The Coaches' Voice - LJ

[Davefevs]

46 minutes ago, Sheltons Army said:

Thanks for posting this Dave - Never seen it before 

What a difference to Johnson’s talk 

Some seem impressed with Johnson’s ......ehmmmmm......’talk’

Burt isn’t quite so media friendly , but boy does he talk some sound sense in terms of building a side/squad, future planning , a recruitment plan to fit the managers preferred style

And SC and KB didn’t have a bad summer did they signed up / promoted Bryan Reid and Burns and then signed pieces of a jigsaw that demolished League 1

Burt May come across as a bit dour but comes across as quietly assured in his role and thinking , no ego , no bluff , no self selling

 

Johnson / Burt.(/SC).     Ying / Yang

 

Johnson a success here ?

The Era of Missed Opportunity 

Was thinking more Burt v Ashton than Johnson.

19 minutes ago, Cowshed said:

A style of play is not a principle. A changing style of play certainly is not one. Mr Johnson said playing principles were beyond relevant, they were key. Mr Johnson stated that he wanted to create a playing identity throughout the club. You could not outline one principle of play. Mr Johnson did not put into place these key playing principles and an identity throughout the club. Average placing was eleventh/twelfth but failed to meet his own aims. Brentford have progressed further. 

 

Hiya Cowshed....happy new year....glad to see you back posting

[Sheltons Army]

13 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Was thinking more Burt v Ashton than Johnson.

Hiya Cowshed....happy new year....glad to see you back posting

Understandably , but I was thinking one , having a plan ,  talking sound Football thinking without any bull*** or spin

And then delivering the plan.
 

They (KB / SC) were a very good pairing , working from the same hymn sheet , with a sensible plan

KBs part probably still underrated

That summer window , include the upgrade of Reid , Bryan and Burns , was possibly,  or probably , our best transfer window in all my years 

[Cowshed]

18 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

Not sure whether you call it principle or style but what I saw for two years before his departure followed by this season (although the first and last twenty minutes on Saturday was a welcome deviation) was a team wholly built around counter attacking both home and away.

There is an argument to say league position achieved was fairly successful but I cannot subscribe to the view that watching two whole years of football where game after game, particularly at Ashton Gate, the opposition keepers gloves were as clean at five to five as they were at three o’clock can be viewed as successful!!

In fact, paying good money for a season ticket then watching us set up at home as the away team against all but the very weakest opposition in the league might be viewed by many as bloody painful not successful.

The team over seasons became less possession based, sat deeper etc. If we look at how the team played 2017/18 and at the end of Mr Johnsons tutoring its was clearly playing in a very differing style. Mr Johnson made no commitment over four years to playing principles. Success? No.

The team bored you. Success? Not yours.

And I have made no mention of the team failing in meeting a basic requirement of finishing in sixth place for a play off place. Success for Mr Lansdown? No.

Avoiding relegation and finishing an average (?) eleventh/twelfth and boring fans i would look upon as mediocre. Out you go Lee and he did. 

19 minutes ago, And Its Smith said:

So because Brentford have progressed further that makes Johnson a failure ? Can’t agree at all.

i judge what was achieved and what parameters were set. You can talk principles until the cows come home if you want. 

To improve league positions and improve players and turn a profit is impressive work

Brentford's achievements put into perspective the way BCFC operate and Mr Johnsons own words. A club doing more with less.  A club making commitment's to values and playing principles. 

Yes I can talk principles ... But it was Mr Johnson who was quoted and I posed yourself a question as your observation of fans knowledge piqued my interest . What are Mr Johnsons playing principles? 

Improving players is a requirement of all coaches. Profit? Those who know more about finances can/will correct me - Bristol City make losses and have to sell players to not breech FFP .. improving position well I hope he did in four years given the resources he was given.

[And Its Smith]

3 minutes ago, Cowshed said:

The team over seasons became less possession based, sat deeper etc. If we look at how the team played 2017/18 and at the end of Mr Johnsons tutoring its was clearly playing in a very differing style. Mr Johnson made no commitment over four years to playing principles. Success? No.

The team bored you. Success? Not yours.

And I have made no mention of the team failing in meeting a basic requirement of finishing in sixth place for a play off place. Success for Mr Lansdown? No.

Avoiding relegation and finishing an average (?) eleventh/twelfth and boring fans i would look upon as mediocre. Out you go Lee and he did. 

Brentford's achievements put into perspective the way BCFC operate and Mr Johnsons own words. A club doing more with less.  A club making commitment's to values and playing principles. 

Yes I can talk principles ... But it was Mr Johnson who was quoted and I posed yourself a question as your observation of fans knowledge piqued my interest . What are Mr Johnsons playing principles? 

Improving players is a requirement of all coaches. Profit? Those who know more about finances can/will correct me - Bristol City make losses and have to sell players to not breech FFP .. improving position well I hope he did in four years given the resources he was given.

I meant turn a Nett transfer profit.  The resources he was given was to have to sell his best players, after he improved them, and replace them with cheaper players who weren’t as good.  How can you expect managers to improve league positions with that remit ?

Brentford’s achievements are irrelevant. They have been more successful than us but (a) that doesn’t make Johnson unsuccessful and (b) their recruitment is a lot better than ours, especially from overseas. Whoever identified our overseas players wasn’t as good as whoever Brentford had doing it 

 

[Rob k]

4 minutes ago, And Its Smith said:

I meant turn a Nett transfer profit.  The resources he was given was to have to sell his best players, after he improved them, and replace them with cheaper players who weren’t as good.  How can you expect managers to improve league positions with that remit ?

Brentford’s achievements are irrelevant. They have been more successful than us but (a) that doesn’t make Johnson unsuccessful and (b) their recruitment is a lot better than ours, especially from overseas. Whoever identified our overseas players wasn’t as good as whoever Brentford had doing it 

 

For every Brentford there will be a Portsmouth, Stoke etc 

[Cowshed]

1 minute ago, And Its Smith said:

I meant turn a Nett transfer profit.  The resources he was given was to have to sell his best players, after he improved them, and replace them with cheaper players who weren’t as good.  How can you expect managers to improve league positions with that remit ?

Brentford’s achievements are irrelevant. They have been more successful than us but (a) that doesn’t make Johnson unsuccessful and (b) their recruitment is a lot better than ours, especially from overseas. Whoever identified our overseas players wasn’t as good as whoever Brentford had doing it 

 

Brentford achievements are not irrelevant. They are a sensible parallel to BCFC who do not receive parachute payments. Are a club who do not dwarf BCFC is size. They are a competitor in the same league. A competitor with a smaller wage bill who like Bristol City frequently sell players. 

You are with respect missing the point about principles of play. Brentford in your words are recruiting a lot better than BCFC. How? If as you point out Mr Johnson football style frequently changed and you cannot outline what its principles were how do you recruit players with skill sets to meet team needs? 

In answer to your question. Trim squad size. Don't spend millions on players to be clubs in the bag, don't bring in loans on 20k(Diony?)a week and Ryan Kent to not progress the football the team was playing. Commit to playing principles and recruit players with qualities that can be developed or progress the model of play that is being put or is in place.  

 

[Bassomylord]

1 minute ago, Cowshed said:

Brentford achievements are not irrelevant. They are a sensible parallel to BCFC who do not receive parachute payments. Are a club who do not dwarf BCFC is size. They are a competitor in the same league. A competitor with a smaller wage bill who like Bristol City frequently sell players. 

You are with respect missing the point about principles of play. Brentford in your words are recruiting a lot better than BCFC. How? If as you point out Mr Johnson football style frequently changed and you cannot outline what its principles were how do you recruit players with skill sets to meet team needs? 

In answer to your question. Trim squad size. Don't spend millions on players to be clubs in the bag, don't bring in loans on 20k(Diony?)a week and Ryan Kent to not progress the football the team was playing. Commit to playing principles and recruit players with qualities that can be developed or progress the model of play that is being put or is in place.  

 

The difference with Brentford is that they make players better.....we sign those of a similar ilk and gradually make them worse.

[IAmNick]

23 minutes ago, And Its Smith said:

I meant turn a Nett transfer profit.  The resources he was given was to have to sell his best players, after he improved them, and replace them with cheaper players who weren’t as good.  How can you expect managers to improve league positions with that remit ?

 

Last years top 6:

Leeds:

Expenditure: £0m

Income: £27.36m

Net: +£27.36m

 

West Brom:

Expenditure: £19.35m

Income: £33.54m

Net: +£14.19m

 

Brentford:

Expenditure: £31.39m

Income: £36.83m

Net: +£5.64m

 

Fulham:

Expenditure: £33.30m

Income: £25.65m

Net: -£7.65m

 

Cardiff:

Expenditure: £16.21m

Income: £17.82m

Net: +£1.61m

 

Swansea:

Expenditure: £0.496m

Income: £35.71m

Net: +35.21m

(https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/championship/transfers/wettbewerb/GB2/plus/?saison_id=2019&s_w=&leihe=1&intern=0&intern=1)

So... pretty common then? I know the numbers wont be perfect, and it's not a complete picture as it doesn't take into account wages (ours have increased by what, 30% each year or something?) but to try and paint a picture that Lee had to do something totally unique is just wrong.

 

 

[And Its Smith]

12 minutes ago, IAmNick said:

Last years top 6:

Leeds:

Expenditure: £0m

Income: £27.36m

Net: +£27.36m

 

West Brom:

Expenditure: £19.35m

Income: £33.54m

Net: +£14.19m

 

Brentford:

Expenditure: £31.39m

Income: £36.83m

Net: +£5.64m

 

Fulham:

Expenditure: £33.30m

Income: £25.65m

Net: -£7.65m

 

Cardiff:

Expenditure: £16.21m

Income: £17.82m

Net: +£1.61m

 

Swansea:

Expenditure: £0.496m

Income: £35.71m

Net: +35.21m

(https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/championship/transfers/wettbewerb/GB2/plus/?saison_id=2019&s_w=&leihe=1&intern=0&intern=1)

So... pretty common then? I know the numbers wont be perfect, and it's not a complete picture as it doesn't take into account wages (ours have increased by what, 30% each year or something?) but to try and paint a picture that Lee had to do something totally unique is just wrong.

 

 

Not sure comparing one season is relevant.  Truer picture would be to view it over a longer period.  Maybe it’s not as unique as I am imagining.  Still doesn’t mean that LJ wasn’t a success here

 

[Lrrr]

14 minutes ago, IAmNick said:

Last years top 6:

Leeds:

Expenditure: £0m

Income: £27.36m

Net: +£27.36m

 

West Brom:

Expenditure: £19.35m

Income: £33.54m

Net: +£14.19m

 

Brentford:

Expenditure: £31.39m

Income: £36.83m

Net: +£5.64m

 

Fulham:

Expenditure: £33.30m

Income: £25.65m

Net: -£7.65m

 

Cardiff:

Expenditure: £16.21m

Income: £17.82m

Net: +£1.61m

 

Swansea:

Expenditure: £0.496m

Income: £35.71m

Net: +35.21m

(https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/championship/transfers/wettbewerb/GB2/plus/?saison_id=2019&s_w=&leihe=1&intern=0&intern=1)

So... pretty common then? I know the numbers wont be perfect, and it's not a complete picture as it doesn't take into account wages (ours have increased by what, 30% each year or something?) but to try and paint a picture that Lee had to do something totally unique is just wrong.

 

 

To be honest I'd discount most of those except Leeds and Brentford on the basis that they've come down from the premier league and will have assets to sell and will naturally replace with cheaper ones.

[Cowshed]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

 

Hiya Cowshed....happy new year....glad to see you back posting

And yourself all .. I have not been posting as I haven't been watching due to taking employment coaching. Now due to that sound judgement of deciding to alter my life significantly during a pandemic I'm watching again I hope temporarily. 

[Simon79]

5 hours ago, Robbored said:

That was integral part of why he was appointed.. His remit set out under SL’s  ‘sustainability’ plan. Previous managers - SC in particular failed to implement.

A ‘cake and eat it’ policy...................

I wonder if Deano is under the remit?

Although it’s difficult to be sure because of the landscape on transfers Covid has given us, my initial thought would be no. In the summer we didn’t buy any for the future or rough diamonds like Szmodic, Adelukan, Eisa etc who would be on relatively low wages. We went for players like Martin, Mawson, Brunt, Mariappa, all I would assume would be on decent money for this level. When you couple in those signings with the younger players being a year on or the return of loan players, I actually think this is a stronger squad. Which is why I’ve never understood some people’s opinion on not expecting more come then end of the season. We didn’t lose anyone over the summer that we didn’t want to lose, Smith & Mäenpää were deemed surplus to requirements. So for his first managerial gig, I think it’s been a decent opportunity for Holden. The one variable is obviously the injuries & that certainly needs looking at. COYR 

[Davefevs]

42 minutes ago, IAmNick said:

Last years top 6:

Leeds:

Expenditure: £0m

Income: £27.36m

Net: +£27.36m

 

West Brom:

Expenditure: £19.35m

Income: £33.54m

Net: +£14.19m

 

Brentford:

Expenditure: £31.39m

Income: £36.83m

Net: +£5.64m

 

Fulham:

Expenditure: £33.30m

Income: £25.65m

Net: -£7.65m

 

Cardiff:

Expenditure: £16.21m

Income: £17.82m

Net: +£1.61m

 

Swansea:

Expenditure: £0.496m

Income: £35.71m

Net: +35.21m

(https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/championship/transfers/wettbewerb/GB2/plus/?saison_id=2019&s_w=&leihe=1&intern=0&intern=1)

So... pretty common then? I know the numbers wont be perfect, and it's not a complete picture as it doesn't take into account wages (ours have increased by what, 30% each year or something?) but to try and paint a picture that Lee had to do something totally unique is just wrong.

 

 

Thank god for Commercial revenues of Ashton Gate Limited!!!

I’m surprised SL (as a businessman) allows the recruitment folly to continue, adding massive wage increases and amortisation costs likes a millstone around the club’s neck for the next 2/3 years.

In 3 years of accounts:

Spent £78.8m in wages

Cost the club £29.1m in amortisation 

Spent £38.7m in running the club

Against revenues of £76.6m

Some of the costs above are Ashton Gate Limited.

19/20s accounts out soon....I’m dreading the numbers....and not just because of Covid, which will only be 3 months impacted!

Why do we have to sell players:

1) our cost base is unsustainable, wages are over 100% of income, let alone the other costs (88.5%)

2) we don’t achieve the aims, meaning ambitious players want to move on, are wanted by other clubs

Not everything is a negative in point 2) above, but we are no different to any other non-pp club in having to sell our best players.  Have we adequately replaced them? Not imho.

I’m very boring, but the recruitment team have benefitted massively from the saleable assets left behind for them.  LJ even says that in his interview in different words.  We don’t have a bad squad now, but the cost of this squad is significantly higher than the one of 17/18...and achieved worse results.

[Davefevs]

1 minute ago, Simon79 said:

Although it’s difficult to be sure because of the landscape on transfers Covid has given us, my initial thought would be no. In the summer we didn’t buy any for the future or rough diamonds like Szmodic, Adelukan, Eisa etc who would be on relatively low wages. We went for players like Martin, Mawson, Brunt, Mariappa, all I would assume would be on decent money for this level. When you couple in those signings with the younger players being a year on or the return of loan players, I actually think this is a stronger squad. Which is why I’ve never understood some people’s opinion on not expecting more come then end of the season. We didn’t lose anyone over the summer that we didn’t want to lose, Smith & Mäenpää were deemed surplus to requirements. So for his first managerial gig, I think it’s been a decent opportunity for Holden. The one variable is obviously the injuries & that certainly needs looking at. COYR 

Agree.  I’ve never set lower expectations for Dean....even though it’s a tough ask.  Like Lee, if you want the job, accept the expectations / objectives too.  There are plenty out there that would love to have the opportunity.

[Rob k]

32 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Agree.  I’ve never set lower expectations for Dean....even though it’s a tough ask.  Like Lee, if you want the job, accept the expectations / objectives too.  There are plenty out there that would love to have the opportunity.

The expectation is of a top 6 finish with a top 12 budget, is that realistic? There will be plenty out there who would like the opportunity but they will also struggle to meet the expectations set as we don’t have the players. We also set an expectation of a top 6 finish with one of the least experienced managers in the division so that hardly screamed ambition to me and that’s nothing against Dean as id like him to suceed, We’re now an established championship club but god knows how you kick on from here as all i see is the club hoping for a bit of luck. 
I’m not saying i have the answers, but to me it seems like it’s getting harder and harder to get out of this division and who is the next big asset we’re going to sell to balance the books? 
 

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, Rob k said:

The expectation is of a top 6 finish with a top 12 budget, is that realistic? There will be plenty out there who would like the opportunity but they will also struggle to meet the expectations set as we don’t have the players. We also set an expectation of a top 6 finish with one of the least experienced managers in the division so that hardly screamed ambition to me and that’s nothing against Dean as id like him to suceed, We’re now an established championship club but god knows how you kick on from here as all i see is the club hoping for a bit of luck. 
I’m not saying i have the answers, but to me it seems like it’s getting harder and harder to get out of this division and who is the next big asset we’re going to sell to balance the books? 
 

All fair challenges Rob.  I think the expectations, rightly or wrongly, are that despite the disconnect between league position and budget, several of those top 12 clubs are crap, poorly run etc...therefore a club like us should be able to compete.

re kicking on.  Yep, that’s the challenge.  LJ stagnated ultimately....and we aren’t in such a healthy position (not league position) in reality to the one he took over in.

Any business that relies on increasing revenue to meet spiralling costs runs a big risk when revenues can’t be supported.  That’s almost where we are now, partly brought on by Covid and it’s impact on attendances and other stuff, but also the “crash” (subjective) of the transfer market / fees.

For me, I’d go back to the basics of recruiting young talent, cheaply, bully the less financially stable clubs in doing so, but do it around a playing system that allows players to grow with us.  I know that sounds simple, but there will be much more detail underpinning it.

[IAmNick]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

Thank god for Commercial revenues of Ashton Gate Limited!!!

I’m surprised SL (as a businessman) allows the recruitment folly to continue, adding massive wage increases and amortisation costs likes a millstone around the club’s neck for the next 2/3 years.

In 3 years of accounts:

Spent £78.8m in wages

Cost the club £29.1m in amortisation 

Spent £38.7m in running the club

Against revenues of £76.6m

Some of the costs above are Ashton Gate Limited.

19/20s accounts out soon....I’m dreading the numbers....and not just because of Covid, which will only be 3 months impacted!

Why do we have to sell players:

1) our cost base is unsustainable, wages are over 100% of income, let alone the other costs (88.5%)

2) we don’t achieve the aims, meaning ambitious players want to move on, are wanted by other clubs

Not everything is a negative in point 2) above, but we are no different to any other non-pp club in having to sell our best players.  Have we adequately replaced them? Not imho.

I’m very boring, but the recruitment team have benefitted massively from the saleable assets left behind for them.  LJ even says that in his interview in different words.  We don’t have a bad squad now, but the cost of this squad is significantly higher than the one of 17/18...and achieved worse results.

Wow, there are some staggering amounts of money there - not unique to us of course though. But in 4 years our income increased by £16m, and our costs by £30m? I guess the worrying thing for me there is that costs of players (wages, amortisation) are more guaranteed than income from selling them is!

I guess the real question is that given the squad cost significantly more, is it worth significantly more.

[Davefevs]

Bang on

[Mr Popodopolous]

14 hours ago, Cowshed said:

The team over seasons became less possession based, sat deeper etc. If we look at how the team played 2017/18 and at the end of Mr Johnsons tutoring its was clearly playing in a very differing style. Mr Johnson made no commitment over four years to playing principles. Success? No.

The team bored you. Success? Not yours.

And I have made no mention of the team failing in meeting a basic requirement of finishing in sixth place for a play off place. Success for Mr Lansdown? No.

Avoiding relegation and finishing an average (?) eleventh/twelfth and boring fans i would look upon as mediocre. Out you go Lee and he did. 

Brentford's achievements put into perspective the way BCFC operate and Mr Johnsons own words. A club doing more with less.  A club making commitment's to values and playing principles. 

Yes I can talk principles ... But it was Mr Johnson who was quoted and I posed yourself a question as your observation of fans knowledge piqued my interest . What are Mr Johnsons playing principles? 

Improving players is a requirement of all coaches. Profit? Those who know more about finances can/will correct me - Bristol City make losses and have to sell players to not breech FFP .. improving position well I hope he did in four years given the resources he was given.

Spot on- agree with your post entirely too, but I will say our possession and proactivity, you're quite right, declined gradually over these 3 seasons- think there were periods where we had or aimed for shot dominance in 2018/19 and there were games where we still had strong possession, notably in the 15 game run, but yeah declined absolutely.

[Mr Popodopolous]

16 hours ago, Lrrr said:

I’d argue against that tbh,

Kalas wasn’t better than Webster, but no doubt about handsomely for fee

Weimann isn’t as good as the Reid we saw in 17/18

kelly - Dasilva was his competition at u21 for England so would say about level

brownhill - Henriksen? Stop gap at best and no where near as good, still haven’t replaced Brownhill.

kodjia - Abraham was already on loan that season, engvall was a late window punt or you say his funds were used next season for Famara who hasn’t come close to matching his season.

Pack - Nagy has only recently shown what he’s capable of, plus was league one when he joined so shows how much he developed.

LJ never used him correctly IMO. Besides part of the reason for Wells and Henriksen- let's forget Benkovic for a minute- Henriksen less prolific than Brownhill but then  you're adding in a 1 in 3 Championship player, should be getting more.

I'd suggest his record at Hull had comparables to Brownhill tbh- in terms of total end product. 2019/20 is hard to compare as he was frozen out for 6 months.

2017/18- Hull. 25 starts and 6 subs- 2 goals and 5 assists.

2018/19- Hull, 39 starts, 2 goals and 2 assists.

I wonder if we used Weimann entirely right either- by which I mean in a way that we would have got the optimum out of him- he was so prolific early season, 5 goals and 1 assist in 6 games IIRC?? In 2018/19, granted.

Brownhill's was better overall and undoubtedly we would miss him- but LJ absolutely should IMO have made better use of Benkovic, Henriksen and Wells. 100%.

Captain Hindsight here but there are and were ways- there are more, this is 3 quick ones!

                  Bentley

Hunt Kalas Benkovic DaSilva

      Smith Nagy Henriksen

      Weimann Wells Eliasson

With the likes of Maenpaa, Pereira, Baker,  Williams, Rowe, Massengo, Palmer, O'Dowda Paterson, Diedhiou in reserve...more as well, just off the top of my head! Plus Afobe in the latter stages.

Weimann would NOT be a winger but a wide midfielder- could also switch central and then wide forward- maybe Paterson on the left would be of use in this scenario too.

Or

                Bentley

        Kalas Baker Benkovic

Hunt Nagy Smith DaSilva

  Weimann              Paterson

                   Wells

Weimann and Paterson would sort of vacillate between wide forward and wide midfielder.

Or

               Bentley

       Kalas Baker Benkovic

Hunt Nagy Smith Henriksen DaSilva

              Weimann Wells

I suppose 2 vs 1 on the left is a risk- whereas Weimann can help Hunt on the right.

That's just 3- I think LJ had tools to produce a better style of play from say a transitional spell but from say March onwards- and to keep the playoff push much stronger than it was.

I still wonder if he might be in charge today if not for the collapse- especially post restart in June.

[Cowshed]

8 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Spot on- agree with your post entirely too, but I will say our possession and proactivity, you're quite right, declined gradually over these 3 seasons- think there were periods where we had or aimed for shot dominance in 2018/19 and there were games where we still had strong possession, notably in the 15 game run, but yeah declined absolutely.

Which means possession was not a key principle.

I have asked a question in threads repeatedly what was Lee Johnson's/ Bristol City's identity? I can faithfully say nobody has manged to articulate what this playing identity was over years.

Which is why I asked a poster who insists Mr Johnson was successful what Lee Johnson principles of play were? 

Spin the question around to the successful (promoted teams) and its clear what they are and what they are based upon.