Quote:the most glaring info here is 19 double digit losses in two seasons.

And this is likely to be a pointer to how the team's progressing. Saying that the team must be 6-10 is ludicrous. If they scrape six wins and are blown out ten times, that's a bad result - we should be expecting better. If they win 5 games well, and lose 11 games by close margins, that's a better sign of improvement.

Which is why Khan isn't willing to put a required number of wins on the team this season; it's about the nature of the wins and losses more than their number (within reason).

Last year felt a lot better than the year before from that perspective; the team was in games most or all the way through a lot of the time (even in some cases where the final score suggested otherwise), whereas the year before a lot of the games had been lost before the half. Obviously eventually improvement in that respect will and must result in more wins, but as long as things are on an upward trend in that respect it's a good plan to stay the course.

It seems stunningly obvious to me that there are some win/loss records where Bradley could either be safe or on a very hot seat depending on how the wins were won, and how the losses were lost. Which is why although I have expectations for the team this year, I'm not going to go crying that everyone should be fired if they don't meet them.

---