Christopher Hughton’s interview approach

[Red_Alligator]

As if the wound wasn't deep enough. This smacks of desperation. What a mess. 

[LondonBristolian]

On 15/08/2020 at 19:36, Allwaysred said:

CH wanted complete control of incoming and outgoing players which will never happen while Mr Ashton is there it was that simple. I have no doubt like most CH would have taken us to the next level most of us crave but unfortunately nothing has changed and we will regress under the new set up. Mark my words me Ashton will ruin this club top to bottom and all for his own gains just like he did at Oxford and WBA before that. Utter Shambles and KS litterly turned the lights off on his way out.

To be honest, we had a succession of managers almost ruin the club from 2008 to 2012 specifically because they were given complete control of incomings and outgoings and we were burdened with a succession players on expensive contracts that were unwanted by the next manager and that we could not shift. There is a very good reason why the vast majority of clubs - and certainly not just us - no longer give one individual sole control of incomings and outgoings and instead try to have continuity from one manager to the next.

Like or dislike Ashton but it is really hard to argue he ruined Oxford, who got promoted the season he left, or West Brom, who got promoted the season he left. He did have a falling out at Watford but they were promoted whilst he was there and he left them in decent shape.

I think there is a valid argument that Ashton's financial prudence may cost us promotion but he certainly is not going to ruin the club. And any modern football club that gives a manager complete control of transfers is foolish, completely out of step with the rest of football and risking financial ruin...

[Numero Uno]

5 minutes ago, LondonBristolian said:

To be honest, we had a succession of managers almost ruin the club from 2008 to 2012 specifically because they were given complete control of incomings and outgoings and we were burdened with a succession players on expensive contracts that were unwanted by the next manager and that we could not shift. There is a very good reason why the vast majority of clubs - and certainly not just us - no longer give one individual sole control of incomings and outgoings and instead try to have continuity from one manager to the next.

Like or dislike Ashton but it is really hard to argue he ruined Oxford, who got promoted the season he left, or West Brom, who got promoted the season he left. He did have a falling out at Watford but they were promoted whilst he was there and he left them in decent shape.

I think there is a valid argument that Ashton's financial prudence may cost us promotion but he certainly is not going to ruin the club. And any modern football club that gives a manager complete control of transfers is foolish, completely out of step with the rest of football and risking financial ruin...

Any chance the bloke could leave then?

[fatchers]

We still seem to have one man in charge of bringing in players to a large squad who may or may not be to the managers first choice anyway.

If Ashton's other clubs only got promoted when he left it appears he may have been an obsticule to us going up. Do we have to wait for him to go too ?

 

[LondonBristolian]

13 minutes ago, fatchers said:

We still seem to have one man in charge of bringing in players to a large squad who may or may not be to the managers first choice anyway.

If Ashton's other clubs only got promoted when he left it appears he may have been an obsticule to us going up. Do we have to wait for him to go too ?

 

I disagree with your reading of it. The CEO is there for the long-term planning not the short term and no CEO would influence results on the pitch in their first six months. I certainly don't think you can credit any CEO with a club getting promoted either but the point I was trying to make is that a CEO or Director whose club gets promoted shortly after they leave is proof that that individual was not an obstacle to success or that they did not, in the poster I was replying to's words, "ruin the club from top to bottom".

I've mixed views on Ashton and I don't necessarily think our transfer policy is always coherent but my point is more that the structure we have in itself - where the manager does not have a sole control over incomings and outgoings - is neither unhealthy or unusual but something that is becoming increasingly common and I'd argue is essential in order for the club to be sustainable and successful in the long-term. 

[Kid in the Riot]

If the person best suited to fitting into the club's structure is the assistant coach of the previous failed regime, then I would suggest it is the club's structure which is the problem. 

People trying to justify it as an acceptable appointment for Bristol City, who have the supposed intention of getting promoted to the Premier League, are kidding themselves. 

[oldstandrobin]

2 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

If the person best suited to fitting into the club's structure is the assistant coach of the previous failed regime, then I would suggest it is the club's structure which is the problem. 

People trying to justify it as an acceptable appointment for Bristol City, who have the supposed intention of getting promoted to the Premier League, are kidding themselves. 

Very short post but sums it up exactly. Well said KITR 

[Davefevs]

Here is the truth of MA’s role of Director at West Brom....it was more of a job title rather than a true board position, nor was it Director of the whole football club.  

Ashton, Oxford's chief executive, knows Albion well. 

He spent 16 years at the club, starting off as a reserve goalkeeper - he played in the 6-1 friendly defeat to Real Madrid in July 1989 - before becoming youth team coach, goalkeeping coach and community officer.

From there he was appointed commercial executive, before becoming community director and assuming his final role at the club, as director of community, youth and new projects.

https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/west-brom-v-oxford-united-7670105

Here’s his Companies House profile.

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/officers/qoejyvFelWmTZsZ99NjiaO44bh8/appointments

Genuine Director jobs at Oxford and City.

So, much as I don’t like the bloke, I think the above points to the fact that he wasn’t in any position of authority to ruin West Brom.

 

[The Dolman Pragmatist]

2 hours ago, Red_Alligator said:

As if the wound wasn't deep enough. This smacks of desperation. What a mess. 

Sorry, I’m confused.  What smacks of desperation?

[The Dolman Pragmatist]

16 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

If the person best suited to fitting into the club's structure is the assistant coach of the previous failed regime, then I would suggest it is the club's structure which is the problem. 

People trying to justify it as an acceptable appointment for Bristol City, who have the supposed intention of getting promoted to the Premier League, are kidding themselves. 

Well,that’s your view and you’re entitled to it.  For what it’s worth, I don’t see Lee Johnson’s tenure as anything like a ‘failed regime’.  Failure is not the same as a lack of success: there are gradations in between.  Yes we failed to achieve promotion, but you cannot dispute that we are in a better place than we were four years ago.  People who think that the recipe for success is to give someone a chance and if the overall aims are not achieved then you sack everyone, throw the whole thing up in the air and start all over again  strike me as naive, bordering on deluded.  Of course Dean’s appointment was a surprise but I’m sure I was not alone in feeling that we needed continuity, and to build on what had been achieved, rather than to rip it up and start again.  The legend of Chris Hughton, as some kind of latter day messiah and the only man capable of delivering success, is slightly farcical, and in any case all that is behind us now.

To be successful you need to be sustainable.  No one is going for the kind of knee-jerk management that so many on this forum seem to advocate.  I am very happy to give the new regime a chance to progress, and if that ultimately leads to promotion then that would be fantastic, but I certainly don’t believe in promotion at any cost.  That would be reckless and dangerous.

[Wolf Island]

Holden’s appointment seems more and more on trend for Covid times. More experienced and qualified than Andrea Pirlo the Juve manager for example. Maybe we were lucky to keep hold of him. 

[Guest]

We will sell off our most prized assets and anyone else we get an offer for, as normal. While ignoring the better exp but costlier managers and going for............. last seasons failed managers assistant.

Be worried that the powers that be believe after weeks of thought Dean Holden was the best available; Clearly he was not, having no proven record in this div or championship promotion pedigree.

Yet fans are settling for this, until we go around again on the roundabout that goes no-where and repeat again no doubt even before this next seasons end.

Troubled and uncertain times, yes of course but imo thats just the time to strike and go for it not retreat further into our shell.

Investing in a proven manager and more players would be just that an investment for the future, bringing in prev loaned players and an unproven manager is not the way to progress just regress......chances of making top six nil, chances of top half; not hopefull, chances of another manager by this time next year; high. We it seems will not be waking up anytime soon.

[QuedgeRed]

13 hours ago, The Dolman Pragmatist said:

Well,that’s your view and you’re entitled to it.  For what it’s worth, I don’t see Lee Johnson’s tenure as anything like a ‘failed regime’.  Failure is not the same as a lack of success: there are gradations in between.  Yes we failed to achieve promotion, but you cannot dispute that we are in a better place than we were four years ago.  People who think that the recipe for success is to give someone a chance and if the overall aims are not achieved then you sack everyone, throw the whole thing up in the air and start all over again  strike me as naive, bordering on deluded.  Of course Dean’s appointment was a surprise but I’m sure I was not alone in feeling that we needed continuity, and to build on what had been achieved, rather than to rip it up and start again.  The legend of Chris Hughton, as some kind of latter day messiah and the only man capable of delivering success, is slightly farcical, and in any case all that is behind us now.

To be successful you need to be sustainable.  No one is going for the kind of knee-jerk management that so many on this forum seem to advocate.  I am very happy to give the new regime a chance to progress, and if that ultimately leads to promotion then that would be fantastic, but I certainly don’t believe in promotion at any cost.  That would be reckless and dangerous.

Why are there professional football leagues? Why do fans go to watch football matches in these professional leagues?

To get promoted into a higher league and earn the additional income and rewards that go hand in hand with that promotion.

Any club that starts a season without the goal of promotion is doomed. Consolidation is ridiculous. That club will ultimately fail.

 

[The Dolman Pragmatist]

8 minutes ago, QuedgeRed said:

Why are there professional football leagues? Why do fans go to watch football matches in these professional leagues?

To get promoted into a higher league and earn the additional income and rewards that go hand in hand with that promotion.

Any club that starts a season without the goal of promotion is doomed. Consolidation is ridiculous. That club will ultimately fail.

 

No one is saying that promotion shouldn’t be the goal, but not getting promotion should not necessarily be regarded as failure.  If it was, then all but 10 of 72 EFL clubs would have failed every year.

Many clubs know they won’t get promoted.  A promoted club may see consolidation as the aim, or maybe even just survival.  Of course you go out and you do your best, and hope that this will be your season, but not achieving promotion is not in itself failure.

[QuedgeRed]

2 minutes ago, The Dolman Pragmatist said:

Of course you go out and you do your best, and hope that this will be your season, but not achieving promotion is not in itself failure.

Agree with this, but in my opinion the owner and board are not giving the players the opportunity to go out and do the best.

The club will suffer as a result.

[The Dolman Pragmatist]

Just now, QuedgeRed said:

Agree with this, but in my opinion the owner and board are not giving the players the opportunity to go out and do the best.

The club will suffer as a result.

We’ll see...

[Floatn Over]

1 hour ago, glos old boy said:

We will sell off our most prized assets and anyone else we get an offer for, as normal. While ignoring the better exp but costlier managers and going for............. last seasons failed managers assistant.

Be worried that the powers that be believe after weeks of thought Dean Holden was the best available; Clearly he was not, having no proven record in this div or championship promotion pedigree.

Yet fans are settling for this, until we go around again on the roundabout that goes no-where and repeat again no doubt even before this next seasons end.

Troubled and uncertain times, yes of course but imo thats just the time to strike and go for it not retreat further into our shell.

Investing in a proven manager and more players would be just that an investment for the future, bringing in prev loaned players and an unproven manager is not the way to progress just regress......chances of making top six nil, chances of top half; not hopefull, chances of another manager by this time next year; high. We it seems will not be waking up anytime soon.

I fully accept the points raised here but if those with a “proven record in this div or championship pedigree” who allegedly applied wanted a mega salary also to spend, spend, spend as you suggest in your final paragraph from a long outdated war chest approach and have total control of everything playing wise, what was the club supposed to do ? Just accept it and through caution to the wind ?

For what it’s worth I wanted CH appointed but suppose he or A N Other had brought in a number of older players on high wages and the project failed, the club would be stuck with those contracts for several years to come.  None of this type of manager come with a “guarantee to get success certificate” of course, they just walk off into the sunset before the ship sinks when it goes wrong.

I just feel that the “troubled and uncertain times” you nod to (which could get even worse, let’s be honest) are not being taken account of enough.  No offence intended.

If DH ticked more boxes than others on the interview list, technically he was the best available.  Hope he does well and I’ll certainly be giving him every chance.

 

[QuedgeRed]

13 minutes ago, The Dolman Pragmatist said:

We’ll see...

Nothing personal DP, but from the club’s point of view, to start a season and to say ‘we’ll see what happens’ is not good enough in a professional league like the championship. That’s my whole point.

[MarcusX]

15 hours ago, Kid in the Riot said:

If the person best suited to fitting into the club's structure is the assistant coach of the previous failed regime, then I would suggest it is the club's structure which is the problem. 

People trying to justify it as an acceptable appointment for Bristol City, who have the supposed intention of getting promoted to the Premier League, are kidding themselves. 

Depends if you call it a "failed regime". LJ has left us in a better state than he found us, albeit with a slightly bloated squad of players who may or may not be good enough (which remains to be seen until they get some more freedom).

He "failed" in reaching the playoffs, but that should never have been the fans expectations. He kept us competitive for them, until he couldn't turn his streaks around and we were always in the hunt until the final games of the season. Considering only one manager, for one season, has had us anywhere near those heights in the last 30 years I'd hardly call him a failure.

DH would have seen what went wrong, has an understanding of the players and knows what he needs. He doesnt need the overhaul that a CH might have needed, or the weeks to get to know his players - he already knows them and can get straight to work in the areas that need it e.g. bringing in some respected coaches to get them playing more positively.

At first I voted to be disappointed if DH was appointed, but everything I've seen and heard from him, his assistants and the players as well since then leaves me more comfortable than I was a couple of weeks ago. 

I'm guessing though as you were so confident CH was signing, that this rumour about his car crash interview must be nonsense?

[MarcusX]

14 hours ago, The Dolman Pragmatist said:

Well,that’s your view and you’re entitled to it.  For what it’s worth, I don’t see Lee Johnson’s tenure as anything like a ‘failed regime’.  Failure is not the same as a lack of success: there are gradations in between.  Yes we failed to achieve promotion, but you cannot dispute that we are in a better place than we were four years ago.  People who think that the recipe for success is to give someone a chance and if the overall aims are not achieved then you sack everyone, throw the whole thing up in the air and start all over again  strike me as naive, bordering on deluded.  Of course Dean’s appointment was a surprise but I’m sure I was not alone in feeling that we needed continuity, and to build on what had been achieved, rather than to rip it up and start again.  The legend of Chris Hughton, as some kind of latter day messiah and the only man capable of delivering success, is slightly farcical, and in any case all that is behind us now.

To be successful you need to be sustainable.  No one is going for the kind of knee-jerk management that so many on this forum seem to advocate.  I am very happy to give the new regime a chance to progress, and if that ultimately leads to promotion then that would be fantastic, but I certainly don’t believe in promotion at any cost.  That would be reckless and dangerous.

Agreed. I got fed up of the club ripping everything up and going down a new path with every manager from Coppell, Millen, McInnes, SOD. LJ wasnt a million miles away from getting it right, he just seemed too stubborn to accept his own failings and change his approach which is why he couldn;t turn around losing streaks so easily.

Bournemouth were relegated and still felt that their assistant was a good option, will be interesting to see how that pans out.

[MarcusX]

2 hours ago, glos old boy said:

We will sell off our most prized assets and anyone else we get an offer for, as normal. While ignoring the better exp but costlier managers and going for............. last seasons failed managers assistant.

Be worried that the powers that be believe after weeks of thought Dean Holden was the best available; Clearly he was not, having no proven record in this div or championship promotion pedigree.

Yet fans are settling for this, until we go around again on the roundabout that goes no-where and repeat again no doubt even before this next seasons end.

Troubled and uncertain times, yes of course but imo thats just the time to strike and go for it not retreat further into our shell.

Investing in a proven manager and more players would be just that an investment for the future, bringing in prev loaned players and an unproven manager is not the way to progress just regress......chances of making top six nil, chances of top half; not hopefull, chances of another manager by this time next year; high. We it seems will not be waking up anytime soon.

There's nothing "clear" about it unless you were involved in the interview process.

There's zero guarantee that investing in a manager and yet MORE players is going to bring success. The last thing we needed was another manager to come and bring several new players in, especially in an unusually short transfer window. Not fair to slate the loan signings, there was almost complete agreement that Kalas and JD were good signings last year, and most at the time were happy with Palmer.

IMO there's as much chance of being in and around the top 8 as there is a new manager next year. It's a complete unknown at the minute and only fair to judge after the first 10 or so games. The same amount of time any manager would need before being judged.

[Davefevs]

19 minutes ago, MarcusX said:

Agreed. I got fed up of the club ripping everything up and going down a new path with every manager from Coppell, Millen, McInnes, SOD. LJ wasnt a million miles away from getting it right, he just seemed too stubborn to accept his own failings and change his approach which is why he couldn;t turn around losing streaks so easily.

Bournemouth were relegated and still felt that their assistant was a good option, will be interesting to see how that pans out.

I think each of the last 3 head coaches have helped us on the journey. O’Driscoll sorted stuff off the pitch, Cotterill got us back to the Championship, Johnson steadily improved us.  There have been tweaks and changes throughout.

I’d like to think that Dean Holden, for all the doubts about best candidate”, is the next head coach in that journey.  The club has supplemented him with two experienced assistants appointed from outside.

So they’ve retained some continuity with a Holden, who knows the squad, hopefully knows the bits to put right this season.  But perhaps they have realised they needed a coaching skill set from outside of the “former Bristol City player” pond to bring it all together.  So no more Jamie McAllister, no Cole Skuse coming back.  Although Dean Holden was LJ’s assistant he’s not from got any links to City, apart from LJ bringing him in.  We now have Simpson and Downing.  We’ve broken the “former Bristol City player” link.  For me, that could be the evolvement that was needed.

 

[Kid in the Riot]

16 hours ago, The Dolman Pragmatist said:

Well,that’s your view and you’re entitled to it.  For what it’s worth, I don’t see Lee Johnson’s tenure as anything like a ‘failed regime’.  Failure is not the same as a lack of success: there are gradations in between.  Yes we failed to achieve promotion, but you cannot dispute that we are in a better place than we were four years ago.  People who think that the recipe for success is to give someone a chance and if the overall aims are not achieved then you sack everyone, throw the whole thing up in the air and start all over again  strike me as naive, bordering on deluded.  Of course Dean’s appointment was a surprise but I’m sure I was not alone in feeling that we needed continuity, and to build on what had been achieved, rather than to rip it up and start again.  The legend of Chris Hughton, as some kind of latter day messiah and the only man capable of delivering success, is slightly farcical, and in any case all that is behind us now.

To be successful you need to be sustainable.  No one is going for the kind of knee-jerk management that so many on this forum seem to advocate.  I am very happy to give the new regime a chance to progress, and if that ultimately leads to promotion then that would be fantastic, but I certainly don’t believe in promotion at any cost.  That would be reckless and dangerous.

Ok, we can replace "failed regime" with "unsuccessful" if you like. 

I agree LJ played a part in improving the football club over the past 4.5 years, however there is little doubt we have been heading backwards over the past 12-18 months. We only actually got 9 more points this season in comparison to LJ's first full season in charge, and our points tally this season arguably flattered us with few chances being created up top and Bentley being called into action more than most keepers in the division. Statistically speaking we've been fortunate in that we've been clinical at both ends of the pitch, to the eye we've been very poor to watch. 

There is no comparison to be made between us and the promoted teams, let's face it we were miles away from them. Nowhere near good enough. That's why I used the word failure. We weren't even playing well, promoting any players from the academy or winning our home games to compensate. We couldn't even beat a mid-table League One team over two games to at least set up an exciting FA Cup tie at Ashton Gate. 

This all really deflects from the point I was making which is that Dean Holden is not the appointment of a club with genuine Premier League ambitions, and nor is it the appointment of a club that has a successful structure. 

[LondonBristolian]

18 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

Ok, we can replace "failed regime" with "unsuccessful" if you like. 

I agree LJ played a part in improving the football club over the past 4.5 years, however there is little doubt we have been heading backwards over the past 12-18 months. We only actually got 9 more points this season in comparison to LJ's first full season in charge, and our points tally this season arguably flattered us with few chances being created up top and Bentley being called into action more than most keepers in the division. Statistically speaking we've been fortunate in that we've been clinical at both ends of the pitch, to the eye we've been very poor to watch. 

There is no comparison to be made between us and the promoted teams, let's face it we were miles away from them. Nowhere near good enough. That's why I used the word failure. We weren't even playing well, promoting any players from the academy or winning our home games to compensate. We couldn't even beat a mid-table League One team over two games to at least set up an exciting FA Cup tie at Ashton Gate. 

This all really deflects from the point I was making which is that Dean Holden is not the appointment of a club with genuine Premier League ambitions, and nor is it the appointment of a club that has a successful structure. 

For me, a major issue is the way that it happened. I'd not have a problem with the club having a continuity plan, prepping the assistant manager to move into the main role one day and then enacting that plan when the manager leaves. And I don't even necessarily think Holden's association with the previous regime is necessarily a massive issue. It might be but it very much depends on how much influence he actually had and whether he has an accurate assessment and what did not work and needs to be done differently.

Where the issue lies for me is that it is very clear there was no continuity plan and the club spoke to several very different managers without having any sort of coherent vision of the direction of travel before, five weeks into the process, going for the person who was acting in the role. I'm willing to accept Holden is the manager and give him a fair chance, and I do like the two assistant appointments and what I have heard from them. And I don't think it impossible that the club genuinely believe Holden, Simpson and Downing can deliver promotion and I think, in a very open division, we may do a little better than some on here fear we will.

But, even if Holden turns out to be a superb manager and even if we did go up automatically, it would not change the fact that the club had got to appointing Holden by chance rather than design and that the way the appointment made showed a massive failure within the structure of the club.

I don't actually necessarily think the structure itself is the wrong one. But I do think, within the way our structure should work, that the CEO should be prepared for the possibility of a manager leaving and have a clear contingency plan in place, with a clear idea of the type of appointment we want to make and regularly updated lists of who our main managerial targets would be. And that, as soon as a manager is sacked - perhaps even before if the club is being a bit sly - those manager should be being approached and sounded out, with clear alternatives in mind in case it is not possible to strike a deal for the first choice and/or it emerges that the first choice is the wrong fit for the club.

I don't think the club were in any way obliged to appoint Hughton, and I do think some people on these boards have fixated a bit too much on one particular candidate, but the appearance from outside is that the club approached Gerrard, then re-appproached Gerrard, and then, having failed to get Gerrard, tried to decide between five to eight very different candidates and, if Gregor is believed, ultimately narrowing it down to a choice between an experienced manager with a record of promotions but a very different ethos and approach to the club's current direction or an internal candidate who knew the club well and would offer continuity. I don't know why the final choice was made and there are reasons why either option could prove to be the right or wrong one but the fact the club were making a choice between two massively contrasting candidates five weeks into the process shows that we really did not have a coherent approach and Mark Ashton and others in the recruitment process really need to be asking themselves how they got the process so wrong, regardless of how successful the final decision proves to be. 

[Rich_s]

3 hours ago, LondonBristolian said:

For me, a major issue is the way that it happened. I'd not have a problem with the club having a continuity plan, prepping the assistant manager to move into the main role one day and then enacting that plan when the manager leaves. And I don't even necessarily think Holden's association with the previous regime is necessarily a massive issue. It might be but it very much depends on how much influence he actually had and whether he has an accurate assessment and what did not work and needs to be done differently.

....

Absolutely. It's like they suddenly discovered a surprise candidate called Holden who was the best man for the job. He was there all along.

If this had happened over at the gas we'd have taken the piss.