Can I be the first to say... SC out!

[REDOXO]

There's more evidence to suggest he went where the money was.

http://www.skysports.com/football/news/11748/9957949/brentfords-andre-gray-turns-down-bristol-city-move

It doesn't become a fact just because it was repeated on here a few times, we were closing in on the deal but the goal posts were moved when Burnley matched the fee and offered more in wages. There's no chance we were matching a team just relegated from the Premier League on wages or ambition.

Disagreement in respect of personal terms is the quote!...Where do you think that quote came from..

He thought he could get a game at a better club with better prospects, and he did, the club he was playing against that weekend as pointed out by your own quote...Had they even  approached  Brentford at that point?....We did not have to match burnley as he had already rejected us according to your quote so matching or more money was not a barrier for Burnley the boys ambition was the major factor

Burnley offered a better option as did Man U to Lindegard and Palace to Gayle in respect of their ambition

As for things posted on here not being facts.....Really....I think that is proved everyday, but thanks for the insight!

[Bristol Rob]

Rather than SC out, could we not just send him on loan to Plymouth so he comes back first-team ready?

[screech]

Disagreement in respect of personal terms is the quote!...Where do you think that quote came from..

He thought he could get a game at a better club with better prospects, and he did, the club he was playing against that weekend as pointed out by your own quote...Had they even  approached  Brentford at that point?....We did not have to match burnley as he had already rejected us according to your quote so matching or more money was not a barrier for Burnley the boys ambition was the major factor

Burnley offered a better option as did Man U to Lindegard and Palace to Gayle in respect of their ambition

As for things posted on here not being facts.....Really....I think that is proved everyday, but thanks for the insight!

But you said we offered more money, that is not true. We approached his agent and enquired where the money was at, we got a figure which sat well with us, we then approached Brentford and agreed a fee, we then couldn't agree on the wages because Burnley appeared on the scene who matched the fee.

 Where does it say we offered more money for wages, it doesn't. That's the shitty stick people use to beat the club with. That part is not a fact, yet is often repeated on here.

[Donkeeebles]

Interesting post - one I'd suggest that our 'It's all gonna be alright' fans have a careful read of 

No doubt you will get the usual Source ? source ? bulls**** Source ? From the usual suspects but for what it's worth, from all I and others hear you are spot on SX

Not moving in the same circles as your good self and SX naturally this first thing I thought was I wonder how they know all these things..........

I feel like it's wrong to ask now so I will just take both your words for it

[NickJ]

true - Whether our supporters Like it or not , our manager has a 'reputation' amongst (some) players and agents and it 'may be' that players do not want to come here , end of.

I think some may also be surprised what some of the current squad / last yeas squad also think of the managers 'approach'.

Not a good base to be fighting relegation.

And I have heard that some players like his "approach".

 

 

[REDOXO]

But you said we offered more money, that is not true. We approached his agent and enquired where the money was at, we got a figure which sat well with us, we then approached Brentford and agreed a fee, we then couldn't agree on the wages because Burnley appeared on the scene who matched the fee.

 Where does it say we offered more money for wages, it doesn't. That's the shitty stick people use to beat the club with. That part is not a fact, yet is often repeated on here.

I said…There is/was plenty of anecdotal evidence coming from the club that in their opinion the deal on offer at AG was better than that on offer at Burnley.

I also said in an earlier post, The rumour is we offered more than Burnley to the striker in wages, but they were a better bet for his career....

The anecdotal evidence is key as that certainly made its way from the club...whether it is true or no ask Steve/Jon L or SC...

Why would we approach his agent about the fee to Brentford? 

When a fee was agreed a very good package was put on the table, however what you suggest is evidence of something else makes no mention of Burnley as a suitor and does in fact mention Hull.

Burnley, according to your own evidence, did not appear on the scene until after he had declined Bristol City. However selectively you would like to choose and use your replies or what you yourself have posted.

It does not say we offered more for wages because at that point Burnley had offered nothing and according to Sky were not even in the running and were in fact about to play against him.....As such there was no comparison to make between the clubs.

The player using what we offered as leverage was thus moot, but no doubt mentioned in someway....

Burnley were able to offer the player better prospects, but there is nothing that says better terms, whether that be a signing on fee or ongoing wage.

What is not in dispute that and is fact that your own link says nothing about what Burnley offered  as they and you could not possibly know as it had not  actually  happened.....  

 

[screech]

 

I said…There is/was plenty of anecdotal evidence coming from the club that in their opinion the deal on offer at AG was better than that on offer at Burnley.

 

I also said in an earlier post, The rumour is we offered more than Burnley to the striker in wages, but they were a better bet for his career....

 

The anecdotal evidence is key as that certainly made its way from the club...whether it is true or no ask Steve/Jon L or SC...

Why would we approach his agent about the fee to Brentford? 

When a fee was agreed a very good package was put on the table, however what you suggest is evidence of something else makes no mention of Burnley as a suitor and does in fact mention Hull.

Burnley, according to your own evidence, did not appear on the scene until after he had declined Bristol City. However selectively you would like to choose and use your replies or what you yourself have posted.

It does not say we offered more for wages because at that point Burnley had offered nothing and according to Sky were not even in the running and were in fact about to play against him.....As such there was no comparison to make between the clubs.

The player using what we offered as leverage was thus moot, but no doubt mentioned in someway....

Burnley were able to offer the player better prospects, but there is nothing that says better terms, whether that be a signing on fee or ongoing wage.

What is not in dispute that and is fact that your own link says nothing about what Burnley offered  as they and you could not possibly know as it had not  actually  happened.....  

 

You'll have to dig out this evidence then because I can't find it. The only place where I can find reference to it, is on this forum.

I can find reference to Bristol City being able to match the fee but not being able to agree terms with Gray, Hull being confident that they can meet the terms but they did not want to match the fee, and Burnley being able to match the fee and pay the terms and therefore land the player.

If you can show me anything to suggest otherwise I'm willing to accept what you said is right.

[Dolman Block B]

Nigel Pearson, a name being talked about.

Strong manager

[spudski]

The one thing worth thinking about, is that we have a Director of football that any new manger would have to work with, and a certain amount of backroom staff that have been put in place by SC.

If it came to it, it's not just about the manager changing, but a whole lot of probable other changes as well.

This is why I think it's never a good idea to allow one man to change a Club to his liking....the 'Club' should dictate what they want, so it's seamless when changes are made.

When reading this forum, it's obvious to see so many views are based on supposition..... there is very little clarity when understanding what is going on at a football club.

Fans judge on what they see for 90 mins, the media clips put out by the club or other media outlets, and then the odd 'rumour'.

As an Agent said to me recently at a FGR's game....words along the lines of....'Football fans have very little idea of what goes on at football clubs, things happening on the field, often reflect what's going on behind closed doors'.

It's not the fans fault....it's how Clubs want it. They want fans to know very little, but turn up and support regardless of what's going on.

Since the end of last season, the one question that could 'umbrella' the whole of this forum regarding BCFC would be 'what the hell is going on?'

Nobody knows...excuse after excuse comes out from the managers mouth, often contradictory, players and staff come and go and no one knows why, and the manager shows open frustration in the media about how transfers have gone on. And since last years success....you hear so little from Board and owner.

I feel sorry for any manager that works for this Club....

[Guest]

The one thing worth thinking about, is that we have a Director of football that any new manger would have to work with, and a certain amount of backroom staff that have been put in place by SC.

If it came to it, it's not just about the manager changing, but a whole lot of probable other changes as well.

This is why I think it's never a good idea to allow one man to change a Club to his liking....the 'Club' should dictate what they want, so it's seamless when changes are made.

When reading this forum, it's obvious to see so many views are based on supposition..... there is very little clarity when understanding what is going on at a football club.

Fans judge on what they see for 90 mins, the media clips put out by the club or other media outlets, and then the odd 'rumour'.

As an Agent said to me recently at a FGR's game....words along the lines of....'Football fans have very little idea of what goes on at football clubs, things happening on the field, often reflect what's going on behind closed doors'.

It's not the fans fault....it's how Clubs want it. They want fans to know very little, but turn up and support regardless of what's going on.

Since the end of last season, the one question that could 'umbrella' the whole of this forum regarding BCFC would be 'what the hell is going on?'

Nobody knows...excuse after excuse comes out from the managers mouth, often contradictory, players and staff come and go and no one knows why, and the manager shows open frustration in the media about how transfers have gone on. And since last years success....you hear so little from Board and owner.

I feel sorry for any manager that works for this Club....

Just one remark though Spud, has the club allowed SC to build his own backroom or have they allowed Burt to do that and through their (SC/KB) previous associations at Forest etc it would appear as though its SC doing the hiring and firing?

May be the flip side of the same coin, but I think we'll learn the answer when SC's reign inevitably ends and what that spells for a) Keith Burt and b) the backroom. Until then, I think it's a (not necessarily unreasonable) presumption.

[spudski]

Just one remark though Spud, has the club allowed SC to build his own backroom or have they allowed Burt to do that and through their (SC/KB) previous associations at Forest etc it would appear as though its SC doing the hiring and firing?

May be the flip side of the same coin, but I think we'll learn the answer when SC's reign inevitably ends and what that spells for a) Keith Burt and b) the backroom. Until then, I think it's a (not necessarily unreasonable) presumption.

I understand it's a mutual arrangement between the two. Have yet to hear any different....but things can change very quickly in Clubs. One minute someones doing something...the next they are not.

['Orns]

What a thoroughly depressing thread

After what happened last season I'm just amazed that we have ****** up so badly

One thing I want to add - if, Little did stick one on Fredericks for being a Billy Big Bollocks, then good, I'm glad. If a potential new signing had an issue with that I'd suggest it says more about him than it does about our club

Actually, two things - if the players are unhappy with SC now, were they unhappy with him last season? I bet they weren't, and I bet the gaffer hasn't changed. A lot of them have had nice pay rises over the summer, and well deserved ones, but if the boss is getting on your tits because you keep ******* it up, then I'm afraid it's time to put your big boys pants on and get on with it

This is one tough league, I said in the summer I'd be happy with 15th - all the people clambering for SC to go now, were you part of the 'play offs is the minimum' crowd? Because if you were then you need to get your head out of your arse. Just because other teams of a similar size have done well and got to the Prem doesn't mean we will. Football doesn't work like that

I am worried about it all right now though, something is amiss at our club

[Kid in the Riot]

Just one remark though Spud, has the club allowed SC to build his own backroom or have they allowed Burt to do that and through their (SC/KB) previous associations at Forest etc it would appear as though its SC doing the hiring and firing?

May be the flip side of the same coin, but I think we'll learn the answer when SC's reign inevitably ends and what that spells for a) Keith Burt and b) the backroom. Until then, I think it's a (not necessarily unreasonable) presumption.

Only two weeks ago Groves and Brooks were appointed to the Academy who are both there on the recommendation of SC. When Jennings left post in June we were told the net to search for his replacement would be cast far and wide. So much for that then.

Given's SC's potentially precarious position was it wise to appoint two people close to him and on his recommendation in these roles? What if SC leaves, goes to another club and takes them with him? Where's the continuity? I honestly thought we'd learnt from previous mistakes.

Or are we that bad a proposition for prospective recruits that we couldn't find anyone else?

[Guest]

Only two weeks ago Groves and Brooks were appointed to the Academy who are both there on the recommendation of SC. When Jennings left post in June we were told the net to search for his replacement would be cast far and wide. So much for that then.

Given's SC's potentially precarious position was it wise to appoint two people close to him and on his recommendation in these roles? What if SC leaves, goes to another club and takes them with him? Where's the continuity? I honestly thought we'd learnt from previous mistakes.

Or are we that bad a proposition for prospective recruits that we couldn't find anyone else?

Should a manager's recommendation not be taken into consideration? I absolutely think it should so long as that doesn't equate to ignoring other options. Given the length of time posts were vacant I don't think it indicative of a snap decision, or a job to a mate.

Given how quickly we turf people out of the academy with no chance of having any meaningful impact is it any wonder those jobs are perhaps not that attractive, no matter how far and wide we cast our net? You questioned above are we that bad a proposition... at Academy level I would say so yes. But that can change.

As for SC's position and appointing these two I don't really see the controversy there I'm afraid. I don't think it reinforces their position, reinforces his position, and again whilst they may have had SC's recommendation I don't see that this necessarily correlates to him appointing them, although I can see why some may think it is suspect. The whole point is, as I see it, coaches etc should outlast managers. I think we should see what happens before lambasting these appointments, albeit I agree I would also have a close eye on what happens to them in the post-SC world. 

 

['Orns]

As for SC's position and appointing these two I don't really see the controversy there I'm afraid.

Here's the problem, 29, you're not looking for a controversy

If you want to find one, you will find one....

[spudski]

What a thoroughly depressing thread

After what happened last season I'm just amazed that we have ****** up so badly

One thing I want to add - if, Little did stick one on Fredericks for being a Billy Big Bollocks, then good, I'm glad. If a potential new signing had an issue with that I'd suggest it says more about him than it does about our club

Actually, two things - if the players are unhappy with SC now, were they unhappy with him last season? I bet they weren't, and I bet the gaffer hasn't changed. A lot of them have had nice pay rises over the summer, and well deserved ones, but if the boss is getting on your tits because you keep ******* it up, then I'm afraid it's time to put your big boys pants on and get on with it

This is one tough league, I said in the summer I'd be happy with 15th - all the people clambering for SC to go now, were you part of the 'play offs is the minimum' crowd? Because if you were then you need to get your head out of your arse. Just because other teams of a similar size have done well and got to the Prem doesn't mean we will. Football doesn't work like that

I am worried about it all right now though, something is amiss at our club

Woodsy....you say 'something is amiss with our club'.... yet you say 'you are amazed we have ****** up so badly'?

Have you not followed our history? This is what happens ;-)....we can operate at League 1 level well, because of money. We struggle at Championship level because of so many other reasons.

There is nothing wrong with the players attitude....they are a good bunch and have talent. They just need better man management and experience added to the squad.

They also need a leader....not a 'Boss'.

 

 

['Orns]

Woodsy....you say 'something is amiss with our club'.... yet you say 'you are amazed we have ****** up so badly'?

Have you not followed our history? This is what happens ;-)....we can operate at League 1 level well, because of money. We struggle at Championship level because of so many other reasons.

There is nothing wrong with the players attitude....they are a good bunch and have talent. They just need better man management and experience added to the squad.

They also need a leader....not a 'Boss'.

 

 

I'm amazed after last season, completely ******* baffled that we didn't know what the wages were going to be. I'm amazed that we only signed two permanent players, I'm even more amazed only 1 is still here! If you had told me 5 months I'd be writing this, I'd be even more amazed! There were no clues back in May that this was going to happen. Our recruitment last summer was bang on, nothing led me to think that this would ever happen (although check out my post on the SL/JL thread, maybe I was!). That's why I say something is amiss

Don't want to turn this into a 'Spud has an anti SC agenda' thread, but presume you refer to SC in your last sentence? I'm intrigued as to what you mean by needing a leader, not a boss? Can you explain more?

[spudski]

I'm amazed after last season, completely ******* baffled that we didn't know what the wages were going to be. I'm amazed that we only signed two permanent players, I'm even more amazed only 1 is still here! If you had told me 5 months I'd be writing this, I'd be even more amazed! There were no clues back in May that this was going to happen. Our recruitment last summer was bang on, nothing led me to think that this would ever happen (although check out my post on the SL/JL thread, maybe I was!). That's why I say something is amiss

Don't want to turn this into a 'Spud has an anti SC agenda' thread, but presume you refer to SC in your last sentence? I'm intrigued as to what you mean by needing a leader, not a boss? Can you explain more?

This is purely my opinion, based on what I hear.

Probably the one sentence that sums up SC for me, was when a Board member said to a confident.... 'this will be fine when results are going well, but can only see this ending in tears when they are not'.....which seems to be coming true.

Various people have said, that SC is a stubborn man, and when things are not going his way, throws his toys out the bag and becomes for want of a better word....a bully.

In football circles....he's marmite....some love him....some hate him. It doesn't surprise me that certain players haven't come here.

No doubting his passion, and will to do well....but it will by his way only. Or so I've heard.

Football managers need many skills....some of the biggest when things are not going to plan, is the ability to listen, take advise and also have great man management skills. Alex Ferguson....ruled with a rod of iron....but he also had all those qualities as well.

I'm not anti SC....I just don't think he has all the necessary skills as a manager to sustain us at this level. Especially when it comes to dealing with players who have choices and proven ability and experience. I would say he maybe able to do it at more stable clubs....but not here.

In saying that....as I've alluded to in another post....I think any manager will struggle to sustain us for a long period of time in the Championship.

SC isn't the problem perse.

 

['Orns]

This is purely my opinion, based on what I hear.

Probably the one sentence that sums up SC for me, was when a Board member said to a confident.... 'this will be fine when results are going well, but can only see this ending in tears when they are not'.....which seems to be coming true.

Various people have said, that SC is a stubborn man, and when things are not going his way, throws his toys out the bag and becomes for want of a better word....a bully.

In football circles....he's marmite....some love him....some hate him. It doesn't surprise me that certain players haven't come here.

No doubting his passion, and will to do well....but it will by his way only. Or so I've heard.

Football managers need many skills....some of the biggest when things are not going to plan, is the ability to listen, take advise and also have great man management skills. Alex Ferguson....ruled with a rod of iron....but he also had all those qualities as well.

I'm not anti SC....I just don't think he has all the necessary skills as a manager to sustain us at this level. Especially when it comes to dealing with players who have choices and proven ability and experience. I would say he maybe able to do it at more stable clubs....but not here.

In saying that....as I've alluded to in another post....I think any manager will struggle to sustain us for a long period of time in the Championship.

SC isn't the problem perse.

 

All about opinions mate, and you appear to have contacts in the game that I certainly don't

We agree that SC isn't the problem, which leads me to think that maybe you feel that SL is....? I have my doubts on whether the Lansdown family are the correct people to be running a football club, and I've voiced them before, and have done so again today. If SL doesn't believe that then we are stuck with a massive problem. God, I feel harsh saying that about a bloke who has spent so much money on our club, but we're no better off than when he joined, new stadium aside. Massive asset, but I'm more interested in results on the pitch, not off it

[Frenchay Red]

I can't imagine for one moment that there is that much going on "behind the scenes" that isn't similarly going on at any number of clubs. Football players aren't generally life's sporting academics. I would hazard a guess that bust ups and training ground "incidents" are quite common.

Similarly I can't imagine that all players are necessarily totally supportive of their manager, nor would I expect them to wholeheartedly embrace every aspect of their manager's methods, management style and ethos. Especially if things are not going well and mistakes are being made.

However at this club, with the squad he has assembled, Cotts has always been very supportive of this group of players and unless he's an incredibly good liar, puts across his total belief in them. It's only a few games since we completed a marvellous season with pretty much those same players. So it seems to me unlikely that there can be a lot of unrest in the squad. It wasn't alluded to last season and ok the pressure is on at the moment but I can't see how things behind the scenes can have changed that much as far as the management and players are concerned.

However the summer strengthening was a disaster and this club literally seems to operate on a peaks and troughs basis. Never pushing on when the opportunity arises.

Poor manager after poor manager, since GJ ran out ideas, has been the path we have followed, up to and including Cott's  predecessor.

The club has been pulled one way then the other in the forlorn quest for success.

There has only been one constant through all of this, and perversely he is the one person who keeps the club going by pouring in vast amount of money.

If this is the real problem what a dichotomy!

[screech]

Show me any place of work where everybody gets on, or your boss doesn't piss you off, somebody who doesn't pull their weight, in fighting amongst the managers, one upmanship amongst some staff. I mean if it wasn't going on it wouldn't be normal would it. It's a workplace, of course this shit goes on, it's hardly unique

Christ, it's like standing outside the school gates listening to the mothers gossip amongst themselves about their neighbours dog barking early in the morning.

[spudski]

All about opinions mate, and you appear to have contacts in the game that I certainly don't

We agree that SC isn't the problem, which leads me to think that maybe you feel that SL is....? I have my doubts on whether the Lansdown family are the correct people to be running a football club, and I've voiced them before, and have done so again today. If SL doesn't believe that then we are stuck with a massive problem. God, I feel harsh saying that about a bloke who has spent so much money on our club, but we're no better off than when he joined, new stadium aside. Massive asset, but I'm more interested in results on the pitch, not off it

Imho...yes I do believe the direction SL has gone, and the mistakes he's made, are why we are where we are now.

It's my opinion, that he's been ill advised or wants to do things his way.

I've used this analogy before....but he seems to want the shiny new Ferrari competing in the best race, but not willing to invest in all the small quality parts inside the car, that make it a success.

As for what others have mentioned....about in fighting within a club....of course that happens, at every club, even when it's going well, it's a normal occurance, especially in football, because of it's nature. That's not the biggest problem here....and is already being taken out of context in a few posts.

Just because SC did extremely well last season, I don't understand how people can't see it's not him that is solely the problem for our demise right now. It's not all SC's fault.

[View from the Dolman]

'this will be fine when results are going well, but can only see this ending in tears when they are not'

Surely that's just how most managers end?

[spudski]

Surely that's just how most managers end?

Depends on how the manager reacts to results....obviously it's a given all managers get the sack eventually....but the sentiment of his words, were along the lines of 'this will be fine when things are going well...but tin hat on when it's not'....if you get my drift.

[Nogbad the Bad]

Depends on how the manager reacts to results....obviously it's a given all managers get the sack eventually....but the sentiment of his words, were along the lines of 'this will be fine when things are going well...but tin hat on when it's not'....if you get my drift.

I suspect SC looks at the league table and doesn't like what he sees like the rest of us.

On one of your other points Cotterill shows himself by his supportive public comments to be very much a leader rather than a boss, however behind closed doors I'd hope he is a firm disciplinarian who doesn't mince his words if necessary.

He'll be well aware what BCFC dressing rooms are historically capable of after the way the players turned on more pally managers like Millen and Del.

[spudski]

I suspect SC looks at the league table and doesn't like what he sees like the rest of us.

On one of your other points Cotterill shows himself by his supportive public comments to be very much a leader rather than a boss, however behind closed doors I'd hope he is a firm disciplinarian who doesn't mince his words if necessary.

He'll be well aware what BCFC dressing rooms are historically capable of after the way the players turned on more pally managers like Millen and Del.

Noggers....regardless of whether I like SC as a person....I truly feel for him. Like I've said numerous times, I don't think any manager can successfully sustain success at this Club in this league without hitting major problems.

[BCFC Jimmer]

It is too soon to start thinking about firing him (and I am not SC biggest fan by any means).  I think that we should give him till December.  If we are still in the same position it would make sense to get rid and get in a manager who would have enough time to steady the ship and bring players in.

[Red-Robbo]

Depends on how the manager reacts to results....obviously it's a given all managers get the sack eventually....but the sentiment of his words, were along the lines of 'this will be fine when things are going well...but tin hat on when it's not'....if you get my drift.

A bit like Johnson then, in that respect. 

One of the things that worries me, is that when Cotts came here, he was working with a makeshift squad assembled by other men and one that was neither ideal for the job or instilled with any sort of confidence. 

He was able to not just lift confidence and morale, but in games where things were not going to plan, make prompt and timely changes, play to people's strengths and turn situations around. 

Someone who had never watched football in their life, could've seen how much trouble we were in during that second half on Saturday - and identified some of the causes. 

Yet Cotterill seeed impervious to this. Sort of an iron belief that his system would eventually deliver an ugly win

While I agree with everyone that we need to recruit,  the tools are in our box already to get out of the bottom three. If only we were using them wisely! 

[Kid in the Riot]

A bit like Johnson then, in that respect. 

One of the things that worries me, is that when Cotts came here, he was working with a makeshift squad assembled by other men and one that was neither ideal for the job or instilled with any sort of confidence. 

He was able to not just lift confidence and morale, but in games where things were not going to plan, make prompt and timely changes, play to people's strengths and turn situations around. 

Someone who had never watched football in their life, could've seen how much trouble we were in during that second half on Saturday - and identified some of the causes. 

Yet Cotterill seeed impervious to this. Sort of an iron belief that his system would eventually deliver an ugly win

While I agree with everyone that we need to recruit,  the tools are in our box already to get out of the bottom three. If only we were using them wisely! 

The only explanation for that second half performance is that he told the team to hold on for the win at all costs. The pressure would seem to be getting to him as usually we'd continue to play for the full 90 mins.

I spoke to a Burnley fan earlier this season who said SC went on a bad run in his final season and then completely shut up shop playing very negatively. It didn't work and eventually after a shocking run he was sacked. Hope this isn't history repeating and he sticks to his principles.

Not sure I agree he does have the tools to get us out of the bottom 3, which makes his job yet more difficult.

[REDOXO]

You'll have to dig out this evidence then because I can't find it. The only place where I can find reference to it, is on this forum.

I can find reference to Bristol City being able to match the fee but not being able to agree terms with Gray, Hull being confident that they can meet the terms but they did not want to match the fee, and Burnley being able to match the fee and pay the terms and therefore land the player.

If you can show me anything to suggest otherwise I'm willing to accept what you said is right.

Thanks screech I appreciate the opportunity

Will The Lancashire press or Andre Gays own words suffice?

http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/13631980.Burnley_a_better_place_than_Bristol_City_for_me__says_new_Clarets_striker_Andre_Gray/

I may be able to put this to bed in other ways if necessary, but hopefully that will be enough for everyone. 

To my original point the problem is not money its who wants to come and play for a footballing backwater. We are in a better position than many comparble clubs simply because of the new ground and super rich chairman, however I would be looking seriously to Europe right now....!