Davefevs

Yep. I always quoted that LJ needed a “Lenny Lawrence” type person in between him and Ashton, a mentor there 24/7, not a Marwood / Dalglish distant “guide”. As you say, someone to bounce off of, someone to squash the hair-brain ideas. I think we will see some changes in staff in the summer. Whether it gives us the right set up who knows? I think Pearson likes to watch and evaluate, not knee-jerk into change.

Beat me to it.

If I’m being honest, I’d rather have a fit King than James. James has had a few good games, but I saw more from King in his small amount of minutes than James in terms of being a better fit for City. Then again, James carried his foot injury for a while.

It’s quite possible Lowe was the un-named 4th man along with Cook, Hughton and Holden who got to the 2+ interview stage. The fact that he was in a job might be the reason that no news / rumours came out.

We might well have been. Wilder and Cooper wouldn’t have chosen City over their respective clubs though. Martin or Lowe, who knows. Both PNE and Swansea far better financial outlook than City too. I’ve said all along that I think we’ve needed the experienced football man with the younger man alongside him. No idea whether Pearson would work like that or not, but LJ definitely missed having someone (football person) as the buffer between him and Ashton.

You already know the answer to that, so I’m trying to work out the relevance of your question?

You don’t really read my posts then is all I can say. ??

No, we’ve not been getting our share for much longer than the Preston game.

Sorry??? What are you insinuating? That i unearth players by looking at data? Ha ha. Nice one. Completely wrong. You were trying to insult me. Thought so, Thanks.

Yep, as Joe Royle said - recruitment, recruitment, recruitment. Our recruitment has been sub-standard for too long. The financial situation has not made it easy at all, narrows the pool….but there are nuggets out there. We need to find them, more of them.

What we have is a blinkered view of how good some of our players are. Those players we deem to be so good can’t do it week in week out, which most likely means they aren’t as good as you think. Please don’t resort to insults either.

I completely agree. 20 points, no way. But I still think they have a better squad than us.

Miles better aren’t they?

It does doesn’t it. Team in 4th vs team in 18th, 20 points between them. You gonna tell me you think City’s squad is better? no wonder you put everything negative down to Pearson. All clear now.

Yes I am. For many reasons.

Forest in worse position than us and another £20m loss this season would see them bust ffp for this season. We have no such issues this season. Much depends on whether their covid allowances are accepted or not They can of course sell Brennan Johnson.

Only watched from about 25 mins in. Liverpool much better in possession and better patterns. That long throw is a huge weapon. Their second goal an obvious offside and potentially a shove too. Got it all to do.

Out of interest, as City are often compared to Luton. Heres a useful graphic I just found on Transfermarkt. Luton not got any players u21 in their 26 man squad. FWIW, Lansbury has started 15 / subbed on 14. City’s 24 man squad includes 4 u21s. Doesn’t include Conway, Bell…assume it is based on minutes played. Heres the minutes of the u21s for each team. Just thought it was interesting to compare one v the other. Over 5k minutes played by our u21s….just 159 by Luton’s. Luton have got recruitment spot-on with Harford, Chapple and Socik. It is what we must aspire to, to get ourselves back on track.

The EFL have published (recently) that clubs can offset up to £5m in 19/20, £5m in 20/21 and £2.5m this season. This goes against their previous rules which said you can offset Covid-linked revenue losses (paraphrased). You could argue that last season we lost £12m of revenue, whereas the new rules say only £5m. What we don’t know is whether the new rules are - you can claim these without providing evidence, but you can can claim more with appropriate evidence. It seems some clubs are specifically calling out £millions in their accounts. City just used words rather than categorically stating an amount. That is not to say the FFP return hasn’t done so…we don’t get to see that. If we could claim £12m rather than £5m, at 50% of that (because of the way FFP splits the 19/20 and 20/21 seasons) that would give us a £3.5m “benefit”…and would probably mean we start the summer on or around the £39m max. That would help considerably.

If we did move on two of those last three for the type of money you suggest, that would sort out FFP…but then we have to replace them and use that money to plug other gaps too. That is where we’d need to execute recruitment expertly. I wish we could fast forward a few months.

Toby pinched Rob @Olétweet from yesterday morning…didn’t even credit him ?

Yep, you either follow the plan….or start a new one.

…and that’s the hard bit. Until we either move a player or two on, or create some budget with re-contracting those players we paid fees for who have a year left, we really can’t move. We’ve seen how difficult it is to move on players you don’t want when they are on wages that nobody else will pay. Mutual termination weakens our financial position, for any posters thinking that is the way to get rid of them. If we can arrive in September with anything like a stronger, better balanced squad (on paper) it will have been a very successful summer. We are being massively hampered by what has gone on previously. The likelihood is that the summer feels more like inching towards what Pearson wants, rather than striding into next season. We have to get through next season with Championship status intact as a bare minimum. That sounds like setting the bar incredibly low, but until we see who moves and what budget it creates it’s really a massive unknown. As it stands even bringing is a “George Tanner” is out of budget currently. I guess we will start to build the picture when we know what is happening to those OOC this summer plus Baker: Andy King Robbie Cundy Callum O’Dowda Timm Klose Nathan Baker Then we are into the likes of the players with no future (alleged / speculation) or too costly to keep based on minutes: Taylor Moore Tyreeq Bakinson Kasey Palmer Nahki Wells can we get a fee and all of their wages picked up? Here’s hoping. If someone like Palmer doesn’t want to leave, we are stuck with the best part of £2m completely tied up. and then we are into those with a year left who cost us fees: Tomas Kalas Dan Bentley Han-Noah Massengo It really is gonna be a nervy summer. Whats left might not actually be what Pearson wants, just that he can’t “trade” them either! Sorry to depress OTIB on a sunny, Sunday morning.

Good post. The squad was unbalanced even at the start of the season….compromises made in summer recruitment after losing several players. Through injury, it’s been exposed further. The finances have made it difficult to address that imbalance. Perhaps if you were Craig it would be a help! ? See SuperSonic’s quoted post above. I guess if you take the best bits of every player and take that as your baseline, you’ll see a decent team / squad. But our players don’t play at those levels week in week out for they? Plus it is unbalanced with little depth. The fact that our young ones are covering that depth makes my opinion that it isn’t a great squad. But all about opinions, just explaining mine. ?