Lang Park wrote: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".

WormInHand wrote: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 were we are today. All my opinion, of course.

Mild Rover wrote: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...

UllFC wrote: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.

Mild Rover wrote: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.

Lang Park wrote: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".

C for Cuckoo wrote: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.

Mrs Barista wrote: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.

Mild Rover wrote: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.