I blame Steve Coppell

[Bris Red]

3 hours ago, Banjo Island said:

If you always do what youve always done youll always get what youve always got

And it’s this that i find truly baffling when it comes to Steve Lansdown. You don’t become a successful billionaire by repeating the same mistakes so why does he think repeating the same failed actions in regards to the football team will get him success? 

If he genuinely is put off by appointing another higher profile proven manager then that really is a depressing scenario we find ourselves in as a football club.

[handsofclay]

1 hour ago, CodeRed said:

I started supporting City when Fred Ford was manager!   And thinking about it Coppell was arguably the only manager we've appointed in those 55 years who had proven experience at a higher  level. Wilson got Barnsley to the top div but came straight down. Everyone else was either starting out or came from a lower league- or from the same league but not with a record of success in that league.

Ford, Dicks, Millen, Osman, Jordan, Lumsden,Tinnion, Holden,.... 1st job

Benny, Houghton, McInnes ...1st English job

Cotts,SOD, TC, Ward, Smith, .....same level no promotions at that level ((all except TC had promotions but at a lower level)

Lee Johnson, GJ, Pulis, came from a lower level.

 

So we've never actually gone for a high profile, higher level proven manager except for Coppell who lasted 1 game.

 

 

 

You make some good points. I would disagree, however, that Coppell was the highest level, proven manager we have ever appointed in your time. I would argue it was Bobby Houghton who got unfashionable Malmö to the European Cup Final and a narrow defeat to Forest. He also brought Roy Hodgson as his number 2. It was a great shame that this talented managerial pair were recruited on the cusp of the worst financial period in the club's history. Plus being tied to Dicks' long term contract signings. 

[steviestevieneville]

31 minutes ago, Robbored said:

That is simply not true..................

Alessandro was spot on in his post earlier.

Bollocks

[BTRFTG]

36 minutes ago, Robbored said:

 

36 minutes ago, Robbored said:

That is simply not true..................

What isn't true? That the Chairman deliberately undermined him, took no action to complete the deal he'd lined up (they didn't even bother to call,) and foisted James upon him such the Chairman could show off a marquee signing.

If he didn't want the job he wouldn't have taken it and certainly wouldn't have waited all summer to come here. I've heard from those who know and have worked with him that he truly thought he could do a job with us to resurrect his career. In SL he soon discovered otherwise.

If you are to be believed in that he wasn't fussed about working in the first place, what does that say about the board that interviewed and appointed him? 

"What's excites you about the prospect of working here?"

"Not bothered, truth be told..."

And then you appoint them ?

 

[Sheltons Army]

23 minutes ago, bris red said:

And it’s this that i find truly baffling when it comes to Steve Lansdown. You don’t become a successful billionaire by repeating the same mistakes so why does he think repeating the same failed actions in regards to the football team will get him success? 

If he genuinely is put off by appointing another higher profile proven manager then that really is a depressing scenario we find ourselves in as a football club.

Even being ridiculously successful in a business - Investments and finance in his case doesn’t qualify you in another field though does it

I know an extremely wealthy man who made a fortune having started with nothing in the motor trade - He then had a dabble in restaurants , hotels and other ventures each of which he confesses were a bit of a disaster and lost him money.

 

Even SL will have certain skill sets and experience , but how many that help him produce a Football Club That is successful on the pitch ?

[steviestevieneville]

1 minute ago, Sheltons Army said:

Even being ridiculously successful in a business - Investments and finance in his case doesn’t qualify you in another field though does it

I know an extremely wealthy man who made a fortune having started with nothing in the motor trade - He then had a dabble in restaurants , hotels and other ventures each of which he confesses were a bit of a disaster and lost him money.

 

Even SL will have certain skill sets and experience , but how many that help him produce a Football Club That is successful on the pitch ?

None . He doesn’t have those skill sets In rugby either and knows it. That’s why he doesn’t interfere with the bears. Mark Tainton, a well respected director of rugby is allowed to carry out his work and they’re reaping the rewards. For some reason , Lansdown truly thinks he knows about football even though he was never interested until junior wanted to watch city.

 

Only Bristol city could have a billionaire owner who’s a financial expert . Builds a fantastic stadium and state of the art training ground , only for it all to be pretty bloody pointless because when it comes to running the football side of things he’s thicker than a whale omelette 

[Sheltons Army]

50 minutes ago, Robbored said:

That is simply not true..................

Alessandro was spot on in his post earlier.

Did you actually bother to read Alessandros post that you now endorse as ‘spot on’

It makes the first line of your post contradictory , but maybe that’s a bit confusing for you

funny

[Sheltons Army]

1 minute ago, steviestevieneville said:

None . He doesn’t have those skill sets In rugby either and knows it. That’s why he doesn’t interfere with the bears. Mark Tainton, a well respected director of rugby is allowed to carry out his work and they’re reaping the rewards. For some reason , Lansdown truly thinks he knows about football even though he was never interested until junior wanted to watch city.

 

Only Bristol city could have a billionaire owner who’s a financial expert . Builds a fantastic stadium and state of the art training ground , only for it all to be pretty bloody pointless because when it comes to running the football side of things he’s thicker than a whale omelette 

Absolutely - Not an egg chasing fan but havnt they still got their same Chairman too - Boyd ?

Weve got Jon and his kit designing...

[redsquirrel]

cotterill is more to blame than coppell,if he hadnt done so well,we wouldnt have such high expectations

[exAtyeoMax]

1 hour ago, megansdad said:

and yet the same person appointed Pat Lam, which seems to me to counter the arguments quite effectively- could not have a more high profile manager. Think its a case of SL choosing who he thinks is best able to do the job simple as that. He has been successful with Bristol and hopefully soon will be with Bristol City.

Is MA CEO of the rugby too? Does MA's influence spread to the rugby too? If he doesn't have any say, perhaps that's why they are more successful. (Plus the finances with football are massive compared to rugby...)

[CodeRed]

15 minutes ago, handsofclay said:

You make some good points. I would disagree, however, that Coppell was the highest level, proven manager we have ever appointed in your time. I would argue it was Bobby Houghton who got unfashionable Malmö to the European Cup Final and a narrow defeat to Forest. He also brought Roy Hodgson as his number 2. It was a great shame that this talented managerial pair were recruited on the cusp of the worst financial period in the club's history. Plus being tied to Dicks' long term contract signings. 

  In terms of achievements Houghton had a good CV but I merely make the point that it was a gamble as he had never managed in England. A gamble that quickly failed due to the financial circumstances more than his coaching or management skills. Maybe right man, wrong time.

A lot of us wanted Dicks to step aside the season before and Norman Hunter but he never succeeded as a manager either.

[Fuber]

5 hours ago, Banjo Island said:

Lansdown wont recruit a high profile manager because of the coppell debacle yet relentlessly pounds the tried and failed routine of appoiting from within

Correction. Blows millions on the playing squad and then appoints a manager with the know-how of getting out of league one (when we end up back there), rebuild, appoint inexperience then internally when that fails in a butchered attempt at progression, rinse and repeat.

I'm becoming of the view that you can get by out of league one with a decent manager and morale and a half decent playing staff.

Championship to Prem required the full hand meaning ambition, process, management, identity and or organisation, plus the three aforementioned.

Unfortunately in terms of processes, management, identity, and any organisation and communication - we suck. We're a league one management structure and coaching staff with a top-10 championship playing budget. 

We could save millions on player costs and wages just by virtue of having a decent tactical manager and a good coaching staff. Cook at Wigan is a prime example, before admin 11th in the table while having second lowest wage budget in the league.

Others include Bielsa, Frank, Cooper. All have a philosophy and good coaching records on the whole, the latter two at point at having achieved or competed for promotion had lower wage-spending than we do currently, which speaks volumes. Compare Norwich to where they were when Farke first came in at Carrow Road, best example.

We need a head of football operations who has some history within the game and an idea and or philosophy they wish to implement. Not a businessman who is more interested in sponsorships and commercial negotiations. 

[BigTone]

1 hour ago, bris red said:

And it’s this that i find truly baffling when it comes to Steve Lansdown. You don’t become a successful billionaire by repeating the same mistakes so why does he think repeating the same failed actions in regards to the football team will get him success? 

If he genuinely is put off by appointing another higher profile proven manager then that really is a depressing scenario we find ourselves in as a football club.

SL is another I have met at various dinners on occasions and spoken with. His outlook is more that the club needs to on a strong and self sufficient footing like any other business to be sustainable. In my mind he has done that now what with the new stadium, non football related income etc etc. He understands you can't keep throwing good money after bad. I personally think he wants us at the next level to further ensure that sustainability. However, I think with Covid he is happy to tread water and see how football pans out this season and probably next. I also think with him at the helm we will survive these troubled times while many other clubs will go to the wall.

Times are challenging just now and beyond those to be considered normal.

[BTRFTG]

1 minute ago, BigTone said:

SL is another I have met at various dinners on occasions. His outlook is more that the club needs to on a strong and self sufficient footing like any other business to be sustainable.

If that's true then he's failed miserably in respect of the football club. Under his chairmanship he's delivered operational losses in excess of £30m a year and without his patronage we'd have gone bust yonks ago.

Furthermore, and anticipating what will be awful numbers in the accounts next year, we're light years from being sustainable.

If he was gambling big money to secure success I'd understand, but he isn't. He's spending big money to stagnate and it's difficult to comprehend what strategy that fits?

[BigTone]

3 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

If that's true then he's failed miserably in respect of the football club. Under his chairmanship he's delivered operational losses in excess of £30m a year and without his patronage we'd have gone bust yonks ago.

Furthermore, and anticipating what will be awful numbers in the accounts next year, we're light years from being sustainable.

If he was gambling big money to secure success I'd understand, but he isn't. He's spending big money to stagnate and it's difficult to comprehend what strategy that fits?

I think you'll find we are heading in the right direction. As I said we are living in troubled times. We have lost an awful lot of income streams but I am sure that when normality returns then we will still be standing.

[BigTone]

1 hour ago, BTRFTG said:

What isn't true? That the Chairman deliberately undermined him, took no action to complete the deal he'd lined up (they didn't even bother to call,) and foisted James upon him such the Chairman could show off a marquee signing.

If he didn't want the job he wouldn't have taken it and certainly wouldn't have waited all summer to come here. I've heard from those who know and have worked with him that he truly thought he could do a job with us to resurrect his career. In SL he soon discovered otherwise.

If you are to be believed in that he wasn't fussed about working in the first place, what does that say about the board that interviewed and appointed him? 

"What's excites you about the prospect of working here?"

"Not bothered, truth be told..."

And then you appoint them ?

 

Good idea to read up on Coppells management career. Did ok at some and not so good at others. I doubt Man City remember him with much fondness. He was the problem and not BCFC. 

[Robbored]

1 minute ago, BigTone said:

Good idea to read up on Coppells management career. Did ok at some and not so good at others. I doubt Man City remember him with much fondness. He was the problem and not BCFC. 

Yep indeed he was but some otib posters still have conspiracy theories about that saga.......and call the real truth ‘bollocks’.................

[steviestevieneville]

1 hour ago, Sheltons Army said:

Absolutely - Not an egg chasing fan but havnt they still got their same Chairman too - Boyd ?

Weve got Jon and his kit designing...

He’s on the board though. Nice work if you can get it . 

[Red7]

6 hours ago, The hand of RO'D said:

If it wasn’t for that bush twitcher, Lansdown would still have faith in expensive high profile managers.

What's a bush twitcher?

Any ideas, @Rudolf Hucker?

[BigTone]

1 hour ago, steviestevieneville said:

None . He doesn’t have those skill sets In rugby either and knows it. That’s why he doesn’t interfere with the bears. Mark Tainton, a well respected director of rugby is allowed to carry out his work and they’re reaping the rewards. For some reason , Lansdown truly thinks he knows about football even though he was never interested until junior wanted to watch city.

 

Only Bristol city could have a billionaire owner who’s a financial expert . Builds a fantastic stadium and state of the art training ground , only for it all to be pretty bloody pointless because when it comes to running the football side of things he’s thicker than a whale omelette 

Must need a very big frying pan for that.

Anyway, let's all just chill and have a little sing song.

Altogether now ...... "whale meat again, don't know where, don't know when"

[Bristol Oil Services]

1 hour ago, handsofclay said:

You make some good points. I would disagree, however, that Coppell was the highest level, proven manager we have ever appointed in your time. I would argue it was Bobby Houghton who got unfashionable Malmö to the European Cup Final and a narrow defeat to Forest. He also brought Roy Hodgson as his number 2. It was a great shame that this talented managerial pair were recruited on the cusp of the worst financial period in the club's history. Plus being tied to Dicks' long term contract signings. 

It's a funny one. We are a bit of an oddity. When it comes to managers. Even the ones that do well and get us promoted soon find the "magic" melts away, and to a man, they do nothing of note anywhere else.

The only one to leave here and manage at the top with any success is Pulis, who we couldn't wait to get rid of. Perhaps LJ will follow in Pulis's footsteps? 

There have been some "sliding doors" moments, for example when we appointed Coops in '82, we turnt down Joe Royle (my source: Joe Royle), and also Pulis instead of Moyesie. Royle, certainly, was a more capable, or cut out for, top class management than TC (much as we love and revere him) so it is tempting to wonder what might have been but then we remember this is Bristol City and so the certainty is that something would've come up, something would've happened and Joe Royle would've left for a more ambitious, more professional or up together, or whatever, club, before he had taken us back to glory.

I am tempted to think, though, that JR might well have won us back-to-back promotions and whisked us from the 4th to challenging in the top half of the second division by the mid-80s (before leaving for a bigger job as the board failed to back his ambition to take us back to the top tout de suit).

I need to leave this here; I should be over this by now.

 

[handsofclay]

3 minutes ago, Moments of Pleasure said:

It's a funny one. We are a bit of an oddity. When it comes to managers. Even the ones that do well and get us promoted soon find the "magic" melts away, and to a man, they do nothing of note anywhere else.

The only one to leave here and manage at the top with any success is Pulis, who we couldn't wait to get rid of. Perhaps LJ will follow in Pulis's footsteps? 

There have been some "sliding doors" moments, for example when we appointed Coops in '82, we turnt down Joe Royle (my source: Joe Royle), and also Pulis instead of Moyesie. Royle, certainly, was a more capable, or cut out for, top class management than TC (much as we love and revere him) so it is tempting to wonder what might have been but then we remember this is Bristol City and so the certainty is that something would've come up, something would've happened and Joe Royle would've left for a more ambitious, more professional or up together, or whatever, club, before he had taken us back to glory.

I am tempted to think, though, that JR might well have won us back-to-back promotions and whisked us from the 4th to challenging in the top half of the second division by the mid-80s (before leaving for a bigger job as the board failed to back his ambition to take us back to the top tout de suit).

I need to leave this here; I should be over this by now.

 

I agree about Joe Royle, he did a magnificent job at unfashionable Oldham and it's amazing to think that when our club was in the basement in the league scrimping and saving just to keep the club afloat we had the choice of two great potential managers in Cooper and Royle. I think Cooper won out at the time because we admired what he had done at Rovers and how he had been harshly dismissed (similar with John Ward later). Plus he knew one of the board members very well. Cooper did a fantastic job, but as you suggest, he was great at playing exciting, attacking football in the lower divisions, whereas Royle was at home managing at all levels and Oldham experienced a meteoric rise under him. David Moyes v Pulis, was a no brainer for me at the time. Unfortunately, the split board seen it differently. 

[BTRFTG]

1 hour ago, BigTone said:

I think you'll find we are heading in the right direction. As I said we are living in troubled times. We have lost an awful lot of income streams but I am sure that when normality returns then we will still be standing.

The troubled times however started long before Covid. Before that even arose we shipped losses of £30m in each of the preceding two years. 2020 and the full impact of the virus hadn't yet been reported.

If SL (or some other patron) continues to fund us we'll be standing. If not, we won't. Sustainability doesn't, yet, come into it.

[BigTone]

3 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

The troubled times however started long before Covid. Before that even arose we shipped losses of £30m in each of the preceding two years. 2020 and the full impact of the virus hadn't yet been reported.

If SL (or some other patron) continues to fund us we'll be standing. If not, we won't. Sustainability doesn't, yet, come into it.

Time will tell.

[BTRFTG]

1 hour ago, BigTone said:

Good idea to read up on Coppells management career. Did ok at some and not so good at others. I doubt Man City remember him with much fondness. He was the problem and not BCFC. 

As I say I'm no fan of Coppell but in this instance you couldn't be more wrong. Name one thing HE did badly during his short tenure - go on, try?

Perhaps you should ask Palace fans "What did Coppell ever do for them?"

"Recruited cut price top division players to build a promotion to the top flight.."

"Well apart from that...."

"Recruited bargain basement stars like Ian Wright from Non-League.."

"Yes, except..."

"Took us to the Cup Final, took us to our highest finish (3rd) in decades, delivered the Full Members as silverware..."

"Yeah, but you went down"

"Not wholly unsurprising given the influx of new Premier cash and Palace's boardroom antics, but he did come back and get us promoted again within months. He created the legacy the pervades to this day of us being a top flight side..."

"As I say, what did Coppell ever do for Palace!"

[Alessandro]

2 hours ago, BTRFTG said:

What isn't true? That the Chairman deliberately undermined him, took no action to complete the deal he'd lined up (they didn't even bother to call,) and foisted James upon him such the Chairman could show off a marquee signing.

If he didn't want the job he wouldn't have taken it and certainly wouldn't have waited all summer to come here. I've heard from those who know and have worked with him that he truly thought he could do a job with us to resurrect his career. In SL he soon discovered otherwise.

If you are to be believed in that he wasn't fussed about working in the first place, what does that say about the board that interviewed and appointed him? 

"What's excites you about the prospect of working here?"

"Not bothered, truth be told..."

And then you appoint them ?

 

My opinion is that he did absolutely think he could do a job, that’s why he took it, but soon realised he didn’t have the ‘heart’ or whatever turn of phrase you like, to see it through when he found himself undermined by the chairman or saw the extent of the ‘building’ needed. 
 

[steviestevieneville]

1 hour ago, Robbored said:

Yep indeed he was but some otib posters still have conspiracy theories about that saga.......and call the real truth ‘bollocks’.................

It’s not the truth though is it. You constantly defend Lansdown just because he rushed into GJ’s office to stop him giving you a good hiding . I got a very good source that heard SL shout . 
 

Leave it Gar the gas trolls not worth it as Johnson had you by the throat and was about to pummel you again .

 

[steviestevieneville]

1 minute ago, Alessandro said:

My opinion is that he did absolutely think he could do a job, that’s why he took it, but soon realised he didn’t have the ‘heart’ or whatever turn of phrase you like, to see it through when he found himself undermined by the chairman or saw the extent of the ‘building’ needed. 
 

The thing is though. Lansdown himself has admitted sticking his nose in and signing james without coppell’s knowledge . He’s said it himself on interview. I listened to it. 

[BigTone]

32 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

As I say I'm no fan of Coppell but in this instance you couldn't be more wrong. Name one thing HE did badly during his short tenure - go on, try?

Perhaps you should ask Palace fans "What did Coppell ever do for them?"

"Recruited cut price top division players to build a promotion to the top flight.."

"Well apart from that...."

"Recruited bargain basement stars like Ian Wright from Non-League.."

"Yes, except..."

"Took us to the Cup Final, took us to our highest finish (3rd) in decades, delivered the Full Members as silverware..."

"Yeah, but you went down"

"Not wholly unsurprising given the influx of new Premier cash and Palace's boardroom antics, but he did come back and get us promoted again within months. He created the legacy the pervades to this day of us being a top flight side..."

"As I say, what did Coppell ever do for Palace!"

Name one thing he did well or badly, full stop. He did sweet FA in 4 months old sock. I don't give a monkey's gonads what he did at Palace. It's what he did here that matters. Problem is he'd mucked others over elsewhere so the appointment was a bit risky from day one given his unpredictability to perform the task he was undoubtedly being paid handsomely to undertake.

He didn't have the get up and go to do the job. He admitted that much as well when he left.

He was the problem and nothing or anyone else. You can blame whoever you want.

[BTRFTG]

10 minutes ago, Alessandro said:

My opinion is that he did absolutely think he could do a job, that’s why he took it, but soon realised he didn’t have the ‘heart’ or whatever turn of phrase you like, to see it through when he found himself undermined by the chairman or saw the extent of the ‘building’ needed. 
 

Coppell's forte was building squads and it was that, plus the prospect of developing the Academy that drew him to the job, or at least that's what those who know and have worked with him tell me.

James was the clincher. Not only could Coppell not believe SL had reneged on following-up the Sheff Keeper deal, he couldn't believe he'd failed to consult or take on board Coppell's warning that James would be nothing other than an unwanted and unsettling distraction to the squad (no need to attend training, indeed.) Coppell neither rated or liked James at that point and didn't want a prima donna of dubious reputation in his midst.

It wasn't heart. I'm told Coppell approached SL after the Southend debacle, informed him in the most basic terms :"I can't work with YOU," and when SL asked what type of payoff he was looking for he couldn't believe his luck when Coppell responded :"Nothing."

I've also been told of conversations that have been had with prospective managers, including some who have attended for abortive interviews. A common theme is they were expected to work to SL's agenda irrespective of whether or not that accorded with their football opinion, in which case they questioned why the need for us? They quickly and quietly walked away, though not so quiet as to often describe our backroom set-up as being: "...a joke..." In the case of McClueless I'm told he got the position as he was the only one, when informed what the package WOULD be, didn't walk.

19 minutes ago, BigTone said:

He didn't have the get up and go to do the job. He admitted that much as well. He was the problem and nothing else. You can blame whoever you want.

You can fool some of the people some of the time......