Esmond Million's Bung Posted May 20, 2014 Report Share Posted May 20, 2014 Great to see the resident ITK's on this thread again, the one's who said last week the board were blocking attempts of Anton signing Spanish kids, blah, blah, blah. The one's who told us we missed out on Chris Forrester and pretty much 12 months on he's still looking for a league club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin1988 Posted May 20, 2014 Report Share Posted May 20, 2014 SOD was playing Reid and Bryan whenever he could. SC hasn't done that IMO however Reid and Bryan have been offered new deals which is encouraging. You brought that up earlier this season and it was shown to be categorically untrue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Posted May 20, 2014 Report Share Posted May 20, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esmond Million's Bung Posted May 20, 2014 Report Share Posted May 20, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Posted May 20, 2014 Report Share Posted May 20, 2014 When he does finally find a club I look forward to hearing how much he is earning. I won't know because it won't be for BCFC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid in the Riot Posted May 20, 2014 Report Share Posted May 20, 2014 You brought that up earlier this season and it was shown to be categorically untrue. Link please... From 1st March Reid played 12 minutes, that's categorically true. Ok so he had an injury but still didn't feature in at least half a dozen games that he was available for...he was dropped SC said so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid in the Riot Posted May 20, 2014 Report Share Posted May 20, 2014 When he does finally find a club I look forward to hearing how much he is earning. Haha. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esmond Million's Bung Posted May 20, 2014 Report Share Posted May 20, 2014 I won't know because it won't be for BCFC. Pity, but I see you skipped the other bit you and your mate got wrong, Matt Grimes is the next stick is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Posted May 20, 2014 Report Share Posted May 20, 2014 Pity, but I see you skipped the other bit you and your mate got wrong, Matt Grimes is the next stick is it? You mean the bit about the Spanish lads, yes? Just because they've now joined, doesn't mean to say what went on before that isn't true. There are plenty of sticks if you go walking in the woods, rather than sitting in a marble hall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin1988 Posted May 20, 2014 Report Share Posted May 20, 2014 Link please... From 1st March Reid played 12 minutes, that's categorically true. Ok so he had an injury but still didn't feature in at least half a dozen games that he was available for...he was dropped SC said so. Sorry my mistake, it was Screech. I could have sworn it was you. http://www.otib.co.uk/index.php?/topic/162250-the-confessional/#entry2012324 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esmond Million's Bung Posted May 20, 2014 Report Share Posted May 20, 2014 You mean the bit about the Spanish lads, yes? Just because they've now joined, doesn't mean to say what went on before that isn't true. There are plenty of sticks if you go walking in the woods, rather than sitting in a marble hall. Well I Harry I read your Irish story, a really nice story but that's all it is like everything else that you and Spud put on here, my personal favourites are when SOD arrived the kit man was shit, Mark O'Connor a coach brought in by SOD is shit, but nothing of real substance, the rest is just tittle tattle from so called disgruntled employees, who presumably are not good enough to gain employment anywhere else, if they are so unhappy at our club. Funnily enough I went for a lovely walk in the woods earlier today with my dog and you are correct lot's of sticks, the dog loved it and best of all it was meant to rain but it didn't it was a really nice day, as for marble i've got a small marble topped table, I find marbled halls so pretentious. it shouldn't matter what went before, they've been signed, you should be happy for once or weren't they the right one's?. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Port Said Red Posted May 20, 2014 Report Share Posted May 20, 2014 Perhaps it had something to do with what SC said in his Radio Bristol Interview? 'Potential signings SC: We need to look for more experienced players, 30 years olds are alright so long as they are the right ones. We need to find players 25-28. Bristol is a good city, younger players take advantage of the city nightlife and sometimes it doesn't benefit the club. Ideally a 25 year old married player with kids would be a good player. We have enough youngsters here. They might struggle but at the end of the season they will have learned something and the tough ones will break there way in to the first team. We wont be signing any 17/18/19 year olds from league 1/2 to come and play in our academy as its blocking our own players.' I find this depressing in all honesty, if thats his criteria for players we might as well have kept the ones he let go, at least they were settled and he knew what he was getting with them. We have had years and years of this kind of recruitment policy and it has got us the occasional good season in 4 or 5 and a huge debt. If we buy players in the age bracket he wants, they are hardly likely to be worth more when they leave. He says he doesn't want outside youngsters blocking ours, but he is happy to bring in people like Tyrone Barnett and have them block a place. It's forty years since we genuinely invested in youth and developing from within our own structure and it's 40 years since we had our most lasting success. Perhaps that's just coincidence? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickJ Posted May 20, 2014 Report Share Posted May 20, 2014 Hmm Will your SOD/SC prejudices and views need a bit of factual correction.................. SOD was playing Reid and Bryan whenever he could. SC hasn't done that IMO SOD was playing Reid and Bryan fairly regularly, we were losing games, and were odds on to complete a Bristol relegation double. Maybe a good reason for SC's decision? Maybe. He bombed Reid out too dont forget. And I'm not buying his record on Burns which consists of bringing him on for 10 mins. His total game time must of consisted of no more than 2 games. SOD played Burns for one minute in his 22 games in charge during 2013/14. That's ONE minute. Or 1 minute. Cotterill - managerial record: play off form - started Burns in one game and as sub in 21 others, for a lot more time than you suggest, and certainly millions of time more minutes per game than under SOD. Check here: http://www.11v11.com/teams/bristol-city/tab/players/season/2014 What's more SC's use of Burns as an impact player turned around more than one game. The evidence would suggest that when it comes to younger player selection, SC's judgment is far superior. No, it's not "genius" at all monkeh. It's quick fix football management. Maybe appropriate given the situation we were in last season, but not going forward. We need to build a strong 21s and use the loan system well. Agree with the second part of that but compared with what went on before I'd agree with Monkeh, it was genius AND quick fix, and just as well too. Unless we were to be happy with L2 football in 2014/15. Skuse would've been good enough for Cship football when we went up IMO but he was kept out the side by LJ if you recall...he was extremely pissed off about that, and his City career never really recovered from it I thought... That on the other hand is a good point well made............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marcofisher Posted May 20, 2014 Report Share Posted May 20, 2014 Joe Bryan is only just a year older than Matt Grimes, both play as midfielders yet Joe Bryan has had a better scoring record in a higher division, albeit nothing amazing but yet hes still being written off as poor youth at only 20 years old! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nogbad the Bad Posted May 20, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 20, 2014 Joe Bryan is only just a year older than Matt Grimes, both play as midfielders yet Joe Bryan has had a better scoring record in a higher division, albeit nothing amazing but yet hes still being written off as poor youth at only 20 years old! Very nearly 2 years between them, and no one has written off Joe Bryan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marcofisher Posted May 20, 2014 Report Share Posted May 20, 2014 Very nearly 2 years between them, and no one has written off Joe Bryan. Maybe exaggerated but for what has been Bryans and Reids properly full professional seasons, I don't think they have under performed at all and have showed a lot of promise, some more experience and they will really start shining. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IdliketoRogerMoore Posted May 21, 2014 Report Share Posted May 21, 2014 Gareth bale was written of and very nearly shipped off to Birmingham for 3 mill! Different players develop at different speeds! Ian wright did even play pro football until about 24! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esmond Million's Bung Posted May 21, 2014 Report Share Posted May 21, 2014 I find this depressing in all honesty, if thats his criteria for players we might as well have kept the ones he let go, at least they were settled and he knew what he was getting with them. We have had years and years of this kind of recruitment policy and it has got us the occasional good season in 4 or 5 and a huge debt. If we buy players in the age bracket he wants, they are hardly likely to be worth more when they leave. He says he doesn't want outside youngsters blocking ours, but he is happy to bring in people like Tyrone Barnett and have them block a place. It's forty years since we genuinely invested in youth and developing from within our own structure and it's 40 years since we had our most lasting success. Perhaps that's just coincidence? You seem to very conveniently forget that SOD brought in Harewood a similar type of player to Barnett and 6 years older, just as a matter of interest who is the youngster that Barnett or Harewood blocked?. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spudski Posted May 21, 2014 Report Share Posted May 21, 2014 What an amazing set of quotes!!! Setting some very narrow boundaries for potential signings. Yes, 30 year olds are alright, as long as they're the right ones, but what you must do is not give them lengthy contracts on high wages. 25 - 28 year olds are good if they're married with kids?? What a strange comment? Younger players get turned by the city nightlife? Well, this is where man-management comes into it, how can the manager handle this. We won't be signing any 17-19 year olds from League 1/2? My word, how incredibly blinkered. This is exactly the reason we'll miss out on Grimes, because we weren't willing to take a chance 2 years ago, 1 year ago, 6 months ago. The club say they want to recruit "in the main" players under 25, with players over that age still being considered but only as necessary exceptions. Now we have the manager saying he won't be signing anyone under 25 and single! What I find incredible mate, is that certain fans on this forum will argue the toss about 'who said this, and who said that' and will often be pedantic and tedious in discussions, whilst making it personal or try to make out people have agendas or don't like certain managers etc,etc,etc. Instead of being 'open' and looking at things with a neutral mind. I know that by making this post, certain people will see it as an anti SC thing...but it's not. It's a post that would be made about any manager if he came out and said all the above, because it contradicts what our Board and owner set out in the 'five pillars' policy on recruitment of players. SC has achieved the short term goal of 'survival'...now it's the 'long term' goal of pushing on... So...who is control of our long term policy on recruitment? Has everything gone out the window re trying to recruit a majority of players under 25? Are the board going to allow SC or any manager, to run the Club how 'HE' wants it, and not by it's policy...again? I personally find SC's comments strange, and pretty much against what he said he had agreed to bring into when he joined. Do we allow another manager to have free reign with signings? Bringing in 'older' players? Who's running this Club...the owner and board or one man on a three year contract? This is why Clubs fail...because they allow managers to do what they want...for their own success...or often failure. Imho...Clubs should set out a plan and tell any manager to stick to it, and not allow 'personal' preference to rule. They are only here the term of their contract after all. Another manager comes in and changes everything...a constant merry go round. I would love to know what SC's thinking is here...or is it all bullshit and just talk for the media. Imho...it's about time our Club stood up and grew a backbone and dictated to managers what they want as a Club, and practiced what they preach...for the long term future...not this constant short term policy. It will be interesting to see over the coming months who SC is allowed to bring in, and whether our 'Recruitment policy' is adhered too...or whether it's gone out the window on a whim.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esmond Million's Bung Posted May 21, 2014 Report Share Posted May 21, 2014 What I find incredible mate, is that certain fans on this forum will argue the toss about 'who said this, and who said that' and will often be pedantic and tedious in discussions, whilst making it personal or try to make out people have agendas or don't like certain managers etc,etc,etc. Instead of being 'open' and looking at things with a neutral mind. I know that by making this post, certain people will see it as an anti SC thing...but it's not. It's a post that would be made about any manager if he came out and said all the above, because it contradicts what our Board and owner set out in the 'five pillars' policy on recruitment of players. SC has achieved the short term goal of 'survival'...now it's the 'long term' goal of pushing on... So...who is control of our long term policy on recruitment? Has everything gone out the window re trying to recruit a majority of players under 25? Are the board going to allow SC or any manager, to run the Club how 'HE' wants it, and not by it's policy...again? I personally find SC's comments strange, and pretty much against what he said he had agreed to bring into when he joined. Do we allow another manager to have free reign with signings? Bringing in 'older' players? Who's running this Club...the owner and board or one man on a three year contract? This is why Clubs fail...because they allow managers to do what they want...for their own success...or often failure. Imho...Clubs should set out a plan and tell any manager to stick to it, and not allow 'personal' preference to rule. They are only here the term of their contract after all. Another manager comes in and changes everything...a constant merry go round. I would love to know what SC's thinking is here...or is it all bullshit and just talk for the media. Imho...it's about time our Club stood up and grew a backbone and dictated to managers what they want as a Club, and practiced what they preach...for the long term future...not this constant short term policy. It will be interesting to see over the coming months who SC is allowed to bring in, and whether our 'Recruitment policy' is adhered too...or whether it's gone out the window on a whim.... What I find strange is that in a week where the club did something you claimed the board was blocking (signing young identified Spanish players) you don't say 'well done' or admit 'I didn't see that coming', you point out all that you believe is bad and ignore any step in the right direction, but you have no agenda?. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glynriley Posted May 21, 2014 Report Share Posted May 21, 2014 I find this depressing in all honesty, if thats his criteria for players we might as well have kept the ones he let go, at least they were settled and he knew what he was getting with them. We have had years and years of this kind of recruitment policy and it has got us the occasional good season in 4 or 5 and a huge debt. If we buy players in the age bracket he wants, they are hardly likely to be worth more when they leave. He says he doesn't want outside youngsters blocking ours, but he is happy to bring in people like Tyrone Barnett and have them block a place. It's forty years since we genuinely invested in youth and developing from within our own structure and it's 40 years since we had our most lasting success. Perhaps that's just coincidence? Have you listened to the interview, or drawn all your conclusions from Spudskis edited version? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chipdawg Posted May 21, 2014 Report Share Posted May 21, 2014 Joe Bryan is only just a year older than Matt Grimes, both play as midfielders yet Joe Bryan has had a better scoring record in a higher division, albeit nothing amazing but yet hes still being written off as poor youth at only 20 years old! I'd also point out that last season, while Bryan was a similar age to Grimes, he was also receiving rave reviews in the same division as a left winger whilst on loan at Plymuff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted May 21, 2014 Report Share Posted May 21, 2014 lets sign aload of 17/18/19 yo for the first team and no experiance because I really like to have a 5 relegation battle in a row........ there are 2 reasons and only 2 reasons we stayed 1 was cotts the other was cotts bringing in much needed experiance yet the cult of sod want to use this to beat him with.....unbelievable, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spudski Posted May 21, 2014 Report Share Posted May 21, 2014 What I find strange is that in a week where the club did something you claimed the board was blocking (signing young identified Spanish players) you don't say 'well done' or admit 'I didn't see that coming', you point out all that you believe is bad and ignore any step in the right direction, but you have no agenda?. Really? I replied to your comment... Quote... 'Esmond Million's Bung, on 17 May 2014 - 09:09 AM, said: The one's the the board wouldn't let CA sign? Apparently so mate... Future is looking bright ;-)' I have no agenda...just questioning the policy on recruitment for the first team. I want the Club to do well...I'm glad they have allowed SC and BT to bring in the young foreign players they've been after...a good move imho. Yet still people think there is an agenda against SC and the board and a 'Cult of SoD'... it's like playground stuff on here...it seems everyone has to have a 'side'. Surely we all want what's best for the Club? Regardless of manager? All working towards a goal of success? Nothing wrong in pointing out something that concerns me. Yet some still think it's about agendas and SoD... If the Club comes out with a big sweeping announcement on how they are going to recruit, then change it...do we sit back and not ask why? I want the Board, Owner and SC to do well... how loud do I need to shout it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esmond Million's Bung Posted May 21, 2014 Report Share Posted May 21, 2014 Really? I replied to your comment... Quote... 'Esmond Million's Bung, on 17 May 2014 - 09:09 AM, said: Apparently so mate... Future is looking bright ;-)' I have no agenda...just questioning the policy on recruitment for the first team. I want the Club to do well...I'm glad they have allowed SC and BT to bring in the young foreign players they've been after...a good move imho. Yet still people think there is an agenda against SC and the board and a 'Cult of SoD'... it's like playground stuff on here...it seems everyone has to have a 'side'. Surely we all want what's best for the Club? Regardless of manager? All working towards a goal of success? Nothing wrong in pointing out something that concerns me. Yet some still think it's about agendas and SoD... If the Club comes out with a big sweeping announcement on how they are going to recruit, then change it...do we sit back and not ask why? I want the Board, Owner and SC to do well... how loud do I need to shout it? My point being, you had to be prompted to comment, when I expected you to be that shouting to from the roof tops, because it was a step in the right direction and you were obviously misinformed about it. of course everybody on here wants success and sustainable success because that is important, I asked a question a couple of weeks ago which you and Harry didn't/couldn't answer, what english club model should we be following?. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted May 21, 2014 Report Share Posted May 21, 2014 My point being, you had to be prompted to comment, when I expected you to be that shouting to from the roof tops, because it was a step in the right direction and you were obviously misinformed about it. of course everybody on here wants success and sustainable success because that is important, I asked a question a couple of weeks ago which you and Harry didn't/couldn't answer, what english club model should we be following?. southampton, but that will take years, we are going in the right direction after being granted a cat 2 but now we need to work harder, get out of league one and go for cat one, but our fans want everything yesterday instead of letting things improve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esmond Million's Bung Posted May 21, 2014 Report Share Posted May 21, 2014 southampton, but that will take years, we are going in the right direction after being granted a cat 2 but now we need to work harder, get out of league one and go for cat one, but our fans want everything yesterday instead of letting things improve I suspected that Southampton would be the shout Monkeh, Everton are another, Arsenal (perhaps) and manu used to be (but a wheel would appear to have come off there), but after those 2/3?, so it's not as if there is huge successful template to follow here. Edit:- in the past 7 years Chelsea have been in the FA youth cup final 5 times, winning it 3 times and there haven't been many breakthrough players yet and it hasn't exactly stopped them buying big in every position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Isewater Posted May 21, 2014 Report Share Posted May 21, 2014 Gareth bale was written of and very nearly shipped off to Birmingham for 3 mill! Different players develop at different speeds! Ian wright did even play pro football until about 24! Why on earth did we let these two get away ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted May 21, 2014 Report Share Posted May 21, 2014 I suspected that Southampton would be the shout Monkeh, Everton are another, Arsenal (perhaps) and manu used to be (but a wheel would appear to have come off there), but after those 2/3?, so it's not as if there is huge successful template to follow here. Edit:- in the past 7 years Chelsea have been in the FA youth cup final 5 times, winning it 3 times and there haven't been many breakthrough players yet and it hasn't exactly stopped them buying big in every position. indeed its rare that players break through in the top division these days, the main problem being greed by the big teams, some one tell me why the likes of liverpool chelsea arsenal need 50+ under 21 players? Squads these day are limited to naming squads of 25 players, i suggest this should stretch to the the under 21's and under 18's, players do need to devlop and I would go as far and say out of the young players at every club (lets say for arguements sake they all have 30 players) only one or two of these will go on to "make it" which is a bad return the likes of spudski makes it out to be the fault of this club and alluds to us being the only club that doesn't devlop players, I'd go as far and say 88 out of 92 pro clubs are failing, Look at williams here a youngster with a great future in the game with our manager comparing him to cahill, he was never going to get a chance at villa but he took his chance here, Wynter was never going to get a chance at arsenal and i suspect he was only offered a contract to make up numbers in their under 21's he hasn't taken his chance like williams, Youth devlopment is so hard these days so I fail to understand why the same posters keep knocking the club for things they are trying to get right (there have been massive improvements in the last year alone) when nearly every other club in this country are failing on the same thing, The problem is a city thing its a national problem, the EPPP hasn't worked and I'm not suprised, it wasn'[t focused on players it was focused on greed from the top clubs, Greg Dykes league 3 will not work ether as its pandering to the elete again, imo what would work is a ban on transfers of players between the age of 13 - 18 and give the smaller clubs a chance to devlop there own players they are far more likely to get a game in the lower leagues which in turn helps their devlopment and when they finally reach 18 the bigger clubs have to pay a fair price if they want them whcih would help money trickle down the leagues again, City aren't he prefect club they are not the worst ether they do not warrent the constant critisim from the same posters over and over again, We all want whats best for the club but some need to give the club time to sort things out that hasn't been right since about 1990 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spudski Posted May 21, 2014 Report Share Posted May 21, 2014 My point being, you had to be prompted to comment, when I expected you to be that shouting to from the roof tops, because it was a step in the right direction and you were obviously misinformed about it. of course everybody on here wants success and sustainable success because that is important, I asked a question a couple of weeks ago which you and Harry didn't/couldn't answer, what english club model should we be following?. If you read that thread I actually commented on it before... I didn't need prompting. I wasn't misinformed... The Club have obviously had a change of heart. That does happen. A lad from Valencia has been watched for quiet a while. There were frustrations. Thankfully it looks like things are moving in a positive way. As for your last question... I don't get to read every post on this thread, so sorry if I missed it. Personally... I wouldn't follow any English Clubs model. I would set my own model, based on the good points from various Clubs that work. A lot of the set ups in France that you know about are good. Lyons is fantastic. Pick something that works, and can be worked into our structure. No doubt the Club are trying...about bloody time too...we've been going for over 100 years...yet have a scouting net work Mangotsfield would be proud of. Just my opinion of course... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.