Did Relegation Work Out For The Best?

[Esmond Million's Bung]

I believe it was. Drastic, but it got rid of the dross. I also think SOD did a useful coaching job.

I don't expect either statement to be popular, mind.

 

it seems to have worked out good for us in a back handed way, as for SOD he wasn't an excellent coach for us, just look at how players like Flint, Bryan, Fielding, Williams and Pack have improved under SC, especially Flint.

 

 

Quite possibly, but an excellent coach.

[Welcome To The Jungle]

Relegation or just the passage of time

[AshtonGreat]

The most impressive thing about SC's reign is how he achieved what many predicted would take years (ie building a young, hungry, successful squad) in a matter of months.

[finbarr_in_z]

Sigh. Was it really that long ago.

But on the bright side I'm loving the moments we are having now.

 

Yep, 2008 play off final (I had to look it up!)

There always seems too be a promoted League 1 team that has a great first season in the Championship (currently Bournemouth, earlier Southampton). Of those, some maintain that form, some implode. That'll have been us then.

[LondonBristolian]

The most impressive thing about SC's reign is how he achieved what many predicted would take years (ie building a young, hungry, successful squad) in a matter of months.

 

This is exactly where I think you're being a touch naive.  I think a lot of people underestimate the years of work it takes to be an overnight success and right now we're reaping the rewards of four years of overhauling the coaching structure, management structure, youth system, finances, personnel and everything else.  SC has done a superb job without a shadow of a doubt, perhaps the best job of any manager in the 25 years I've been supporting the club but it's nowhere near as simple as new manager comes in and everything's suddenly brilliant.  SC took over at a point where the basis for a young, hungry successful squad was in place and our finances  were organised so we could continue to make that happen.  Regardless of how hard it is to quantify whether the previous managers did anything useful, certainly Keith Burt, Steve Lansdown and John Pemberton deserve their share of the credit for the turnaround too.  

 

I don't want to take any credit away from SC but the idea he came in and suddenly made everything brilliant is like watching a duck calmly floating on a pond and ignoring the furious paddling going on beneath the water.  It's very easy to judge purely on performances and results, as they're the most visible and most obvious measures of progress (and, without those being in place, there's obviously no progress at all) but good performances and good results don't magically appear from nowhere and a lot of work has gone into turning us from a floundering club haemorrhaging our finances away into one that's lean, trim, sustainable and building for the future.  And a Hell of a lot of that work went on behind the scenes before SC took charge.

[AshtonGreat]

This is exactly where I think you're being a touch naive.  I think a lot of people underestimate the years of work it takes to be an overnight success and right now we're reaping the rewards of four years of overhauling the coaching structure, management structure, youth system, finances, personnel and everything else.  SC has done a superb job without a shadow of a doubt, perhaps the best job of any manager in the 25 years I've been supporting the club but it's nowhere near as simple as new manager comes in and everything's suddenly brilliant.  SC took over at a point where the basis for a young, hungry successful squad was in place and our finances  were organised so we could continue to make that happen.  Regardless of how hard it is to quantify whether the previous managers did anything useful, certainly Keith Burt, Steve Lansdown and John Pemberton deserve their share of the credit for the turnaround too.  

 

I don't want to take any credit away from SC but the idea he came in and suddenly made everything brilliant is like watching a duck calmly floating on a pond and ignoring the furious paddling going on beneath the water.  It's very easy to judge purely on performances and results, as they're the most visible and most obvious measures of progress (and, without those being in place, there's obviously no progress at all) but good performances and good results don't magically appear from nowhere and a lot of work has gone into turning us from a floundering club haemorrhaging our finances away into one that's lean, trim, sustainable and building for the future.  And a Hell of a lot of that work went on behind the scenes before SC took charge.

You say that, but in the months immediately prior to SC taking him over, it was all doom and gloom at Ashton Gate and on here. We were rock bottom and, as I said, many were predicting it would take years to mimic Swansea's model and turn the club's fortunes around. If, like you say, all the foundations had already been put in place prior to Cotterill's appointment, surely we'd all have been saying, 'Don't worry, most of the work's been done behind the scenes; we just need someone to come in and put the finishing touches on the project.'

[Coxy27]

Yep, 2008 play off final (I had to look it up!)

There always seems too be a promoted League 1 team that has a great first season in the Championship (currently Bournemouth, earlier Southampton). Of those, some maintain that form, some implode. That'll have been us then.

 

You mean Brentford?

 

Bournemouth came 10th in the Championship last season...

[Esmond Million's Bung]

This is exactly where I think you're being a touch naive.  I think a lot of people underestimate the years of work it takes to be an overnight success and right now we're reaping the rewards of four years of overhauling the coaching structure, management structure, youth system, finances, personnel and everything else.  SC has done a superb job without a shadow of a doubt, perhaps the best job of any manager in the 25 years I've been supporting the club but it's nowhere near as simple as new manager comes in and everything's suddenly brilliant.  SC took over at a point where the basis for a young, hungry successful squad was in place and our finances  were organised so we could continue to make that happen.  Regardless of how hard it is to quantify whether the previous managers did anything useful, certainly Keith Burt, Steve Lansdown and John Pemberton deserve their share of the credit for the turnaround too.  

 

I don't want to take any credit away from SC but the idea he came in and suddenly made everything brilliant is like watching a duck calmly floating on a pond and ignoring the furious paddling going on beneath the water.  It's very easy to judge purely on performances and results, as they're the most visible and most obvious measures of progress (and, without those being in place, there's obviously no progress at all) but good performances and good results don't magically appear from nowhere and a lot of work has gone into turning us from a floundering club haemorrhaging our finances away into one that's lean, trim, sustainable and building for the future.  And a Hell of a lot of that work went on behind the scenes before SC took charge.

 

Millen, DMC and SOD all did their bit to improve the off field problems of that there is no doubt, but I have to say that some people would try to justify their support for SOD even if this season was occurring in some 10 years from now.

[samo II]

You mean Brentford?

 

Bournemouth came 10th in the Championship last season...

I'd happily take the sort of season Brentford are having this time round next year...

[Bris Red]

'Don't worry, most of the work's been done behind the scenes; we just need someone to come in and put the finishing touches on the project.'

Its funny because if im not mistaken there actually were a few on here saying just that at the times of doom and gloom under SOD, Spudski springs to mind as someone. Obviously the vast majority of short sighted fans could only see the here and now and results back then were dire but there were people who could see past it.

For what its worth i think London Bristolian is spot on, i like SC and fair shout to him for what he has done, but dont be mistaken it has been others that have given him the platform to achieve what he has.

Lets look at it another way, if Cotterill would have come in when Mciness had in 2011 would he have had the same impact? Would we have flown up the Championship? The jurys out for me on that one.. I cant wait for next season anyway, really interested to see how SC and the board attack it this time round in the Championship, shall be interesting for sure!

[Aizoon]

You say that, but in the months immediately prior to SC taking him over, it was all doom and gloom at Ashton Gate and on here. We were rock bottom and, as I said, many were predicting it would take years to mimic Swansea's model and turn the club's fortunes around. If, like you say, all the foundations had already been put in place prior to Cotterill's appointment, surely we'd all have been saying, 'Don't worry, most of the work's been done behind the scenes; we just need someone to come in and put the finishing touches on the project.'

Sorry, but that's bollocks. When we were doing badly on the pitch, and boring to boot, no one was interested in the slightest about off pitch matters.

Equally, when we were winning under GJ, no one worried that the club was falling apart behind his back.

[AshtonGreat]

Sorry, but that's bollocks. When we were doing badly on the pitch, and boring to boot, no one was interested in the slightest about off pitch matters.

Equally, when we were winning under GJ, no one worried that the club was falling apart behind his back.

It's not bollocks. This forum was rife with people commenting that we needed to follow Swansea and Southampton's models. I will find said posts if you really need me to

[Aizoon]

Its funny because if im not mistaken there actually were a few on here saying just that at the times of doom and gloom under SOD, Spudski springs to mind as someone.

And me.

[Aizoon]

It's not bollocks. This forum was rife with people commenting that we needed to follow Swansea and Southampton's models. I will find said posts if you really need me to

Indeed. I was one of them, but we were a tiny minority.

[LondonBristolian]

You say that, but in the months immediately prior to SC taking him over, it was all doom and gloom at Ashton Gate and on here. We were rock bottom and, as I said, many were predicting it would take years to mimic Swansea's model and turn the club's fortunes around. If, like you say, all the foundations had already been put in place prior to Cotterill's appointment, surely we'd all have been saying, 'Don't worry, most of the work's been done behind the scenes; we just need someone to come in and put the finishing touches on the project.'

 

I'd make two points in relation to that.

 

1) Some people were saying that.  They got dismissed as happy-clappers and blinded to reality - and perhaps they were and knew nothing but got lucky in hindsight - but there were those who said it nonetheless.

 

But more importantly

 

2) I'm not at all sure why you think it would have been that obvious.  It's possible to look back in hindsight at the work behind the scenes and see why it got us here now but, at the time, we had no way of knowing it would all work out for the best.  All we see as fans is what's going on on the pitch and what the results are.  And, of course, as fans we're going to be unhappy when results go badly and delighted when they go well but that's certainly not the whole story. 

 

 

Millen, DMC and SOD all did their bit to improve the off field problems of that there is no doubt, but I have to say that some people would try to justify their support for SOD even if this season was occurring in some 10 years from now.

 

Perhaps so.  And let's face it - we're all sometimes guilty of sticking to an opinion we've formed despite mounting evidence to the contrary.  But, as you say, all three of those managers did their bit to improve the off-field problems.  And it doesn't excuse the bizarre team selections and negative tactics under McInnes or the dreadful performances and results under SOD but I think sometimes people tend to need to see managers as wholly brilliant or wholly terrible where there's a lot more nuance in there. There is no doubt at all we're much better off with SC than SOD and Christ knows where we'd be if SOD was still in charge but it doesn't mean SOD did nothing of value.  

[Esmond Million's Bung]

Its funny because if im not mistaken there actually were a few on here saying just that at the times of doom and gloom under SOD, Spudski springs to mind as someone. Obviously the vast majority of short sighted fans could only see the here and now and results back then were dire but there were people who could see past it.

For what its worth i think London Bristolian is spot on, i like SC and fair shout to him for what he has done, but dont be mistaken it has been others that have given him the platform to achieve what he has.

Lets look at it another way, if Cotterill would have come in when Mciness had in 2011 would he have had the same impact? Would we have flown up the Championship? The jurys out for me on that one.. I cant wait for next season anyway, really interested to see how SC and the board attack it this time round in the Championship, shall be interesting for sure!

 

of course others have given him the platform, but the SOD excellent coach quotes are nonsense in our case, who actually improved under SOD?, Fielding, Flint, Williams and Pack all SOD signings have improved under SC to the consistent level they are at now as has Bryan, thank you SOD for signing them, but a bigger thank you to SC for bringing out the talent in all of them.

[Aizoon]

I'd make two points in relation to that.

1) Some people were saying that. They got dismissed as happy-clappers and blinded to reality - and perhaps they were and knew nothing but got lucky in hindsight - but there were those who said it nonetheless.

But more importantly

2) I'm not at all sure why you think it would have been that obvious. It's possible to look back in hindsight at the work behind the scenes and see why it got us here now but, at the time, we had no way of knowing it would all work out for the best. All we see as fans is what's going on on the pitch and what the results are. And, of course, as fans we're going to be unhappy when results go badly and delighted when they go well but that's certainly not the whole story.

Perhaps so. And let's face it - we're all sometimes guilty of sticking to an opinion we've formed despite mounting evidence to the contrary. But, as you say, all three of those managers did their bit to improve the off-field problems. And it doesn't excuse the bizarre team selections and negative tactics under McInnes or the dreadful performances and results under SOD but I think sometimes people tend to need to see managers as wholly brilliant or wholly terrible where there's a lot more nuance in there. There is no doubt at all we're much better off with SC than SOD and Christ knows where we'd be if SOD was still in charge but it doesn't mean SOD did nothing of value.

Thank you, LB. My point exactly.

[joe jordans teeth]

God bless sod,wenger liked his coaching methods don't you know :laugh:

[LondonBristolian]

It's not bollocks. This forum was rife with people commenting that we needed to follow Swansea and Southampton's models. I will find said posts if you really need me to

 

There were indeed.  I was one of the ones saying it.  And now we are.  But Swansea and Southampton's models show that it's not just about the work of one manager, it's about the work of a club as a whole.  And whilst we were all sneering at the Five Pillars, we failed to spot they were actually beginning to work.  But I'm not sure why you think the fact we couldn't see something without the benefit of hindsight proves it wasn't happening. 

[Esmond Million's Bung]

I'd make two points in relation to that.

 

1) Some people were saying that.  They got dismissed as happy-clappers and blinded to reality - and perhaps they were and knew nothing but got lucky in hindsight - but there were those who said it nonetheless.

 

But more importantly

 

2) I'm not at all sure why you think it would have been that obvious.  It's possible to look back in hindsight at the work behind the scenes and see why it got us here now but, at the time, we had no way of knowing it would all work out for the best.  All we see as fans is what's going on on the pitch and what the results are.  And, of course, as fans we're going to be unhappy when results go badly and delighted when they go well but that's certainly not the whole story. 

 

 

 

Perhaps so.  And let's face it - we're all sometimes guilty of sticking to an opinion we've formed despite mounting evidence to the contrary.  But, as you say, all three of those managers did their bit to improve the off-field problems.  And it doesn't excuse the bizarre team selections and negative tactics under McInnes or the dreadful performances and results under SOD but I think sometimes people tend to need to see managers as wholly brilliant or wholly terrible where there's a lot more nuance in there. There is no doubt at all we're much better off with SC than SOD and Christ knows where we'd be if SOD was still in charge but it doesn't mean SOD did nothing of value.  

 

 

Thank you, LB. My point exactly.

 

and many more called it a shameful day for the club for the sacking of SOD, but not to do with anything off field improvements but everything to do with his emperors new clothes coaching, that only the illuminated could see.

 

The off field quotes came a long time after, round about the time SOD's glee club realised that SC might actually be the right man at the right time.

[finbarr_in_z]

You mean Brentford?

 

Bournemouth came 10th in the Championship last season...

 

Yep, you're right. But you get the drift of what I was on about.

 

 

"Never let the truth get in the way of a good story" - Mark Twain

[highlandcityfan]

I think without a shadow of a doubt, it was a good thing. Sometimes you have to take a step back to move forwards.

Coming down a league has absolutely helped shift all the expensive deadwood.

Also, not sure it's been mentioned yet, but of our recent signings, who have chosen to sign for a growing club, how many would have signed for a team struggling in the championship (possibly/probably) trying to compete and rebuild at the same time?

Sorry for the analogy - it's the cider! But - if you're going to build a house, you start with the foundations, and whilst it may have been conceivable to go that from the championship as others have pointed out, it appears that completely starting again may well prove much more fruitful...

For example - we will no doubt carry considerable momentum and jubilation into the next season, which as we now, bodes well considering the last time we were promoted. Also as we equally (and painfully know) to get that kind of team spirit and momentum from a regular relegation candidate position is very very difficult.

Onwards and upwards.

Cheering on the boys from up here in Fort William!!

[LondonBristolian]

and many more called it a shameful day for the club for the sacking of SOD, but not to do with anything off field improvements but everything to do with his emperors new clothes coaching, that only the illuminated could see.

 

The off field quotes came a long time after, round about the time SOD's glee club realised that SC might actually be the right man at the right time.

 

To be honest, I think we're on different discussions here.  I can tell you've got a gripe with the fact people supported SOD for longer than they should have done and were outraged by a sacking that turned out to be completely the right decision but I don't see that it really has any relevance to what me or Aizoon are saying. 

 

Besides, I think people were talking about the off-the-field stuff at the time.  (Christ knows there wasn't much on the pitch to defend him on. )  Not many of course but it's not true to say the argument wasn't made at all. 

[Esmond Million's Bung]

To be honest, I think we're on different discussions here.  I can tell you've got a gripe with the fact people supported SOD for longer than they should have done and were outraged by a sacking that turned out to be completely the right decision but I don't see that it really has any relevance to what me or Aizoon are saying. 

 

Besides, I think people were talking about the off-the-field stuff at the time.  (Christ knows there wasn't much on the pitch to defend him on. )  Not many of course but it's not true to say the argument wasn't made at all. 

 

Aizoon has said on this thread SOD was an excellent coach and that might be so, especially now IMO he has job specifically tailor-made for his particular talents, he wasn't for us. That's why it's being mentioned.

 

I said at the time of SOD's sacking that off field stuff was unquantifiable and it was until this season unfolded and I don't see many if any not saying that Millen, DMC and SOD all played their part in that off field stuff, in fact even SC himself has alluded to it, because he is an honest man.

 

To be honest I don't recall a lot of threads or posts about SOD's off field influence at the time of his sacking, in fact i'm glad that you mentioned the 5 pillars because many who mourned the demise of SOD claimed that the 5 pillars was now at an end, as though SOD was the only person capable of understanding the concept and SC would turn out to be the devil incarnate, playing endless long balls signing useless journeymen on high wages, which was something Millen, DMC and SOD all did and of course destroying the academy because he was a control freak.

[Aizoon]

I'm interested to know what makes you say that?

I actually felt the times I could hear what he said he spoke a lot sense but if you go by results on the pitch which is pretty much all I could go on it told a different story.

Poor man management maybe

I said I'd answer that and I will.

Firstly, SoD's brief wasn't about results on the pitch, it was about building a structure and a squad for the future. All he was required to do was to keep us in the division, which he would have done.

Secondly, he is now a part of the England coaching structure, which suggests that someone recognises his talents.

Thirdly, anyone looking at how SC's team plays the ball about when in possession must surely recognise the fruits of SoD's training. Remember that SC has worked with SoD before.

So, why the down on SoD so frequently expressed here?

Firstly, the results were poor, not dreadful, but poor. For those who never saw the team play, that was enough.

Secondly, it was terrible to watch. I was pro-SoD, and even I described it as being like watching an England friendly. That wasn't a compliment. I imagine a practice session would have been just as unenthralling. You got the impression at times that he wanted to call them together for a huddle and a tactical talk. Skill was being shown and we did have JET, but no one was going to die of excitement.

Thirdly, he sounded boring or even incomprehensible. In this, was badly served by Radio Bristol. His written comments were thoughtful and interesting. His spoken comments might have been, if any bugger could have heard them. The man clearly has a chronic chest problem and weak voice in a West Midlands accent. Why RB couldn't turn up the gain on their microphones, I really don't know*

Those negatives don't imply that he made no contribution to the players' development or that of the club, but they weren't calculated to make the fans happy. Read the comments of the anti-SoD brigade and tell me I'm wrong!

* Actually I do, it's because they're incompetent tossers, but that's not the point.

[Aizoon]

"SC would turn out to be the devil incarnate, playing endless long balls"

EMB, the reason people thought that because that is what we were told by his advocates. We were also told that he was just what we needed, an arm-waving shouty manager who would motivate his troops in the manner of GJ. Thank god he turned out to be something very different.

[Esmond Million's Bung]

"SC would turn out to be the devil incarnate, playing endless long balls"

EMB, the reason people thought that because that is what we were told by his advocates. We were also told that he was just what we needed, an arm-waving shouty manager who would motivate his troops in the manner of GJ. Thank god he turned out to be something very different.

 

Rubbish Aiz we were told by the so called ITK's, who thought SOD was the dogs do dahs and over egged his CV, you keep using that little gem of yours but actually only a few on here advocated that, in the main people wanted a manager who could connect with them and not one who claimed he didn't know how to.

 

PS:- of course knowing what a joker you are, your " which he would have " quote on your earlier post, is obviously tongue in cheek or did you merely leave out the IMO bit?.

[LondonBristolian]

"SC would turn out to be the devil incarnate, playing endless long balls"

EMB, the reason people thought that because that is what we were told by his advocates. We were also told that he was just what we needed, an arm-waving shouty manager who would motivate his troops in the manner of GJ. Thank god he turned out to be something very different.

 

Indeed.  I'm happy to admit to being absolutely wrong about Cotterill but I'd also say that the manager we got was not the same manager we'd seen at Forest, Portsmouth, Burnley etc.  I remember after that first FA Cup game against whichever non-league team it was, he explained his team selection and it was clear he was a far more cerebral manager than anyone expected.

 

I've said this on other threads before but I think what sets Cotts apart from the likes of Holloway, GJ or Warnock is that, whilst they've been left behind by changes in the game meaning that performance analysis and marginal games are increasingly important and it's no longer enough to shout a lot and show 'passion' is that Cotts has clearly studied and learned about the changing game and adapted over time.  He's clearly a very intelligent man and so much more than the ranty motivator that we all expected him to be.

[LondonBristolian]

Rubbish Aiz we were told by the so called ITK's, who thought SOD was the dogs do dahs and over egged his CV, you keep using that little gem of yours but actually only a few on here advocated that, in the main people wanted a manager who could connect with them and not one who claimed he didn't know how to.

 

PS:- of course knowing what a joker you are, your " which he would have " quote on your earlier post, is obviously tongue in cheek or did you merely leave out the IMO bit?.

 

Let's not forget that, in the main, people were delighted at the appointment of SOD and few wanted Cotterill.  The people advocating Cotterill didn't say very much at all because so few of them existed and, even those who were okay with his appointment, didn't want him as their first choice.  On top of which, the general consensus seemed to be the board was rushing to a decision without considering other options. 

 

Kudos to Lansdown for having the balls to stick to his guns and make such an unpopular appointment with the confidence it would work.

[Esmond Million's Bung]

Let's not forget that, in the main, people were delighted at the appointment of SOD and few wanted Cotterill.  The people advocating Cotterill didn't say very much at all because so few of them existed and, even those who were okay with his appointment, didn't want him as their first choice.  On top of which, the general consensus seemed to be the board was rushing to a decision without considering other options. 

 

Kudos to Lansdown for having the balls to stick to his guns and make such an unpopular appointment with the confidence it would work.

 

and let's not forget many went further in their deliberations and claiming the end as I said earlier to the 5 pillars under SC (i'm glad you mentioned the 5 pillars in one of your posts).