Where do we go from here?

[Banjo Red]

Let's hope Dean's new year wish is I will play entertaining football and sort this shambles out.

[Swede]

13 hours ago, GrahamC said:

True, but if you take out the caretaker bit (8 points from 5 games) then 33 from 22 doesn’t look quite so good.

Totally get the injuries & think he will get the season whatever happens, but the summer recruitment looks pretty bad this far in, as we replaced Pereira & Benkovic on loan with 2 Fulham players who are injured, Korey with someone who hasn’t even kicked a ball, Brunt for who? Henriksen? So arguably only Martin (on very decent wages) has made any sort of impact.

The Korey Smith one is interesting. We spent a lot of time and effort getting him back fit. When he did play he looked a shadow of the player he once was hence the shorter contract offer. We all thought time was catching up with him yet Swansea's manager thought differently and he's played most games for them.

There is something seriously wrong about the decision/recruitment of players which is above Holden's pay  grade. 

[The Dolman Pragmatist]

Where do we go from here?  In the short term, if there is no reasonable prospect of players returning from injury, then we recall loan players who we know ARE fit.  I would bring back all of Palmer, Adelakun, Pring and Johnny Smith.  At least we would then have a bench that might be able to make a difference if called upon.  At present we have almost no realistic options.

[GrahamC]

9 minutes ago, Swede said:

The Korey Smith one is interesting. We spent a lot of time and effort getting him back fit. When he did play he looked a shadow of the player he once was hence the shorter contract offer. We all thought time was catching up with him yet Swansea's manager thought differently and he's played most games for them.

There is something seriously wrong about the decision/recruitment of players which is above Holden's pay  grade. 

Spot on.

For all the noise being generated at the moment (which let’s face it, is all down to how poor results have been of late) there really wasn’t too much complaint when we chose to let him go & replaced him with Williams (who despite the claims on here had prior to joining a very decent availability record).

Korey started just 22 of his last 92 games with us, I can well imagine what some would be posting if we had given him another 2 years & he then replicated that.

However we brought in Mawson, which was a huge gamble with his injury history, Sessegnon, who has almost no first team experience, Brunt, who at 36 now & no starts last season was also a gamble, plus Williams (one I am willing to think was bad luck) & Martin, who at least is bloody fit to play.

That is pretty crap overall, adding in many cases to the already huge injury list.

[Johnr1986]

So frustrating how our club is run, and the total lack of ambition from and the inept decision making from the clubs hierarchy, It confusing to see what the lansdowns and Ashton are seeing to think that this should continue for the better of the club. 

[exAtyeoMax]

1 hour ago, Top Robin said:

.....is it down to the lake I fear

Aye aye aye aye aye aye

[Davefevs]

37 minutes ago, GrahamC said:

Spot on.

For all the noise being generated at the moment (which let’s face it, is all down to how poor results have been of late) there really wasn’t too much complaint when we chose to let him go & replaced him with Williams (who despite the claims on here had prior to joining a very decent availability record).

Korey started just 22 of his last 92 games with us, I can well imagine what some would be posting if we had given him another 2 years & he then replicated that.

However we brought in Mawson, which was a huge gamble with his injury history, Sessegnon, who has almost no first team experience, Brunt, who at 36 now & no starts last season was also a gamble, plus Williams (one I am willing to think was bad luck) & Martin, who at least is bloody fit to play.

That is pretty crap overall, adding in many cases to the already huge injury list.

Mawson has cost us in more ways than one....unless he can come back and play 15-18 games.  He raised expectations because he was stand-out at this level, but with an injury history...on the flip-side he's costing us a lot of budget.

It needs to be a serious lesson learned.  The risk has not outweighed the benefit.

I never understood the Brunt signing....not from a pure playing side anyway.  Not enough for it to undoubtedly made Morrell think about his future and subsequently move on.

Unless there really is something that comes out about Williams then I agree, this is just bad luck....but it is exactly the type of recruitment we should be aiming for.

If the club genuinely critically analyse our recruitment of the time Mark Ashton had headed it up I would say there have been two successes of the strategy:

- Josh Brownhill

- Adam Webster

Those are the only players bought and sold during the period.

There are other players who were already here that of course have been successful from a financial point of view, but we haven’t identified, recruited and then sold many players to justify the strategy.  Of the current squad I’d say Dan Bentley is the only player you could sell at a decent profit.

That is quite damming.

I’d suggest Mark Ashton has benefitted massively from the work of the three previous managers, they themselves benefitting from their previous incumbent (and their recruitment).  I think that run has ended....and he is gonna have a tough job making himself look good going forward.

I accept this is a tired argument / debate, but it always comes back to him.  That’s not to say others are without blame either, but I think until he either leaves the club or SL places recruitment under different control we will continue having these debates.

[old_eastender]

4 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Mawson has cost us in more ways than one....unless he can come back and play 15-18 games.  He raised expectations because he was stand-out at this level, but with an injury history...on the flip-side he's costing us a lot of budget.

It needs to be a serious lesson learned.  The risk has not outweighed the benefit.

I never understood the Brunt signing....not from a pure playing side anyway.  Not enough for it to undoubtedly made Morrell think about his future and subsequently move on.

Unless there really is something that comes out about Williams then I agree, this is just bad luck....but it is exactly the type of recruitment we should be aiming for.

If the club genuinely critically analyse our recruitment of the time Mark Ashton had headed it up I would say there have been two successes of the strategy:

- Josh Brownhill

- Adam Webster

Those are the only players bought and sold during the period.

There are other players who were already here that of course have been successful from a financial point of view, but we haven’t identified, recruited and then sold many players to justify the strategy.  Of the current squad I’d say Dan Bentley is the only player you could sell at a decent profit.

That is quite damming.

I’d suggest Mark Ashton has benefitted massively from the work of the three previous managers, they themselves benefitting from their previous incumbent (and their recruitment).  I think that run has ended....and he is gonna have a tough job making himself look good going forward.

I accept this is a tired argument / debate, but it always comes back to him.  That’s not to say others are without blame either, but I think until he either leaves the club or SL places recruitment under different control we will continue having these debates.

Agree. The only way we are going to move forward is to a) Remove Ashton, b) Remove Holden, c) Give a proper manager (not head coach) the job - Paul Cook for me. Just getting rid of Holden may help in the short term, but in the long term it's Ashton's position that will hold us back I feel.

[RedRock]

59 minutes ago, GrahamC said:

Spot on.

For all the noise being generated at the moment (which let’s face it, is all down to how poor results have been of late) there really wasn’t too much complaint when we chose to let him go & replaced him with Williams (who despite the claims on here had prior to joining a very decent availability record).

Korey started just 22 of his last 92 games with us, I can well imagine what some would be posting if we had given him another 2 years & he then replicated that.

However we brought in Mawson, which was a huge gamble with his injury history, Sessegnon, who has almost no first team experience, Brunt, who at 36 now & no starts last season was also a gamble, plus Williams (one I am willing to think was bad luck) & Martin, who at least is bloody fit to play.

That is pretty crap overall, adding in many cases to the already huge injury list.

What alarms me about Korey is that by the looks of things he has developed his physicality and athleticism since he left us. More upper body strength, power and stamina. Just like Joe and Bobby, who worked on those attributes in the summer before they left us. 

Why are we so bad about recognising the value of power as an asset?

 

Unbelievable for a ‘professional’ outfit.

 

[GrahamC]

11 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Mawson has cost us in more ways than one....unless he can come back and play 15-18 games.  He raised expectations because he was stand-out at this level, but with an injury history...on the flip-side he's costing us a lot of budget.

It needs to be a serious lesson learned.  The risk has not outweighed the benefit.

I never understood the Brunt signing....not from a pure playing side anyway.  Not enough for it to undoubtedly made Morrell think about his future and subsequently move on.

Unless there really is something that comes out about Williams then I agree, this is just bad luck....but it is exactly the type of recruitment we should be aiming for.

If the club genuinely critically analyse our recruitment of the time Mark Ashton had headed it up I would say there have been two successes of the strategy:

- Josh Brownhill

- Adam Webster

Those are the only players bought and sold during the period.

There are other players who were already here that of course have been successful from a financial point of view, but we haven’t identified, recruited and then sold many players to justify the strategy.  Of the current squad I’d say Dan Bentley is the only player you could sell at a decent profit.

That is quite damming.

I’d suggest Mark Ashton has benefitted massively from the work of the three previous managers, they themselves benefitting from their previous incumbent (and their recruitment).  I think that run has ended....and he is gonna have a tough job making himself look good going forward.

I accept this is a tired argument / debate, but it always comes back to him.  That’s not to say others are without blame either, but I think until he either leaves the club or SL places recruitment under different control we will continue having these debates.

No surprise, but we agree & for all LJ’s faults, one of those 2 you named (& arguably both) was definitely largely down to him.

Prior to his latest injury you probably could have included Dasilva as someone we could reasonably expect to sell on at a profit, but this shin business has happened twice with him now & so a sensible club won’t dive in & buy him until he has proved himself with a long unbroken run of games.

Mawson has the pedigree, true & maybe the fact that we ended Webster’s reputation as a sick note made us think we could do so again? I know you disagree that Baker is injury prone but either way he is often a 36 games a season player rather than a 46 one, so with Kalas also not unaccustomed to injuries either, this was just too much of a gamble.

Also, I know I bang on about this but your recruitment strategy really has to be a blend, look at Tommy Rowe, already 30 when we signed him, a league one player who wasn’t even an automatic choice at Doncaster, on probably one of our lowest squad wages, with no resale value at all, on paper that is an odd one, but he will play his 50th league game for us at Brentford, he’s been a terrific signing.

In a Covid transfer market with no income we are also probably going to have to rely on the Academy even more in the future, so Vyner, Semenyo & the likes will have huge roles to play.

[Isawjonshaw]

19 hours ago, headhunter said:

 "we want to get on the front foot, we want to play attacking exciting football, creating chances in the oppositions half of the pitch and when we haven't got the ball we want to win it back as quickly as we can and get our supporters out their seats" so said Dean Holden 10 August 2020.

Deano, as the lads like to call him, it ain't happening mate. Yes, you've been hit by injuries but you seem to be making basic errors in tactics and formation and the mindset / attitude of those wearing the shirt seems to be awry.

This is a recording of this morning's Forever Bristol City podcast in which DaveFevs, Ian, Mark & myself try to get to the bottom of what's going wrong: 

https://foreverbristolcity.podbean.com/e/where-do-we-go-from-here-1609350758/ 

We point a finger firmly in Mark Ashton's direction and as DaveFevs has asked on Twitter it is time for him to publicly support his appointment and tell us all what the strategy is going to be for the remainder of the season.

As I said in an earlier thread - the coaches have a lot to answer for. What are Downing & Simpson doing by way of support. What is Cisse doing for his wage and you could ask the same of Pat Mountain. You could lose 3 of that bunch and for the same money have McCarthy as a Technical Advisor to support Holden whose ego is not so great that he would take something like that as an affront to his ability. Won't happen as Ashton wouldn't allow it.

We have regressed since Dec 30th 2017 and too many on here are expressing the loss of any enjoyment in watching us play which will filer through in low attendances when we are allowed back in. If Holden had blooded some youngsters last night and we had lost 4-2 but put in a performance he'd still be getting ripped apart on here but I think the level of toxicity on here wouldn't be quite as bad as it is getting.

 

 

Absolutely spot on.  

[headhunter]

43 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

If the club genuinely critically analyse our recruitment of the time Mark Ashton had headed it up I would say there have been two successes of the strategy:

- Josh Brownhill

- Adam Webster

Those are the only players bought and sold during the period.

There are other players who were already here that of course have been successful from a financial point of view, but we haven’t identified, recruited and then sold many players to justify the strategy.  Of the current squad I’d say Dan Bentley is the only player you could sell at a decent profit.

That is quite damming.

I’d suggest Mark Ashton has benefited massively from the work of the three previous managers, they themselves benefiting from their previous incumbent (and their recruitment).  I think that run has ended....and he is gonna have a tough job making himself look good going forward.

I accept this is a tired argument / debate, but it always comes back to him.  That’s not to say others are without blame either, but I think until he either leaves the club or SL places recruitment under different control we will continue having these debates.

100% agree.

and so too have the Wasserman Agency [called something else before being acquired by them] who are what we in the recruitment world would say are on the PSL [Preferred Supplier List] - for our future transfer prospects check this list from £3M and below - that is the pond we are likely to be fishing in!

https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/wasserman/beraterfirma/berater/440

[Davefevs]

34 minutes ago, GrahamC said:

No surprise, but we agree & for all LJ’s faults, one of those 2 you named (& arguably both) was definitely largely down to him.

Prior to his latest injury you probably could have included Dasilva as someone we could reasonably expect to sell on at a profit, but this shin business has happened twice with him now & so a sensible club won’t dive in & buy him until he has proved himself with a long unbroken run of games.

Mawson has the pedigree, true & maybe the fact that we ended Webster’s reputation as a sick note made us think we could do so again? I know you disagree that Baker is injury prone but either way he is often a 36 games a season player rather than a 46 one, so with Kalas also not unaccustomed to injuries either, this was just too much of a gamble.

Also, I know I bang on about this but your recruitment strategy really has to be a blend, look at Tommy Rowe, already 30 when we signed him, a league one player who wasn’t even an automatic choice at Doncaster, on probably one of our lowest squad wages, with no resale value at all, on paper that is an odd one, but he will play his 50th league game for us at Brentford, he’s been a terrific signing.

In a Covid transfer market with no income we are also probably going to have to rely on the Academy even more in the future, so Vyner, Semenyo & the likes will have huge roles to play.

Yep, totally agree.

In another thread, think it was the one @Prinnymade his “would you give a player a 3 year deal” comment, I made the comment that the younger player recruits have to be bought on the basis of being here and developing for the long term, and not a numbers game / series of punts.  Coupled with that I said we should still in experience, but perhaps this should be more of the free transfer variety (or low fee at worst).  Rowe would fit into that.  Our recent policy is leaving ourselves with players like Hunt, Weimann etc approaching end of their deals where we’ve sunk £1.5-£2.0m in a 3 year deal with no future value.  To make these pay-off you either sell them on after 2 years, or buy them with an extension in mind.  Maybe we will extend both of these...but until we see MA’s strategy we are in the dark.  We’ve seen how he’s dealt with Smith, Maenpaa, Walsh, Eliasson and Diedhiou, that he has let things drift into a position where he ain’t holding the aces.

As for Rowe, there was the usual criticism, e.g. “why are getting a 29 year old from Lg1” type stuff.  For me he’d always been a good technical player, and having made 100 appearances at this level previously I had little doubt he could come in and do a job.

In an ideal world he would’ve played LM/LW in a midfield 4, but narrow, in a similar way to Brownhill played narrow in 17/18.  However the injury to Dasilva and wingbacks meant he slotted in well, as he did at LB in a back 4.

Rowe is the gem type of free transfer.  He still had the enthusiasm to want to re-prove himself at this level.  Top pro too.

[Swede]

With Lee Johnson you could see the enthusiasm and that he was a real student of coaching and always willing to learn. That's why I backed him to the hilt. He lost his way by overcomplicating teams and changing to suit the opposition too much.

Even early last season with Palmer and Afobe there was a new dynamic to our play and the potential was there for this team to go places rather than play it wide and lump it into Dhiedhou.

He saw the potential of developing Josh Brownhill, he had the vision and turned Bobby Reid into a £10M 20 goal striker when some on here would've accepted £250K and driven him to his new club. He saw the potential of Adam Webster.

I do not see Dean Holden having anyway near that kind of vision.

I believe (Dean Holden aside) that the hierarchy of the club are dipping into the player pool and asset stripping talent too eagerly without replacing sufficiently. Brownhill is a case in question. I firmly believe we would've made the playoffs with him still in the side and Johnson would still be in a job and perhaps Lee Johnson saw that the writing was on the wall as no sooner he finds and developes a gem the club sell the asset.

So now we are back to square one lumping balls into a big man but now without wingers so, at this level, any team with good organisation at the back can easily deal with this type of static (league 1) threat, hence we struggle against the so called lower ranked teams.

The way forward at this level is the angled passes, the intelligent runs in behind. Only then will we see a tangeable improvement and it won't be under the current head coach.

[mozo]

8 hours ago, GrahamC said:

Spot on.

For all the noise being generated at the moment (which let’s face it, is all down to how poor results have been of late) there really wasn’t too much complaint when we chose to let him go & replaced him with Williams (who despite the claims on here had prior to joining a very decent availability record).

Korey started just 22 of his last 92 games with us, I can well imagine what some would be posting if we had given him another 2 years & he then replicated that.

However we brought in Mawson, which was a huge gamble with his injury history, Sessegnon, who has almost no first team experience, Brunt, who at 36 now & no starts last season was also a gamble, plus Williams (one I am willing to think was bad luck) & Martin, who at least is bloody fit to play.

That is pretty crap overall, adding in many cases to the already huge injury list.

 

7 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Mawson has cost us in more ways than one....unless he can come back and play 15-18 games.  He raised expectations because he was stand-out at this level, but with an injury history...on the flip-side he's costing us a lot of budget.

It needs to be a serious lesson learned.  The risk has not outweighed the benefit.

I never understood the Brunt signing....not from a pure playing side anyway.  Not enough for it to undoubtedly made Morrell think about his future and subsequently move on.

Unless there really is something that comes out about Williams then I agree, this is just bad luck....but it is exactly the type of recruitment we should be aiming for.

If the club genuinely critically analyse our recruitment of the time Mark Ashton had headed it up I would say there have been two successes of the strategy:

- Josh Brownhill

- Adam Webster

Those are the only players bought and sold during the period.

There are other players who were already here that of course have been successful from a financial point of view, but we haven’t identified, recruited and then sold many players to justify the strategy.  Of the current squad I’d say Dan Bentley is the only player you could sell at a decent profit.

That is quite damming.

I’d suggest Mark Ashton has benefitted massively from the work of the three previous managers, they themselves benefitting from their previous incumbent (and their recruitment).  I think that run has ended....and he is gonna have a tough job making himself look good going forward.

I accept this is a tired argument / debate, but it always comes back to him.  That’s not to say others are without blame either, but I think until he either leaves the club or SL places recruitment under different control we will continue having these debates.

Smart posts.

Happy new year to you two, I've really enjoyed your OTIB chat in 2020.

[Davefevs]

4 minutes ago, mozo said:

 

Smart posts.

Happy new year to you two, I've really enjoyed your OTIB chat in 2020.

Likewise....HNM to you.

HNY to you....bloody auto correct.

[Offside]

I don’t have an answer for where we can go from here. 
 

It’s difficult to determine properly with the pandemic situation, but to me it feels like we are in a period of decline. After the peak of the Man Utd win 3 years ago, we seem to have a worse squad and the standard of football has been poor for a long time. 
 

We seem to have fewer saleable assets (Reid, Bryan, Webster, Kelly, Brownhill etc gone) to provide funding, and we are also lacking those players who get stuck in and/or want to take games by the scruff of the neck. 
 

We’ve had turgid football for and people are losing their enthusiasm. Added to that is our long injury list. 
 

Like I said, I’m not sure what the remedy is but the club need to do something to energise fans to attend games again when we’re allowed to back to the ground. 

[Loosey Boy]

We need to revert back to 3-5-2.

This was the formation which the players seemed most comfortable with and we have to players available to play this set-up - overall, we were more solid and conceded fewer goals.

Time for DH to play to the players strengths....square pegs in square holes and all that!

 

[mozo]

27 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Likewise....HNM to you.

HNY to you....bloody auto correct.

And a Han Noah Massengo to one and all 

[Mr Popodopolous]

23 hours ago, SuperRed said:

They could certainly spot a player. So many of the permanent and loan signings we made in that period have gone on to have really good championship careers, with some achieving Premier League moves. Then when Ashton returned as CEO he and the club claimed it was his talent ID and recruitment system that had been fundamental to it! Funny how the return of Ashton coincided with a change in strategy and a whole host of crap signings. 

However, it was inevitable that some needed to be, would have needed to have been, sold to comply with FFP.

Something I suspect Cotterill might have had a problem with. The principle I mean.

Maybe managers like him will find themselves less employable at our level with the current regulations in mind? Time will tell.

I still think Brentford's model is excellent, personally.

[Mr Popodopolous]

1 hour ago, Loosey Boy said:

We need to revert back to 3-5-2.

This was the formation which the players seemed most comfortable with and we have to players available to play this set-up - overall, we were more solid and conceded fewer goals.

Time for DH to play to the players strengths....square pegs in square holes and all that!

 

Who plays LCB in the absence of Mawson- and for even longer- Baker? Don't think any of the rest are a great fit for that particular position.

Our early shape was 3-5-2 but there was also scope for Weimann and Paterson to pull wider in phases to perhaps guard against the 2 v 1- something that our current midfielders aren't so comfortable with as they're more standard CMs IMO.

[Nogbad the Bad]

1 hour ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

However, it was inevitable that some needed to be, would have needed to have been, sold to comply with FFP.

Something I suspect Cotterill might have had a problem with. 

 

Cotterill kept Burnley stable in the Championship for several seasons despite selling his best players every year and, don't forget, sold Baldock for a big fee early in our promotion season.

[Mr Popodopolous]

1 hour ago, Nogbad the Bad said:

Cotterill kept Burnley stable in the Championship for several seasons despite selling his best players every year and, don't forget, sold Baldock for a big fee early in our promotion season.

Well the regulations differed then but I do get the impression he might not have appreciated the current ones. Burnley run a pretty tight ship, he did great things for us but the trading model is integral- for better or worse.

May have worked but total buy-in would be required from all.

[Davefevs]

11 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Well the regulations differed then but I do get the impression he might not have appreciated the current ones. Burnley run a pretty tight ship, he did great things for us but the trading model is integral- for better or worse.

Cotts did it on a very similar budget to SOD having looked back through the accounts.  Had we been under Championship FFP we would’ve been well inside.  The money he recouped for Sam Baldock (and Liam Kelly to a lesser extent but funded part of Korey) more than covered the amortisation costs of the new signings, not forgetting Elliott, Wilbraham and Little were free transfers.  The wage bill was no bigger than SODs, but it was trimmer in terms of numbers.  SOD was hamstrung by the previous regime before anyone thinks I’m having a go at SOD.  Both SOD and Cotts trimmed the squad....and Keith Burt provided excellent player identification alongside each.

As @Harrycorrected my timings earlier, McInnes’s tenure included the first iteration of Mark Ashton’s recruitment!!  Look what he left behind.

Trading to the extent we’ve seen in recent years is only necessary if 1) you don’t recruit well in the first place, 2) achieve success so players want to stay.

[Gakoe]

Brilliant episode of the podcast guys, very interesting and informative. Your efforts are very much appreciated.

 

 

[Swede]

On 31/12/2020 at 12:19, GrahamC said:

Spot on.

For all the noise being generated at the moment (which let’s face it, is all down to how poor results have been of late) there really wasn’t too much complaint when we chose to let him go & replaced him with Williams (who despite the claims on here had prior to joining a very decent availability record).

Korey started just 22 of his last 92 games with us, I can well imagine what some would be posting if we had given him another 2 years & he then replicated that.

However we brought in Mawson, which was a huge gamble with his injury history, Sessegnon, who has almost no first team experience, Brunt, who at 36 now & no starts last season was also a gamble, plus Williams (one I am willing to think was bad luck) & Martin, who at least is bloody fit to play.

That is pretty crap overall, adding in many cases to the already huge injury list.

Absolutely right.

Its patently obvious that the we have undercooked the Head Coach appointment despite all of the spin.

You have to start questioning the immediate hierarchy in making these decisions. I mentioned before that there has to be a balance between the club, recruitment & Head Coach. Each need a strong voice otherwise it will be to the detriment of the others.

The club needs to make a profit.

Recruitment needs to be viable and affordable.

Head Coach wants to keep hold of the best players.

 

[Clutton Caveman]

On 30/12/2020 at 20:25, tin said:

Well, I’ll stick my head on the block and say if we stick with Holden and SL sticks to his failing policy when it comes to selecting managers, we will be right down there next season.

According to GMcG, We’ve got 62 points from 46 league games in 2020. While that would be safe for mid-table, it’s not a true reflection of the decline we’re witnessing. We can barely muster a shot on goal in most games, we generally can’t defend set pieces, Holden can’t get the basics right, his answer to losing is to throw four strikers on the pitch and forget about the supply, and most importantly there’s no fight in the players which suggests he struggles to motivate them. 

I think season ticket sales will force some action

[chinapig]

1 minute ago, Clutton Caveman said:

I think season ticket sales will force some action

You mean food vouchers as an incentive to buy a season ticket? 

[Bristol Oil Services]

On 31/12/2020 at 13:15, Davefevs said:

Mawson has cost us in more ways than one....unless he can come back and play 15-18 games.  He raised expectations because he was stand-out at this level, but with an injury history...on the flip-side he's costing us a lot of budget.

It needs to be a serious lesson learned.  The risk has not outweighed the benefit.

I never understood the Brunt signing....not from a pure playing side anyway.  Not enough for it to undoubtedly made Morrell think about his future and subsequently move on.

Unless there really is something that comes out about Williams then I agree, this is just bad luck....but it is exactly the type of recruitment we should be aiming for.

If the club genuinely critically analyse our recruitment of the time Mark Ashton had headed it up I would say there have been two successes of the strategy:

- Josh Brownhill

- Adam Webster

Those are the only players bought and sold during the period.

There are other players who were already here that of course have been successful from a financial point of view, but we haven’t identified, recruited and then sold many players to justify the strategy.  Of the current squad I’d say Dan Bentley is the only player you could sell at a decent profit.

That is quite damming.

I’d suggest Mark Ashton has benefitted massively from the work of the three previous managers, they themselves benefitting from their previous incumbent (and their recruitment).  I think that run has ended....and he is gonna have a tough job making himself look good going forward.

I accept this is a tired argument / debate, but it always comes back to him.  That’s not to say others are without blame either, but I think until he either leaves the club or SL places recruitment under different control we will continue having these debates.

 

On 31/12/2020 at 13:45, GrahamC said:

No surprise, but we agree & for all LJ’s faults, one of those 2 you named (& arguably both) was definitely largely down to him.

Prior to his latest injury you probably could have included Dasilva as someone we could reasonably expect to sell on at a profit, but this shin business has happened twice with him now & so a sensible club won’t dive in & buy him until he has proved himself with a long unbroken run of games.

Mawson has the pedigree, true & maybe the fact that we ended Webster’s reputation as a sick note made us think we could do so again? I know you disagree that Baker is injury prone but either way he is often a 36 games a season player rather than a 46 one, so with Kalas also not unaccustomed to injuries either, this was just too much of a gamble.

Also, I know I bang on about this but your recruitment strategy really has to be a blend, look at Tommy Rowe, already 30 when we signed him, a league one player who wasn’t even an automatic choice at Doncaster, on probably one of our lowest squad wages, with no resale value at all, on paper that is an odd one, but he will play his 50th league game for us at Brentford, he’s been a terrific signing.

In a Covid transfer market with no income we are also probably going to have to rely on the Academy even more in the future, so Vyner, Semenyo & the likes will have huge roles to play.

And people say this platform is "depressing" and "toxic," (it is, and can be, but there's nuggets of gold in these 'ere otib hills, if you can only see them) and no-one at the club takes any notice whatsoever. Perhaps with some judicious browsing some at the club might with a little added humility learn something useful. At least get some thoughts beyond the Bristol Sport "group think." 

If you two are anywhere near right on this page, that is.

If you are, then what the fug is SL doing? Hibernating? Watching rugby, exclusively? What's he paying attention to? Are his "antennae" twitching and alarm bells ringing at the 1. Injury situation. 2. Recruitment ups and downs. 3. Level of entertainment?

Between you two and @Harry and one or two others, a persuasive case that Ashton is the problem is being presented and argued on these pages (and that, perhaps, firing LJ was re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic).

And those that will back the owner regardless on this platform and launch into the more rabid and OTT critics of SL appear to be absent from these threads and well-reasoned arguments and opinions. Conspicuous by their absence, even.

Which is worrying in itself, because maybe even they - the SL loyalists - can see that there is a big, big question mark against Ashton, and therefore SL. They can attack the more rabid/intellectually limited assaults on our benevolent owner but have nothing to come back with against the considered criticisms such as we see here.

 

 

[Mr Popodopolous]

15 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Cotts did it on a very similar budget to SOD having looked back through the accounts.  Had we been under Championship FFP we would’ve been well inside.  The money he recouped for Sam Baldock (and Liam Kelly to a lesser extent but funded part of Korey) more than covered the amortisation costs of the new signings, not forgetting Elliott, Wilbraham and Little were free transfers.  The wage bill was no bigger than SODs, but it was trimmer in terms of numbers.  SOD was hamstrung by the previous regime before anyone thinks I’m having a go at SOD.  Both SOD and Cotts trimmed the squad....and Keith Burt provided excellent player identification alongside each.

As @Harrycorrected my timings earlier, McInnes’s tenure included the first iteration of Mark Ashton’s recruitment!!  Look what he left behind.

Trading to the extent we’ve seen in recent years is only necessary if 1) you don’t recruit well in the first place, 2) achieve success so players want to stay.

Fair enough, we wouldn't have breached under Cotterill as it stood- however had we signed Maguire and Gayle that summer e.g. that might have changed the equation=- either in terms of an embargo in January 2017 or in terms of need to trade.

I don't believe we were in a financial position to sign Maguire and Gayle in summer 2015 personally. Summer 2016 different story, but that ship had sailed by then. Still managed to make a £13m loss in 2015/16.

On another note, why did Burt leave? Was it just to bring Ashton back- seems like we recruited quite well in general. Still the problem would have come eventually- Maguire and Gayle in summer 2015, don't think it was feasible at that time.