Trimming the squad - LJ is lost

[The Dolman Pragmatist]

51 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

If so, at some point as head-coach you have gave to say “it’s me or him”, or you keep those players you don’t want out of the picture to prove the point.  Childish? Yep, but it’s gotta come to a head at some point.  If LJ is being undermined by MA, grow some and “out him”.  Self preservation.

I believe Kalas is playing through injury.

That would explain why he has been so terrible since he came back.

[Harry]

2 hours ago, Lez said:

With all this talk of trimming squad I've noticed this seems exclusive to our young talent.....Semenyo Adelukan Bakinson Jankeh Smodicks.....but none of these are actually in contention to play for us at the moment bar Semenyo.

So saying 3 or 4 arrive this month this trimming squad bollocks means nothing because we are still going to have a hopelessly unbalanced bloated squad with a whole load of talent not getting into the 18. 

Why did we offer Maenpaa a new deal? Good keeper but ain't even going to get on the bench now.....why did we offer odowda a new deal? Why did we sign smodiczs when we already have palmer and Patterson as number 10s?

Are we a number 10 side or do we play with wingers and 2 up top.....cant do all 3 apparently cos we dont have a striker who can play by himself up top.

Our squad is so unbalanced....and this Jan unless we SELL players COMPETING for a place in the 18 LJ is going to be in the same position of being spoilt for choice and being utterly lost in a solution to trying to find a consistent set up....

Notice we were doing best when we had injuries? No choice, consistency, confidence amongst playing squad.....when January comes we are going to be in the same position of an overly bloated squad and a manager who doesnt know how to combat it.

 

 

You write this quite implicitly suggesting that LJ has been responsible for everything you’ve stated. 
You might be aware that we have a chap called Mark Ashton who is 90% the one responsible for everything you have said. 

[The Dolman Pragmatist]

2 minutes ago, joe jordans teeth said:

The rumour is Ashton signed Palmer and Lee signed Sammie,obviously Ashton is a better judge of a player

Ashton signs all players, it’s his job.  He works on the basis of a list of targets agreed with Lee and Steve Lansdown.

[Mr Popodopolous]

43 minutes ago, cidercity1987 said:

Fortune favours the brave. You make your own luck. Pick your phrase.

Otoh, imagine if we had gone down this road- 18-19 players.

Injuries we've had over the last 2 and a half seasons, we'd be snookered! Might have a more dominant style of play though which in turn can reduce the injuries but that just feels too low...24, 25 seems right to me.

[Lez]

1 minute ago, Harry said:

You write this quite implicitly suggesting that LJ has been responsible for everything you’ve stated. 
You might be aware that we have a chap called Mark Ashton who is 90% the one responsible for everything you have said. 

You're implying that I'm implying which implies to me that this is a waste of time.

[Tin Soldier]

12 minutes ago, chinapig said:

I understand LJ did demand more say a couple of summers ago and got some leeway (so to speak!). The signs are though that MA is still the de facto Director of Football. I keep pointing out that he refers to "my recruitment team" for instance.

I sense that some signings are not so much made to fit a playing plan but as assets that might appreciate in a year or two. The club's main strategy is undoubtedly financial.

It's not unusual in parts of Europe of course that the Head Coach gets given players and is expected to get on with it. That requires a compliant Coach, which LJ seems to be. So far.

Agreed.

The fact that “buy cheap, sell high” is the obvious objective at the club just won’t work in my book.

1. You need leaders in the team (we have none).

2. You need out and out goal scorers (we have none).

3. You need confidence in players to express themselves (we have none).

Infact all the tInkering and throwing the players under the bus has brought about this mess. He has lost his team. Only a matter of time before the bafoon goes. Listen to the 9 minute post match presser on the clubs twitter feed for more more bullshit from him.

[Davefevs]

11 minutes ago, chinapig said:

I understand LJ did demand more say a couple of summers ago and got some leeway (so to speak!). The signs are though that MA is still the de facto Director of Football. I keep pointing out that he refers to "my recruitment team" for instance.

I sense that some signings are not so much made to fit a playing plan but as assets that might appreciate in a year or two. The club's main strategy is undoubtedly financial.

It's not unusual in parts of Europe of course that the Head Coach gets given players and is expected to get on with it. That requires a compliant Coach, which LJ seems to be. So far.

That’s a good thought provoking post.  Be interested in @Harry’s take on it?  Harry?

Could the word “compliant” also be a lack of LJ’s real confidence in himself (all mouth and trousers as my dad would say) that he knows City is as good as it’s gonna get for him?  Dunno, just your post made me think a bit differently.

[cidercity1987]

5 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Otoh, imagine if we had gone down this road- 18-19 players.

Injuries we've had over the last 2 and a half seasons, we'd be snookered! Might have a more dominant style of play though which in turn can reduce the injuries but that just feels too low...24, 25 seems right to me.

Dont we have 37?

[Mr Popodopolous]

7 minutes ago, cidercity1987 said:

Dont we have 37?

I read on here 29...if we include the loanees out elsewhere then it may well be 37 yes.

The squad is too big but by the same token,, 18-19 players is too small IMO.

[Lew-T]

15 minutes ago, Harry said:

You write this quite implicitly suggesting that LJ has been responsible for everything you’ve stated. 
You might be aware that we have a chap called Mark Ashton who is 90% the one responsible for everything you have said. 

I take it you don’t like Mark Ashton mate...

[joe jordans teeth]

15 minutes ago, The Dolman Pragmatist said:

Ashton signs all players, it’s his job.  He works on the basis of a list of targets agreed with Lee and Steve Lansdown.

Obviously he signs all the players but did lee want Palmer,quite what Lansdown knows about football is beyond me

[JoeAman08]

3 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

I read on here 29...if we include the loanees out elsewhere then it may well be 37 yes.

The squad is too big but by the same token,, 18-19 players is too small IMO.

There is undoubtedly good players we haven’t seen play for us yet. 18 might be too small but 20 ok for me. We have plenty on loan in the league that would do the job if needed because of injury. Just think Marcus Rashford wasn’t considered one of the best in his academy but with injuries and loans he got a chance and became first choice. Ok it is man u but I think we have the talent where 1-2 would step up and others would show us they won’t make it.
 

We sometimes act(make it feel) like we’d be playing with 10 men essentially if Bakinson played or if Jonny Smith played. They are pros too and might not make championship regulars but will probably be lower league ones with what they have shown. Remember we thought we’d be doomed last season with Max. Played 12-15 times and stepped up. Morrell stepped up when called upon. Before that Vyner has stepped up in spots. Very few man of the match performances in that but done jobs to help us get results in this league. 

[Nogbad the Bad]

30 minutes ago, cidercity1987 said:

Dont we have 37?

So others have said without challenge.

Anyway we have 29 pros. pictured on the official site, plus 14 others out on loan according to the 'Squad Updates' thread on the transfer forum.

[Bristol Oil Services]

1 hour ago, Roger Red Hat said:

If I remember correctly, we were very fortunate with injuries that season.

Ayling, Fielding and - of course - Flint were ever present (46 league appearances).

Derrick Williams, Freeman and Korey (44 starts).

Then there was Bryan (39), Little (35) and Wilbs and Agard (34).

Wade Elliott (26) and Marlon (22).

JET pitched in with 10 starts. Easy, JET! Matt Smith covered much of Wilbs' absence with 11 starts.

 

I think Cotts was pumping them full of cortisol and sending them out there, telling them to get on with it. I guess they were loving it, too, and not wanting to miss out.

 

Bobby Reid and Adam el Abd contributed two sub appearances each. Mark Little picked up a nasty shoulder injury around Easter and  missed the run in. The core of the team and that defensive quartet of Ayling, Williams, Flint and Fielding were always there - it must make a difference. 

[cidercity1987]

1 minute ago, Nogbad the Bad said:

So others have said without challenge.

Anyway we have 29 pros. pictured on the official site, plus 14 others out on loan according to the 'Squad Updates' thread on the transfer forum.

Thanks for the info Nogbad, that still seems like way too much to buy a player from Preston first 11, not have him in the squad and still be below them.

[Redrascal2]

1 hour ago, chinapig said:

I suspect there have been a number of signings that are more MA than LJ also.

Good point about the emergency loan system, which gets forgotten. It left us scrambling around to sign 2 players who happened to be out of contract for instance.

What is it that makes you think a number of signings are more MA than LJ. I had thought that LJ had the final say on signings.

[Nogbad the Bad]

2 hours ago, chinapig said:

I suspect there have been a number of signings that are more MA than LJ also.

In what way?

I'm sure we've been told how this works before.

We've been told that a list of potential recruits is meticulously drawn up for each position.

This is compiled by MA with input from the scouts, the analysts, plus, of course LJ will also put forward players he likes the look of.

Ashton's job initially is to find out everything about the potential recruits - availability, wage demands, remaining contract length, whether they are even interested in joining BCFC, and investigate their characters to see they would fit in at City ( their 'DNA') and whittle down the list to have a viable choice of names to present to LJ when a player is needed.

MA then does further spadework, meets the player and agent to sort out their demands in terms of wages, length of contract required etc, agrees the fee with the club, and SL signs it off, but not before LJ has had the opportunity to interview the player personally and have the final say as to whether he actually wants that particular player or not.

Ashton might be part of the list compilers in so far as he also recommends players - although afaik such input has never been confirmed - but it wouldn't matter because we have been told repeatedly that LJ always has the final say and can veto any player he doesn't want.

If I have remembered this correctly then whether the signings turn out to be good, bad or indifferent is down to LJ ( and his coaching!) because they are his choice of players.

 

[arpaul]

2 hours ago, cidercity1987 said:

The absolute opposite of Cotterill storming to the title with 11 clear starters and 7 clear subs no-one in the stands

I wonder where we'd be if Cotterill had been afforded Johnson war chest?

[Harry]

9 minutes ago, Nogbad the Bad said:

In what way?

I'm sure we've been told how this works before.

We've been told that a list of potential recruits is meticulously drawn up for each position.

This is compiled by MA with input from the scouts, the analysts, plus, of course LJ will also put forward players he likes the look of.

Ashton's job initially is to find out everything about the potential recruits - availability, wage demands, remaining contract length, whether they are even interested in joining BCFC, and investigate their characters to see they would fit in at City ( their 'DNA') and whittle down the list to have a viable choice of names to present to LJ when a player is needed.

MA then does further spadework, meets the player and agent to sort out their demands in terms of wages, length of contract required etc, agrees the fee with the club, and SL signs it off, but not before LJ has had the opportunity to interview the player personally and have the final say as to whether he actually wants that particular player or not.

Ashton might be part of the list compilers in so far as he also recommends players - although afaik such input has never been confirmed - but it wouldn't matter because we have been told repeatedly that LJ always has the final say and can veto any player he doesn't want.

If I have remembered this correctly then whether the signings turn out to be good, bad or indifferent is down to LJ ( and his coaching!) because they are his choice of players.

 

That’s how it works in so far as what’s in the public domain. Lots of half truths are of course always part of a clubs communication strategy to its fans. 
The actual truth is not quite that. 

LJ does have some say, of course he does. But it’s quite minor when compared to other managers who work under different systems. 
Ours is very much the traditional Director of Football role which many in English football don’t ever understand and won’t ever accept. 

LJ says “I’m looking for a left back, one who is quick, able to deliver a quality cross”. 
Ashton and his team scour their network and provide a shortlist. 
LJ of course has a say in whom from that shortlist he’d accept, but if it’s a choice of A, a slightly worse B, or a significantly worse C, of course he wants A. 
Ashton will attempt to sign A, but might end up with B or C. 
There may well be a better player D available out there somewhere, but that option would never have been put to LJ as the recruitment dept didn’t think he was good enough. 

So yes, of course the manager has a say, but he’s not responsible for the shortlist he’s presented with. 
 

Hence my continued messages on here that people need to hold Ashton responsible for the quality of the squad and not LJ. 
 

 

[Lrrr]

16 minutes ago, arpaul said:

I wonder where we'd be if Cotterill had been afforded Johnson war chest?

Given we couldn't afford it when he was here kind of a moot point

[Northern Red]

2 hours ago, Roger Red Hat said:

If I remember correctly, we were very fortunate with injuries that season.

SC admitted afterwards that it was a massive gamble to go with a squad that size and he did wonder at various times during that season whether he'd got it right.

[Davefevs]

12 minutes ago, Harry said:

That’s how it works in so far as what’s in the public domain. Lots of half truths are of course always part of a clubs communication strategy to its fans. 
The actual truth is not quite that. 

LJ does have some say, of course he does. But it’s quite minor when compared to other managers who work under different systems. 
Ours is very much the traditional Director of Football role which many in English football don’t ever understand and won’t ever accept. 

LJ says “I’m looking for a left back, one who is quick, able to deliver a quality cross”. 
Ashton and his team scour their network and provide a shortlist. 
LJ of course has a say in whom from that shortlist he’d accept, but if it’s a choice of A, a slightly worse B, or a significantly worse C, of course he wants A. 
Ashton will attempt to sign A, but might end up with B or C. 
There may well be a better player D available out there somewhere, but that option would never have been put to LJ as the recruitment dept didn’t think he was good enough. 

So yes, of course the manager has a say, but he’s not responsible for the shortlist he’s presented with. 
 

Hence my continued messages on here that people need to hold Ashton responsible for the quality of the squad and not LJ. 
 

 

What if LJ doesn’t like A, B, or C?  That’s not me being facetious either.  Is there a point where LJ accepts that the type of player he wants isn’t out there within budget etc.  Does he accept going without, or does he accept sub-standard?

[Portland Bill]

2 hours ago, Roger Red Hat said:

If I remember correctly, we were very fortunate with injuries that season.

Two ways of looking at that. When the team is playing well, the players are enjoying their football and feeling wanted/confident, it often means players will keep smaller injuries to themselves.

When a team is struggling and players ‘aren't’ enjoying playing, these niggling little injuries all of a sudden become far worse!!. 

Every player in Cotterill’s squad that season would have wanted to play every week, simply because it would have been so enjoyable to play.

Yes, serious injuries would have kept players out, and perhaps we were lucky in that respect, but don’t rule out the fact that players can find excuses when they aren’t enjoying playing. 

[Harry]

14 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

What if LJ doesn’t like A, B, or C?  That’s not me being facetious either.  Is there a point where LJ accepts that the type of player he wants isn’t out there within budget etc.  Does he accept going without, or does he accept sub-standard?

It would certainly be true that LJ could ‘veto’ a signing if he really felt like he ought to. But who’s gonna realistically do that when your recruitment team have scoured their network and given you the best they’ve got already. 
If you need that left back then you may have to settle for player C, even though you know he’s not as good as the one that was sold last week. 

[The Dolman Pragmatist]

People suggesting a first team squad of 20 seem to be forgetting how many injuries we have had in the past few seasons.  I would suggest you have to have, as they do for international tournaments, two players per position plus a third keeper as an absolute minimum.  For me, a squad of something like 25 would be right.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, GasDestroyer said:

Agreed.

The fact that “buy cheap, sell high” is the obvious objective at the club just won’t work in my book.

1. You need leaders in the team (we have none).

2. You need out and out goal scorers (we have none).

3. You need confidence in players to express themselves (we have none).

Infact all the tInkering and throwing the players under the bus has brought about this mess. He has lost his team. Only a matter of time before the bafoon goes. Listen to the 9 minute post match presser on the clubs twitter feed for more more bullshit from him.

All spot on and LJ solution is; give the players time off to recover from their efforts so he can put his efforts into..... buy/loan some more players that he can trash with his waffle and grass length reports.

[Nibor]

3 hours ago, Nogbad the Bad said:

So a manageable 25-27 first team squad.

Not sure if it's right but I've read elsewhere ours is now 37?

One poster in one thread said 37, and now it's a fact?

Have a look at the website:

https://www.bcfc.co.uk/teams/first-team-squad/

29 in that list including Afobe who is out for the season, Gilmartin who was signed to coach really, Bakinson who is on loan and Rodri who is likely to leave this month.

 

[Davefevs]

9 minutes ago, The Dolman Pragmatist said:

People suggesting a first team squad of 20 seem to be forgetting how many injuries we have had in the past few seasons.  I would suggest you have to have, as they do for international tournaments, two players per position plus a third keeper as an absolute minimum.  For me, a squad of something like 25 would be right.

That’s what we are saying, the 25 would include Max, Joe M, Antoine etc.

[Nogbad the Bad]

4 minutes ago, Nibor said:

One poster in one thread said 37, and now it's a fact?

Have a look at the website:

https://www.bcfc.co.uk/teams/first-team-squad/

29 in that list including Afobe who is out for the season, Gilmartin who was signed to coach really, Bakinson who is on loan and Rodri who is likely to leave this month.

 

29 pros. pictured on the official site, 14 more out on loan.

 

[Lrrr]

16 minutes ago, Nogbad the Bad said:

14 more out on loan

That 14 bolstered by the fact we don't really have a 23's squad, its not like the total squad number would be lower if they were with us