Danny Simpson leaves City

[Red-Robbo]

23 minutes ago, The Bard said:

I think the key thing is our recruitment team should now know what they are looking for,  The Leicester signings made sense in the context that Nige probably wasn't impressed by suggestions (with the exception of Atkinson) and the 'team' wouldn't have as clear an idea of what is needed as they do now.    Playing Bell there is simply Testing his mettle rather than his right back abilities,  If he comes through it hardened it will have been worth his while.   Wouldn't surprise me to see him have a future as a wing back/wide midfielder.   

 

Perchance. TBH I haven't been that amazed by any of his appearances. I'm undecided whether second tier will be the level he ends up. A few years yet for him to show his mettle, so I'd be daft to write him off at 19!

 

[The Journalist]

4 hours ago, JonDolman said:

James probably was slightly past his best since his bad injuries at Leicester.

But he was still very good in the championship last season. Before his recent injury for us I think he had still looked a good player at this level.

Bit surprised a lot of fans don't seem to rate him.

Agreed - I thought in the early part of the season James looked like exactly what we've needed since Pack left. Needs to get properly fit, clearly, but he's a proper all-rounder.

[Jerseybean]

Leicester media coverage includes some barbed comments re NP https://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/leicester-city-simpson-pearson-bristol-6764659

 

[Bodiesaffer]

6 hours ago, Robbored said:

He certainly looked it against Brum last Saturday…………..

He showed his not fit. He was dog shite Saturday. I was shouting to pull him off at half time for Han. It doesn’t make him past his best. Just not match fit after a longish lay off.

[B-Rizzle]

What annoys me about this one is that signing him created a negative hoo haa PR wise. It was VERY clear to the average Joe that he wasn’t going to offer us anything much (especially after his couple of months at the end of last season).

On what grounds did NP think resigning or even signing him in the first place was a good idea.

Whole thing is an utter shambles and reflects terribly on the club.

Because of that, I’d have this as our worst ever signing (from my memory).

[Merrick's Marvels]

1 hour ago, Jerseybean said:

Leicester media coverage includes some barbed comments re NP https://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/leicester-city-simpson-pearson-bristol-6764659

 

Like the comments you get below the line on Bristol Live, you mean? That special place for seriously special people? 

[GrahamC]

9 minutes ago, B-Rizzle said:

What annoys me about this one is that signing him created a negative hoo haa PR wise. It was VERY clear to the average Joe that he wasn’t going to offer us anything much (especially after his couple of months at the end of last season).

On what grounds did NP think resigning or even signing him in the first place was a good idea.

Whole thing is an utter shambles and reflects terribly on the club.

Because of that, I’d have this as our worst ever signing (from my memory).

Serious question, how long have you supported us?

Because Simpson isn’t even our worst signing of the last few years.

[Harry]

4 hours ago, Fordy62 said:

Well, he was a better signing than LJ’s signing of Diony. 

I’d respectfully disagree. 
Diony came on loan, we realised he was Pony Diony, and he was sent back. 
Simpson came in short term, it was clear to everyone he was Gimpson Simpson, but we re-signed him anyway. 
Both signings were crap. But only one of them was given a further year, so in my opinion that makes it the worst one of the 2. 

[RedRock]

3 hours ago, The Bard said:

I think the key thing is our recruitment team should now know what they are looking for,  The Leicester signings made sense in the context that Nige probably wasn't impressed by suggestions (with the exception of Atkinson) and the 'team' wouldn't have as clear an idea of what is needed as they do now.    Playing Bell there is simply Testing his mettle rather than his right back abilities,  If he comes through it hardened it will have been worth his while.   Wouldn't surprise me to see him have a future as a wing back/wide midfielder.   

What ‘recruitment team’? 

We haven’t got one to my knowledge. Therein lies a massive problem and the major cause of our decline. 

[Waconda]

4 hours ago, Fordy62 said:

Well, he was a better signing than LJ’s signing of Diony. 

Debatable.

[And Its Smith]

1 hour ago, GrahamC said:

Serious question, how long have you supported us?

Because Simpson isn’t even our worst signing of the last few years.

If you take the context of his whole message ie the bad PR around the signing I think he has a very good point. 

[Dan Robin]

A predictable flop.

That being said, I guess that our financial problems justified - at least partially - the choice of confirming him: keeping Hunt would have surely made more sense, in many ways, but probably he would have cost us too much (or forced us to sell/release another decent player)...and the same could be said about the idea of signing a new player.

About the mentality/group culture aspect...it's difficult to know if he had an influence or not.

 

Edited March 7, 2022 by Dan Robin

[daored]

20 hours ago, Davefevs said:

I get the impression this announcement had no impact / bearing on Jan window and Pearson / club have been trying to agree a mutual pay-off.  They’ve now reached an agreement.

It was a poor signing looking back. I totally saw the logic at the time, and even now I’m not gonna heavily criticise Pearson for trying to get us to this season in as cheap a way as possible.

As much as I don’t think DS is on a few hundred a week, he most definitely isn’t on £18k p.w either.  He was given new terms in the summer  

 

Personally don’t think we should ever have signed Simpson either short term or on a permanent contract, due to his conviction.

However, I can see why he was signed, experienced, relatively cheap as back up to Vyner (who I think Pearson probably wanted to play at RB this season). Our lack of right sided defensive options are clear for all to see with Bell playing there Saturday, Vyner is out of favour and Tanner coming back from injury. 
 

Part of the issue with Simpson is that James & King have been unavailable this season and the three ex Leicester players have contributed very little to date. 
 

We simply don’t know what funds Pearson had available and maybe these three players he knew and probably trusts were seen as best options. Everything about wages is unknown , heard on the podcast on Sunday he was on just shy of £10K per week (£500k per year) but no idea if that’s correct and find it hard to understand how people can openly state what players earn. 
It hadn’t worked out and for me a player with should never have signed last season. 

[Davefevs]

45 minutes ago, daored said:

Everything about wages is unknown , heard on the podcast on Sunday he was on just shy of £10K per week (£500k per year) but no idea if that’s correct and find it hard to understand how people can openly state what players earn. 

Yep, I will happily state what I think, but never state as fact. My usual mantra is “I wouldn’t be surprised if he was on x”.

Re Simpson - if Weimann took a big pay cut in the summer and Simpson also had new terms agreed, and based on expectations of each I can’t believe Simpson is on anything like £8-10k pw. Without seeing his contract I’ve got no idea whether I’m close (or no cigar!).

[Waconda]

11 hours ago, Harry said:

I’d respectfully disagree. 
Diony came on loan, we realised he was Pony Diony, and he was sent back. 
Simpson came in short term, it was clear to everyone he was Gimpson Simpson, but we re-signed him anyway. 
Both signings were crap. But only one of them was given a further year, so in my opinion that makes it the worst one of the 2. 

Don't come on here talking sense. You will get slaughtered.

Apparently Simpson was on "hundreds of pounds a week"  according to the kool aid drinkers.

[Waconda]

28 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Yep, I will happily state what I think, but never state as fact. My usual mantra is “I wouldn’t be surprised if he was on x”.

Re Simpson - if Weimann took a big pay cut in the summer and Simpson also had new terms agreed, and based on expectations of each I can’t believe Simpson is on anything like £8-10k pw. Without seeing his contract I’ve got no idea whether I’m close (or no cigar!).

I wouldn't be surprised if he was on around the £5k per week plus appearance bonus.

So around £5k a week !

[Waconda]

15 hours ago, And Its Smith said:

@VT05763 how come you asked Fevs to meet before a game but you asked me to come round your house?!

You didn't turn though ?

Text me to say you were held up at Tog Hill car park.

[daored]

15 minutes ago, VT05763 said:

I wouldn't be surprised if he was on around the £5k per week plus appearance bonus.

So around £5k a week !

 

46 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Yep, I will happily state what I think, but never state as fact. My usual mantra is “I wouldn’t be surprised if he was on x”.

Re Simpson - if Weimann took a big pay cut in the summer and Simpson also had new terms agreed, and based on expectations of each I can’t believe Simpson is on anything like £8-10k pw. Without seeing his contract I’ve got no idea whether I’m close (or no cigar!).

The danger is when people state a player is on £x per week without any substance to the comment as fact

[Waconda]

6 minutes ago, daored said:

 

The danger is when people state a player is on £x per week without any substance to the comment as fact

Correct.

Both of the statements are pure guess work and of equal validity.

 

Edited March 8, 2022 by VT05763

[The Bard]

3 hours ago, VT05763 said:

Don't come on here talking sense. You will get slaughtered.

Apparently Simpson was on "hundreds of pounds a week"  according to the kool aid drinkers.

But there are educated guesses using a bit of common sense.

Minevis that In all likelihood he was on something in the region of £3 to £5 k per week.

Anything more would've been overpayment.  Anything less you'd wonder whether it would've been worth his while considering his career.

[The Journalist]

15 hours ago, GrahamC said:

Serious question, how long have you supported us?

Because Simpson isn’t even our worst signing of the last few years.

There are players in our current squad who were worse signings than Simpson (I struggle to look past Kasey Palmer for that accolade when you consider the eye-watering sums of money involved for a player who wasn't even good on loan)!

In terms of negative PR, I think people over-egg this point slightly. Bristol City are a very small bubble - the ripples weren't even felt that strongly across the local media, let alone further afield.

Most football fans probably wouldn't even know Danny Simpson was at Bristol City, frankly.

[GrahamC]

12 minutes ago, The Journalist said:

There are players in our current squad who were worse signings than Simpson (I struggle to look past Kasey Palmer for that accolade when you consider the eye-watering sums of money involved for a player who wasn't even good on loan)!

In terms of negative PR, I think people over-egg this point slightly. Bristol City are a very small bubble - the ripples weren't even felt that strongly across the local media, let alone further afield.

Most football fans probably wouldn't even know Danny Simpson was at Bristol City, frankly.

Absolutely so.

Simpson hasn’t worked out, but by any measure he was a low cost risk.

Personally I was always uncomfortable with his signing, no matter how he’d worked out but you’re spot on, in the scheme of things that means very little.

Palmer for me is up there with Gustav Engvall (who cost £2m, never started a single league game, no goals, then was sold for a rumoured £200k) as the worst signing that we have ever made.

[The Journalist]

2 minutes ago, GrahamC said:

Absolutely so.

Simpson hasn’t worked out, but by any measure he was a low cost risk.

Personally I was always uncomfortable with his signing, no matter how he’d worked out but you’re spot on, in the scheme of things that means very little.

Palmer for me is up there with Gustav Engvall (who cost £2m, never started a single league game, no goals, then was sold for a rumoured £200k) as the worst signing that we have ever made.

On that theme, I was actually going to edit my original post to say just that - to downplay the PR impact isn't to say I supported his signing.

Like you, I didn't like it at all. Anyone who didn't want him here was well within their rights to be unhappy about it.

[Davefevs]

36 minutes ago, The Journalist said:

On that theme, I was actually going to edit my original post to say just that - to downplay the PR impact isn't to say I supported his signing.

Like you, I didn't like it at all. Anyone who didn't want him here was well within their rights to be unhappy about it.

I’m not gonna reinvent my history, my stance at the time was purely football based as I really had no real background into what happened off the pitch. I read some bits and decided that “rehab” had been done, do didn’t give it any further thought.

Playing wise I bought into the logic of resigning him in the summer.

It hadn’t worked out. It didn’t cost us much imho. Shit happens. Although we need to improve in this respect. 

[bearded_red]

Was never on board with the signing of Simpson, and it’s clearly been a complete failure, but I’m happy that there is now some sense being spoken over suggestions that he is our worst ever signing.

There are at least two still at the club that are worse, just for starters. Both of them were big fees, both of them are amongst the highest earners in the squad, both of them are, if not useless, then very close to useless, both of them are still here for no other reason than we can’t get rid of them, both of them will still be an issue for this club long after people have forgotten that Simpson even played for us.

[Waconda]

18 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I’m not gonna reinvent my history, my stance at the time was purely football based as I really had no real background into what happened off the pitch. I read some bits and decided that “rehab” had been done, do didn’t give it any further thought.

Playing wise I bought into the logic of resigning him in the summer.

It hadn’t worked out. It didn’t cost us much imho. Shit happens. Although we need to improve in this respect. 

Somewhere between  £130.000 and £260,000 (6 months on £5k - £10k per week, not including the odd appearance bonus) would be an estimation,

not a fact but "ball park"

Shit happens.

[REDOXO]

19 hours ago, The Journalist said:

Agreed - I thought in the early part of the season James looked like exactly what we've needed since Pack left. Needs to get properly fit, clearly, but he's a proper all-rounder.

I would say since Hartley left. But yes fitness is the key. If he can get most of the last ten under his belt I’m confident of picking up some useful points. 

[Red-Robbo]

11 minutes ago, VT05763 said:

Somewhere between  £130.000 and £260,000 (6 months on £5k - £10k per week, not including the odd appearance bonus) would be an estimation,

not a fact but "ball park"

Shit happens.

 

Yup. Only in football would you be able to write off a potential quarter of a million pound mistake with just a shrug, but that's the madness of the economics of the game*.

The signing does pale into insignificance compared to some of the clunkers roped in during the Lee Johnson years (although of course, he had much longer plus the "help" of Mr Ashton to sign that lot).

Still a minor blot in the copy book of NP. I'd argue that Simpson never looked fit or ready in March 2021 and I'm not even sure how he passed the physical, let alone got signed. Renewing the contract doubled down on the mistake.

 

 

* Well, only in football and politics 

 

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, Red-Robbo said:

 

Yup. Only in football would you be able to write off a potential quarter of a million pound mistake with just a shrug, but that's the madness of the economics of the game*.

The signing does pale into insignificance compared to some of the clunkers roped in during the Lee Johnson years (although of course, he had much longer plus the "help" of Mr Ashton to sign that lot).

Still a minor blot in the copy book of NP. I'd argue that Simpson never looked fit or ready in March 2021 and I'm not even sure how he passed the physical, let alone got signed. Renewing the contract doubled down on the mistake.

 

 

* Well, only in football and politics 

 

I guess you have to factor in that he started 3, sub 2 and 15 unused sub appearances, and was fit for both training / selection certainly until the turn of the year.  It’s certainly not “all of his wages down the pan”, although easy to frame it like that.

in the 2 league games he started I don’t actually think he played badly….Tin-hat on, but I thought was he was ok v West Brom too, just a shocking backpass is the lasting memory.

The key qualifier is - did he meet the expectations of Nigel Pearson for the wages outlaid?

I suspect the answer is “no”, even with the intangible off the field stuff he hopefully brought whilst here.

Could we have done better with his wages by signing someone else?

imho, undoubtedly yes.

 

[Red-Robbo]

43 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

in the 2 league games he started I don’t actually think he played badly….

 

My main memory is of a player so slow that he made Martin Kuhl look like Usain Bolt!  

He obviously hasn't been like that throughout his career and was pretty handy in his prime. Players are like anyone else though. They age at different speeds. In his case his legs were not going to let him play at 35.  Huddersfield knew this when they released him.