, passion and togetherness, in fact I think we should make this place a grumble free zone and anyone who starts having a pop should be banned (oh well that's this board shutting down then :lol)).

OK we've picked up a few donkeys over the past few years but so have the top clubs with an infinite more money to spend. We do really well on the signing front generally on a very low budget. I have / am still working on an extensive list of players that have joined the club since SS was brought to the club and I'll be honest I think we've had more hits than missed by a long chalk.

The one and only gripe I have with Steve Simms is the fact that he is constantly in the changing room before/after & at HT.

I am in no way a Simms hater as some are, however, you can see why a lot of people chose to target Steve when the team don't perform.

If Simms, as I believe he is, is more of an administrator for the club, concluding deals, targeting players etc then he really needs to distance himself from the playing/coaching side of things. Since KH days we see Simms walking across the pitch at HT to go into the change room. How can people not associate him with the coaching side of things when you see that happening? This season is a given that he'll be there due to the circumstances but it hasn't always been the case.

I've heard lots of positive thing's said about SS from Wilky and you cannot ignore our chairman if he says that SS is invaluable to him. I just wish that there wasn't any grey area in his role and he stayed in the stand and distanced himself a little.

Sorry to stray O/T there just thought I'd have my pennies worth!

Going forward into next year, even though this season has been a bit of a car crash on and off the field I am full of optimisim. Maybe it's blind faith (or stupidity) but I really do believe moving into the new stadium will reinvigerate (sp) the club at all levels. Salford will be a much more attractive option for fans, players & coaches and I can only see us getting bigger. Lets face it, In the 17 years I've had the RL bug I've not had an awful lot to get excited about with Salford!

I have to agree with you on this. What possible contribution could he make that the head coach or assistant couldn't make? Perhaps when Matt Parish arrives it will be time to approach matchdays differently. It's OK for him to go in the dressing room before the game and wish the lads but that's different isn't it?

Fella Sorry if I wasn't clear, I wasn't having a pop at you or JJ as I agree with much of what has been said and respect your opinions on here (and elsewhere

) it was more for "others" to take note.


And there we have an excellent solution, great point mate.

My serious advice would be to see what Leigh RL have done since moving grounds and do the exact opposite wherever possible

Tremendous post King of the Shed, I agree entirely. It's also true that we haven't signed nearly as many donkeys over the last few years as we did at the end of the 90's early 00's.

If you've got a limited a budget you tend to get players who are either solid (as opposed to great) or, for want of a better word, flashy (moments of brilliance but prone to lots of costly mistakes). In recent time we've tended to go for more solid players which has given us more stability but less excitement than in the old days when we signed less consistent players. It's then up to the coach to get the best out of them. That's where we've struggled since Harrison's great year.

CC no 1 fan - I seem to remember Mcrae saying about being stuck with players early in his salford stint when it wasn't his team and later with regard to the finances available meaning that only certain types of players were available to him. Maybe excuses but I think there was something in it.

I don't blame Mcrae for us not becoming a great team but I do think that his attitude meant we weren't as good as we could have been. He seemed to be telling the players that they were playing as well as they could and they just weren't good enough rather than being able to get them to perform beyond their individual abilities

As for the original post, I think there are some valid concerns expressed but I don't agree with the overall theme. I think make or break situations are extremely few and far between. Look how long Huddersfield were in their fabulous stadium before they became a team consistently on the top half of the SL table with a growing fan base. Admittedly it was lower profile with them as they were in the lower division when they moved in but i think the point still stands

There does seem to be a culture at Salford that survival in the top division is enough. I actually think that this is, in many ways, absolutely true. Bigger clubs than us have disappeared/struggled far more than us over the last twenty years so to be in there fighting for a licence to stay as one of the top 30 RL teams in the world is a massive achievement in and of itself. But we need to change the attitude to be one that postpones reality and makes out that we can be a truly top team - change the mindset and the culture, work hard at sustaining it and the rest should follow......

That soapbox appears to be getting passed around a lot on this thread!!

Excellent post. Especially the large font paragraph.

I had to ask the question because, as already touched upon, it had different interpretations. I'm quite sure the head coach is in control of everything to do with picking the team, forming the plays and what not. Of course, Simms is entitled to an opinion just as we all are. Being a man of some experience in the area of coaching, he may actually be asked for an opinion by the coaches themselves.

Look at Ratchford for proof. He was very much on the outs under McRae; you guess Shaun didn't rate him. Yet he's a regular under Veivers. Both coaches under the stewardship of the same man but with differing opinions that were reflected on the team sheet. So it's fair to conclude that any inclination by Simms's to stick his oar in is probably minimal. Some ex-players, ex-coaches may disagree with this. However, there are probably other reasons to why they are former rather than current.





I agree that it would placate some fans if he didn't go in the changing rooms at half-time because it does suggest involvement in team matters. Again, he may be asked by the coach to offer insights and encouragement. The board may insist on it - they may want to know what goes on in there given the let downs they have had in the past. He could, therefore, be somewhat of a spy. An onlooker. An observer. We really don't know do we?



This is the other interpretation. I doubt that the majority of head coaches in rugby league have total control of who they sign. This isn't Manchester United and Alex Ferguson we're talking about here. I doubt many head coaches at Super League level say to their club's board 'I want [iplayer x[/i, make sure it happens'. He was probably given a list of players whose agents were sounded out, who were available and showed some interest in coming to Salford. The list may have been compiled by various people at the club. The head coach then may choose who he thinks could fit in. This isn't full control.



Yes. Same as in all sports including football; including Fergie.

We need to demonstrate things have changed with the new stadium. I sometimes thing we aren't good enough at making the noises other teams do.

We have just signed a good french kid but for reading forums would you know?

I believe Alan Hunte is doing a good job but how does this information get past the internet?

The club shop and the rest of the merchandising is an area where an immediate impact can be made. It shouldn't be run by people doing a more "important" job it should be their focus. Some will remember the days when Chris took over, the shop should become a place where fans go to discuss the games, pick up information, be part of the Salford Family. I hope something better is planned for the stadium. What about a kids corner or something more than the Xmas party.

As for the playing side, lets have a captain who is a leader. A Coach who talks up the team and players not make stupid statements to the press such as "I don't know what the problem is"

We need a buzz, get communities involved spread the word of the "family"

We will all need to do our bit, support the lads not abuse the ref, the other team, or our own players.

Why isn't it full control if the coach gets to choose who he signs from a list of players available and willing to join Salford? If this isn't full control what is?

Let's take a hypothetical scenario: a club can make one signing and a short list of three players is being compiled for the coach to decide upon. The guys doing the negotiations narrow the options down to [iplayer a[/i, [iplayer b[/i and [iplayer c[/i.

[iPlayer d[/i was approached by the negotiations team but they didn't get on with the player's agent, so he wasn't included on the short list. However, the coach loves [iplayer d[/i. He thinks [iplayer d[/i would be a perfect fit into his team. Yet the coach isn't given the option; the coach never even knew he was available.

[iPlayer e[/i was on the original short list but one of the club's executives knows the guy who represents [iplayer c[/i, thinks they can do a good deal, and wants him on the list - at the expense of [iplayer e[/i.

This isn't full control but I bet this happens at most clubs. Full control would be for the coach to go to the board and say 'I would like [iplayer d[/i here next season'.

Quote ="Chico"This isn't full control but I bet this happens at most clubs. Full control would be for the coach to go to the board and say 'I would like [iplayer d[/i here next season'.'" I appreciate what you are saying Chico about a coach saying "Sign me him" but would the coach know if the player he wanted was:- 1. Willing to join the club? 2. Affordable and within the budget? The coach will have full access to out of contract players to choose from. www.therugbyscout.com/ I'd hazzard a guess it works something like this:- 1. The coach knows the areas he needs to improve and then selects a first, second and third choice for each position he's looking to strengthen. 2. The club will then make the enquiries with players and their agents and report back to the coach on who will come and what money they want. 3. The Coach may then have some tough decisions to make to work within the budget. For instance if I sign that prop and that winger we can't afford that centre etc. It's easy for any coach to say sign me that player but it's surely not as easy as that.

Quote ="Chico"This isn't full control but I bet this happens at most clubs. Full control would be for the coach to go to the board and say 'I would like [iplayer d[/i here next season'.'" I appreciate what you are saying Chico about a coach saying "Sign me him" but would the coach know if the player he wanted was:- 1. Willing to join the club? 2. Affordable and within the budget? The coach will have full access to out of contract players to choose from. www.therugbyscout.com/ I'd hazzard a guess it works something like this:- 1. The coach knows the areas he needs to improve and then selects a first, second and third choice for each position he's looking to strengthen. 2. The club will then make the enquiries with players and their agents and report back to the coach on who will come and what money they want. 3. The Coach may then have some tough decisions to make to work within the budget. For instance if I sign that prop and that winger we can't afford that centre etc. It's easy for any coach to say sign me that player but it's surely not as easy as that.

Chico - I tend to agree with you - the coach makes the final call on who is the best player available and willing to join but doesn't necessarily know the full list to choose from or the reason why out of two possible recruits why we got player a and not player c.

At a well run club i would like to think that the starting point of the negotiating team would be "we need a new (say) prop let's have the coach list who he thinks may be the right person and share with the coach our intelligence about who is available and affordable". From there they draw up a credible short list and there is close liaison between coach and negotiators about how the selection process goes. in that way you hopefully achieve the right balance of improving the playing staff without overly-compromising the club either financially or reputationally

The bigger the power imbalance betwen the executive team and the coach the further from that scenario you get. I can imagine that Ferguson will know every detail of why the pursuit of a player isn't succesful and would crucify anyone who didn't do everything possible to get the right man. I'd imagine that the Chelsea coaches will be far less privy to the detail of negotiations or why you ended up with player Torres instead of a new left back (or whatever).

I reckon modern rugby league clubs are nearer the ideal model that football clubs and than they were in the days of Lindsay at Wigan. I'd probably also include the Snapes at Salford in that latter category, and that prompts the question about whether fans will always consider director interference a bad thing. Reading David Watkins autobiography suggets that the coaching staff knew very little about his signing until after it was a done deal. I guess it depends on the choices made.....

Are we suggesting here that the coach should be given control of the club finances and allowed to spend money the club hasn't got?

Guys, apologies for my lack of response, (been busy working all day). I certainly wasn't playing Devil's Advocate with the original post.
Can I just point out that nowhere in my OP did I mention Steve Simms. I did not intend to start another SS bashing thread. I'm neither a fan nor a hater. However, there are some interesting comments/opinions relating to the man, whom I've no doubt is held in high regard at the club. As already mentioned, I see absolutely no reason for him to be alongside the Head Coach on matchday. I think that situation alone does indeed lead people to believe that he has a say with the team selection/interchanges to some degree.
As for the other points I made, I'm certainly not expecting any silverware to suddenly appear (been watching far too long to expect that), but I'd class success as being ultra competitive in each and every game, home or away, league or cup, with the now customary capitulation a thing of the past.
I know there's a lot to do and a lot of hard work to be done, I just sincerely hope that it all comes together after a really long wait.
Cheers

No - I meant power imbalance in either direction. If the coach has too little say it will (probably) be bad for the playing side, if the coach has too much influence it will (probably) be bad for the business side