Squad Rotation - on a Tuesday?! (Merged)

[ChippenhamRed]

2 hours ago, Alan Dicks' Barmy Army said:

How are they being "run into the ground" - the team has been swapped 3/4/5 players per game recently, before last night we had FOUR games in 24 days, hardly anywhere near running them into the ground !!!

Basically BCFC have played the game that the league is their priority, unfortunately for us people that invested our time and money into watching them surrender the result to Hull, I thought if we could go in at half time 0-0 then we had a chance, then keep it scoreless for the first ten minutes of the second half then bring on our big guns, as you know we failed to do either and now Saturdays result has more significance because if we lose the game we all know where the finger will be pointed.

No, they haven't been run into the ground yet, but using your theory of "paying customers deserve to see the best possible side" they soon would be.  And as you have acknowledged, there have been ongoing changes to the side in recent weeks - does this mean that in each instance the "paying customer" hasn't seen the side they deserve to?

Taking your "best possible side" theory a little further, would you expect 19 year old Tammy Abraham to play the solo striker role for upwards of 50 games in the season assuming he avoids injury?  Or do you think there might be a more intelligent way of managing our best players to get the best from them?

As Kid has already pointed out, we didn't surrender the result at all, in fact we put in a decent performance which wouldn't necessarily have been bettered by what you might consider to be our best side.  An enjoyable game despite the result and £12 of my money well spent.

[Nogbad the Bad]

2 hours ago, Kid in the Riot said:

Funny you haven't raised this before Nogbad? Is that because LJ's rotation policy has been working, as we've been winning?

You're right there Kid, when we're winning no one is going to be querying things.

I don't agree the rotation policy has necessarily been working though, and I'm not convinced LJ would say it has either.

Many of the first half performances at home this season have been lacklustre and disappointing, as LJ has said himself. We just haven't got going at all and are frequently left chasing a game. In the majority of games we've only really played well for comparatively short periods and usually in the 2nd half - that's often after the initial selection has been disbanded through circumstance or deliberate substitutions.

So it could be argued that the 3/4/5 regular changes in starting line ups put out by LJ have frequently proved to be the wrong ones or have left the starting 11 inadequate, sometimes this situation has been improved and rectified by 2nd half changes, other times, more recently especially, but at S.Weds. for another example, it hasn't.

Some would call it tactical genius and superb use of the squad when numerous starting changes lead to victory. It follows then that when they lead to poor performances and results the managers' selection policy will naturally come under scrutiny. Are they unfortunate setbacks for his accepted tactical nous, or was the selection somewhat haphazard and hopeful in the first place? Indeed, would we have fared better with no unforced changes, or at least far fewer?

When we lose 3 in 4, including 2 very disappointing all round performances at Cardiff and QPR, making multiple changes routinely becomes a very questionable policy especially when a team 'gelling' (something impossible in City's case with the sheer amount of constant change) is often seen to be key to it's success.

 

 

[Nogbad the Bad]

1 hour ago, Olé said:

So this is a thing, now? Can't complain about signings because we've spent money. Can't complain about results because they're generally impressive. Can't complain about our strength in depth because we finally have some. So we're now complaining about actually using the squad that was assembled?

Blimey. The primary reason for these selections is unlikely to be protecting fitness, as some are surprised by, the primary reason for these selections is to promote and develop form and experience of other players we invested in so they can do a job. And any one from last night can now do so on Saturday.

That's what a good manager does. Creates an abundance of match ready playing options. Player goes down, next one ready to go. Always seems strange in the past to hear that clubs that avoid injuries owe that to their success. What an odd, uncontrollable way of thinking about how you achieve success.

LJ (and I was by no means excited by the appointment) is clearly with hindsight, forward thinking and innovative and has no doubt figured out that to be in a good position for success, you don't hope for luck avoiding injury, you prepare for them. Create depth, competition and give all those players a chance.

The reason some people are surprised is any other manager in living memory, would have looked like a bit of a fraud trying to promote the likes of McKop, Gillespie, Partridge, Odejayi, Stewart as serious alternatives. We're now really invested on like for like quality and last night's team was as good as any.

Also, this whole "as a paying customer" thing is odd. What exactly is a paying customer entitled to? At a push there is a case that for your £12 you want to see players that we've invested in. And yet you got a £2m striker, a £1.5m winger and a £1.5m central defender - all relatively new, and all of whom did well.

Honestly, there were people actually tweeting at @bcfctweets last night that they want their money back due to the team selection. These people shouldn't be allowed to have phones or go to football matches. They should be force-fed glitzy primetime television that their tiny pea sized brains can cope with. 

If you're saying last night's team was as good as any we could have put out, then no, it absolutely wasn't.

Tomlin, Tammy, O'Neil and Magnusson were all benched last night and all are superior to anybody we have who might replace them.

Along with Smith and Flint most would say these are our very best and most dependably consistent players.

We had just one of our 6 top players in the starting line up, and 4 omissions were by choice.

You're also assuming these players don't mind being 'rested' for games of such magnitude - a home game fighting for a place in the last 8 of a major cup is a big game whatever anyone says - whereas in truth for all you know they might resent it.

 

[spudski]

6th in the league, 4th best goal difference, with a young squad, competing against teams with £millions thrown at them and loads of experience in only our second season up...and Squad rotation isn't working?

Tomlin in his latest interview, congratulates McCouslky for his debut and says LJ is keen to promote from the Academy.

It's part of the Clubs blueprint for success and the future.

Giving all players a chance in the team, is a great advert for our youth set up and policy...it makes us attractive to any potential young signing.

We can't compete financially with the very best, so you have to find ways of attracting players.

If you can't pay them daft wages, then you at least offer them all opportunity and not a closed door.

One of the best young managers in the world being courted by Bayern Munich, recently came out and said, football is 30% tactics and 70% man management, finding what makes a player tick, and making it a happy, united and harmonious group...he's spot on imo...and something that LJ is setting about doing it seems.

Fans as long as I've known have moaned that we as a club don't give young players a chance...and now they are moaning when we do.

Some people need to get a grip imo.

We haven't lost a game this season by more than 1 goal...no one has hammered us. If we had won the games some people are moaning about...Sheff W, QPR and Cardiff...then we'd have a further 9 points and be top of the league. I think some fans need a reality check and to lower their aspirations to what is reasonable when you take all considerations in this league.

The fact that a vast majority of fans see it for what it is, and applauded the team and LJ last night, is a Godsend.

Unfortunately we have a small vocal minority that haven't got a  bloody clue about football, or the club it seems.

Yesterdays classic on leaving the game...lad talking to his mate...apparently 'we've got McCoulsky on loan from Weston...they must have some really good players at Weston'....

[Red Exile]

47 minutes ago, Nogbad the Bad said:

 

So it could be argued that the 3/4/5 regular changes in starting line ups put out by LJ have frequently proved to be the wrong ones or have left the starting 11 inadequate, sometimes this situation has been improved and rectified by 2nd half changes, other times, more recently especially, but at S.Weds. for another example, it hasn't.

You're much respected poster Noggers, and although I don't share your annoyance at the starting line-up I understand where you're coming from...but in fairness to LJ, and having been at the Sheff. Weds. match that was a game where we outplayed them in the first half and where the changes really worked. The 3 players he'd brought in - Pack, O'Dowda and notably Josh Brownhill - were very effective. I'd assume that they were specifically introduced to counter Wednesday's strengths. They did it very well. For me that was a case of LJ picking a side that could beat the opposition, not the "best" 11 players...and from my perspective that's largely what the rotation has been about and I'd expect to see more of it. It won't work all the time, Cardiff and QPR being cases in point, in part because the opposition will play to their own strengths.

That the second half in Sheffield was different was partly down to Wednesday massively upping their game, presumably as their boss was able to counter what we were doing, but mainly another soft goal from a corner that gave them hope, a missed penalty and a dodgy sending off. Not a lot that could be done, despite Korey coming on to beef up midfield.

 

 

[Olé]

5 minutes ago, Nogbad the Bad said:

If you're saying last night's team was as good as any we could have put out, then no, it absolutely wasn't.

Tomlin, Tammy, O'Neil and Magnusson were all benched last night and all are superior to anybody we have who might replace them.

It is a subtle difference, but by adding "we could have put out" you've changed the meaning of my remark to one that is quite different.

It's not about whether we put the strongest team out, but how the team we chose performed, and I still say that it was as good as any.

The evidence is all there to back that up, that was our best football and most shots on/off target since Fulham away, over a month ago.

If the relative merits of our squad are so black and white, then why hasn't any team put out hit that quality of football in the past month?

 

Your second sentence proves the whole point of my prior post. Being hung up on who you consider superior is no way to build a team.

For too long we've over invested in some players and under invested in others. We had £5m of players last night who are 'less superior'.

That doesn't make sense for a club with our budget: LJ will know they're not less superior players, we just haven't played them enough.

He addressed that yesterday, and down the line we will be better off for it precisely because we won't need to worry about 'superiority'.

Last night proved we have very capable replacements, who did as well as any side we may have put out. This should be a good thing!?

[Kid in the Riot]

42 minutes ago, Nogbad the Bad said:

You're right there Kid, when we're winning no one is going to be querying things.

I don't agree the rotation policy has necessarily been working though, and I'm not convinced LJ would say it has either.

Many of the first half performances at home this season have been lacklustre and disappointing, as LJ has said himself. We just haven't got going at all and are frequently left chasing a game. In the majority of games we've only really played well for comparatively short periods and usually in the 2nd half - that's often after the initial selection has been disbanded through circumstance or deliberate substitutions.

So it could be argued that the 3/4/5 regular changes in starting line ups put out by LJ have frequently proved to be the wrong ones or have left the starting 11 inadequate, sometimes this situation has been improved and rectified by 2nd half changes, other times, more recently especially, but at S.Weds. for another example, it hasn't.

Some would call it tactical genius and superb use of the squad when numerous starting changes lead to victory. It follows then that when they lead to poor performances and results the managers' selection policy will naturally come under scrutiny. Are they unfortunate setbacks for his accepted tactical nous, or was the selection somewhat haphazard and hopeful in the first place? Indeed, would we have fared better with no unforced changes, or at least far fewer?

When we lose 3 in 4, including 2 very disappointing all round performances at Cardiff and QPR, making multiple changes routinely becomes a very questionable policy especially when a team 'gelling' (something impossible in City's case with the sheer amount of constant change) is often seen to be key to it's success.

I think you should man up, Nogbad. Just because we're winning doesn't mean we can't have some constructive criticism. You may have noticed me and others criticising SC for certain aspects of his 'management style' whilst here. Yes, you'll take some flack but say what you think. You may even be proved right as I was that eventually SC would be the architect of his own downfall by been stubborn and shouting his mouth off.

The narrative you've come up with in this post is an interesting one though it's unclear whether it's what you actually believe it to be the case.

Our first half performances of late have been cause for a bit of concern but obviously this could be down to a numbers of reasons, not necessarily team selection. To counter your thoughts above one could say that LJ is using the squad well and not repeating the glaring error of SC in playing the same team and tactics every week to no avail. The demands of the Championship in regard to fitness/recovery time due to the numerous back-to-back Sat/Tues fixtures is obvious, and I think that is what LJ is trying to manage.

It is also clear that he has faith in pretty much his entire squad of players to come in and do a job which must give each individual huge encouragement and confidence - and of course keep them competitive and on their toes.

[Super]

I still can't work out why we had a stronger team out in round one, just a crazy decision pathetic tired footballer excuse again.

[Kid in the Riot]

4 minutes ago, Super said:

I still can't work out why we had a stronger team out in round one, just a crazy decision.

Er when you say stronger I assume you mean Tomlin and Tammy played? Because other than those two (who it was presumably considered needed game time at the start of the season) that is not a stronger team. We had Del Williams at the back and Garita got on the pitch!

Based on the performances I've seen this month (all bar QPR) last night was the best, so which was the strongest TEAM we put out: last night or Cardiff? Forest? etc

[Big C]

17 minutes ago, Super said:

I still can't work out why we had a stronger team out in round one, just a crazy decision pathetic tired footballer excuse again.

He still made 7 changes to the team that beat Wigan the previous Saturday 

[RedM]

54 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

Er when you say stronger I assume you mean Tomlin and Tammy played? Because other than those two (who it was presumably considered needed game time at the start of the season) that is not a stronger team. We had Del Williams at the back and Garita got on the pitch!

Based on the performances I've seen this month (all bar QPR) last night was the best, so which was the strongest TEAM we put out: last night or Cardiff? Forest? etc

I'd definitely agree with you that it was a good team performance last night, didn't see QPR, only saw Cardiff on the Tv and I was at the Blackburn match. The 'stronger' team may started these matches, but the most effective team was on display last night.

Yes it sounds odd as we obviously lost the match and beat Blackburn, but the football was so much better than it has been in those games mentioned. The ball was mostly played on the deck and driven forward,the majority of long balls had purpose and found their player.

[phantom]

Surely we're all missing one obvious point, the football last night was much better because we weren't playing with one up front. 

Ladtnight's formation certainly looked better than anything at Cardiff /QPR / Blackburn etc

[Marlborough Red]

In my business life we had a mantra- "Get it right first time".

Playing devils advocate , may I suggest that at Ashton Gate LJ has never achieved this objective. It is very concerning that we have failed to score in any game in the first half at home, often failing to get any shots on target and certainly not presenting any serious threat. Tammy is isolated and we seem to play the ball to him too much in the air which, as we all know, does not play to his strengths. The obvious conclusion is that he has not selected the right team for Home games and we only come alive after half time, often when we go  a goal behind and he then makes changes and brings on  the substitutes needed and ends up more often then not playing 2 up front.

It would be a pleasant change at the Brighton match to get the team selection right first time , play 2 up front at home  (Engval and Tammy perhaps)  score a goal  in the first half and take the lead , forcing the opposition to change their tactics and push forward more giving us the chance to score on the break !

Getting the team selection right first time would also mean he  can start with this team for the next home match without the need for constant changes particularly in midfield.

[DirtySanchez]

I would rather start with a strong eleven to see where we are at...but if anyone needed a rest surely it should have been Flint?

It's finished now - but a mistake for me - and revenue to spend!! 

COYRs!

[pillred]

11 hours ago, View from the Dolman said:

Good luck finding agreement on that.

i agree

[NickJ]

Much of this discussion centres around whether we put out a strong team. The squad and strength in depth now is undoubtedly the strongest it has ever been and because of that it was a decent team. However nobody could deny, it was not the best 11 we could have started with.  LJ has said, and some on here have defended, a "bigger picture" in the team selection.

Looking at the draw for the next round, had we won there would have been a realistic prospect of being in the semi finals with Liverpool, Arsenal and Man Utd. 

I don't get the bigger picture of not doing everything possible to achieve that.

[georgebcfc]

With Matthews, Smith and Abraham all returning from illnesses / injuries, Freeman injured, Paterson cup-tied, and GON 36 having put in a massive effort on Saturday v Blackburn, I really can't see what all the fuss is about.

It looks like Moore has been told he'll get his chance to impress at CB in cup games, which was entirely vindicated by his performance, and is great for us to know we have an able replacement should (touchwood) anything happen to Flinty or Magnusson.

The only major selection debate was Tomlin for Engvall, and even then a) none of us knows what is going on behind the scenes, maybe Tomlin took a knock in training? b) we've all been crying out for Engvall to make an appearance, and c) Engvall played bloody well and Tomlin came on and looked sharper than he has done for weeks!

[Ivorguy]

14 hours ago, Super said:

I still can't work out why we had a stronger team out in round one, just a crazy decision pathetic tired footballer excuse again.

Answer: Because we were at a different stage of the season and the priority of the coaches was to get first choices playing another game together to bed down

 

[The Bard]

20 hours ago, Aaron-Bcfc said:

That was only recent examples... He's been doing it all season.

And we're sixth. Sounds like it's working.

[Fiale]

Well I have learn't that - 

 

We have 3 good CB's and would be happy to see any combination of Flint, Moore, Magnusson

Engvall is alive and kicking, and if he replaced Wilbs on the bench (or even started if Tammy is ill/injured) I would not be to worried - 

Cemented my view we need another Right Back - Matthews is only a season long loan, so unless (end even if he does) sign for us we need a good back up - Little is just not cutting it, his best seems to be OK.

We need another Keeper, Fielding and O'Donnell are great number 2 keepers to step in and do a decent job - but what I would give to have a keeper where I am not constantly worried about them at crosses/corners/shots/backpasses/distribution

 

That we have good strength in depth for some positions, but RB / GK / FW we need another player to make up the numbers

 

[JamesBCFC]

12 hours ago, Marlborough Red said:

In my business life we had a mantra- "Get it right first time".

Playing devils advocate , may I suggest that at Ashton Gate LJ has never achieved this objective. It is very concerning that we have failed to score in any game in the first half at home, often failing to get any shots on target and certainly not presenting any serious threat. Tammy is isolated and we seem to play the ball to him too much in the air which, as we all know, does not play to his strengths. The obvious conclusion is that he has not selected the right team for Home games and we only come alive after half time, often when we go  a goal behind and he then makes changes and brings on  the substitutes needed and ends up more often then not playing 2 up front.

It would be a pleasant change at the Brighton match to get the team selection right first time , play 2 up front at home  (Engval and Tammy perhaps)  score a goal  in the first half and take the lead , forcing the opposition to change their tactics and push forward more giving us the chance to score on the break !

Getting the team selection right first time would also mean he  can start with this team for the next home match without the need for constant changes particularly in midfield.

At the same time it's probably harder to get it right first time, than to have it not quite right and then tweak it.

Of course you always aim to have it right first time, but evidence would suggest LJ is very adept at spotting what he has got wrong in the first half of games and making the adjustments as the game goes on, which is just as, if not more important.

[phantom]

3 hours ago, NickJ said:

Much of this discussion centres around whether we put out a strong team. The squad and strength in depth now is undoubtedly the strongest it has ever been and because of that it was a decent team. However nobody could deny, it was not the best 11 we could have started with.  LJ has said, and some on here have defended, a "bigger picture" in the team selection.

Looking at the draw for the next round, had we won there would have been a realistic prospect of being in the semi finals with Liverpool, Arsenal and Man Utd. 

I don't get the bigger picture of not doing everything possible to achieve that.

Exactly this @NickJ I really struggle to see why so many clearly can't grasp that !

[View from the Dolman]

Maybe the manager is best placed to know the full picture...?

"We made nine changes but it wasn't nine changes without a story for four or five of them. Hordur Magnusson, Gary O'Neill and Korey Smith have all got ankle problems. Adam Matthews has played two games on the bounce and Richard O'Donnell deserved a game and is one of two number ones competing for one place."

http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/what-did-bring-bristol-city-and-lee-tomlin-together-it-s-in-the-dna-says-lee-johnson/story-29843711-detail/story.html

Though those that know better will probably suggest he's lying.

[Ivorguy]

44 minutes ago, Fiale said:

Well I have learn't that - 

 

We have 3 good CB's and would be happy to see any combination of Flint, Moore, Magnusson

Engvall is alive and kicking, and if he replaced Wilbs on the bench (or even started if Tammy is ill/injured) I would not be to worried - 

Cemented my view we need another Right Back - Matthews is only a season long loan, so unless (end even if he does) sign for us we need a good back up - Little is just not cutting it, his best seems to be OK.

We need another Keeper, Fielding and O'Donnell are great number 2 keepers to step in and do a decent job - but what I would give to have a keeper where I am not constantly worried about them at crosses/corners/shots/backpasses/distribution

 

That we have good strength in depth for some positions, but RB / GK / FW we need another player to make up the numbers

 

We do have excellent players who I would guess will be in the side to win promotion: Vyner and Lucic

[Big C]

4 hours ago, NickJ said:

Much of this discussion centres around whether we put out a strong team. The squad and strength in depth now is undoubtedly the strongest it has ever been and because of that it was a decent team. However nobody could deny, it was not the best 11 we could have started with.  LJ has said, and some on here have defended, a "bigger picture" in the team selection.

Looking at the draw for the next round, had e won there would have been a realistic prospect of being in the semi finals with Liverpool, Arsenal and Man Utd. 

I don't get the bigger picture of not doing everything possible to achieve that.

 

The bigger picture is that our players are not robots. Smith, O'Neil and Matthews, who many people would put in our strongest team have all had recent injuries. Magnusson apparently has an ankle issue as well and Tammy is player who has just turned 19 and someone we don't want to run into the ground. He needs a rest.

Also a realistic prospect of being in the semi-finals?  We couldn't beat Newcastle at home with our first team out

[cidered abroad]

25 minutes ago, Ivorguy said:

We do have excellent players who I would guess will be in the side to win promotion: Vyner and Lucic

Mention has been made earlier in this thread about our goalkeepers and which of them out of ROD and FF is the number one at present.

I would not be the least bit surprised to see Lucic established as our number one by the start of next season. As for Zak Vyner, I have not heard anything about him recently except a brief mention after Accrington lost only 1-0 at West Ham. In his brief appearances last season, one could see a very competent footballer who will by the end of this season, have played some forty games in League Two giving him a big chunk of experience.

One must also not forget Wes Burns, who may not be getting as much game time as Vyner, but is getting it at a higher level.

Add to them, the other emerging talents from our Academy such as Dowling and McCoulsky and the future is looking brighter than for a very long time at City.

[Aaron-Bcfc]

3 hours ago, The Bard said:

And we're sixth. Sounds like it's working.

Exactly, I don't have an issue with it as our squad is strong throughout. The only thing I would say is that it's worth giving someone like O'Dowda 5 or 6 starts in a row to see what he can produce with consistent game time, as opposed to the odd game here and there.

[Bobfish]

5 hours ago, NickJ said:

Much of this discussion centres around whether we put out a strong team. The squad and strength in depth now is undoubtedly the strongest it has ever been and because of that it was a decent team. However nobody could deny, it was not the best 11 we could have started with.  LJ has said, and some on here have defended, a "bigger picture" in the team selection.

Looking at the draw for the next round, had we won there would have been a realistic prospect of being in the semi finals with Liverpool, Arsenal and Man Utd. 

I don't get the bigger picture of not doing everything possible to achieve that.

1 hour ago, phantom said:

Exactly this @NickJ I really struggle to see why so many clearly can't grasp that !

It's because some of us aren't living in the past thinking that playing a prem team in the semi's is the highlight of the year, of the decade. Some of us think we should be playing premiership teams every week. Some of us can see that the club has to progress to achieve that. Some of us realise that requires an understanding of the modern game, of adapting to your opponents tactics, of utilising a squad of players, of building an academy to enable sustained growth, of buying players with potential rather than spunking millions on a wage-heavy striker. Some of us don't look back at the cotts era and just think "Wow, look we walked that league," but instead think "what the hell were we doing in league one in the first place?"

Some of us fans think the club deserves better.

Live in the past if you must, but if the club thought that way we would still have cotts and now be back in league one. Would you all be happy then, lording it over smaller teams like a big fish in a small pond? Bouncing back and forth every few years? I am just glad there are so many people on these forums and fans who can see what this club is working towards and who actually believe in what it can achieve.

Keep up the good work LJ.

[ChippenhamRed]

30 minutes ago, Bobfish said:

It's because some of us aren't living in the past thinking that playing a prem team in the semi's is the highlight of the year, of the decade. Some of us think we should be playing premiership teams every week. Some of us can see that the club has to progress to achieve that. Some of us realise that requires an understanding of the modern game, of adapting to your opponents tactics, of utilising a squad of players, of building an academy to enable sustained growth, of buying players with potential rather than spunking millions on a wage-heavy striker. Some of us don't look back at the cotts era and just think "Wow, look we walked that league," but instead think "what the hell were we doing in league one in the first place?"

Some of us fans think the club deserves better.

Live in the past if you must, but if the club thought that way we would still have cotts and now be back in league one. Would you all be happy then, lording it over smaller teams like a big fish in a small pond? Bouncing back and forth every few years? I am just glad there are so many people on these forums and fans who can see what this club is working towards and who actually believe in what it can achieve.

Keep up the good work LJ.

You've extrapolated an awful lot just from people wishing we'd put out a stronger team.  How on earth can you draw the conclusion that anyone is "living in the past" just because they would like to have seen us progress to the semi finals of the League Cup, and think we should have played a stronger side to give us a better chance of doing so?

We can all see what the club is working towards.  Playing a stronger side on Tuesday would not necessarily have detracted from our ultimate goals.  Most of us can appreciate the pros and cons of playing our strongest line up on Saturday, but many (myself included) felt it was a risk worth taking given the potential rewards on offer.

And, like it or not, a two-legged League Cup semi final against United or Liverpool would absolutely be one of the highlights of the past decade for this club.  I would have looked forward to that enormously, and if that means I'm living in the past, so be it.

[phantom]

33 minutes ago, Bobfish said:

It's because some of us aren't living in the past thinking that playing a prem team in the semi's is the highlight of the year, of the decade. Some of us think we should be playing premiership teams every week. Some of us can see that the club has to progress to achieve that. Some of us realise that requires an understanding of the modern game, of adapting to your opponents tactics, of utilising a squad of players, of building an academy to enable sustained growth, of buying players with potential rather than spunking millions on a wage-heavy striker. Some of us don't look back at the cotts era and just think "Wow, look we walked that league," but instead think "what the hell were we doing in league one in the first place?"

Some of us fans think the club deserves better.

Live in the past if you must, but if the club thought that way we would still have cotts and now be back in league one. Would you all be happy then, lording it over smaller teams like a big fish in a small pond? Bouncing back and forth every few years? I am just glad there are so many people on these forums and fans who can see what this club is working towards and who actually believe in what it can achieve.

Keep up the good work LJ.

Don't agree with that personally @Bobfish - like I said earlier, yeah the constant changing of the squad EVERY game is a pain, we're never going to gel as a side doing that

But equally we didn't put the best team out against Hull that we could have done on the other night - we'd played 4 games in the previous 4 weeks, and in two weeks we have an international break.

Clearly you are one of those posters on here that constantly refuse to realise other opinions are different, which is the only reason I can assume you've gone into this nonsense about living in the past, surely progressing through a cup competition brings money / exposure / winning habit which is what Bristol City should be striving towards?

Anyway nothing more to be said on this - now to look to Barnsley