50+ players. Really!!

[JBFC II]

1 minute ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

I already had - but thanks anyway , and before I posted , but thanks anyway

 

FWIW Even if he maintained those profit levels (Remember that he inherited a lot of those players now sold to enhance those figures) £5 million a year won’t be sustaining us any time soon and Mr L will need to keep digging deep

People also conveniently forget the signing on fees, agents fees, relocation fees, family fees and, loan fees we’ve spent 

5 mill a year won’t sustain us I agree, but it’s certainly a step in the right direction. I’d imagine the stadium also makes a massive profit every year as well, so that should make a bit of a difference. 
 

I did add in about different fees as well as they’re bound to have an affect, but even with them we’ll have still made a healthy profit since he came here, a much healthier profit on transfers than probably any club in the league, bar Brentford. 

[BobBobSuperBob]

44 minutes ago, JBFC II said:

According to Transfermarkt he’s made a profit of around £21 mill since he came to us, obviously nearly all of the fees nowadays are undisclosed so that fully depends on what fees they believe we got for players and how much they believe we spent on players. You also need to take in to that wages, signing on fees and agent fees as well but as a base sum that is pretty impressive reading I’d say. 
 

https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/bristol-city/alletransfers/verein/698 There’s the link if you want to look through yourself

 

31 minutes ago, JonDolman said:

That's quite incredible. What a job he's done there.

If that’s ‘ Incredible’.    .....

Try researching Brentford........

Same period , they’ve made £50.1 million in trading , have. A lower wage bill and I’d suggest far more saleable value assets at the present time,

Preston , often considered alongside us , ‘only’  £14.6m in profit on trading but a far lower wage bill and sustainability over ours

 

(Love a bit of research me @Prinny - shall I prepare an excel spreadsheet and accompanying PowerPoint for you hon ? )

[Phileas Fogg]

2 minutes ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

If that’s Incredible .....

Try researching Brentford........

Same period , they’ve made £50.1 million in trading , have. A lower wage bill and I’d suggest far more saleable value assets at the present time, and a lower wage bill

Preston , often considered alongside us , ‘only’  £14.6 in profit on trading but a far lower wage bill and sustainability over ours

Brentford's recruitment has been excellent for years, not taking anything away from them but I think one factor that helps them is being London based. Especially when recruiting foreign players.

 

[maxjak]

9 hours ago, La Plage said:

As I have tried to say several times, LJ is what he is some love, some hate. However no tactics no best 11 and certainly no plan B c d e f g, that is the real issue. Get someone in he can learn these things from or get rid. Yes we’re skating round the play off but unfortunately our “luck” bucket is getting empty, anyone else could have seen that amongst the 2100 at QPR to see we stole the Crown Jewels that day and all this winning team blah blah blah is deluded it was the same lightweight midfield that was crying out for our new foreign saviour. NW proven 17 goals in the championship and doesn’t start, fing bonkers. Can we all not just see regardless of league place, Johnson out, better do better he needs to starts leading this bloody squad of 50 players pick his best team/ formation work on the basics all week in training and get on with it, pick players who can pass it forward and not side back side back side back side back to defence woooooooshhhhh.KP dropped again, the only true flair player we have, can’t take off 2 defenders then absorb our only outlet NE and expect him to track back, get rid of the blackmail material AW has on you and move on too many passengers and not enough quality deliveries at set pieces. Act now or I feel that Rooney destroying our midfield wed and an away day at Elland road will be too much for even your luck bucket Mr J.

Kasey Palmer........ILL.  Adnittedley, our midfield is lightweight, we missed Brownhill, here's hoping the physical presence and ability of Henriksen will help.    Have to say, I thought LJ;s team selection and substitutions on Friday, were very poor.  I'm happy to stick with LJ until the end of the season, and then whatever the outcome, it will be time to reassess. It's all very well suggesting he should be sacked?......but I have yet to hear a truly viable replacement named ?  If it should happen, then it will take a lot of time. research and analysis to find a suitable candidate, it is not something that can be rushed.  However, if things work out LJ could yet be here for another 4 years?

[City oz]

1 hour ago, City oz said:

Out 

Well LJ is either in or out but he dont know  how to shake it all about. 

[1960maaan]

7 minutes ago, JonDolman said:

I think the last game was poor. Our midfield seemed strangely too attacking, not close enough to Korey. And the really weird thing was we were 1-0 up, so no need to be playing like we were. I think we maybe thought we could go on and destroy them. Not respecting their quality enough maybe.
I really thought Henriksen would have started, we have needed more solidity and bite, maybe a little experience in the middle. I accept he may not have been match fit, but surely could have done 45 minutes. Could be a change Vs Derby (AKA Wayne Rooney's Derby County)

As for Palmer, I think the mistake we made was trusting in Afobe to stay fit. Had he stayed fit then no doubt we would have seen plenty of Palmer this season. Agree with the second part , not sure he had been injury prone over the previous couple of years though.

We should have maybe have invested in another Afobe type, or like Wells type in the summer. I do think they tried, and in some respects it makes the Wells signing look a little like desperation as they wouldn't pay the fees or wages in the summer for targets. I have no inside knowledge apart from results, but with the amount in wages that has been bandied about for Wells, and the fact we paid £4m for a 29 YO would probably bright a few more targets into contention.

But then even with Diedhiuou up top, not Palmer's type of striker to feed, Palmer has to still do more than he has when given the opportunities.
I am a big fan of Palmer, but he doesn't warrant a place ATM.

One problem I had with the Palmer signing is that he hasn't really shown much progression from when he was probably about 19-20 at Huddersfield.
 I'm  hoping that a lot could be due to formations and systems he's played in. With luck we find one that fits.

If he has not improved much at all in that time, then he might not ever get much better. When signing a 22 year old, it's not just how good the player is now, it's how good they can become. But if he isn't showing any progression in his game, then I am worried he won't ever improve. 

But to be fair he was excellent in some of those early games. And even the odd game like Brentford away when we had Semenyo up top with Weimann. Palmer may have missed a sitter, but he really showed his quality.

4 million is a lot. But like Charlton game when he came on and changed the game, he CAN clearly do things not many can at this level. When he is confident and in the right set up he is class at this level.

The Wells signing is I believe to partly get Palmer back in the side. I didn't mind him not playing Wells last game as I thought we have won 4 in a row. It was always a difficult decision for LJ. 

I expect to see some changes for Derby game. This is where LJ really has to earn his money . Hard to drop Baker, AW , Fam and Pato. I left NE out of that as he may be due a rest to allow a change of shape. With Players available Wells has to be pushing , as does Henriksen as MF needs a boost. Benkovic was brought in to play . Something and someone has to give, hard choices.

 

 

On a wider note, a concern I have with how we go about things, and I know LJ says he has final yes/no , but it does seem we buy decent players who will hopefully improve and provide a future profit. Sensible and necessary strategy, what I wonder (stop me if you've heard this one before) who really is in charge of recruitment? At times we sign 3/4 wingers when our system definitely doesn't naturally fit them, we sign CB's then go to a back 4. Even the HNM and Nagy signings, were we in need of 2 smaller players? I say no. We have rarely , Wells does seem a departure in many ways, highlighted a problem area , and then gone and got that one player to fit. We have needed a big athletic ball winner for CMF for ages, and even now I don't think MH is THAT man, good singing that he may be. With luck we find a system/formation/lineup that jells and we hit some form from now in. How we have played over the last 2 years won't do the job imo.

[Carey 6]

Pre-Jan it was 54.

Preston had signed 38 in the same period.

Until you go through the rest of the league I’m unsure if ours is abnormally high for a club in this division.

One thing that should go against us (in terms of transfers) is having the same manager, a lot of clubs during that period will have had different managers with different ideas wanting new players to implement them. 

City shouldn’t be signing 8-10 players in the summer under Johnson, think he even recently said this himself. Should be 3 or 4 to allow a fine tuning of the squad.

[Prinny]

14 minutes ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

 

If that’s ‘ Incredible’.    .....

Try researching Brentford........

Same period , they’ve made £50.1 million in trading , have. A lower wage bill and I’d suggest far more saleable value assets at the present time,

Preston , often considered alongside us , ‘only’  £14.6m in profit on trading but a far lower wage bill and sustainability over ours

 

(Love a bit of research me @Prinny - shall I prepare an excel spreadsheet and accompanying PowerPoint for you hon ? )

 I wanted you to post the figures to back up your point. Which you still haven't. Now you're doing this with a different point and tagging me. I don't know why you're calling me hon, I don't know you so it's a little creepy.

You're kinda embarrassing yourself with your bizarre behaviour and put downs. You're still being weird by @ing me in an unrelated post.

[Harry]

3 hours ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

Try comparing the players signed by Blackburn and ours Harry in that period

Age / fees etc

No comparison and a lazy one tbh

 

Hi Bob. 
I’m not trying to prove anything one way or another, just pointing out that signing 50 players over a 4 year period is not an anomaly, but is often being used as some kind of evidence that LJ is incompetent. 
Just wanted to point out that many clubs have signed around 50 players in the same period. 
 

It is not a lazy comparison. My initial post was a comparison to the 2 managers who were appointed around the same time as LJ and who are still in their role. 
One has been very successful (Wilder), the other has seen a relegation and a levelling out of expectations (Clough). 
 

The next comparison (Mowbray) was simply the next current championship manager on the list in terms of current tenure. And it proved that he also had signed a similar number of players in the same timeframe. 
 

If I had the time to go through the detail of every transfer I’d likely find that all of them had signed first team players, back up players and multiple loan/free/youth players. 

Most clubs will have signed circa 50 players in the last 4 years. Some with success, others not. 
As said, I’m not trying to prove either way whether LJ has been successful, just that when people come out with “he’s signed 50 players, he’s rubbish”, it’s another load of nonsense to go with a lot of the other nonsense being posted recently. 

[Davefevs]

2 hours ago, JonDolman said:

So what do people want? Us to not sign players?

I don't get what the problem is.

Lansdown admitted they made some mistakes in their recruitment a few years back, which I am sure we can accept if they were to put that right.

Let's look at the last 4 windows

Maenpaa, Marinovic, Bentley, Gilmartin, Hunt, Pereira (loan), Dasilva (loan), Dasilva (perm), Rowe, Kalas (loan), Kalas (perm) Webster, Williams, Benkovic (loan)

Nagy, Massengo, Henriksen (loan), Watkins, Palmer (loan), Palmer (perm), Szmodics, Adelakun, 

Weimann, Afobe (loan), Wells, Eisa, Rodri.

Not many of those were bad signings. Marinovic and Rodri were just brought in as cover, and i'd say the one mistake there was making them anything but cover by starting them. Gilmartin is emergency cover, and I doubt will ever play. That's probably what Marinovic should have been, but he did only play the one game anyway.

Adelkuan might turn out to be a decent signing if he keeps doing well at Rotherham. Eisa we made a profit on. Good business at least. So 4 very good windows since start of 18/19 season imo.

In the windows before this under Johnson the signings were not all quite so good. But he took over a squad that was very poor. Needed improving badly.

I would say Steele, Pisano, Wright, Baker, Moore, Magnússon, Brownhill, Walsh, Cotterill (loan), O'Dowda, Eliasson, Paterson, Abraham (loan), Taylor, Diedhiou were a mixture of good to excellent signings. Impressive list that, actually.

Unfortunate signings were O'Neil and Djuric. Both injured too much but would have been good ones for where we were at the time - a lower championship side looking to progress up the league. Both certainly contributed though so not all bad.

Bad signings overall:

 Marinovic, Giefer (loan), Lucic, Matthews (loan), Ekstrand, Hegeler, Kent (loan), Leko (loan), Tomlin, Diony (loan), Engvall, Woodrow (loan), Rodri

Not a lot of harm done with some of those bad ones. And also some of the bad ones made sense at the time and just did not work out. Like Tomlin and Matthews who were both excellent when they came in on loan the previous season under Pemberton who LJ then managed when appointed in February.

Then there are the youth signings which are cheap, and a bit more of a lottery. Some decent ones there it seems like Bakinson and J smith, and maybe some not so good ones which will always happen. They're young, they have potential. But it doesn't mean they will definitely fulfil it.

Overall it looks very good to me! We were making more mistakes in our recruitment in LJ's first couple of windows, but even then we made some really good signings.

Apologies if any of that is inaccurate! I think I have got it right.

 

 

1 hour ago, La Plage said:

Sorry chaps, my original point was aimed at what he does with the players at his disposal not the actual quantity.

4-5M£ player and probably one of our top earners not even in the squad again, who was signed permanently after spending a loan spell mostly on the bench???

Our “missing link” in midfield not starting against a much stronger and physical team and when we do change it finally bring on another player who always disappears during matches when we are trying to get back from 1-2.

A 17 goal championship striker on the bench when AW seems undroppable, without any idea how to give him service (see first point)

Our defence and midfield need to pass sideways/back (remind you of anyone?) 10 times before smashing in a long ball up to poor old Dave who by that time has at least 2 blokes at least his size all over him

Our main attacking outlet playing some kind of wingback role when we decided to take the left and right backs off taking off one of our most consistent players of in JD

So drawing comparisons to Sheffield United is a complete waist of time as their manager seems able to get the best out of his players.

 Rooney Wednesday will have a field day in the middle of that park then Elland road Saturday, interesting week ahead....

 

 

These two posts are quite good examples of where we are as a club.  Over the past couple of days there have been some really good thought provoking posts. Views from us OTIBers that have the same data behind them but different opinions, especially when being subjective about how good or bad a particular signing is / was. 

As I’ve posted many times re the Finances of City, Net Spend is a bit of an irrelevance.  It’s not how City manage their budgets, and with so many fees as undisclosed, let alone failure to lock in agent fees, signing fees, loan fees, it can be pretty inaccurate.

If I take a few comparisons - Bristol City FC not BC Holdings as it more accurately shows the pure football side

Season 16/17 versus 17/18 and 18/19

Income: £10.3m vs £17.1m vs £17.7m - starting to plateau

Profit on Transfers (not net spend): £0.1m vs £0.3m vs £38.1m - includes Bryan, Flint, Reid, Kelly, Magnússon 

Wages: £15.4m vs £23.1m vs £24.6m - gone up a lot, and will continue to, expect it to be getting close to £30m this year

Amortisation: £2.3m vs £8.1m vs £8.1m - growing, and a big strain on our accounts.  Likely to be a big jump this season too.

Op Costs: £6.0m vs £9.8m vs £10.4 - probably levelling out now

re Players we are now starting to see the truer view of LJ’s transfer dealings, that is players he signed and sold.  Two sides to this.  We can all say that Flint, Bryan, Reid and Kelly (£38m) weren’t his signings, and there will be a bun fight re Reid because he instigated the position change.  Another bun fight re Kelly too.  But ultimately, whichever side if the fence you’re on, apply the same consistency to the manager who comes in and replaces LJ, because he will leave players for the new manager to make profit on too (hopefully).

Personally I think recruitment has improved hugely.  The calibre of players brought in is fantastic.  The proof of this is not on paper, but how they are formed into a team on the pitch.  My view is split!

Are we seeing some players brought in as a business transaction?  Are the likes of Adelakun, Eisa and Szmodics a case of buying up talented lower division players, give them a few games, loan them out and sell for a profit (ignoring wage costs over their time here)?

Finally, if you buy predominantly younger players, you must expect most of them to develop.  Is that down to our coaching, or just natural progression?  Somewhere in between imho!  Was Josh Brownhill down to LJ, or just getting better through age and physical development?  If you are on the side that believes his progress was down to LJ, then use the same consistency with his best mate O’Dowda.

And if you take that view on younger players, ask yourself the same as to whether he’s developed any of our players over 25?  Hunt? Weimann? Smith? Watkins? Baker?  Maybe compare to Wilder with players like McGoldrick.

In terms of where I am, I think he’s doing a decent job, but he’s been wasteful with the club’s resources.  I think he could achieve a play-off challenge with a much trimmer squad, and without a heavy burden on our finances....which ultimately would mean he doesn't need to trade.  At the moment he’s allowed to throw “players” at any problem.  Would love to see him be forced to resolve problems by training, coaching and drilling a “team”!

 

[Davefevs]

3 minutes ago, Harry said:

Hi Bob. 
I’m not trying to prove anything one way or another, just pointing out that signing 50 players over a 4 year period is not an anomaly, but is often being used as some kind of evidence that LJ is incompetent. 
Just wanted to point out that many clubs have signed around 50 players in the same period. 
 

It is not a lazy comparison. My initial post was a comparison to the 2 managers who were appointed around the same time as LJ and who are still in their role. 
One has been very successful (Wilder), the other has seen a relegation and a levelling out of expectations (Clough). 
 

The next comparison (Mowbray) was simply the next current championship manager on the list in terms of current tenure. And it proved that he also had signed a similar number of players in the same timeframe. 
 

If I had the time to go through the detail of every transfer I’d likely find that all of them had signed first team players, back up players and multiple loan/free/youth players. 

Most clubs will have signed circa 50 players in the last 4 years. Some with success, others not. 
As said, I’m not trying to prove either way whether LJ has been successful, just that when people come out with “he’s signed 50 players, he’s rubbish”, it’s another load of nonsense to go with a lot of the other nonsense being posted recently. 

The discussion point should be “it’s not how big it is, but what you do with it” or translated, it’s not how many, but how well he’s done with them.

[Harry]

1 minute ago, Davefevs said:

The discussion point should be “it’s not how big it is, but what you do with it” or translated, it’s not how many, but how well he’s done with them.

And that is the judgement that is aimed at all managers at all clubs - how successful has your transfer policy been. 
And that is a perfectly legitimate discussion. 
What I’m pointing out is the nonsense that “he’s signed 50 players, what a load of horse****”, is not relevant to the argument, as most clubs will have signed a similar number of players. 
I’ve seen this argument being presented a hundred times in the last month or so, and it’s time to call it out as absolute ******* nonsense. 

[BobBobSuperBob]

15 minutes ago, Harry said:

And that is the judgement that is aimed at all managers at all clubs - how successful has your transfer policy been. 
And that is a perfectly legitimate discussion. 
What I’m pointing out is the nonsense that “he’s signed 50 players, what a load of horse****”, is not relevant to the argument, as most clubs will have signed a similar number of players. 
I’ve seen this argument being presented a hundred times in the last month or so, and it’s time to call it out as absolute ******* nonsense. 

 

19 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

The discussion point should be “it’s not how big it is, but what you do with it” or translated, it’s not how many, but how well he’s done with them.

I think we’d all agree it’s about number / quality you’ve been allowed to sign as part of a plan(s) (So Id argue looking at who makes up the 30 40 / 50 signings at any Club , and any underlying reasons is absolutely relevant Harry)

And IMHO opinion we have the strongest deepest squad that I’ve ever know with at least two (On paper) Championship ready players in just about every role with Full Internationals competing for places in some 

At no point,  having to throw youngsters in the eleven when on a run of injuries.

Its then what is produced from that envious position is the crux of the matter for me and I’d be surprised if either of you disagreed

[Davefevs]

24 minutes ago, Harry said:

And that is the judgement that is aimed at all managers at all clubs - how successful has your transfer policy been. 
And that is a perfectly legitimate discussion. 
What I’m pointing out is the nonsense that “he’s signed 50 players, what a load of horse****”, is not relevant to the argument, as most clubs will have signed a similar number of players. 
I’ve seen this argument being presented a hundred times in the last month or so, and it’s time to call it out as absolute ******* nonsense. 

 

13 minutes ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

 

I think we’d all agree it’s about number / quality you’ve been allowed to sign as part of a plan(s) (So Id argue looking at who makes up the 30 40 / 50 signings at any Club , and any underlying reasons is absolutely relevant Harry)

And IMHO opinion we have the strongest deepest squad that I’ve ever know with at least two (On paper) Championship ready players in just about every role with Full Internationals competing for places in some 

At no point,  having to throw youngsters in the eleven when on a run of injuries.

Its then what is produced from that envious position is the crux of the matter for me and I’d be surprised if either of you disagreed

I think we are all on a similar hymn sheet, probably have slightly differing views of “performance”.

[Big C]

2 hours ago, Pickle Rick said:

Is it Johnson Out or Johnson In this week? I never manage to keep track of the movement...

Week? It changes on a daily basis!!!!

[David Brent]

4 hours ago, Prinny said:

You called someones research out as being lazy, then won't post the info.

Keep digging.

It amazing what you can do with a computer and access to t’internet

https://lmgtfy.com/?q=blackburn+rovers+transfer+fees

[Spike]

3 hours ago, Robbored said:

Just pointing out that LJ is £29m in profit on his transfer dealings..........

Plus, how many of those he’s signed were for development and how many first team ready?

Just asking.................
 

It’s an integral part of SLs policy of developing players and moving them on as a part of his ‘sustainability’.

In all fairness I don't think LJ has anything to do with the transfer profits, we have an academy and coaches who has been developing players, MA seems to do all the business work in the transfer dealings, what exactly does LJ do other than coach and choose tactics?! 

LJ has had every resource under the sun, he's been invested in endlessly and the highlight of his career with us is the win over Man Utd. He's yet to get us to the playoffs and yet we've been through so many changes to the squad and he still can't make his best 11.

Wells signed for us and I'm starting to be concerned that he may very well stagnate under Johnson despite being a prolific goalscorer before joining us. 

I'd love to defend LJ but let's be fair, there are plenty of managers out there who given the backing and time he's been given would at the very least see us in the play offs and have some sort of footballing identity. We're so one dimensional under LJ right now and I'll be genuinely surprised if we take more than 3 points in the rest of February's games which would put us firmly out of the running. 

[Phileas Fogg]

9 minutes ago, Spike said:

In all fairness I don't think LJ has anything to do with the transfer profits, we have an academy and coaches who has been developing players, MA seems to do all the business work in the transfer dealings, what exactly does LJ do other than coach and choose tactics?! 

LJ has had every resource under the sun, he's been invested in endlessly and the highlight of his career with us is the win over Man Utd. He's yet to get us to the playoffs and yet we've been through so many changes to the squad and he still can't make his best 11.

Wells signed for us and I'm starting to be concerned that he may very well stagnate under Johnson despite being a prolific goalscorer before joining us. 

I'd love to defend LJ but let's be fair, there are plenty of managers out there who given the backing and time he's been given would at the very least see us in the play offs and have some sort of footballing identity. We're so one dimensional under LJ right now and I'll be genuinely surprised if we take more than 3 points in the rest of February's games which would put us firmly out of the running. 

Ultimately though the buck stops with the manager and it’s him who’ll get the sack if things go wrong. People like Tinnion and Ashton are in far safer jobs.

Because of that, he does also get credit for transfer profits in my opinion.

[Spike]

5 minutes ago, Phileas Fogg said:

Ultimately though the buck stops with the manager and it’s him who’ll get the sack if things go wrong. People like Tinnion and Ashton are in far safer jobs.

Because of that, he does also get credit for transfer profits in my opinion.

Maybe, but my point is that if he were replaced by a tactically superior coach tomorrow the profits would keep happening due to the infrastructure and other staff we have but the football on the pitch would be far less manic and far more consistent. 

LJ is a nice guy, he really is, but as far as tactics and coaching goes he's got far too many weaknesses that don't seem to be going away which will hold progression back. 

[Phileas Fogg]

7 minutes ago, Spike said:

Maybe, but my point is that if he were replaced by a tactically superior coach tomorrow the profits would keep happening due to the infrastructure and other staff we have but the football on the pitch would be far less manic and far more consistent. 

LJ is a nice guy, he really is, but as far as tactics and coaching goes he's got far too many weaknesses that don't seem to be going away which will hold progression back. 

And then the replacement manager would get credit for transfers if they’d helped develop the players as the buck would stop with them.  Past managers obviously retain some credit for identifying players (O’Driscoll with Flint for example) but ultimately the buck stops with the current manager.

I think trying to remove credit from LJ for transfers like Kelly, Bryan and Reid etc is reaching a bit.

[JBFC II]

4 minutes ago, Spike said:

Maybe, but my point is that if he were replaced by a tactically superior coach tomorrow the profits would keep happening due to the infrastructure and other staff we have but the football on the pitch would be far less manic and far more consistent. 

LJ is a nice guy, he really is, but as far as tactics and coaching goes he's got far too many weaknesses that don't seem to be going away which will hold progression back. 

In most cases I’d agree, but with the sales of Kelly, Webster and Brownhill in particular the credit has to partly go to LJ as he was the one who gave them more exposure and developed them into premier league quality players

[Spike]

6 minutes ago, Phileas Fogg said:

And then the replacement manager would get credit for transfers if they’d helped develop the players as the buck would stop with them.  Past managers obviously retain some credit for identifying players (O’Driscoll with Flint for example) but ultimately the buck stops with the current manager.

I think trying to remove credit from LJ for transfers like Kelly, Bryan and Reid etc is reaching a bit.

I'm not talking about credit though, I'm talking about the fact that LJ doesn't offer us anything another manager couldn't. LJ's role is coaching, tactics and the final say on deals that the other staff work on. If tomorrow LJ was gone and we replaced him with a coach with better tactical knowledge and better experience that coach would be an instant improvement even if he wasn't great at player deals as he wouldn't have to do that side of things. 

LJ's best attributes are his gift of the gab, motivation and bonding a team. Tactically he's lower Championship at best and when it comes to consistency he's probably lower again. 

What we need is a manager /coach who is tactically strong, can find a consistent starting 11 and can motivate, everything else is already in place. Lee has one of those 3 key attributes for the role and that's why we're struggling, it's not the players we have, the money etc, we've got a great squad, we've got the money under control, what we need is someone who has experience with taking quality players and making them play attacking, confident football, not negative, hoof and cross counter football that is far too easy to sit back against. 

 

[Guest]

18 minutes ago, Spike said:

In all fairness I don't think LJ has anything to do with the transfer profits, we have an academy and coaches who has been developing players, MA seems to do all the business work in the transfer dealings, what exactly does LJ do other than coach and choose tactics?! 

LJ has had every resource under the sun, he's been invested in endlessly and the highlight of his career with us is the win over Man Utd. He's yet to get us to the playoffs and yet we've been through so many changes to the squad and he still can't make his best 11.

Wells signed for us and I'm starting to be concerned that he may very well stagnate under Johnson despite being a prolific goalscorer before joining us. 

I'd love to defend LJ but let's be fair, there are plenty of managers out there who given the backing and time he's been given would at the very least see us in the play offs and have some sort of footballing identity. We're so one dimensional under LJ right now and I'll be genuinely surprised if we take more than 3 points in the rest of February's games which would put us firmly out of the running. 

I think it is largely down to LJ the transfer profits. Improving players is one of his strengths. 

Reid - many fans wanted to get rid for a small fee. LJ said he is converting to a striker in preseason and most fans could not believe it. It seemed like no one had thought of him possible of doing that. A season later 10 million. If he'd done what many fans were suggesting he'd have got less than even a million before converting him into a striker.

Bryan - He moved his position to left back. Whether he was always at his best or not, Fulham felt he was so good they'd spend 6 million on him and play him in the prem.

Flint - Since leaving he has apparently been very poor at Boro, and now poor at Cardiff. When with us LJ had him playing very well. Seems like he was playing much better under LJ than he has since leaving us. 7 million for Flint, thank you very much LJ. Incredible we got that for him.

Kelly - LJ trusted in him and played him. He played extremely well and we got 15 or whatever million from Bournemouth. Also even though Kelly was clearly a fantastic prospect in the England set up, Johnson must have had a part in him signing a long term deal which would have helped us getting the money we did. He must have  believed in LJ to sign that deal and not let the previous contract run down.

Webster - LJ said to Ashton to only sell Flint if he signs him Webster. So i'd say it was almost all down to LJ that we made so much money on Webster. Not only in signing him, but the Webster we saw in the first month or so was not even close to the player he became under LJ.

Brownhill - Signed for a small fee. Brownhill said in an interview he moved to us because of LJ. We just made a huge profit on him. He improved hugely under LJ. He was also converted into a wide right midfielder for a period of time. Brownhill has said he has never played there but it turns out it suits his game. I imagine that is where Dyche sees him playing rather like he does with Hendrik. That position change could have been key in getting interest from Burnley. That's down to LJ.

Even Kodjia I would say improved under LJ. He played at his best when on his own up top at the end of the season with Tomlin in behind. We got 11 million plus add ons for him.

And Pack improved more than I ever imagined he could under LJ. He cut out the ridiculous hollywood balls. Was very good end of 16/17 when LJ came in, and had his best spell in the side in 17/18 with all that movement ahead of him, the likes of Pato and Reid. Improving Pack would have helped in getting 4 million, a decent sum I reckon for Pack.

There will be more i am sure. We have to surely give LJ credit for improving players he is coaching every day in training.

 

[Spike]

1 minute ago, JonDolman said:

I think it is largely down to LJ the transfer profits. Improving players is one of his strengths. 

Reid - many fans wanted to get rid for a small fee. LJ said he is converting to a striker in preseason and most fans could not believe it. It seemed like no one had thought of him possible of doing that. A season later 10 million. If he'd done what many fans were suggesting he'd have got less than even a million before converting him into a striker.

Bryan - He moved his position to left back. Whether he was always at his best or not, Fulham felt he was so good they'd spend 6 million on him and play him in the prem.

Flint - Since leaving he has apparently been very poor at Boro, and now poor at Cardiff. When with us LJ had him playing very well. Seems like he was playing much better under LJ than he has since leaving us. 7 million for Flint, thank you very much LJ. Incredible we got that for him.

Kelly - LJ trusted in him and played him. He played extremely well and we got 15 or whatever million from Bournemouth. Also even though Kelly was clearly a fantastic prospect in the England set up, Johnson must have had a part in him signing a long term deal which would have helped us getting the money we did. He must have  believed in LJ to sign that deal and not let the previous contract run down.

Webster - LJ said to Ashton to only sell Flint if he signs him Webster. So i'd say it was almost all down to LJ that we made so much money on Webster. Not only in signing him, but the Webster we saw in the first month or so was not even close to the player he became under LJ.

Brownhill - Signed for a small fee. Brownhill said in an interview he moved to us because of LJ. We just made a huge profit on him. He improved hugely under LJ. He was also converted into a wide right midfielder for a period of time. Brownhill has said he has never played there but it turns out it suits his game. I imagine that is where Dyche sees him playing rather like he does with Hendrik. That position change could have been key in getting interest from Burnley. That's down to LJ.

Even Kodjia I would say improved under LJ. He played at his best when on his own up top at the end of the season with Tomlin in behind. We got 11 million plus add ons for him.

And Pack improved more than I ever imagined he could under LJ. He cut out the ridiculous hollywood balls. Was very good end of 16/17 when LJ came in, and had his best spell in the side in 17/18 with all that movement ahead of him, the likes of Pato and Reid. Improving Pack would have helped in getting 4 million, a decent sum I reckon for Pack.

There will be more i am sure. We have to surely give LJ credit for improving players he is coaching every day in training.

 

I have to disagree with a few there, Joe always was a left back, he moved up to midfield and LJ simply moved him back there. 

Reid is probably the biggest plus LJ has had but I don't think it was down to any kind of incredible ability to read a player, he gave him a chance because he needed a spark up front, Bobby's hard work provided that spark. 

Brownhill was a great signing, he honestly showed so much potential when he signed but LJ played him our wide where he was poor, he continued to moved him between a central role and a wide one and often paired him with players that didn't compliment him. If anything I think Brownhills strongest part of his game is his natural technical ability that was improved on just by getting game tone. LJ's tactics were certainly not the reason he improved as he used him out of position for long periods of his progression and he never allowed him that role behind the striker but in front of the midfield where he's best suited to. 

Webster I agree with in that LJ saw talent there but the fact he was in and gone so quickly just screams out that lots of people knew the potential was there but his injury was what was the real gamble. Once he held his fitness his ability showed, it was a great decision in hindsight but I feel we got him because we were the only ones willing to take the gamble on his fitness. Had he turned out to be a player who was always injured I'm not sure we'd have been so find on the move which is probably why we sold him so soon, to ensure we got peak value (which is a lot) incase he got injured again. 

Pack I kind of agree but wouldn't say we had a great player, more of a dedicated professional. With Lack he developed slightly and was an easier decision again because his initial fee to buy him was so low. 

With those put aside how much has LJ lost on players, not just fees but wages of players who offered us absolutely nothing or never even got a chance? 

Ryan Kent - absolutely wasted here but put in the right tactical formation at Rangers and he's behind an instant fan favourite. 

Woodrow - wasted loan again, never got a decent chance

Diony - Best not talked about

Engvall - Waste of time and money

Djuric - Had a role to play, never really given a chance

Mo Eisa - Such potential, fans wanted to see him play, never given a chance. 

Don't get me wrong, we only lost wages on most of these but they were players that took a place and never contributed or even held us back in Dionys case. 

Currently we have Wells ready and raring to go and what did he get... 32 minutes off of the bench when we were already 2-1 down. Wells is one of those players who threatens defences, he needs to start because at 2-1 down Brum had the game and their confidence was high. 

Despite my desire to move on from LJ I do like him, he is a nice guy but he's the weak link in our chain right now. We have a strong academy, a good transfer man in MA, we have a good financial structure with more development in the works, the only thing we're lacking is a coach with the tactical experience to bring it all together. 

[Rich]

4 hours ago, JBFC II said:

According to Transfermarkt he’s made a profit of around £21 mill since he came to us, obviously nearly all of the fees nowadays are undisclosed so that fully depends on what fees they believe we got for players and how much they believe we spent on players. You also need to take in to that wages, signing on fees and agent fees as well but as a base sum that is pretty impressive reading I’d say. 
 

https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/bristol-city/alletransfers/verein/698 There’s the link if you want to look through yourself

I would like to point out that of the players sold under Johnsons tenure, approximately £35m of those sales were already at the club. So that would put him in deficit by some £14m, not taking into account the current playing staff values.

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Spike said:

I have to disagree with a few there, Joe always was a left back, he moved up to midfield and LJ simply moved him back there. 

Reid is probably the biggest plus LJ has had but I don't think it was down to any kind of incredible ability to read a player, he gave him a chance because he needed a spark up front, Bobby's hard work provided that spark. 

Brownhill was a great signing, he honestly showed so much potential when he signed but LJ played him our wide where he was poor, he continued to moved him between a central role and a wide one and often paired him with players that didn't compliment him. If anything I think Brownhills strongest part of his game is his natural technical ability that was improved on just by getting game tone. LJ's tactics were certainly not the reason he improved as he used him out of position for long periods of his progression and he never allowed him that role behind the striker but in front of the midfield where he's best suited to. 

Webster I agree with in that LJ saw talent there but the fact he was in and gone so quickly just screams out that lots of people knew the potential was there but his injury was what was the real gamble. Once he held his fitness his ability showed, it was a great decision in hindsight but I feel we got him because we were the only ones willing to take the gamble on his fitness. Had he turned out to be a player who was always injured I'm not sure we'd have been so find on the move which is probably why we sold him so soon, to ensure we got peak value (which is a lot) incase he got injured again. 

Pack I kind of agree but wouldn't say we had a great player, more of a dedicated professional. With Lack he developed slightly and was an easier decision again because his initial fee to buy him was so low. 

With those put aside how much has LJ lost on players, not just fees but wages of players who offered us absolutely nothing or never even got a chance? 

Ryan Kent - absolutely wasted here but put in the right tactical formation at Rangers and he's behind an instant fan favourite. 

Woodrow - wasted loan again, never got a decent chance

Diony - Best not talked about

Engvall - Waste of time and money

Djuric - Had a role to play, never really given a chance

Mo Eisa - Such potential, fans wanted to see him play, never given a chance. 

Don't get me wrong, we only lost wages on most of these but they were players that took a place and never contributed or even held us back in Dionys case. 

Currently we have Wells ready and raring to go and what did he get... 32 minutes off of the bench when we were already 2-1 down. Wells is one of those players who threatens defences, he needs to start because at 2-1 down Brum had the game and their confidence was high. 

Despite my desire to move on from LJ I do like him, he is a nice guy but he's the weak link in our chain right now. We have a strong academy, a good transfer man in MA, we have a good financial structure with more development in the works, the only thing we're lacking is a coach with the tactical experience to bring it all together. 

You say Brownhill was poor on the right of midfield. I thought he was superb there in 17/18 season. I bet that is where Dyche will play him. If that is where he plays then credit to LJ for converting him into that position.

I really think we have to give LJ all the credit for Webster. He told Ashton to sign him and then had him playing better than he had previously.

There will be bad ones for sure. Did he even want Mo Eisa? Called him a 'club signing'. Strange way of describing a player if it was his signing.

I don't really see the potential in Eisa. He is now 4th choice striker for Peterborough. Their fans say he is very weak, dodgy touch and lightweight and does not try. So since leaving I'd say the evidence suggests he really is not upper championship standard.

Kent was poor and didn't suit our system. He was younger so has improved since, but that is the Scottish league which is worse than the championship.

Djuric was injured so often. He used him quite a bit when he was fit.

Engvall was a terrible signing. 

Diony LJ couldn't get his confiednece back having had a very good season 2 seasons before in France.

There will be examples of money wasted, players not improving. But overall we have made a lot of money from players that have improved under LJ. And some like Webster and Brownhill was mainly down to LJ that they came to us in the first place.

[BobBobSuperBob]

7 minutes ago, Rich said:

I would like to point out that of the players sold under Johnsons tenure, approximately £35m of those sales were already at the club. So that would put him in deficit by some £14m, not taking into account the current playing staff values.

Loan fees paid included ?

[Rich]

3 minutes ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

Loan fees paid included ?

It was only a quick bit of research Bob. Lazy of me really.

[BobBobSuperBob]

1 minute ago, Rich said:

It was only a quick bit of research Bob. Lazy of me really.

Made me laugh 

 

[Rich]

5 minutes ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

Made me laugh 

 

Strange how people call someone else out and demanding they show the research. Do they really expect you to dig again and show where you found something, just because they want to point score against you? **** um, as you say, here's the link, look yourself.