CONFIRMED James Hanson

[finlaytheblade]

Not doubting your credentials Sir, or your source of knowledge, but, whose fault is it when a team goes "long ball" to accommodate a big centre forward? (We used to do the same when we had Henderson in the side). Is it the centre forward's fault? (As you seem to infer) or is it the fault of the manager and players around him, who change the way they play?

I'd say that's all down to the manager and his tactics. Not the player himself. Now, if you could possibly entertain that thought for a moment, then why would that reflect negatively on the player? And what makes you so sure that if he joined us we'd abandon all the lovely quick passing football that we've seen from the team this season and just go route 1 instead? It's almost like you are suggesting this is inevitable - and it's not.

I'd put it to you that we wouldn't change our style at all. But, I'd also expect that the sheer size, aerial threat and physical presence of this guy in our team would create a totally different dimension to our attack. Look, Billy Sharp, love him to bits, BUT, half the time he's not in the game because he's a poacher in the traditional sense and needs someone to do the dirty physical stuff and create opportunities for him to exploit in the box. Can you not see the potential in having a big tough guy like Hanson, occupying the attention of the other team's centre halves and leaving gaps for Billy to operate in? Can't you see that?

You refer to Hanson as "a clogger". He is. Most definitely. I've often thought that about him. He's a big tough so and so who doesn't take any prisoners. Excellent! Yes, I'd prefer someone more in the Ronaldo or Messi mode myself, but not for where we are right now. I'd absolutely love a clogger to put the cat amongst the pigeons and turn games like the one we had yesterday, into wins.

All that bloody possession we have but no cutting edge in the box because we don't have a big hard clogger that is going to make defenders crap themselves when the ball comes flying in.

Each to their own - but I'm afraid you're another one on here who just doesn't seem capable of understanding why Hanson would be a good signing. Thank God our manager does. Can't wait tbh! It will transform the team.

Well said that man, 10000 likes

 

[Bladezz]

Firstly, you say 'no one is doubting your credentials' whereas actually that's EXACTLY what Sitwell is doing! So I needed to clear that up!

Couple of things. Often, you're right, tactics come from the manager. However, I can confirm that there is no other option with Hanson. He is simply a poor footballer. He is a good header of the ball but a really poor footballer. He has only ever been a success when playing in a long ball side with Nakhi Wells... a la Warnock'a big man, little man mould.

Hanson can do a job last 10 mins when you're chasing a game and I've said this since my first post on the subject. However, there are other players of a similar mould that are younger and more prolific in L1 and L2 that would jump at the chance to join us. Hanson is Bradford's largest earner (by some distance apparently) so he won't be a cheap option. Why get a guy in on such a large wage just to he a bench player? Any player we sign in Jan should improve the first 11 IMO, not as an 'extra option'. He won't be a starter, and god help us if he is. When you look on the face of it, he is a 30 year old non-scoring striker on a big wage who is definitely not capable at playing at a higher level, there's not a lot going for him. The other issue ofcourse is that it is VITAL that, for Hanson, he needs a quick man alongside him. Considering that his partner would certainly be Billy, that's not going To happen. I could understand Parkinson signing him for Bolton, as I think he would suit them OK, but just dont see it for Blades. I am, however, more open to this transfer if it means we get rid of
Clarke the other way! I can confirm this is the worst possible outcome for City fans! They're personally attacking me at the idea we would flog them Clarke! Don't think I've got too much of a say in it.

Who are these more prolific strikers in league 1 and 2 who are a similar mould? Who would be cheaper than a striker who's out of contract in the summer!? Negotiation is all about how strong your hand is, he will leave Bradford for nothing at the end of the season.

But most importantly I await your names of these strikers.

 

[blader]

Who are these more prolific strikers in league 1 and 2 who are a similar mobile? Who would be cheaper than a striker who's out of contract in the summer!? Negotiation is all about how strong your hand is, he will leave Bradford for nothing at the end of the season.

But most importantly I await your names of these strikers.

Tom Elliot, Omar Bogle, Lee Gregory, Charlie Wyke, Mr Blobby, Richard Osman and Baloo the bear.

 

[Bladezz]

Omar's Bogle - championship teams are after him. So he's not cheaper.

Lee Gregory - again too expensive! (Would be my preferred choice) but without major backing he won't be coming to us. You also made the point of Hanson been on a lot of money he would cost more on wages and a bigger fee. Also he's 1 year younger.

Tom Elliott - last season got 6 in 44 games. Not more prolific. Would be cheaper on wages I would imagine. But as in contract a decent size fee would be needed.

Like say names of people similar who are younger and cheaper with a proven record.

 

[Torrix1889]

Any swap links with Clarke appear to have been rubbished this morning...

 

[Ricky]

200k is too much for him given his age and contract situation IMO.

Tom Elliott is the obvious alternative, he's 6"4 battering ram who's scored plenty of goals for Wimbledon this season. He's 26 and also out of contract in the summer. Probably wouldn't be any more expensive. We'll 100% be aware of him too now our scouting's adequate domestically.

I can still see why they'd choose Hanson instead though.

 

[mattbianco1]

I've said elsewhere, Hanson isn't a prolific scorer but he wins header after header. He offers something different to two smaller players up top (Sharp with Done/Lavery/McNulty). I think CW thought Clarke could do this job but quite clearly, Clarke isn't a target man. Hanson is. I don't particularly want the guy but if CW's plan B is a target man, Hanson is better than Clarke.

If we do sign him. He will most definitely start against Bolton, because they're huge.

Other thought is, if we do go up, then what? He'll have to be moved on so would Hanson actually want to sign for us knowing that!?

 

[Esablade]

Bradford fan friend of mine says it's a done deal, he's passed a medical and the fee is £200K. He's sorry to see him go. He says they play better football without him but he creates space for others and gives them a different option. At Bradford against us this season he did exactly this.

Expect this is the case, I don't think Wilder would have said we'd put a bid on if it wasn't pretty much tied up...welcome to the Lane Mr Hanson.

UTB!

 

[Pinchy]

I see the evidence of 'credentials' in what I read. The poster in question has established himself as a purveyor of drivel over many years.

 

[blade too long]

http://the72.co.uk/73315/bradford-city-blades-transfer-deal-include-striker-swap/

 

[Esablade]

Thank God. We have someone at last who knows their football and can see past all this stupid negativity about Hanson. He'll be a great signing for us and help us out of this division. After that...who cares?

Wilder has wanted this type of player in the squad from the start...we got Clarke, who has suffered injury after injury and hasn't really done it...its just upgrading a part of the squad that's already in place and isn't functioning as it should.

 

[blade too long]

Hanson has never had the service at Bradford that we will be giving him
it might be a terrific deal for both parties , it might be the chanmce hes waited for
thing is with football , you never know if a mix is right till you put it out there

its certain Clarke wasnt the ingredient to make us tasty up front

 

[Pinchy]

Not doubting your credentials Sir, or your source of knowledge, but, whose fault is it when a team goes "long ball" to accommodate a big centre forward? (We used to do the same when we had Henderson in the side). Is it the centre forward's fault? (As you seem to infer) or is it the fault of the manager and players around him, who change the way they play?

I'd say that's all down to the manager and his tactics. Not the player himself. Now, if you could possibly entertain that thought for a moment, then why would that reflect negatively on the player? And what makes you so sure that if he joined us we'd abandon all the lovely quick passing football that we've seen from the team this season and just go route 1 instead? It's almost like you are suggesting this is inevitable - and it's not.

I'd put it to you that we wouldn't change our style at all. But, I'd also expect that the sheer size, aerial threat and physical presence of this guy in our team would create a totally different dimension to our attack. Look, Billy Sharp, love him to bits, BUT, half the time he's not in the game because he's a poacher in the traditional sense and needs someone to do the dirty physical stuff and create opportunities for him to exploit in the box. Can you not see the potential in having a big tough guy like Hanson, occupying the attention of the other team's centre halves and leaving gaps for Billy to operate in? Can't you see that?

You refer to Hanson as "a clogger". He is. Most definitely. I've often thought that about him. He's a big tough so and so who doesn't take any prisoners. Excellent! Yes, I'd prefer someone more in the Ronaldo or Messi mode myself, but not for where we are right now. I'd absolutely love a clogger to put the cat amongst the pigeons and turn games like the one we had yesterday, into wins.

All that bloody possession we have but no cutting edge in the box because we don't have a big hard clogger that is going to make defenders crap themselves when the ball comes flying in.

Each to their own - but I'm afraid you're another one on here who just doesn't seem capable of understanding why Hanson would be a good signing. Thank God our manager does. Can't wait tbh! It will transform the team.

Very good points. I'm always amused by "X club fans say..." as though fans of X are the fount of all knowledge. For example, I'm taking no lessons on strikers from people who sought to justify Runaround Nogoals!...

 

[sheffielder]

Very good points. I'm always amused by "X club fans say..." as though fans of X are the fount of all knowledge. For example, I'm taking no lessons on strikers from people who sought to justify Runaround Nogoals!...

To be fair, I think the runaround nogoal fans were pointing at the wins column, not his personal goals column.

 

[blader]

Omar's Bogle - championship teams are after him. So he's not cheaper.

Lee Gregory - again too expensive! (Would be my preferred choice) but without major backing he won't be coming to us. You also made the point of Hanson been on a lot of money he would cost more on wages and a bigger fee. Also he's 1 year younger.

Tom Elliott - last season got 6 in 44 games. Not more prolific. Would be cheaper on wages I would imagine. But as in contract a decent size fee would be needed.

Like say names of people similar who are younger and cheaper with a proven record.

Eh? So what do you want from me? thryre all better options. Why is Gregory on more than hanson? How do you know? I would think Hanson is on more than Gregory. Hanson is Bradford's highest earner.

So, you want me to name a player that is : younger, cheaper AND a better scoring record?? Well, Omar Bogle, Charlie Wyke and Gregory all fit that bill.l to a point, but maybe not all 3. You won't accept them as answers though because you claim they're too expensive so there's no winning with you! A young goal scorer doesn't come for nothing. Doesn't mean we have to go out and buy James Hanson!

I also don't understand your point re:scoring record. Would you rather have a lad who was prolific 5 years ago or prolific this season? It makes no sense?? You're making criteria so bloody specific so that you can then go'there, told you there's no better option' but there are loads.

However, of you want: a 6ft + striker, with 6 months left on their contract, that has scored goals in L1 in the past, that must have played at this level for a few seasons and will command a small transfer fee, then you might be right - Hanson is the best choice

 

[saltaire bantam]

No, because a I live WITH a Bradford season ticket holder. I don't know why I'm trying to prove myself, so pointless, but anyway.... look, I'm born and raised in Bradford. All my mates are Bradford fans, everyone I work with is a Bradford fan, pretty much everyone I know is! (With the odd Leeds thrown in for good measure). Any football chat I am part of is about premier league or Bradford. So don't patronise my statements by changing what I said.

If ever Hanson's name is announced in the startzing line up, it is met with groans and comments along the lines of 'well that'll be our midfielders out for 2 weeks with neck ache' and the like. You know what. I have only see Bradford once this year (I usually go to a few a season on my mates flexi card) and I aren't claiming this is first hand information. However, I trust people that go to every game and they know what they're on about. Based on that, I know that Bradford go long ball when hanson plays. That's my big issue. I like to think we're going away from that and I don't want a player that forces us to play long ball because they aren't good for anything else. It must also be added that Hanson has been there for a lot of years. This isn't a small sample size. City fans will have a good grasp of him by now. I just really don't like the idea of us signing a 30 year old clogger, I thought they were a thing of the past for our club.

I am a season ticket holder and that is just not true the mic guy will draw out JAAAMES HAAANSON like he was in Vegas boxing ring. Of course some fans don't like him but more do. I could chip in that I do and don't know anybody who thinks he is a clogger.

He is what he is a big, tireless working human battering ram who will score a decent amount of goals and create havoc for others to feed off.

Bradford played long ball with Hanson under Parkinson because that was the managers style of football. McCall style is the polar opposite,, patient pass and move and wait we've done this since game one you saw this at VP, McCall still picks James Hanson.

 

[WORKSOPBLADE]

200k is too much for him given his age and contract situation IMO.

Tom Elliott is the obvious alternative, he's 6"4 battering ram who's scored plenty of goals for Wimbledon this season. He's 26 and also out of contract in the summer. Probably wouldn't be any more expensive. We'll 100% be aware of him too now our scouting's adequate domestically.

I can still see why they'd choose Hanson instead though.

£200k to help deliver promotion is nothing!

 

[sheffielder]

Any permanent signings need to be good enough to play at championship level looking forward to next season

Hanson can do what he does at Championship level. he will cause championship defenders as much grief as he does at this level.

 

[Harry's Game]

It looks on paper a bad signing, but as ever we can only judge him on how he plays.

However I suspect he will get very little leeway and time to bed in, and for once people will have some justification for it, we have no time to let him "see how he goes once he has settled" we are entering the defining point of the season and every one has to be on top of their game for the next two crucial months.

If he doesn't hit the ground running and start either scoring or assiting from the off then there is little point in him being here.

Unless of course we are already planning for a play off campaign?

 

[blader]

I am a season ticket holder and that is just not true the mic guy will draw out JAAAMES HAAANSON like he was in Vegas boxing ring. Of course some fans don't like him but more do. I could chip in that I do and don't know anybody who thinks he is a clogger.

He is what he is a big, tireless working human battering ram who will score a decent amount of goals and create havoc for others to feed off.

Bradford played long ball with Hanson under Parkinson because that was the managers style of football. McCall style is the polar opposite,, patient pass and move and wait we've done this since game one you saw this at VP, McCall still picks James Hanson.

Well, he hasn't started a game in 2017, and he hasn't been injured. Also, with respect, he might have been starting but there's a reason you have scored fewer goals than teams aa low as Bury, who are in the relegation zone! Your team this year is built on a good defence and the fact you have arguably the best midfielder in the division. You would comfortably be in the top 2 if you had a goal scorer but you don't and it's something City fans are very resentful of. Hanson also hasn't had a look in since you signed Jones, who I believe was pretty poor yesterday apparently? It's hard to defend your strikers when that's the exact position that has held you back this season.

Hanson has 4 goals this season, playin in a team that dominates games and possession (particularly at home). I hear you create a lot of chances but don't put them away. Hanson, as one of 2 strikers, must be one of the most guilty party for squandering these chances. 4 goals in a that side isn't good enough.

 

[GRUMPY BLADE]

Apologies if this has already been posted.

6/8 of them could make a big difference.

Trust the Wilder judgement.

 

[Silent Blade]

No he is not. It's a small minority on a message board and the moaners are always the loudest. The large majority rate JH. He is an iconic Bradford City player, a decent bloke and utterly selfless, you will not ever catch him pointing to his name on the back of his shirt after scoring, he is a straight up man.

His scoring record is there for all to see, it is good, compare it to other similar players, "doesn't score enough" is a myth and Billy Sharp will think he's won the lottery when matched with him. You have the best squad and he will only make you stronger and enable you to mix things up.

Thank you for this. We also have a minority in here who shout the loudest

 

[GRUMPY BLADE]

No, because a I live WITH a Bradford season ticket holder. I don't know why I'm trying to prove myself, so pointless, but anyway.... look, I'm born and raised in Bradford. All my mates are Bradford fans, everyone I work with is a Bradford fan, pretty much everyone I know is! (With the odd Leeds thrown in for good measure). Any football chat I am part of is about premier league or Bradford. So don't patronise my statements by changing what I said.

If ever Hanson's name is announced in the startzing line up, it is met with groans and comments along the lines of 'well that'll be our midfielders out for 2 weeks with neck ache' and the like. You know what. I have only see Bradford once this year (I usually go to a few a season on my mates flexi card) and I aren't claiming this is first hand information. However, I trust people that go to every game and they know what they're on about. Based on that, I know that Bradford go long ball when hanson plays. That's my big issue. I like to think we're going away from that and I don't want a player that forces us to play long ball because they aren't good for anything else. It must also be added that Hanson has been there for a lot of years. This isn't a small sample size. City fans will have a good grasp of him by now. I just really don't like the idea of us signing a 30 year old clogger, I thought they were a thing of the past for our club.

Thing is however Bradford City play will have no impact on how Sheffield United will play for 17 out of 18 games.

Its up to Wilder not McCall what style we use and Wilder has the Man U winger to use.

 

[Silent Blade]

So why do 99% of the posts from Bradford fans say he is gash and they would pay him to leave?

This sentence is 100% bullshit!

 

[Grappler]

In one interview Wilder noted that we had had over 70 crossing opportunities in the two games against Walsall. Have to think at 6 feet four he would have got on some of them, particularly if we started aiming for him. It is all about what you do with the opportunities you get. For me the signing makes sense.

I was at the Walsall game and we got bullied and pushed off the ball all the time. Outside of the back three, only Freeman and Sharp have any strength and can stand up to prolonged pushing and shoving. Hanson, or a player like Hanson (in size, build and aggression) would give other teams a lot to worry about. It's not about lovely flowing football, it's about grinding out results, not losing to fuckin Walsall, not drawing with fuckin Gillingham, having some grit and bollocks in the team and getting out of League fuckin one.

 

[Barney]

Amazing how we come round to accepting such players so quick.

It is the expectation thing again. Being in league one for so long tampers with your expectation levels and makes a lot of fans convert any bad situation in to a good one in their heads, regardless of whether it actually is, because they are so desperate for it to be that way.

Some of our fans would make themselves believe that Hammond signing again would be a stroke of genius.

 

[sheffielder]

Amazing how we come round to accepting such players so quick.

It is the expectation thing again. Being in league one for so long tampers with your expectation levels and makes a lot of fans convert any bad situation in to a good one in their heads, regardless of whether it actually is, because they are so desperate for it to be that way.

Some of our fans would make themselves believe that Hammond signing again would be a stroke of genius.

Last 5 minutes yesterday EEL goes up top. We get Hanson, he comes on. There is the difference Hanson will make.

 

[JordoBlade]

I'm not a fan of Hanson but I'll repeat what I've posted a few times. We signed a lad called Jake Wright who wasn't deemed good enough at this level by the majority of his own supporters at Oxford but yet he's always been solid for us and a lot of blades are calling for him to start more games. If we sign Hanson put your differences aside and get behind the lad. We're top of the league for Christ sake! Last thing we need is a load of negativity. Regardless of what you may think there's no doubt he'll give us an option that we DONT currently have so it can't be all that bad.

 

[Grappler]

Well, he hasn't started a game in 2017, and he hasn't been injured. Also, with respect, he might have been starting but there's a reason you have scored fewer goals than teams aa low as Bury, who are in the relegation zone! Your team this year is built on a good defence and the fact you have arguably the best midfielder in the division. You would comfortably be in the top 2 if you had a goal scorer but you don't and it's something City fans are very resentful of. Hanson also hasn't had a look in since you signed Jones, who I believe was pretty poor yesterday apparently? It's hard to defend your strikers when that's the exact position that has held you back this season.

Hanson has 4 goals this season, playin in a team that dominates games and possession (particularly at home). I hear you create a lot of chances but don't put them away. Hanson, as one of 2 strikers, must be one of the most guilty party for squandering these chances. 4 goals in a that side isn't good enough.

Bury have got James Vaughn, third top scorer in our league, and a player I have been banging on about for a while.

 

[Kozzy_is_my_Dad]

Hanson could really add something different. Is he the most exciting signing? No. But he's a plan B and a presence up front that we lack. I wanted Clarke to work as he had the potential to be as prolific as Billy at this level and I think Clarke wants it to work too. But he isn't the typical big man Hanson is, and the difficulty is, wherever he's been he's always been the main man, he isn't ever going to be that here whilst Billy is on the pitch. If you want the best out of Clarke you'd have to play him in the Sharp role and drop Billy.