What do you individually want Bristol City to achieve?

[054123]

So a poor performance last night and as usual lots of debate following.

If you set a scale between 1-10 with 1 being Johnson out and 10 being the happiest of clappers, I’m personally a 5. I don’t think this team or manager will achieve a storming march to promotion but I really don’t believe we will struggle. Somewhere in the puddle awaits, with a couple of good wins along the way and a few stinkers in between.

Steven Lansdown is also happy with this and is more concerned with building self sustaining business. I don’t mind this, the premiership doesn’t hold any value to me, I just enjoy having the club I love being safe and secure.

So.....what is it you all want? Those who sit somewhere lower on the scale i presume are expecting more? Those higher up on the scale, something different?

Its taken me a good couple of seasons to adjust and accept where we are as club,but once you do, it helps.

[cidercity1987]

I want us to pull our weight for once, the best team in the 6th city should be Premier League more often than not.

I am however fairly content with the LJ regime, a contradiction I suppose.

[Rossi the Robin]

4 - I generally fluctuate between 4 and 6

I was a 5 last night pre match

I like to see us play good football and do well in this league and although the prem / promotion is the goal, don’t want us to do a Cardiff and get beaten every week

[ExiledAjax]

My head says that financially we have to get to the prem sooner rather than later. I'd also love to get the recognition that comes with it, and to see the quality of player at the club go up. Better football, better coverage.

Then my heart says that we'd get tinker every week, would struggle and end up playing 541 every week. I know you can do it differently (see Wolves and even Fulham) but I think we'd struggle.

So I don't know. For the moment I'm happy that we are a competitive top ten championship team, but ultimately I do want promotion.

[One BCFC]

I want us to at least play some attractive football but we haven't been, all year. 

[And Its Smith]

All I ask for is to play a attractive football and make maximum effort. Preferably in at least this league. Had enough of League one over the years and no desperate urge to get to the Premier League. I kind of dread the thought of becoming a Crystal Palace, just trying to survive.

[pongo88]

One word for me - Consistency. Two points from the first 3 matches; 12 points from the next 4 matches; 2 points from the last 4 matches is an awful pattern. No team is going to play well in every match but City, under LJ, are far too unpredictable 

[RedRock]

I too hover between a 4 and 6. 

Like SL though, I’m looking for continuous improvement. I’m beginning to have grave doubts he can deliver. 

He should now be experienced... no excuses. He has his own teams, on and off the pitch. It’s his transfer strategy, tactics, substitutions - he’s in total control. 

His strongest card, ought to be the midfield. He played there, he should know more than most what is required. 

At present, it’s shocking. Just woeful. He’s committed the most basic of management errors. Loads of ‘mini-me’s’. All players that buzz around achieving very little. ‘Lightweight’ is an understatement .... Eliasson, Brownhill, COD, Pato, Walsh, Pack - no strong physical or mental presence to be found. He then reverts to his Barnsley ‘safety net’ with the likes of Watkins to try and provide some ‘trusted’ physicality ( or at least I think he does as I can’t quite understand what he is).

Nope, talks a good game but is starting to worry me that, as Colin suggests, it’s all froth. 

Would I take the squad that Cotts had on promotion or, the squad that over near 3 years and with millions of pounds, the squad that LJ has built? Without question, Cotts. 

 

[MelksRed]

I'm less worried about league position. That Will come with my aspiration......consistency.....I am becoming tired of us starting each season well.....and gradually diminishing until we start the inevitable run of bad results at Christmas. 

 

To be fair.....we are drawing rather than losing and each point gained takes us a point closer to safety. 

 

In short my aspiration is to watch us play decent football in our own style consistently.....I don't expect us to win every game (pragmatist in me) and I'd be happy to lose as long as we played well.....what grates me is we often lose due to basic errors after failing to capitalise on the opportunities we make whilst we dominate.

#workinprogress

[054123]

Some interesting replies. 

The common theme seems to be ‘attractive football’, which we do at times play. 

My question would be, does attractive football equal success? If we played attractive football every week then I presume we would be more successful and probably a promotion contender. If the consensus is we are a mid table team (no shame) then attractive football is not going to be an event game occurrence. Or would it? With the squad we have, would trying to play attractive football every week see us drop more points?

[ZiderEyed]

I just want a team of players who actually try. Actually committed players and honestly I can deal with anything.

[BessexRED]

Consistency. If I supported Sheffield Utd whilst it may be frustrating they don’t always get the results they deserve I’d be content knowing that every week I’m going to turn up and see the same level of attractive football and work levels.

What we’d do for a manager like Wilder, with Johnson you turn up not knowing if we’re going to play it on the deck, play it long, whether we’ll have lots of the ball or little of it etc etc. 

Fed up of it to be honest. I’d take horrible football if it meant getting results, yet most on here seem to think this club is bigger than Warnock — I’ll tell you one thing, the football under Warnock wouldn’t have been any worse than what we put on show last night and we wouldn’t have drawn that game.

[Cowshed]

3 minutes ago, 054123 said:

Some interesting replies. 

The common theme seems to be ‘attractive football’, which we do at times play. 

My question would be, does attractive football equal success? If we played attractive football every week then I presume we would be more successful and probably a promotion contender. If the consensus is we are a mid table team (no shame) then attractive football is not going to be an event game occurrence. Or would it? With the squad we have, would trying to play attractive football every week see us drop more points?

Having a model of play is more likely to bring success. There is also a point about what does success look like - It can  be playing attractive football in the main, winning more games than you lose, while utilising local talent. 

[Bar BS3]

27 minutes ago, pongo88 said:

One word for me - Consistency. Two points from the first 3 matches; 12 points from the next 4 matches; 2 points from the last 4 matches is an awful pattern. No team is going to play well in every match but City, under LJ, are far too unpredictable 

Or is it the entire league that is unpredictable..?

Sitting a point or 2 off of the play off places, after around a quarter of the season played, suggests that our return has been pretty decent and, as with most seasons in this division, there aren’t too many teams with a consistently better return. 

[Red]

Johnson playing the team to our strengths and not to other teams strengths. Let other teams worry about us.

 

[daored]

I would like us to follow the Brentford model. Good young manager whose team plays attractive, attacking football. A club that’s willing to take a ‘punt’ on lower league players and develop them. I appreciate we’ve supposedly tried this , I just think we need to be creative in locating that next gem.

I believe with the infrastructure at the club we could really thrive.

[Red white and red]

To the OP's second question, attractive football doesn't always equal success. Swansea play beautiful football and they got relegated and are average (at this time) in the championship.

You can even turn that round and take Cardiff for example. Horrible long ball football hoping something sticks and being very good at set pieces and getting the ref on side. They've managed to get promotion. 

So there isn't one set way of getting 'success'. I just know which one I would prefer.

What do I want? I want a team of tryers who don't always get it right, but get the ball down and play the right way. If I can credit every player when they walk off the pitch having just lost 4-3, I can stomach that. 

The squad we have is built around playing football. We don't have a big striker so the route one approach is obviously bottom of the list, and so it should be. However, teams are aware that city like to 'play' therefore, teams will set up in a way that restricts us passing through them. We then end up playing the long ball which rarely sticks. 

I see us a side between 7th-12th. We will win more games than we lose. That is due to the way we are trying to operate in football matches. 

Overall, I would hate us to adopt a long ball approach in favour of boring, scrappy 1-0 wins. That doesn't work for me. I would much rather carry on the way we are playing and improve every year. If that means mid-table, so be it. 

[RedM]

29 minutes ago, pongo88 said:

One word for me - Consistency. Two points from the first 3 matches; 12 points from the next 4 matches; 2 points from the last 4 matches is an awful pattern. No team is going to play well in every match but City, under LJ, are far too unpredictable 

I saw the thread title and decided ‘stability’ was what I was going to write, but I think your ‘consistancy’ is a better word and for the reasons you state. I don’t want to be going to matches and wonder which team is going to turn up, the slick pressing team with a bit of desire and belief, or the lacklustre team out for a kickabout with little commitment or belief. 

Yes I understand we are playing opposing teams who also want to win but when it comes to teams like Rotherham who we fail to match and see them dominate us in almost every area, something is very lacking. We need to find stability and consistancy and stop lurching

[ZiderEyed]

3 minutes ago, Red white and red said:

To the OP's second question, attractive football doesn't always equal success. Swansea play beautiful football and they got relegated and are average (at this time) in the championship.

You can even turn that round and take Cardiff for example. Horrible long ball football hoping something sticks and being very good at set pieces and getting the ref on side. They've managed to get promotion. 

So there isn't one set way of getting 'success'. I just know which one I would prefer.

What do I want? I want a team of tryers who don't always get it right, but get the ball down and play the right way. If I can credit every player when they walk off the pitch having just lost 4-3, I can stomach that. 

The squad we have is built around playing football. We don't have a big striker so the route one approach is obviously bottom of the list, and so it should be. However, teams are aware that city like to 'play' therefore, teams will set up in a way that restricts us passing through them. We then end up playing the long ball which rarely sticks. 

I see us a side between 7th-12th. We will win more games than we lose. That is due to the way we are trying to operate in football matches. 

Overall, I would hate us to adopt a long ball approach in favour of boring, scrappy 1-0 wins. That doesn't work for me. I would much rather carry on the way we are playing and improve every year. If that means mid-table, so be it. 

Famara Diedhiou?

[Cowshed]

1 minute ago, Red white and red said:

To the OP's second question, attractive football doesn't always equal success. Swansea play beautiful football and they got relegated and are average (at this time) in the championship.

You can even turn that round and take Cardiff for example. Horrible long ball football hoping something sticks and being very good at set pieces and getting the ref on side. They've managed to get promotion. 

So there isn't one set way of getting 'success'. I just know which one I would prefer.

What do I want? I want a team of tryers who don't always get it right, but get the ball down and play the right way. If I can credit every player when they walk off the pitch having just lost 4-3, I can stomach that. 

The squad we have is built around playing football. We don't have a big striker so the route one approach is obviously bottom of the list, and so it should be. However, teams are aware that city like to 'play' therefore, teams will set up in a way that restricts us passing through them. We then end up playing the long ball which rarely sticks. 

I see us a side between 7th-12th. We will win more games than we lose. That is due to the way we are trying to operate in football matches. 

Overall, I would hate us to adopt a long ball approach in favour of boring, scrappy 1-0 wins. That doesn't work for me. I would much rather carry on the way we are playing and improve every year. If that means mid-table, so be it. 

What Cardiff did have was a cohesive approach that was consistent.

So did Wolves.

So did Fulham.

And so do successful teams every season.

Each approach is built on differing playing principles while Bristol City have styles of play with principles that have to change regularly and often game to game. Bristol City do not have a way we are playing .. That is the consistent under Mr Johnsons tenure.

 

[ChippenhamRed]

Why is it assumed that “Steve Lansdown is happy with this”?

Lansdown has said repeatedly that he wants to see this club in the Premier League and I believe him. I don’t believe he would have invested so much in our infrastructure if he was content with the Championship. I don’t think he is happy just to be in the Championship, but I also think he wants to do it with incremental improvement and sustainable growth. Given the club is on course for a 5th consecutive season of league position improvement, I’d say he’s getting something right. Just because he isn’t throwing endless amounts of money at the problem doesn’t mean he’s content with where we are.

[East End Old Boy]

50 minutes ago, ZiderEyed said:

I just want a team of players who actually try. Actually committed players and honestly I can deal with anything.

Basically this, as it appeared to be nonexistent last night.

Edit: should qualify this by excluding the keeper and centre backs, who performed well.

[Trueredsupporter]

20 minutes ago, Badger08 said:

I was thinking about this question this morning.  I'm personally on a 7.  

We play a bit more hot and cold than we should, but I'm overall happy with where we are currently.  I just like that we've got a stable championship side! Imagine saying that a few years ago.

Lets not run before we can walk I say.  I do sometimes get a bit frustrated with the style of play, but when you take a step back, we've almost made a rod for our own backs with our success (relative).  Teams have worked us out, and we they play us at our own game of pressing.  We can't handle being pressed, and when we are, we panic and start hitting long balls up to Fammy.  Fammy, in my opinion, is MASSIVELY overrated.  

*Remember, attack the post, not the poster

what style of football ??? Banging it long??

 

  

[Red 90]

4/5

 

Sustainable = Average. I understand why SL wants to build this club in ‘the correct way’, however a sustainable budget will only ever attract average players.

 

This season our squad is full of at best 7/10 players. With a squad like this we will pick up points if everyone plays well as a team but IMO we are really lacking any type of creative or leader style of player. Perfect example, last night could have easily been 3 points if we had 1 or 2 individuals who could produce a bit of magic or a leader/captain to drive the team and change the tempo.

 

It’s a shame that our biggest average home attendance in years are being subjected to such mediocrity. I wonder how long the attendance figures will last if this keeps up. I wouldn’t suggest we do a Villa but we do need to recruit some ‘star’ players that can inspire and give us fans a reason to come and watch other than just being loyal.

[RedJim]

A lot of people saying midtable is fine but they want consistency. The very definition of a midtable side is that they are inconsistent in their results, and performance. They'll lose as many as they win roughly. Consistency gets you a top 6 finish.

For me midtable is fine, and inconsistent results and performances are ok, but it's the style of play that seems to change from passing football one week to aimlessly banging it long the next. I'm not sure tactically what the plan is under LJ, and it all seems a bit muddled. 

I'm not as angry as a lot of posters on here (though some appear to have borderline personality disorders) but I feel a bit 'meh' about City under LJ. But my attitude to football has changed too, it's no longer the be-all and end-all, and for me it's now about individual moments and memories (Man United last season, title win under Cotts). As long as we don't go down this season I can't really get too wound up about things.

 

[The Batman]

2 hours ago, ExiledAjax said:

My head says that financially we have to get to the prem sooner rather than later. I'd also love to get the recognition that comes with it, and to see the quality of player at the club go up. Better football, better coverage.

Then my heart says that we'd get tinker every week, would struggle and end up playing 541 every week. I know you can do it differently (see Wolves and even Fulham) but I think we'd struggle.

So I don't know. For the moment I'm happy that we are a competitive top ten championship team, but ultimately I do want promotion.

 

This pretty much mirrors my feelings on it.

Wolves have started tremendously, but they signed Jota and Neves for huge money and on salaries that tower over anything we could offer, whilst in the Championship. They had the financial backing plus the behind the scenes contacts to get there and stay there (albeit, it's early but they look good so far).  Fulham as well getting Mitrovic on loan then signing him for over £20 million (depending on who you read and add ons etc). Diedhiou is our record transfer of around £5 million from memory. 

For every Wolves / Bournmouth that get there and stay up, there is a Bradford / Portsmouth where they get there and the club goes to pot soon after. Bradford is a bit of an exaggeration as they've not been in the Prem for years, but we can use Leeds, Bolton, Sunderland, even now Swansea and Stoke are not setting this division alight and they only got relegated last season.

Let's not forget, If Villa do not go up this year, they will be in a huge financial mire. Something I do not want for this club when you consider the expenditure that is due to be spent on developing around the ground.

Top 10 championship, pushing for playoffs, playing entertaining football, that'll do me for the moment.

I'll let you know when the moment passes and we can push on when the time comes. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

Probably around 5 or 6.

We've had some good displays- not tiki-taka, but good displays- Blackburn 2nd half was one (reckon 4-1 flattered us a bit mind), but especially Swansea and Sheffield United- the latter a good sound tactical shape. Unlucky at WBA too.

Like the commitment to youth and sustainability- have reservations about tactics and ability to get the best out of players who are more established or from a higher level- LJ should learn how to handle these better as he gets more experienced, well I hope so anyway.

@Red white and red Wouldn't actually agree on Swansea- would say about 4 seasons ago after Laudrup and a lot of the players he signed left, that their identity finally left with them- had been maintained there since Martinez but post Laudrup? Nope. Then they were were chopping and changing under different coaches, different approaches- papering over cracks, coaches who came in did a good short term job but couldn't build a thing. Now they are attempting to get back to that identity they had before, but after 4 years of flux- but that in the same division- let alone the upheaval of relegation from PL- takes time.

Back to us, already like certain things but a more cohesive 4-3-3, with fluidity- and yet the ability to change tactically as per the Sheffield United game would improve things further IMO. That's a frustrating aspect for me- he's shown he can do it in that case but seems to just stick with the same template a lot of the time.

@ChippenhamRed Think SL may need to re-align his summer expectations a bit, at least for this season- with all the changes, it's fair IMO to see this season as a bit of a transitional one, lots of change- that was before we signed Kalas though- but at some point say next summer we should look to go for it a tad- not sell key players, keep the stability factor and build on what we have.Try and re-sign Kalas on loan if possible.

[Redland]

 I want us to achieve Premier League status which is the minimum a city the size of Bristol should aim for. Having supported City for  nearly 60 years I have only seen us in the top flight for four seasons in the 1970s.  The rest of the time has been perpetual underachievement. As I get older I am now beginning to doubt if I will again experience the excitement of us playing the likes of Chelsea, Man City, Liverpool, Arsenal, Man Utd, Spurs etc on a regular basis. 

[Sixtyseconds]

25 minutes ago, RedJim said:

A lot of people saying midtable is fine but they want consistency. 

 

 

25 minutes ago, RedJim said:

 but it's the style of play that seems to change from passing football one week to aimlessly banging it long the next. I'm not sure tactically what the plan is under LJ, and it all seems a bit muddled. 

 

 

You will see what I did there.

I don't want Thatchers one week.

Magners the next.

That be Lee Johnson.

For a bloke who rarely played the ball long as a player as the Manager his compass goes wonky and Hi Ho Hi Ho smash it up the pitch we go. 

[RedJim]

5 minutes ago, Sixtyseconds said:

 

You will see what I did there.

I don't want Thatchers one week.

Magners the next.

That be Lee Johnson.

For a bloke who rarely played the ball long as a player as the Manager his compass goes wonky and Hi Ho Hi Ho smash it up the pitch we go. 

I thought someone might pick up on that! My main point is (forgetting results): I'm just not sure what our discernible style of play is.