Fuber

Just now, Marina's Rolls Royce said:

He's spent a total £2m ? 

Let's not let the facts get in the way of the populist narrative.

In my head I was thinking off the top of my head since January - so sorry, allow me to amend that to £5.5m (forgot McCrorie) - for all the difference that makes. 

Fees in during the same period are £36m.

£30m up.

And 35% lower wage budget (circa £23m p/annum, down from £34m).

The bank account. Creativity costs money. 

Pearsons sold players for £35m+ and spent £2m ffs.

6 minutes ago, Hot Air said:

You are mistaken: there was no whatboutism and no attempt to relativize what has occurred. I simply object to BCFC fans pretending they have a moral high ground on this issue. 

Brown was sacked by Exeter and was then employed by BRFC. The matter has been handled by the courts, who have handed down their judgement. The player has indicated his intention to rehabilitate himself and the club have committed themselves to helping him do this. I consider the matter closed.

Partridge, Brooker and Orr were employed by City at the time of their offences. I personally would have fired them and encouraged them to pursue their careers at another club. 

Brown wasn't even sacked at any stage by any club was he? - His contract ended June 30th and Exeter released him while he was suspended. So thats irrelevant.

There is zero equivilence here, and you do relativize it by saying we/City fans don't have the moral high ground because of something 20 years ago, something for which the charges now are generally greater (Kyle Dempsey 12-month suspended). We would not (and don't) condone what Brown has done due to a sentence having been handed down and being served like you seem to. That's all there is to it. We would not want him employed by Bristol City, in the same way we didnt want Simpson employed.

You also highlight the double standard in the above by saying due to being convicted the club (City) should have sacked Patridge et al - yet Brown has never been sacked, sp you're telling my that simply due to the time of year the offense was committed, Brown gets a pass for Rovers because....?

Also unironically ended up on your forum to try and find any information I thought I was missing but came across gems like this - which consider the HG2 movement are corkers.





Sorry for having some morality.

53 minutes ago, RedRaw said:

They weren’t crimes against women….drunken ********* fighting bouncers, not even comparable.

I’ll ask you again, do you think crimes against women should be covered under”social obligation”? 

And to save time, you have just signed a man who admitted attacking a woman and was fined for it in a court of law. I could also chuck in other ‘misdemeanours’ but expensive lawyers are marvellous for certain people 

Added to which, Patridge and Scott Brown both did community hours for their time. Brown however..


Partridge, Brooker, and Orr. were all also given a sentence, and suspended by the club for the same period.

57 minutes ago, Hot Air said:

So do you believe that your own club should have sacked Bradley Orr, David Partridge and Steve Brooker after they were sentenced to prison for their role in a drunken brawl? 

Please don't pretend that you are in a position of moral authority on this. 

I would expect the clubs to suspend them.

Alternatively, if we're working the whataboutism angle; If they - like Jevani - had beaten women, in for example Bristol City centre - then yes, I'd 100% expect them sacked, because I'm not some degenerate. At least the bouncer could defend himself in the indicated incident and did so.

In the same way I was 100% against the club employing Simpson. Moral fibre is determined by the individual, and its not your right to question anyone on this forum when you're attempting to draw compairsons in defence of your own player. Its a bit sickening to be honest. I'd feel like morals have improved slightly in 17 years.

The fact you're trying to even make this a debateable point while calling us tinpoint is the most ironic thing I've read on this forum.

27 minutes ago, Red Exile said:

Riddled with contradictions for me. I mean which is it:

'we've got to bide our time' - 'we can't compete with the parachute payments' - 'if we can sell players for £25m every year we're building that nest egg up to be able to compete in the longer term' 

all of which suggests its a long haul, steady building

or: 

Luton went up with 'far less talent than we've got in our squad' - 'with the squad of players we've got we've got a great chance of competing at the top end of the table - maybe we'll strike lucky - that's the way we've got to look at it' - 'we've got the makings of a promotion winning side if we can get that little bit of luck and that consistency'

which suggests over to you Pearson, if we don't go up its your fault.

Good to hear something from him I guess but hardly inspirational!

 

Therein lies the issues. Big spending when its someone he likes - all overly emotional for an owner. inspite of the fact LJ (and MA) left us up sh*ts creek without a paddle.

For all the money he puts in; the management of the club, integration, and strategy are sorely lacking. Seems like NP is the only one telling it as it is. If this carries on I coould see him walk.

34 minutes ago, phantom said:

Ditto 

I'm pretty MEH about all this now 

The last player to leave I was really gutted about was coming back from Glastonbury to hear Scott Murray had signed for Reading 

Webster.

5 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Styles I’m guessing?

Yup - Damn autocorrect on the phone.

GK, DM, CM, ST.

Examples; Southwood (Cheltenham), Iroegbaunam (Villa), Sykes (Barnsley), Zeqiri (Brighton, Loan). 

59 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

GK, CB, some kinda Central Player.

Then maybe a striker of sort of we deem fit.

Honestly, between Dickie, Vyner, Pring, Roberts, Araoye, and Naismith able to cover? Think we should be OK until Rob is fit circa (hopefully) November, if similar time frame to Benarous for rehab.

Think we need more options on in the middle. Not enough strength in the middle with Massengo gone and now Scott, assuming McCrorie is to challenge Tanner for RB. Add in competition for O'Leary to then allowing Wiles-Richards and Bajic out on loan and to be sold respectively.

I'd see if we can get a striker on loan to Januray to cover for Conway, or compete for the season, would be ideal.

So GK, DM, CM, ST?

Off the top of my head (of players made available for transfer or mooted on here previously) examples of each position would be the likes of Matej Kovar (linked with Hull, United looking for fee, or loan with obligation), Callim Styles (linked with Watford, but nothing has materialised), Tim Iroegbunam (linked with a move out of Villa), then possibly someone in the mould of Andi Zeqiri perhaps on Loan? (Basel last season on loan, apparently only 70% of £15kpw wages, with minimal (£300k) fee). We should be able to fit all within wage structure utilising signing on fees where needed. Note that I'm not saying all of the above at the same time are realistic, but just the first players for each position popped into my head, from browsing socials - we likely wouldn't quire have the amount available for the above suggestions.

Would take the hit on wages this season slightly, but whoever we get in we can offset with a portion of the Scott funds and have players ready next season to hopefully transition into the squad from the academy or having been out on loan (Taylor-Clarke, Sebastian Palmer-Houlden, Araoye, Knight-Lebel) for those whose deals run out end of season (Vyner, Williams, King, James, Weimann), so depending on which of the latter are released, we'd then be bringing wages more back into parity next season. Would also allow us to, where needed, evaluate deals on those whose contracts expire, including NP, towards the second half of the season.

Interesting time to be a City fan. Will be disappointed if we're not able to turn this situation around as a chance to strengthen moderately.

44 minutes ago, italian dave said:

We neither of us know what goes on behind the scenes, but I’d wager money on the fact that LJ didn’t agree to whatever ‘strategy’ resulted in those sales. 

He bought into the fact that we had to sell, of course, but not at all costs. We had no plan b in place for either of those departures and it cost us dear. 

If he seriously couldn't see the impact of the inflated wages and what that meant for liquidity and FFP - then that's his problem. He outed that he had sign off on transfers. More than once.

Comparatively, NP has multiple times quoted the proviso of bringing parity of wages across the squad and the way in which it eases squad and player management, and the financial implications.

Anyhow - I won't derail this thread getting back unto the LJ/ MA critiques. The benefit here is we have time to resolve. Let's hope Tinns et al have targets lined up, still time to get some business done.

6 minutes ago, Open End Numb Legs said:

Football aside, the Bournemouth area has to be a bit nicer for AS to live in than Wolverhampton. Just my opinion having been to both places.

About the ambition thing, it just comes down to maths and making gradual progress.

We will judge this better at the end of the season.

Closer to home as well - can't begrudge him that aspect.

Just a shame that someone such as Brighton or Palace didn't come in for him; Bournemouth for me could either be a fantastic move or all go pear shaped under Iroala. There's always risk.

2 minutes ago, italian dave said:

LJ also lost his two best players just when a promotion push was going to determine whether he kept his job or not. 

LJ forced that on himself with the overspending from the "Clubs in Bag" Approach. He agreed to the strategy with MA at the end of the day.

13 minutes ago, steviestevieneville said:

Pearson has said . We’re close to our ceiling height on wages. 

Depends on whether that statement takes into account offers on the table. Alex had one, as well as Kalas.

That coud easily be £20kpw-£30kpw budgeted free up, assuming latter isnt signing the former now no longer needed with AS leaving.

12 minutes ago, Fontaineofallknowledge said:

Don't think we have cash flow issues so not sure this is relevant for ffp calcs?

Not that I'm aware of - time of deal dictates FFP impact - recognised at transfer for the total deal amount (so if £20m up front and £5m over 3 years, its just recognised at £25m point of transfer) - i.e. £8m for Bryan hit the books 18-19 season. Although anyone can feel free to correct me as not 100% certain.

2 minutes ago, Dolman Block B said:

Wonder if City will go in for K Moore at Bournemouth ?

Not with his wages. Unless we organise a deal where Bournemouth subsidise his wages in exchange for money off the Scott deal.

Where has this news come out of? - I havent seen anything on socials... If true -

3 minutes ago, Lew-T said:

Bugger.

21 hours ago, Mike Stone said:

It's one of the dearest pubs near the ground , don't encourage people in there to be ripped off.

 

...Eh?

Always considered the Packet to be decent - if they start up-pricing on match-days they'd be shut by now. Its one of the few selling points, beer-garden aside.

Usually optimistic. However.

Midfield nonexistent for me. Not impressed with any of Williams, Knight, or James today, all seemed lost without Scott in front.

Could count second balls or 50-50s won second half on one hand.

Tanner and Pring, by their own standards, poor.

Plusses - Dickie and Zak looked decently solid, former especially in an unfamiliar position.

Bell scoring - good for his confidence. Wells worked hard.

Ticketing system not working with android after the players-fans day is a farce.

Need to buckle up for Millwall off that performance.

2 hours ago, phantom said:

Again..... 

 

Ah, sorry Phants, missed that one.

However I'd caveat that by saying in that case its just absolutely piss-poor by the club. I'd argue they've lost more money moving over to O'Neills - in a shortsighted move at an attempt of temporary cash-cow - than they otherwise would have done sticking with and awaiting change of Hummel's UK distributor (As others have mooted in thread). Due to the associated cost of reduced longer term commercial gain from a better value and higher quality suite of products they would have had sticking with the latter.
Alternaitvely as the market is likely mostly children, for all that I'm assuming, it may be parents wont care as long as the kids dont care and just want the latest shirt. Can guarentee those that do buy shirts are buying out more 'classic' options to avoid the quality issues -  thereby costing the club money. I've seen a couple who are more vocal critics on the socials side doing exactly that including a friend.

More surprised the club dont just bundle the shirts in with promotional season ticket deals on renewals to be able to get an idea of the scope demand for the kit earlier on - would save more of the stock issues from happening to a marginal extent, i.e. optional £20 and £30 add-on fees to season tickets (Adult and kids) deals for shirts. for early and end of season renewal and new season tickets up to July 15th, not that O'Neills have an excuse as lead times by their own website are 4-8 weeks it seems for UK customer(s).

And thats not even touching on the 'splat' issue. Becoming apparent rather that waiting for the wound to heal, we've cut the nose to spite the face - in not waiting for Hummel to resolve their distribution/distributor issues. Buck stops with JL as Chairman at the end of the day.

On 03/08/2023 at 14:43, BCFC_Dan said:

I always liked him from that sort of interview. He's clearly an interesting, thoughtful and intelligent man.

I've never enjoyed his spiky press conferences, though. I understand his frustration at some of the stupid questions, but I've felt he was a bit disrespectful towards journalists sometimes. It's good to know which people to have time for and which not, but everyone deserves to be treated with a certain level of respect.

I also felt there was a long period of time where there was little or no progress on show. Right up until this calendar year it was pretty hard to see anything concrete. Some would argue that there was a lot being sorted out behind the scenes, and I was prepared to believe that, but equally there was nothing to show it, which is often the way with these things. Fortunately, it does look like those who believed him and believed in him are being proved right. Things are genuinely moving forward now, and Pearson seems much happier for it. Perhaps it won't last, but right now it looks like, despite a few rough moments, a good man is doing a good job. I can probably admit I was wrong in my previous judgement of him.

Think it depends - some journalists (few of them more-so now) have integrity, ask the right questions in depth. Stuart James, Winter, Piercy, etc. Who actually know how to interview someone.
Most media and interviewers are now just frauds looking for content to generate clicks and revenue, unfortunately.

As for the bit in bold - I think it depends in what context you view it. For some, like myself - I wasn't much appeased by how 21-22 went overall. However, nothing was going to happen 20-21 due to the contract situation and the circus around MA with multiple players (too many of them I'd add) not playing and on bigger contracts.

As he addressed in the interview above; its all well and good informing players they're no longer required unless you are able to actually move them on. Culture is one of those overlooked aspects that can require a breaking of club hierarchy to sort - compare and contrast Matt Mills to Kasper Schmeichel's opinions on NP. It's literally taken this long to get a point where we can firmly say this is a 'Pearson' squad. Instead of having the caveat of overpaid shysters from the MA era.

On 02/08/2023 at 23:50, Not Banksy said:

Just a thought .. Thinking about it.. have they pulled the kit as it had the splat on it.. surely releasing in September was never the plan… they must have seen how much people hated it after the third kit came out… seems a bit of a mad situation to not have an away kit this long after the deal was made with oneills 

This was my take thinking on it the other day. Retracted to amend - hence delays in production.

For all that it matters:

1 hour ago, ExiledAjax said:

This is the issue though. I know the Club always cry "commercially sensitive" but all I want from them is communication.

Explain what they are doing and why and that removes the speculation and cries of "bullshit". Yes it opens them up to challenge and debate but we're supposed to be a Club where like minded people join together to support a common goal - our team(s). They shouldn't be afraid of some communication.

Communicate, collaborate, and club together. 

Gould understood this from his time at Surrey, I wish Alexander would buy into it a bit more.

I think the thing to consider here, is that until Phil's comfortable in the role - we're unlikely to hear much until he gets the measure of it. Gould, initial press release aside, had precious little communications with the fans.

As for the kit situation - its shambolic. But ultimately JL made that decision as a quick cash-grab with the Man City cup tie in view of the Hummel/Distributions issues; we're now seeing a case-study in how short term decision making can implicate longer term damage. He likely asked Alexander (at short notice) if there was a supplier at hand who could do it.

As for the badge element - if anyone is to blame its the marketing and media team who likely helped or at least corresponded with O'Neils with regards to the iconography used. It's annoying - as I have family in Ireland and their GAA merchandise is superb.

I'd have just turned to them and said - take your GAA Cork 22/23 kit - alter it to Bristol City badge, iconography and sponsors. Done, sorted. Not much lead time as its something for which the press/template already basically exists and the quality is better than your current football shirt line-up. Simple and clean.

26 minutes ago, Grey Fox said:

According to my understanding this is a forum where we , Bristol City fans, can debate our opinions, and not a mouth piece for a select group of accountants to which the rest of us must pay homage.

So , for the “billionanth “ time , I don’t agree with your opinion, which I find to be small minded at best.

To reiterate,

According to the arch bishop of our accountant clique, Mr Pop , we will not fall foul of FFP if we don’t sell Scott this season 

Having Scott in our side must improve our chances of promotion.

We have excellent facilities in terms of the ground, training, medical centre , academy etc

We have a top Manager

We have a number of young players who I would expect to improve from last year’s “ blooding”

We have strengthened, particularly in defence

 

yes, there are no guarantees, but there is room for informed hope, and a calculated gamble this year. 
 

You win nothing without ambition 

To be fair GF - the point with regards to "stand in the players way" is not Monkeh's opinion or "mouthpiece" spiel from a "group of accountants"; but a partial quote of words that are attributable to our very owner.

While I can see youor viewpoint, I don't think its as black and white or small minded to be thinking about selling Scott. I don't think it was small minded when we did it with Bryan, Reid or Webster.

It just may be worth taking into consideration that we have chance here to completely wipe the FFP slate sparkling clean; as well as.spend on improving not just the midfield, but get a keeper, defender, and forward options if we so feel. For example, is we sell Scott now instead of next Summer for £15m - it may avoid us needing to sell a second player to balance costs - so better squad depth and planning for the longer term.

Honestly wouldn't mind £21m plus Cundle and Sarkic.

On 16/07/2023 at 10:47, BS3_RED said:

A tweet currently on Twitter that Leeds have now agreed to price match away ticket costs.

 

https://twitter.com/FootyAccums/status/1680169934414835712?s=20

Being Spearheaded by their supporters trust iirc.