By Stephen Hodgson

The news that Bradford City were approached by Preston North End and that Graham Alexander had been given permission to speak with them regarding a possible move has brought the future success of the club into question. After two and a half years of sustained progress, fans are again asking: who is the right person for the job?

The proper question they should be asking is: Does the club have a contingency plan to ensure managerial continuity? If the club doesn’t have contingency plans in place for the sustained functioning and development of the club, it’s very unlikely it will continue progressing.

Of course, from the outside it is difficult to know what, if anything, has been planned behind the scenes. Since the departure of Alexander was confirmed over the weekend and his replacement with joint Caretaker Managers Mark Trueman and Colin Doyle, initial developments do not yet provide much visible evidence of a well-developed succession plan and suggest they are, yet again, scrambling for a replacement management team. The next fortnight or so will be telling on how successful either approach may be.

On the surface, you might think that having a contingency plan and looking for a new manager afresh is a distinction without a difference in terms of outcomes. However, if the club is complacent in this area, it would speak volumes about what the club is and where it sees itself going long term. Given the club’s limited financial resources, Bradford City AFC cannot simply outspend bigger clubs. To compete, it must stay ahead of the curve, building incrementally on a long-term strategic plan, with contingency and continuity at its core. Embracing contingency and continuity planning is essential to the success of any such plan.

Before we delve into what contingency planning could look like at present, let’s take a little trip down memory lane. Since the Bantams were relegated from the Championship, a league I think most reasonable fans would like to see us become established in, we have had 13 different permanent managers and a smattering of caretaker managers. Of these managers, only three have any claim to having been a success: 1) Phil Parkinson, 2) Stuart McCall (2nd spell), and 3) Graham Alexander. That gives City a hiring success rate of, at best, around 30%.

That track record doesn’t just reflect individual misjudgements. It also raises questions about the club’s approach to succession and continuity planning. The regression years post-McCall (#2) and pre-Alexander are further testament to the club’s woeful managerial recruitment record.

The Bantams’ dire record of managerial hiring underlines the need for proper contingency and continuity planning. The club has only recently recovered from Parkinson’s exit and re-established itself as a force in League One, learning some hard truths along the way and being forced to plot a new path. Some lessons have been painfully slow to land, with the club having to learn the hard way that its player scouting infrastructure should be in house, and only after sustained fan pressure did it appoint a Head of Football Operations to oversee recruitment and scouting.

Now, with that backroom structure finally in place, the club has a foundation on which a new manager could thrive, making successor contingency planning more important now than ever. If there is no clear plan for the next manager to slot into, there is a real possibility of the club slipping back into a period of regression and mediocrity. Effective contingency and continuity planning now would allow decisions to be made quickly, with the club’s long-term goals in mind. With City currently top of the division, that efficiency and foresight are as vital now as they have ever been.

If the club doesn’t have a contingency plan and needs to develop one, the next question becomes: What might a managerial contingency plan look like? Such a plan does not need to be complicated and could be guided by core principles, updated against the realities of the game and the leagues. For comparison, a recent BBC article discussed the criteria Manchester City consider when recruiting new players, and I suggest City adopt something similar. In this article, the three criteria proffered for player recruitment were:

1. Ability
2. Overall characteristics
3. The system they play in at their current club and how the manager is asking [the player] and the team to play

A genuine contingency plan wouldn’t just name a couple of replacements favoured based upon availability, it would establish clear criteria for any future appointment, so that decisions made under pressure still align with the club’s long-term strategy. With this in mind, and inspired by the BBC article, I propose the following managerial hiring criteria:

1) Does the managerial candidate play the same system as Bradford City currently plays or sufficiently similar that their system can be quickly implemented?

In the current club, that would be 3-4-3 or a 3-4-2-1.

2) Managerial style and work ethic.

Personally, I feel that a manager that focuses on working hard and inspiring confidence in their squad is much more successful in the modern game than the “shout and kick stuff” managerial style of old. Parkinson and Alexander’s success speaks for itself in this regard. Our club must do more with less, and to maximise this you must ensure the whole squad is pulling in the same direction.

3) Is the proposed assistant manager also an asset for the club?

A good #2 is also a contingency in themselves: someone who understands the club’s methods and can help bridge any transitions. A good #2 can supercharge a club and a bad one can hold them back. With the stresses and strains of the modern game, a good #2 is essential.

4) The level of success the proposed manager has had relevant to the resources of their previous club(s).

The club must have some understanding of what budget other teams have, and managers that maximise and outdo budgetary limitations should be favoured over those that have more resources and squander them. Outperforming budgetary constraints also reflects on the candidate’s capacity to maximise the players they have.

5) Connections with other clubs further up the football pyramid and further afield.

The club should prioritise candidates whose networks complement the club’s recruitment strategy. The cold hard reality is that teams with less money need some good connections to build a squad, and as part of this they need to be able to sell the opportunity of playing for Bradford.

Alexander has a clear connection with David Moyes, for example, and we were beneficiaries of this relationship when we were able to sign Jenson Metcalfe, benefit from a year of his services, and then sell him on at a comfortable profit.

In addition to these criteria, the club should also consider:

1) The background and values of the manager.

To be Bradford City manager you must understand the workings of the club and the fan base and a large part of this is recognising and appreciating the working class roots of the fan base and their desire to do well.

Taking the extra little steps of engaging with the community, organising little events, and making inroads in those that might overwise never interact with the team, will pay dividends for the club in the long run and ensure the fans feel connected to the progress and setbacks.

A manager whose public persona makes the game all about themselves and the officials rather than the club and community (as many fans felt was the case under Adams), is unlikely to be a good fit for Bradford City.

2) An ability to adapt their strategy to the game unfolding.

This is perhaps one of the greatest shortfalls Alexander has been faced with in his time with Bradford City, with his “parking the bus” style in the last 15 minutes of game drawing criticism. The last few games of the promotion period, particularly the Swindon game, stand out.

***

Crucially, this work should be ongoing, not something that begins only once an approach for the current manager has been accepted. The club should also be constantly assessing these criteria against those managers that are on the market right now and taking the opportunity to learn about new managers when they visit Valley Parade.

There must also be consideration of candidates that are both in and out of work. I recognise that in the club’s recent history they were punished for seeking out an in-work manager when they hired Derek Adams, but there will be occasions where this kind of hire is warranted in future (particularly if the managers out of work do not meet enough of the above criteria). I also recognise that there are financial limitations on who the club can recruit, those constraints are an ever-present reality for any hiring process in the lower divisions.

The club’s handling of Alexander’s departure raises an obvious question: is there actually a contingency plan in place for when a manager leaves? We cannot say for certain that there isn’t one, and appointing caretaker managers could, in theory, be part of a calculated and considered strategy that allows the club time to work through a shortlist and organise interviews.

However, the club’s actions to date might suggest otherwise. Alexander says he told Ryan Sparks that the Preston job was his ultimate aim, implying the club had some notice of his potential exit as soon as they accepted the approach, yet there has been little public sign of a replacement strategy kicking into gear.

A club with a clear contingency plan would already be refining its shortlist, sounding out candidates and arranging interviews, especially with the two-week reprieve provided by postponements due to international call-ups. The lack of visible urgency from the club suggests either there is no plan, or the plan is not being executed effectively. A swift, well-judged appointment by the end of this week would quickly prove those doubts wrong.

The question that hangs over this whole episode is whether the club is learning from its past. We cannot say with certainty that lessons aren’t being learned or that there is no strategic thinking going on in the background.

However, the club’s recent history and decision-making raise concern that it will again default to its usual hiring pattern: prioritising the managers that are available immediately over those who are the right fit for the club’s aims. Names like Challinor and Rowett have been widely rumoured and favoured by supporters, and on paper these names meet several of the criteria proposed for a more robust appointment and could represent the kind of proactive choice the club needs. However, there may still be other candidates out there that fulfil even more of these criteria.

Whether the club bucks its longer-term post-Championship trend and assembles a successful successor managerial team remains to be seen. What this situation underlines, though, is how quickly things can change in football. Some measure of forward planning is essential to stay ahead of better-resourced rivals.

To borrow an analogy Ryan Sparks has used before, even a speedboat crew piloting an oil tanker can set a course and prepare for stormy seas in advance. If the club is doing that kind of planning, it has yet to make it clear to supporters. Only time will tell whether the club’s actions start to reflect a more deliberate, contingency-minded approach.

Categories: Opinion

Tags: BCAFC