The Dolman Pragmatist Posted January 19, 2011 Report Share Posted January 19, 2011 Please read my post, and actually take on board what ive said....or at least try, if you are capable. I'll explain again. We NEED to bring in 1 or 2 new players. I UNDERSTAND we do not have any money as the club is running on a loss, but I DO UNDERSTAND our chairman does have money. I also understand he has pumped a lot of money into the club in recent years. What I am saying is, with this current crop of players, I think we will go down. What Im questioning is, what will cost us more in the long run....1 or 2 new signings, whether its loan signings (more likely) or permanent.....or relegation to League 1?????????? Please try to process what im saying. Thank you I'll try to ignore how unpleasant and patronising your post above is, and reply to the gist of it. If our experiences 30 years ago are anything to go by, it might well cost us more in the long run to buy players now and put them on Championship wages, than to be relegated. That is not to say that I want it to happen, but a balance has to be achieved. We cannot risk bankrupting the club, and we cannot rely on the Chairman bailing us out year on year. Having said that, I am sure we are trying to recruit players now and will make sensible business decisions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy082005 Posted January 19, 2011 Report Share Posted January 19, 2011 I'll try to ignore how unpleasant and patronising your post above is, and reply to the gist of it. If our experiences 30 years ago are anything to go by, it might well cost us more in the long run to buy players now and put them on Championship wages, than to be relegated. That is not to say that I want it to happen, but a balance has to be achieved. We cannot risk bankrupting the club, and we cannot rely on the Chairman bailing us out year on year. Having said that, I am sure we are trying to recruit players now and will make sensible business decisions. no more unpleasant and patronising as the post I was replying to In reply to your post, I pretty much agree with what you said, but it doesnt escape the fact that, with this current crop of players, next year there is a strong chance we will be back in League One. Its such a shame we persisted with Gary Johnson as long as we did, and let him spend the money he did Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yate super reds Posted January 19, 2011 Report Share Posted January 19, 2011 well if haynes leaves i can see us bringing someone in as akinde has gone out on loan and henderson as well so thats will be 3 players gone if haynes does go Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
downendcity Posted January 19, 2011 Report Share Posted January 19, 2011 1) We are losing money as our wage bill exceeds our income 2) We have too many players, and those signed in the summer, on big wages who have not performed, we cannot get rid of 3) We are in the bottom 7 4) We have never won anything 5) we are a small club 6) we are not first choice, second choice or third choice for many players 7) We have no money But apart fropm that things are looking pretty good for BCFC! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dolman Pragmatist Posted January 19, 2011 Report Share Posted January 19, 2011 Its such a shame we persisted with Gary Johnson as long as we did, and let him spend the money he did Quite agree and this is why the hero worship of Steve Lansdown perplexes me sometimes. He has made a number of awful decision since being Chairman - appointing Tinnion was the worst, but also allowing Johnson so much freedom to sign (dreadful) players; gambling on overseas loan signings; and the appointment of Coppell (for which I still feel he must take the principle blame). I am not one that thinks that the club is safe because Steve is in the chair. His heart is clearly with the club, but he is decidedly fallible, which is why I don't want to see us getting ourselves into further financial trouble. I am not convinced that we have a strategy for the future that sits comfortably within the present economic climate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CiderHider Posted January 19, 2011 Report Share Posted January 19, 2011 Quite agree and this is why the hero worship of Steve Lansdown perplexes me sometimes. He has made a number of awful decision since being Chairman - appointing Tinnion was the worst, but also allowing Johnson so much freedom to sign (dreadful) players; gambling on overseas loan signings; and the appointment of Coppell (for which I still feel he must take the principle blame). I am not one that thinks that the club is safe because Steve is in the chair. His heart is clearly with the club, but he is decidedly fallible, which is why I don't want to see us getting ourselves into further financial trouble. I am not convinced that we have a strategy for the future that sits comfortably within the present economic climate. Perplexes you? Perhaps you should educate yourself then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riaz Posted January 19, 2011 Report Share Posted January 19, 2011 Its 1st of February already??! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy082005 Posted January 19, 2011 Report Share Posted January 19, 2011 Its 1st of February already??! I think the OP is referring the the fact that, as usual, other clubs seem to pull their finger out way before ours does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redcliffe 78 Posted January 19, 2011 Report Share Posted January 19, 2011 I honestly believe if the right player comes along Landsdown will dig deep again, regardless of who leaves AG. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CiderHider Posted January 19, 2011 Report Share Posted January 19, 2011 I think the OP is referring the the fact that, as usual, other clubs seem to pull their finger out way before ours does. So your saying the club is being lazy by not pulling its finger out, seriously? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy082005 Posted January 19, 2011 Report Share Posted January 19, 2011 So your saying the club is being lazy by not pulling its finger out, seriously? did I say that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CiderHider Posted January 19, 2011 Report Share Posted January 19, 2011 did I say that? Yes, I think its fair to say you implied it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy082005 Posted January 19, 2011 Report Share Posted January 19, 2011 Yes, I think its fair to say you implied it. I didnt imply anything of the sort. I dont know the reasons why each January we seem fairly slow off the mark when it comes to signing players, either on loan, or permanently Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riaz Posted January 19, 2011 Report Share Posted January 19, 2011 I didnt imply anything of the sort. I dont know the reasons why each January we seem fairly slow off the mark when it comes to signing players, either on loan, or permanently Well we all know why we are slow this january....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy082005 Posted January 19, 2011 Report Share Posted January 19, 2011 Well we all know why we are slow this january....... Im guessing you mean because of the financial situation. Out of interest, has Lansdown ever come out and actually said "we must sell before we can buy...." I appreciate he has said we need to work on a smaller squad, and players have to move on to find football, and I am fully aware that to get to a 24 man squad we have to release a fair few players. However, I dont ever recall him saying anything along the lines of, there will be no players coming in unless we ship a fair few out. Anyway, if Haynes goes, thats 3 out the door....including one of our higher earners. Getting the squad down to 24 will take time, if Citys policy is now turning into "we wont be bringing in any new players until our squad is down to 24"....then prepare yourself for "local" derbies with Swindon and Exeter next year Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted January 19, 2011 Report Share Posted January 19, 2011 I was speaking to Alan Walsh recently and he said the Squad is to big and we need to let 5 or 6 go before we can bring in new faces, There aware we're short in a few place (Left Back left Midfield and Centre Back mainly) and this will be sorted in time, As normal some fans have no idea of real world, Lansdown has £560 million not Bristol City that money is lansdown and its up to him where he spends it, If he choices not to give any more of HIS cash to the club then we will sign no one as the bank books read about -20 million Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrahamC Posted January 19, 2011 Report Share Posted January 19, 2011 If Haynes does go in the next day or so I wouldn't be too surprised if we did manage to bring someone in by the Forest game. We'll then have offloaded Akinde, have Henderson out on loan too and can probably expect another one out by the end of the transfer window, so the caller to Radio Bristol last week who said three out this week and one in, could be proved right after all... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ison Posted January 19, 2011 Report Share Posted January 19, 2011 1) We are losing money as our wage bill exceeds our income 2) We have too many players, and those signed in the summer, on big wages who have not performed, we cannot get rid of 3) We are in the bottom 7 4) We have never won anything 5) we are a small club 6) we are not first choice, second choice or third choice for many players 7) We have no money So who exactly, and by what means do you expect to sign anyone? We are in a very difficult position, and this season is ONLY about survival. KM will then have the space in the aquad to bring in young hungry players , players with something to prove and a return to the drive and desire we lost in the last 2 seasons /thread Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCFC_Dan Posted January 19, 2011 Report Share Posted January 19, 2011 Quite agree and this is why the hero worship of Steve Lansdown perplexes me sometimes. He has made a number of awful decision since being Chairman - appointing Tinnion was the worst, but also allowing Johnson so much freedom to sign (dreadful) players; gambling on overseas loan signings; and the appointment of Coppell (for which I still feel he must take the principle blame). I am not one that thinks that the club is safe because Steve is in the chair. His heart is clearly with the club, but he is decidedly fallible, which is why I don't want to see us getting ourselves into further financial trouble. I am not convinced that we have a strategy for the future that sits comfortably within the present economic climate. The thing with Lansdown is that while he makes mistakes, they've all been understandable mistakes. I know plenty of people who had reservations about appointing Tinnion but show me a City fan who didn't want him to succeed. He was going to be manager someday, one way or the other, and as long as he remained at the club he would have been working to get himself the job. He shouldn't have been appointed but I can understand why he was. I also know plenty of people who had reservations about appointing Coppell but there's no doubting his pedigree at this level and I believe it was a gamble worth taking. The alternative of appointing Millen back in May (and to be honest he was the best option if you exclude unrealistic ones like O'Driscoll) might have been better but unless we ran away with the league there would always be people complaining that things would have been better if we'd got Coppell in. Right now the club isn't in a place where it can run on a "sensible" economic basis. It can spend to move forward and take a risk, or it can shrink to become a club that will never compete at the top. Neither guarantees long term survival and as far as I'm concerned the whole point in sport is to attempt to succeed. A failed attempt at glory is better than a hundred years of mediocrity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chappers Posted January 19, 2011 Report Share Posted January 19, 2011 A failed attempt at glory is better than a hundred years of mediocrity. As one who went through '82, I would suggest you are talking bolox. If we get to the Premier League, do we have to spend £200m per year going for glory? Otherwise we'll just be a mediocre Premier League side, and you would not want that. Oh, and thanks for the offer of funding this bid for glory, send the money to City, and they'll happily spend it to chase your fantasy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCFC_Dan Posted January 19, 2011 Report Share Posted January 19, 2011 As one who went through '82, I would suggest you are talking bolox. If we get to the Premier League, do we have to spend £200m per year going for glory? Otherwise we'll just be a mediocre Premier League side, and you would not want that. Oh, and thanks for the offer of funding this bid for glory, send the money to City, and they'll happily spend it to chase your fantasy. Whoever said I'd fund it? Lansdown is helping to fund it and that's why I support him. There's a whole world of difference between investing to succeed and wasting silly money. Sadly people seem to think it's one or the other. We're as likely to see a 1982 scenario if the club cuts back on spending as we are if they keep it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dolman Pragmatist Posted January 19, 2011 Report Share Posted January 19, 2011 Perplexes you? Perhaps you should educate yourself then Sorry? Would you care to explain that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dolman Pragmatist Posted January 19, 2011 Report Share Posted January 19, 2011 The thing with Lansdown is that while he makes mistakes, they've all been understandable mistakes. I know plenty of people who had reservations about appointing Tinnion but show me a City fan who didn't want him to succeed. He was going to be manager someday, one way or the other, and as long as he remained at the club he would have been working to get himself the job. He shouldn't have been appointed but I can understand why he was. I also know plenty of people who had reservations about appointing Coppell but there's no doubting his pedigree at this level and I believe it was a gamble worth taking. The alternative of appointing Millen back in May (and to be honest he was the best option if you exclude unrealistic ones like O'Driscoll) might have been better but unless we ran away with the league there would always be people complaining that things would have been better if we'd got Coppell in. Right now the club isn't in a place where it can run on a "sensible" economic basis. It can spend to move forward and take a risk, or it can shrink to become a club that will never compete at the top. Neither guarantees long term survival and as far as I'm concerned the whole point in sport is to attempt to succeed. A failed attempt at glory is better than a hundred years of mediocrity. We'll have to disagree about the Coppell situation. I stll find it hard to believe that alarm bells didn't start ringing as soon as he made it clear he wouldn't take up the post immediately. Perhaps Steve Lansdown knew he was taking a risk, but felt it was worth taking. Don't get me wrong, I think Lansdown has been good chairman - possibly great - but I still worry that we cannot use him as a safety net and take chances this season that will come back to haunt us in years to come. We've just experienced almost precisely 100 years of mediocrity - would you really have blown all that for one failed attempt at glory? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bcfcnick Posted January 19, 2011 Report Share Posted January 19, 2011 I think it is mainly defence where players need to go out and a couple with real quality need to come in. Central midfield can be resolved with the addition of a play-maker and possibly a left-sided winger but all four of Nyatanga Stewart ,Hunt and Cisse need to be shipped out. I agree with KM's policy of not making signings that don't improve the squad but I'm afraid all four of those players don't inspire confidence. Nyatanga looks as if he has the makings of a decent centre-half but, there again, so did Clayton Fortune , I think Lewin certainly has has a better attitude and could do well but right now the Club need a solid and quality leader at the back to join Carey, Caulker, Fontaine and McCallister and Ribeiro. If Rose is going to struggle with injury (or attitude) then a left winger is needed as well. On the left if Rose is unavailable and no signings are made I'd rather use the pace and unpredictability of Sproule than JCR who, whilst being a tidy footballer, doesn't seem to be have much end product in terms of getting in crosses, other assists or goals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazooka Joe Posted January 19, 2011 Report Share Posted January 19, 2011 Best things come to those who wait. Yeah.....bloody relegation! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazooka Joe Posted January 19, 2011 Report Share Posted January 19, 2011 As it's been said a million times before..............We can't BUY until we have SOLD We couldn't get rid of some of the rubbish we 've got even at a car boot sale. Just give 'em away to any suckers who'll have them. Then we can start bringing in some quality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nogbad the Bad Posted January 19, 2011 Report Share Posted January 19, 2011 KM made it quite clear we need a left back and a midfield player some time ago. Many fans thought that such was the obvious long term need he might already have a couple lined up to come in early in January, but that obviously wasn't the case. The club will get rid of who they can to reduce numbers but, whatever happens, I'm pretty sure we'll have newcomers in those two positions by the end of the window. KM and SL must be extremely worried by recent displays - City have looked a relegation-bound side far too often and surely SL won't let that become a reality for the sake of 2 players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chappers Posted January 19, 2011 Report Share Posted January 19, 2011 Whoever said I'd fund it? Lansdown is helping to fund it and that's why I support him. There's a whole world of difference between investing to succeed and wasting silly money. Sadly people seem to think it's one or the other. We're as likely to see a 1982 scenario if the club cuts back on spending as we are if they keep it up. Sorry, I assumed that your enthusiasm to spend on players meant that you were happy to fund it. You mean you want SL to fund new players, as well as the Ground, and continuing to fund the losses caused by our excessive wage bill. There is no such thing as 'investing to succeed' - We tried that under Ward/ Davidson and only succeeded in getting relegated, we tried again under Pulis, and succeeded in signing a pile of sicknotes, Johnson tried it recently and saddled us with a bunch or high-earning journeymen - "wasting silly money" is what happens with about 95% of football Clubs who intend to "invest to succeed". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oops Posted January 19, 2011 Report Share Posted January 19, 2011 The trouble is, the preposterous fee paid by Villa for Darren "6 out of 10" Bent will cause a domino effect in the market. Players within reach before Gerard Houllier and Randy Lerner's joint lobotomy will have an extra couple of hundred thousand added to their value, even at lower Championship level. I think it will be a disappointing window for City fans to be honest, maybe get a League One left back at the last minute, but as for a quality creative midfielder, they're as rare as fish tits as it is. And picking up a bargain from a Premier League club is simply not going to happen. We will be looking to the top of League 1 for our marquee signings this year I reckon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red badger Posted January 19, 2011 Report Share Posted January 19, 2011 Sorry, I assumed that your enthusiasm to spend on players meant that you were happy to fund it. You mean you want SL to fund new players, as well as the Ground, and continuing to fund the losses caused by our excessive wage bill. There is no such thing as 'investing to succeed' - We tried that under Ward/ Davidson and only succeeded in getting relegated, we tried again under Pulis, and succeeded in signing a pile of sicknotes, Johnson tried it recently and saddled us with a bunch or high-earning journeymen - "wasting silly money" is what happens with about 95% of football Clubs who intend to "invest to succeed". Never clear to me why Steve Lansdown emerges from some posts like the chap who's having to cover the costs of other people's decisions. He's been the chairman of this club for years...running the place from top to bottom. The main interest in funding the ground is coming from SL himself...he needs no encouragement...it's his bid for glory. And fair play to him. The wage bill is, and has been for years, under his control...he's the boss. If we need new players it's because the ones he's sanctioned us signing aren't up to the job. And if managers haven't been up to signing the right players then they are managers he appointed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.