Whats the real Reason Holden was appointed?

[Atticus]

Now, I genuinely do not know why. I cannot fathom the reason.

Did he promise them attacking football like he said to us? Cus that hasn't been happening has it?

Did he suggest a top 6? Cus that wont be happening will it. And that was what LJ was sacked for. 

I know we have an insane amount of injuries. But being battered by basically every team we face home or away is still questionable. Even when we have lucked a win.

Now i know there has been talk of SL still wanting a voice in the dressing room and a voice in team etc but i do not see that. It makes no sense. Why? Why, when under SC we had so much success, where apparantly SL accepted no voice?

Why would he suddenly revert back to wanting more influence? When we had success when he wasnt allowed it? 

Plus JL. Im sorry, but if it was me and my dad, id happily tell my dad to stfu and listen to people that know about football. Is JL really that much of a wet blanket? Nah none of that makes sense to me.

So what is it? He really wants to save money? He has some kind of delusions of bringing up an inexperienced manager? Is it all about money? Making profit at any cost? What the hell is with the bizarre appointments we make? There has to be a reason for SL to do what he does. 

[Tre Bong]

He's cheap?

[One Team]

I don’t think there really is a ‘cheap’ option; he will still be on several hundred k a year. Cheaper than LJ perhaps, but he’s not doing it for free.

For me the one and only reason is that he is a “yes” man to Ashton and SL. 

[sticks 1969]

19 minutes ago, Tre Bong said:

He's cheap?

Nail on the head and he told them exactly what they wanted to hear 

[Oh Louie louie]

He was certainly the cheapest option, out of all the people we were in the frame.

 

[Major Isewater]

There are plenty of apparently good reasons why DH was promoted.

1) Experienced coach 

2) Known to the club so not a risk of a bad fit like Coppell or Pulis ,for example ,who set the club back many years. 

3) He knows the club and the players and could identify quickly where our weaknesses are. 
4) He is well liked by everyone and is a top bloke.

5) Did a thorough and , perhaps surprising, presentation of his staff plans for the club at his interview.

All the above, in my opinion, are not to be ignored when comparing him to other candidates who presented themselves to the club.

What does he lack ?

Concrete achievements as a manager or player.

He is not a ‘ big name’, that attracts players to come and play for him or shows to the supporters the club’s ambition.

All in all , I would say he is a typically ‘safe’ SL choice, which in itself could be the problem.

 

[Eddie Hitler]

1 hour ago, Major Isewater said:

There are plenty of apparently good reasons why DH was promoted.

1) Experienced coach 

2) Known to the club so not a risk of a bad fit like Coppell or Pulis ,for example ,who set the club back many years. 

3) He knows the club and the players and could identify quickly where our weaknesses are. 
4) He is well liked by everyone and is a top bloke.

5) Did a thorough and , perhaps surprising, presentation of his staff plans for the club at his interview.

All the above, in my opinion, are not to be ignored when comparing him to other candidates who presented themselves to the club.

What does he lack ?

Concrete achievements as a manager or player.

He is not a ‘ big name’, that attracts players to come and play for him or shows to the supporters the club’s ambition.

All in all , I would say he is a typically ‘safe’ SL choice, which in itself could be the problem.

 

Yes, he has many good qualities but his appointment boiled down to his being the easy option.

Unlike someone like Cotts who was the difficult option, got people's backs up within the club hierarchy, and won us promotion at a canter.

[old_eastender]

Yes man for Ashton

[Phileas Fogg]

Unlikely to shake the apple cart too much. Would allow Ashton to have influence over certain areas.

Could you imagine a Chris Houghton or Paul Cook allowing Ashton as much influence as he has?

[Robbored]

3 hours ago, Atticus said:

Now, I genuinely do not know why. I cannot fathom the reason. 

SLs mantra of  ‘stability’.

Promoting from within is exactly what Liverpool did in the days of Paisley, Fagan, Evans etc etc. The ‘boot room’ approach with the benefit of the new manager knowing the club, the players and the tea lady consequently far less upheaval.

City have adopted a similar approach by promoting DH and hopefully when he has a full squad to select from things will improve.

[Robbored]

2 hours ago, Tre Bong said:

He's cheap?

We don’t know that’s true. My guess is that’s he’s on the same wedge as LJ was with a generous bonus for promotion

[Oh Louie louie]

I agree robbo, only diffrence, was everybody who came through the boot room at anfield tasted sucess.

 

[Red DNA]

I don’t think it’s why Holden was appointed it’s more about why the board didn’t want to appoint anyone else - if that makes sense. 
 

Houghton was a clear favourite with all all the credentials but he wanted £4M salary plus he wanted to bring in his entire back room staff. Getting rid of the existing backroom staff would have cost another lump (yes I know SL has loads ) on top of the money they had to pay to LJ. 

All this happened in the middle of a very uncertain pandemic and meltdown of financial markets and SL being the astute money man he is just didn’t see the point of simply throwing away more money at this point in time.
 

Had LJ departed in normal times I feel the board really would have rolled the dice for Houghton and gone all out for promotion. 

By appointing Holden - (for all his good points detailed on other posts), on a short contract it’s bought them time to see how the finance side of things settle down (they still haven’t yet). 
If Holden does achieve a top 6 place then they’ll continue with him for another season, if not it’ll be time to pick a cheap but experienced candidate off the manager merry go round of who’s available at that time. 

[Spoons]

3 minutes ago, Robbored said:

We don’t know that’s true. My guess is that’s he’s on the same wedge as LJ was with a generous bonus for promotion

 No chance. My guess is all 3 coaches are on combined what LJ was on. 

[CyderInACan]

6 minutes ago, Oh Louie louie said:

I agree robbo, only diffrence, was everybody who came through the boot room at anfield tasted sucess.

 

Yup - winning was literally in the blood. Whilst I think stability is a decent shout, especially at a time such as this, it's only 1 part of the jigsaw. 

 

[Oh Louie louie]

The bootroom way of thinking can only work, if you have served under people who know what it takes to win something in management.

 

[Chappers]

At a guess, continuity, quality and ideal choice in times of Global uncertainty.it’s not normal times, we have a long injury list, and we are finally looking at our own youth players as the future. This type of transition season was inevitable at some time, no great problem really as I can’t see normality returning next season, and who wants a PL season with limited fans and no away trips?

[oldstandrobin]

15 minutes ago, Robbored said:

We don’t know that’s true. My guess is that’s he’s on the same wedge as LJ was with a generous bonus for promotion

Well thats some money SL will save then !!!

[Oh Louie louie]

Exactly cyder, shankly, paisley, fagin, kenny.

That philosophy, hasnt worked here in the past.

On the plus, we had, joe, but then we had jimmy, and osman after smith.

And the ones since, never worked.

[Major Isewater]

53 minutes ago, Eddie Hitler said:

his appointment boiled down to his being the easy and relatively safe option considering the uncertainty surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic. 

 

[GrahamC]

Two reasons, there is a clear need within our current structure to avoid anyone who is confrontational (like Cotterill) & who won’t get along with Ashton.

Secondly the belief that he was the continuity candidate, would not need time to get up to speed in a shortened close season.

The theory about Hughton’s desire to bring in his own staff being a factor is clearly bollocks though, as Holden did exactly that.

The Liverpool boot room comparison, which is about 35 years ago now, is just laughable.

[Bernard Lerring]

25 minutes ago, Robbored said:

We don’t know that’s true. My guess is that’s he’s on the same wedge as LJ was with a generous bonus for promotion

I think the managers salary is only a small fraction of the costs they were using for decision making. I'd say the prospective candidates were told what the approximate transfer budget would be and, being desperate to get a foot on the management ladder, holden would've been a candidate who accepted it regardless 

To answer the OP, I think holden was appointed as a safe pair of hands in a very tumultuous year... stay in the league and see how the financial side of this year pans out.

If he does well, it's a bonus.

My concern is if it goes badly and, although I do try not to be too kneejerk about city, the stats of the last few games have left me longing for us to limp over the 50 point mark ASAP 

[Oh Louie louie]

Now you mention that gra, id bet simpson and downing aint far off managers wages with their cvs?

Wouldnt be cheap.

[Prinny]

Happy to work within the structure, had a clear and cost appropriate plan.

[Robbored]

49 minutes ago, Oh Louie louie said:

I agree robbo, only diffrence, was everybody who came through the boot room at anfield tasted sucess.

 

It’s early days for DH but he might well do the same............

[Phileas Fogg]

1 minute ago, Robbored said:

It’s early days for DH but he might well do the same............

Your point was that DH was part of a 'boot room' type internal promotion. They key difference with the Anfield 'boot room' of the 80s was that there was a culture of success domestically and in Europe. We are a middling Championship club. 

[Antman]

2 hours ago, Major Isewater said:

There are plenty of apparently good reasons why DH was promoted.

1) Experienced coach 

Not so experienced that SL thought to bring in 2 england coaches for support (which has been his approach with the rugby.) and his only real experience has been at BCFC under LJ and his hot air and gimmicks regime. He was courted by some lower league sides, but doesn't have much experience really. The problem with the England coaches is that as is often the case, they are under acheivers at club level, but at England Youth they do great things. so here's hoping they bring some useful coaching to our younger players pathway to the first team - which seems to be a driver for SL.

2) Known to the club so not a risk of a bad fit like Coppell or Pulis ,for example ,who set the club back many years. 

SL has history here, so yes. Tinnion, Millen - he's tried this before (to not much succcess)

3) He knows the club and the players and could identify quickly where our weaknesses are. 

Not sure - he quickly ditched the flair players, but seems unable to spot where we need more creativity. will give him time with the injury list, but the jury is out for me.

we are not Liverpool, or Barca who had a succes mentality and that spawned the 'boot room' succession.

4) He is well liked by everyone and is a top bloke.

is he? does he have the breadth of vision and knowledge to be able to adapt? being catty, he comes across as a bit mono tone, one speed. a coach who is unable to change and adapt his plans or see a bigger picture. - i hope to be proven wrong.

5) Did a thorough and , perhaps surprising, presentation of his staff plans for the club at his interview.

do we know this to be true? if so that will have impressed the SL MA axis of power (point)

All the above, in my opinion, are not to be ignored when comparing him to other candidates who presented themselves to the club.

What does he lack ?

Concrete achievements as a manager or player.

He is not a ‘ big name’, that attracts players to come and play for him or shows to the supporters the club’s ambition.

All in all , I would say he is a typically ‘safe’ SL choice, which in itself could be the problem.

agree with that - SL has a track record of 'going for it' followed by relative failure and then a 'panic mode' where he pulls his horns in. its very cyclical.

i also think that he interferes to a massive extent in the playing side, albeit through Ashton. and to many managers that's a no.

He may be rich, but is quite conservative in how he applies his wealth to the club. he seems intent on building a legacy of infrastructure and through the Bristol Sport brand. he clearly likes total control (trying to soak up all the remaining supporters tiny shares under some spurious excuse was an example of this when he already owns 98%?)

The game as a whole seems on a knife edge in terms of it's sustainability going forward, the relationship between the EFL and the Prem has spoiled the game IMO and we are looking at a very difficult task in getting promotion and making it stick ( and not doing a Hull/Blackpool/ etc etc)

so basically **** knows. Holden just seems a safe bet and that feels slightly unambitious.

 

 

 

 

[Robbored]

38 minutes ago, Oh Louie louie said:

Exactly cyder, shankly, paisley, fagin, kenny.

That philosophy, hasnt worked here in the past.

On the plus, we had, joe, but then we had jimmy, and osman after smith.

And the ones since, never worked.

We did but back then the ckub was run by well meaning amateurs. Things are far more professional these days.

[Robbored]

2 minutes ago, Phileas Fogg said:

Your point was that DH was part of a 'boot room' type internal promotion. They key difference with the Anfield 'boot room' of the 80s was that there was a culture of success domestically and in Europe. We are a middling Championship club. 

The ‘boot room’ approach is a model that worked fantastically well at Liverpool back then. A model or approach is all it is but with DH getting promoted from within suggests a similar approach from City.

It makes no difference which level any club is at. Promotion from within can have distinct advantages, one of which the stability that SL desires.

[And Its Smith]

The ‘cheap’ argument is nonsense. Even if he is on £200k less than Johnson, that is only about 10 weeks of Kalas’s salary.  If Lansdown wanted to save money he’d just buy one fewer player. That would cover the £200k.