Do We Underplay Our Power?

[havanatopia]

29 minutes ago, Sheltons Army said:

unfair

Cooper did a excellent job with the resources he had

Jordan was very good, and what might have been if he hadn’t gone to Hearts

Ward did a good job but baulked at the next level

Gary Johnson did a fine job 

But none of those had the infrastructure or resources behind them , (That we allegedly have now) to build on , to help them that Lee Johnson had or Holden has

And oh how it has been said so many times that the club has invested heavily in facilities and players like never before and yet utterly bizarrely have a penchant for novice experimentation with managers. At least half of the managers under this tutelage are what would clearly be regarded as novice. The other half, easily the most successful group, were hugely experienced. The mind boggles how this nonsense continues. I suspect nobody can explain it and not even Steve, honestly, can tell you why he chooses novices at least 50% of the time. I know of no other club like it in the land. Utterly bizarre and other mangers, clubs and fans must look at us with weird bemusement.

[Davefevs]

18 minutes ago, Sheltons Army said:

Interestingly Dave Tony Bloom at Brighton made his money as a professional gambler / poker payer didn’t he 

I don’t know whether you can catch it anywhere but Steve Sidwell was on BT last night as one of the post match pundits

Jake a Humphreys was questioning him all about coaching young players in Brighton’s Academy and the thinking and philosipophy at Brighton

Most interesting - Dan Ashworths influence as DofF, age groups playing to a shape in and out of possession but coaching freedom within that

Lads having a DNA ‘passport’ that goes with them through the age groups with constant development plans for each player as they are developed to play in a particular position with a view to progression through to first team level, giving players the reassurance to ‘play’ , even if they make mistakes ,  etc etc

 

 

Yes, I read about Bloom this week too.  The Brentford “model” was an obvious parallel, so I looked into that (knew a fair bit already about Benham and Ankersen).  The other one SL has eluded to was Brighton, so read a bit about Bloom too.

As for Dan Ashworth, MA styles himself on him, but doesn’t have the back-history of being involved so closely to the playing side.  I’ve said it before, he’s a “footballer wannabe”.

[havanatopia]

4 minutes ago, Sheltons Army said:

Jordan had started to make us more professional in a few areas away from the pitch as well as on it , such as setting up coaching schools / youth development (We had none when he came in) 

The Club had only just stabilised post 82 (Thanks to TC and the board) and had no infrastructure at all

- with a decent set up I think Jordan may have stayed and been very sucessfull

Denis Smith encountered a difficult dressing room but I think would have done well with some time nad backing 

Ward wanted Ray Harford to come in and help as he had no Championship experience but the board saw that as a weakness and got rid of him and brought in Benny

Correction; Benny came in before Ward left, just but that is an important distinction.

[Ring]

I have to admit to being a “recovering City fan”. I decided not to renew my ST 2 seasons ago, due to the lack of entertainment under LJ. It was boring and tedious, so much so that I used to get headaches watching the games.

I decided to spend my Saturdays with other friends and family and haven’t looked back. Obviously I’m still on here writing about City, but you don’t get rid of the bug completely.

What I’m trying to say is that I what tried 2 years ago is now being forced onto the rest of the fan base. I prefer it now, even though  I still keep an eye out. I suspect that many others will find that having more time and money is better for them, so will stop going to games.

I tried going to watch my local non-league team when I was able to and found it really enjoyable.

Its up to the city to sort this out, if they want to have a reasonable sized crowd in the future.

[Sheltons Army]

2 minutes ago, havanatopia said:

And oh how it has been said so many times that the club has invested heavily in facilities and players like never before and yet utterly bizarrely have a penchant for novice experimentation with managers. At least half of the managers under this tutelage are what would clearly be regarded as novice. The other half, easily the most successful group, were hugely experienced. The mind boggles how this nonsense continues. I suspect nobody can explain it and not even Steve, honestly, can tell you why he chooses novices at least 50% of the time. I know of no other club like it in the land. Utterly bizarre and other mangers, clubs and fans must look at us with weird bemusement.

Ward , Gary Johnson , Cotterrill had promotions on their CVs

Cooper and Jordan had been top  top players,  and Internationals, schooled at great Clubs  and  played in World Cups 

Theres some guides there somewhere 

[havanatopia]

1 minute ago, Sheltons Army said:

Ward , Gary Johnson , Cotterrill had promotions on their CVs

Cooper and Jordan had been top  top players,  and Internationals, schooled at great Clubs  and  played in World Cups 

Theres some guides there somewhere 

Indeed so. Not heeded a great deal though. This comes down to a CEO position not wishing to have a manager with a big gob and an opinion. While Ashton is there this will continue which i think we all realise.

[Mendip City]

1 hour ago, Rocking Red Cyril said:

Yes I agree I was felt I was much happier watching us in divs 3 and 4.

Abd bogs really had to get better 

But I feel in modern days society it is seen as not to be good to be a loser the pressure to be a winner is big. And that goes into football 

 Therefore less risks taken. In the board room or on the pitch 

Therefore we get what we have 

Good post and I think you’re right. I wish you weren’t!

[Olé]

2 hours ago, handsofclay said:

If SL and MA stated that we would be mainly relying on Academy products for the first team and employed a head coach who totally bought into that, I could get my head around it and back it. It's the subterfuge that grates.

This is exactly what exhausts me too. We're in this painful no mans land between plucky overachievers and expensive underachievers, on the one hand teased to expect more by endless signings and spin, on the other reminded to shut up and be happy with our lot because we're a small club, narrated by a club hierarchy that give out wildly mixed messages.

As you've said, I could live quite happily being a Tier 2/3 yoyo club packed with a small close-knit squad of young players and battling in either division with the likes of Barnsley, Rotherham, Luton as our peers - to be honest that's the majority of my life supporting City. Cotterill's promotion team was exactly that and the club made clear it wanted much more.

Since then our owner has thrown eye watering money that even as an excited supporter I've at times found ludicrous, at being a very different club - the Premier League club in waiting™ that literally every media report seems to describe us as. And the hierarchy far from distancing themselves from it, have done everything to lap it up and amplify the message.  

And yet despite doing and saying everything to suggest we should be a much bigger and more successful club, we're not allowed to question the job they're doing because conveniently at that point we are small and lucky with our lot. I could get my head round it if we weren't paying our CEO a fortune to throw money about like confetti signing average players. 

So yes, it's exhausting, they need to stop patronising us with the double speak and just tell us what we should expect, if there's any chance of us all getting properly behind the club. SL in particular needs to stop the charade of young, easily influenced, grateful coaches at the same time as indulging the transfer spending and insisting he wants Premier League.

I think it comes down to something very simple. Section82 have highlighted in the past the transition in recent years from "fans to customers". It's exactly that - but in the sense that we're oversold a highly marketed product in the patronising belief we need a sugar coated storyline to keep coming back for more. When in fact as supporters we're back whatever.

The great irony is honesty costs nothing. Perhaps rather than as a customer, we should - like membership of many fan run clubs - be treated as something akin to being a shareholder. Allowing for a bit of polish in the chief executives report, PLCs don't lie to shareholders. You tell them exactly what the strategy is, how the business is getting on, what to expect.

For some reason for a man who has spent his whole life trading on the fortunes of such organisations, SL doesn't operate Bristol City like it, and worse, nor does he treat people who care deeply about the club with the dignity of a transparency that sort of "investment" deserves. Instead we get this endless we're a big club/small club/big club/small club purgatory.

[Red Army 75]

9 hours ago, handsofclay said:

For the most part the story of Bristol City these past twenty plus years since SL's involvement has been 'where would we be without him? Aren't we fortunate.'

I recall twenty plus years ago being a fan and shareholder who felt part of the club. We had not early gone through the hoop in 1982, been bottom of the basement division for a short while a little later but within four years were playing and winning in our first Wembley final and by 1990 were back in the second tier and finishing in a creditable position in 1991 only bettered once in the thirty years since then. Thus from bottom of the pile to the high echelons of what is now the championship and two Wembley finals had been achieved in less than 9 years. We, the supporters of the club, deserve a great deal of credit for that. We turned up in the fourth division in numbers and gave our backing. With our numbers behind us we achieved things. We also felt like the club was ours and together we owned our stadium and felt like ultimately we could call the directors to task. There was no one supporter who thought he knew best and if things were done his way we would succeed though his way was skewered and wasn't the model for any other club.

I suppose what I am trying to convey is would we really be worse off had Steve Lansdown not taken over here? It's automatically assumed we would be a mid-table third tier side at most playing in an antiquated stadium. Really? I haven't access to a crystal ball but maybe, just maybe, we might have experienced premier league football this century as managers were appointed instead of head coaches tasked with participating in the running of this club in the manner Mr Lansdown wants. Managers with football nous not head coaches effectively controlled by the man at the top with a fantastic knowledge of finance and business models but a crap comprehension of what it takes to mould a team that will take to the field with a winning mentality. 

Surely too, with the fan base we have (nothing whatsoever to do with Steve Lansdown) we would have improved OUR stadium too. Maybe it might by now have involved foreign backers, but one rarely hears the media, or supporters of the Manchester clubs, or various championship clubs who have tasted promotion to the premier league complain about this. I'm pretty sure I have never heard a Leicester City fan wish he/she was still in the championship under the ownership of a local businessman made good like the lucky  Bristol City fans experience.

I don't wish to denigrate Steve Lansdown as he has put his money into the club (although not when it comes to appointing the most important role in the club that of manager). His heart is in the right place and he feels that he is doing the best for everyone by being a benevolent dictator. However, I truly believe he has done so by disenfranchising the supporters. We have to go along with his model for the club and doff our caps and be truly grateful. We deserve a voice too, Steve. You have taken the club from us. It's only your view that counts. Yet we are supporters too. Your ideas are not working. They have rarely worked in football and are unlikely to. Treat us with respect too. Why on earth were the likes of Cook and Hughton interviewed for the post when you, the great businessman, knew full well they would never work as your lapdog unable to 'manage' this football club. I fear it was simply a cosmetic exercise to placate the fans.

Mr Lansdown if someone treated you like a mug they'd be out on their ear. Please don't treat us with disrespect. In future when you make a head coach appointment just inform us of the candidates who are prepared to play the role you have scripted for them. It will be a very uninspiring list but at least we will know where we stand. Then we, as supporters of this proud football club, might actually think that if it comes to it we will be better off forming our own club and starting at the bottom of the pyramid then passing yours on the way up.

 

8 hours ago, spudski said:

For all the moaning...they hold the Trump card.

The only way they will take notice, is if fans stop paying for season tickets and going to games.

We are customers...nothing more, nothing less these days.

Clubs are in a win, win situation. So many fans pay up regardless. It's in the blood for many. We go because it's a ritual. Many have said they don't go for the football...but for meeting up with mates and going through the same rituals each week.

Forums are also great for clubs...people rant on forums, get it out of their systems then are less vociferous when at the ground.

The only way they will take notice is if it hits the pocket.

In a world where everything is negative, we look for joy and entertainment. Give us something to be proud of regardless of result. 

It's dire to watch, depressing, cloaked in bullshit words from the club. 

Its not about winning anymore...many fans are losing the love for it. 

I'd rather we heard that we are going to blood as many academy products as we can, without Prem talk, know where we stand and get behind that. Not...we want Prem and expect it, and then employ people out of their depth to provide it.

That's why so many are frustrated.

Two really good posts

[Mendip City]

13 hours ago, handsofclay said:

Brilliant Mendip City, quite agree. You state about Pompey that's a brilliant example. Something I have learned since 1982 when we nearly folded is that even if a club does fold if the fan base is there, and it is in abundance at Bristol City, it effectively means the club can reform and rise again due to its roll of loyal customers. I guess that's what I meant by us as fans underplaying our power. Too many make it seem that without Mr Lansdown we would be nothing. I am grateful for what he has done, but I don't buy into that argument. As when a product has 20-30,000 plus loyal subscribers it will never be nothing and chances are in the past twenty years we could well have achieved more on the pitch than we actually have.

 

I agree... we’re singing from exactly the same hymn sheet you and I. 
I sometimes wonder what people are worried about. If we want it, we’ll never lose our club.
Right now we’re just customers with no real stake in “our” club. 
Are people concerned we’d go on a journey like Aldershot, Wimbledon, Hereford, Bury, Portsmouth, Swansea, Wolves, Cardiff, Southampton, Man City Bournemouth.... wouldn’t that be boring?? 
Perhaps people are concerned that a change of ownership or strategy would lead to decades of no success and nothing happening? Oh wait... 

[Mendip City]

12 hours ago, Sheltons Army said:

I think a lot of us on here are of a similar age group and watched 70s through , and some from even further back

For me it’s the intense frustration at the missed opportunities.

Through the 80s , 90s we dreamed of having a Board or owner with the money to push us on

We have , and have had for some time - an owner who without question has backed us in hard £ notes.

But still we fumble and stumble whilst sides push past us

Wrve only had real momentum a few times in my lifetime and I can’t help look particularly at SCs departure - leaving a talented slim squad that needed further nurturing , the odd tweak and addition with the luxury of not having to clear out lots of dead wood and a free hand to build on it 

As it stands , in all my years it’s been the period of missed opportunities 

I think that’s where a lot of the disillusion and frustration comes from l, it does for me.

 

Completely agree - SC had a clear strategy and plan. With the two or three quality additions he wanted we would have got going (if they were brought in in the summer we may have hit the ground running). Trouble is other strategies won the day and look at us now back to signing journeymen players and going nowhere. 

[Clutton Caveman]

On 06/02/2021 at 22:04, steveybadger said:

Re Steve’s vision, yes. I think it’s naive to think that A.N. Other owner also wouldn’t run the club the way they wish, with only limited regard to fans’ views. We might get somebody who throws cash at the club or we might not, but at least with SL we know his intentions are benevolent. To summarise, we can criticise his decision making but (I think) not his intentions.

I think it is a simple matter of bad advise. SL is clearly a great business man in the of world financial services but he is not a football man and his son is neither good businessman or football man (or he wouldn't be in his current role).

So he relies heavily on his Director of football or whatever he calls the boss. Ashton was brought in probably because his slick style is what SL is used to in his world. I think a real football man would ruffle his feathers and occasionally tell him he's wrong. So the advise he gets is just a reflection of his wishes. In this case why bother to employ Ashton why not just have your son as the mouthpiece?

I think that SL understands bricks and mortar and is not prepared to be told anything he doesn't like, so Ashton is here to stay and so is DH until the fans come back. When the noise from the fans gets too much DH will be sacrificed and another low cost yes man will be brought in.

So in summary nothing positive will happen unless SL bumps into a bloke who knows football but has the diplomacy skills to convince him that everything said is his idea. I am not holding my breath.

[Sheltons Army]

2 minutes ago, Clutton Caveman said:

I think it is a simple matter of bad advise. SL is clearly a great business man in the of world financial services but he is not a football man and his son is neither good businessman or football man (or he wouldn't be in his current role).

So he relies heavily on his Director of football or whatever he calls the boss. Ashton was brought in probably because his slick style is what SL is used to in his world. I think a real football man would ruffle his feathers and occasionally tell him he's wrong. So the advise he gets is just a reflection of his wishes. In this case why bother to employ Ashton why not just have your son as the mouthpiece?

I think that SL understands bricks and mortar and is not prepared to be told anything he doesn't like, so Ashton is here to stay and so is DH until the fans come back. When the noise from the fans gets too much DH will be sacrificed and another low cost yes man will be brought in.

So in summary nothing positive will happen unless SL bumps into a bloke who knows football but has the diplomacy skills to convince him that everything said is his idea. I am not holding my breath.

Great post

[Davefevs]

On 07/02/2021 at 00:42, Olé said:

This is exactly what exhausts me too. We're in this painful no mans land between plucky overachievers and expensive underachievers, on the one hand teased to expect more by endless signings and spin, on the other reminded to shut up and be happy with our lot because we're a small club, narrated by a club hierarchy that give out wildly mixed messages.

As you've said, I could live quite happily being a Tier 2/3 yoyo club packed with a small close-knit squad of young players and battling in either division with the likes of Barnsley, Rotherham, Luton as our peers - to be honest that's the majority of my life supporting City. Cotterill's promotion team was exactly that and the club made clear it wanted much more.

Since then our owner has thrown eye watering money that even as an excited supporter I've at times found ludicrous, at being a very different club - the Premier League club in waiting™ that literally every media report seems to describe us as. And the hierarchy far from distancing themselves from it, have done everything to lap it up and amplify the message.  

And yet despite doing and saying everything to suggest we should be a much bigger and more successful club, we're not allowed to question the job they're doing because conveniently at that point we are small and lucky with our lot. I could get my head round it if we weren't paying our CEO a fortune to throw money about like confetti signing average players. 

So yes, it's exhausting, they need to stop patronising us with the double speak and just tell us what we should expect, if there's any chance of us all getting properly behind the club. SL in particular needs to stop the charade of young, easily influenced, grateful coaches at the same time as indulging the transfer spending and insisting he wants Premier League.

I think it comes down to something very simple. Section82 have highlighted in the past the transition in recent years from "fans to customers". It's exactly that - but in the sense that we're oversold a highly marketed product in the patronising belief we need a sugar coated storyline to keep coming back for more. When in fact as supporters we're back whatever.

The great irony is honesty costs nothing. Perhaps rather than as a customer, we should - like membership of many fan run clubs - be treated as something akin to being a shareholder. Allowing for a bit of polish in the chief executives report, PLCs don't lie to shareholders. You tell them exactly what the strategy is, how the business is getting on, what to expect.

For some reason for a man who has spent his whole life trading on the fortunes of such organisations, SL doesn't operate Bristol City like it, and worse, nor does he treat people who care deeply about the club with the dignity of a transparency that sort of "investment" deserves. Instead we get this endless we're a big club/small club/big club/small club purgatory.

Poetic Rob!

On 07/02/2021 at 06:44, Red Army 75 said:

 

Two really good posts

I agree

21 minutes ago, Clutton Caveman said:

I think it is a simple matter of bad advise. SL is clearly a great business man in the of world financial services but he is not a football man and his son is neither good businessman or football man (or he wouldn't be in his current role).

So he relies heavily on his Director of football or whatever he calls the boss. Ashton was brought in probably because his slick style is what SL is used to in his world. I think a real football man would ruffle his feathers and occasionally tell him he's wrong. So the advise he gets is just a reflection of his wishes. In this case why bother to employ Ashton why not just have your son as the mouthpiece?

I think that SL understands bricks and mortar and is not prepared to be told anything he doesn't like, so Ashton is here to stay and so is DH until the fans come back. When the noise from the fans gets too much DH will be sacrificed and another low cost yes man will be brought in.

So in summary nothing positive will happen unless SL bumps into a bloke who knows football but has the diplomacy skills to convince him that everything said is his idea. I am not holding my breath.

...and another one too.