Cotts desperate for Blackburn on SSN

[BigAl&Toby]

1 hour ago, spudski said:

A solid one in the Championship...really?

15% win rate with us in the Championship, worse win rate than any other City manager in this league.

At other teams in the Championship he's managed...He's mainly lost more games than he's won.

Forest...32% win rate.

Pompey....29%

Burnley...  34%

However...he did really well lower down the leagues with Cheltenham, Notts County and Us.

I look at those facts and regardless of what I think of him as a person, they speak for themselves.

He's a dinosaur in the way he runs a football club. He'll struggle to get anyone above League 1 imo.

Look at the experience Phil Brown has got...and now managing at Southend.

I can see a similar posting for SC.

As for the board looking at SC now as a replacement for LJ having not managed before...maybe...he did agree to the blueprint the club set out previously, then when mental and feral, and decided he was going to do it his way...sod the academy and pay structures put in place. Sod the rest of the coach's...sod the pathway for academy players into the first team. Ignore what the financial director asked. And only worked with Agents him and Burt 'fancied'.

If you think his Championship percentages are 'Solid'...then that's your prerogative. :-)

 

I'm with you spud. A dinosaur. Even down to his bloody hair cut and suits - stands back for a torrent of "so what's".

Look what happened to dinosaurs. Extinct. Couldn't evolve or keep up and died out.

Like SC. Great whilst it lasted and was right at the time. But it came to an end. His stubbornness caused that.

So what if he'd had the resources and time that LJ has had. Facts are he didn't. Like all of us he made his choices, he stuck to his guns and ducked it up.

Live in the present. Embrace change. Try something new. Even PowerPoint presentations have their place.......

[Esmond Million's Bung]

51 minutes ago, CityLew said:

We could have been playing in league one if Cotts had stayed.

We could playing in league one without him and the wrong end of 15 mil spunked on players, oh yes and a new club record of 9 consecutive league defeats.

And for the record the only reason LJ is the manager of a championship side is because SC got us promoted, with one of the most successful seasons in the clubs history.

SC was rightly sacked but LJ wrongly appointed IMO, I think most fans expected with the ground renovation and expected higher crowds and higher revenue streams a manager with something of a track record and we ended up with an experiment that is turning into a disaster.

 

[Esmond Million's Bung]

5 minutes ago, BigAlToby&Liam said:

I'm with you spud. A dinosaur. Even down to his bloody hair cut and suits - stands back for a torrent of "so what's".

Look what happened to dinosaurs. Extinct. Couldn't evolve or keep up and died out.

Like SC. Great whilst it lasted and was right at the time. But it came to an end. His stubbornness caused that.

So what if he'd had the resources and time that LJ has had. Facts are he didn't. Like all of us he made his choices, he stuck to his guns and ducked it up.

Live in the present. Embrace change. Try something new. Even PowerPoint presentations have their place.......

Does that include relegation?.

[petehinton]

30 minutes ago, Robin1988 said:

Except that we admitted we overdid the youth-buying policy in the summer. Which is, at least, better than last summer, when we did nothing. Of the 9 who came in during the summer, just under half of them  will be out on loan if Engvall goes back to Sweden. I'm all for building for the future but to paraphrase Ashton himself, "it's about the now" as well.

Remember when the five pillars came out, we had McInnes trotting out lines about having to bring in Jody Morris because we couldn't afford anyone better?

Contrast that with the summer spending in 2016, which was - luckily - off-set by the sale of JK, its chalk and cheese. JK's sale wasn't anywhere near certain until the last couple of weeks of August, neither Bolasie's, so going by our approach to that point, we were ready to make a considerable net loss on transfers.

I'll happily stand corrected when the accounts come out (but that won't be for a good 6 months) but I would be shocked the sums we spent in the summer, JK & YB aside, were countered by the new facilities, or anything close to it.

There is not necessarily a problem with us spending money. That's not the issue, we change youth coaches like confetti, we go from Jody Morris being our signing calibre to £2million centre-halves from Juventus.

You miss my point about Cotterill, too. Why did we switch from a 12-month rolling deal and a head coach to a 3.5-year one with a manager within 10 months - what kind of consistent philosophy is that? I could be wrong, but it sounds very much like a case of "What would you like? Yes of course, sign here".

if anything it's a worse deal. I think the term 12 month rolling is misinterpreted, it's not reviewed/renewed every year it's basically full time employment i.e you are constantly employed and have no 'end date'.

Head Coach and Manager are exactly the same thing too. I'm sure there's all kinds of clubs in the Prem that have 'head coaches' and 'managers' yet couldn't tell you what title is with what club, Poch and Pulis are both 'head coaches' but are they any different to Wenger/Pep...?

[Robin1988]

23 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

got to disagree with you there, it wasn't a lucky offset, we don't see whats going on behind the scenes,

we also had greater spending power this season than before any other season in our existence as we finally had corporate facilities which enabled us to set bigger budgets,

 

the second bit you don't really have a point as each manager is different, some would be happy for a 12 month rolling contract others may not want to come for anything less the 3 years as it gives them some security,

When it comes to contracts you need to stop thinking as a fan and start thinking as an individual,

hypothetically speaking for example if you had a choice between a zero hours contract on a potential 30k a year (providing the work is there) in a industry that hasn't got any secure jobs  would you take it? or would you take a job on a fixed term contract for 29k a year but you'd have a bit of job security and if things went tits up you'd get redundancy, 

Without meaning to go all Spudski, until he refused to play at Scunthorpe in the cup he was expected to stay by the hierarchy. I posted on here saying he'd refused at the time before MA mentioned it later on if you want something getting near proof.

Of course we've had greater spending power, but you've not read my post. We spent near enough eight figures in the summer. Considering we were making several million pounds in losses in the Champ last time we were here with comparatively minimal transfer budgets towards the end, that's a monumental shift from the new facilities to not only ensure we're not making a bigger loss than back then, but actually turn it towards the black.

I'm not thinking as a fan when I say Cotterill had been dumped as Nottingham Forest boss a few months earlier and had very low stock. He shouldn't have been in a position to dictate Lansdown's philosophy - no one should, for that matter, although if Conte walks in the door tomorrow maybe that'd be different. 

Think how many jobs he's missed out on since leaving City despite what he achieved here. He was close at Bolton and second choice at MK, but missed out both times. All in all, not  a recipe for dictating not only that you want a substantially longer contract, but also your own job title. If you think that's reasonable I'm not sure what industry you're working in.

[spudski]

1 hour ago, Monkeh said:

have a look at the situation all those clubs were under at the time he managed them,

Pompy were a hairs breath from going to the wall, he kept them up against all odds,

Forest were certs for relegation, he steadied the ship and got them to respectable lower mid-table before being replaced by the new owners

he under achieved a bit at burnley but still made them a solid mid-table team and one that was good in cup competitions to boot,

 

I'd say that's a pretty decent championship manager who in turn was a fantastic lower league manager,

You never took to cotterll when he was here, I seem to remember your user name being Depths of despair,

Granted we'd never win promotion from this league with him in charge, but we'd be doing a damn set better if he had the resources Johnson has had

I think your personal feelings are clouding you on this one to be honest 

 

We put in bids for over 10 £ million each, for two players when he was here...how is that not being backed and given resources? Perhaps his scouting was inept and his dealings with players and agents flawed?

How come players didn't want to come and play for him, yet in a struggling Club like we are now, we are able to attract players like we have in the January window?

They aren't going to sign for us, if they think we are awful.

You can make situations up to fit your argument. The fact is...SC blew it. It was his fault he failed. The WORST manager we've ever had results wise in the Championship...just 15%. That is a fact that you just want to gloss over because it doesn't fit in with your argument. Perhaps likewise, if you took your rose tinted specs off, he had decent players, that he openly admitted he couldn't do anything more with. Who's faults that? He brought them in, with a view to winning promotion and playing them in the Championship. Poor judgement on his part.

It's not 'personal' feelings...it's just knowing when a manager isn't the right fit for your club. And imo...SC wasn't in the Championship.

Plus...any manager that turns up on a fans door, and has it out with him, toe to toe on his door step, because he didn't like what he'd said about him, like he did when at Burnley, shows imo, how unprofessional he is. The blokes a loose cannon that lets emotion take over logical thinking.

Anyway...it's been done to death. Those are the facts...but still some fans will say he was the best thing since the invention of wet look gel.

Each to their own...we can agree to disagree, until the next time :laugh: ;-)

[Nogbad the Bad]

1 minute ago, BigAlToby&Liam said:

I'm with you spud. A dinosaur. Even down to his bloody hair cut and suits - stands back for a torrent of "so what's".

Look what happened to dinosaurs. Extinct. Couldn't evolve or keep up and died out.

Like SC. Great whilst it lasted and was right at the time. But it came to an end. His stubbornness caused that.

So what if he'd had the resources and time that LJ has had. Facts are he didn't. Like all of us he made his choices, he stuck to his guns and ducked it up.

Live in the present. Embrace change. Try something new. Even PowerPoint presentations have their place.......

Hair cut and suits? So what indeed.

Do you like the cut of LJ's suits better, or have a particular fondness for his stubble? 

You're evidently another who didn't like Cotterill personally above all else so like spudski your tainted opinion is unyieldingly ungenerous, biased, and frankly so obviously prejudiced by dislike it's bordering on worthless.

Perhaps you've got something sensible to add to the debate based on SC's all round managerial record and his likely future in football management?

Do you really think City have a better manager in place now, and if so, based on what?

 

[BRISTOL86]

Thank god they appointed Mowbray. For a minute I was worried they might turn things around. 

[Monkeh]

4 minutes ago, spudski said:

We put in bids for over 10 £ million each, for two players when he was here...how is that not being backed and given resources? Perhaps his scouting was inept and his dealings with players and agents flawed?

How come players didn't want to come and play for him, yet in a struggling Club like we are now, we are able to attract players like we have in the January window?

They aren't going to sign for us, if they think we are awful.

You can make situations up to fit your argument. The fact is...SC blew it. It was his fault he failed. The WORST manager we've ever had results wise in the Championship...just 15%. That is a fact that you just want to gloss over because it doesn't fit in with your argument. Perhaps likewise, if you took your rose tinted specs off, he had decent players, that he openly admitted he couldn't do anything more with. Who's faults that? He brought them in, with a view to winning promotion and playing them in the Championship. Poor judgement on his part.

It's not 'personal' feelings...it's just knowing when a manager isn't the right fit for your club. And imo...SC wasn't in the Championship.

Plus...any manager that turns up on a fans door, and has it out with him, toe to toe on his door step, because he didn't like what he'd said about him, like he did when at Burnley, shows imo, how unprofessional he is. The blokes a loose cannon that lets emotion take over logical thinking.

Anyway...it's been done to death. Those are the facts...but still some fans will say he was the best thing since the invention of wet look gel.

Each to their own...we can agree to disagree, until the next time ;-)

I'm not disagreeing with you in terms of results spud, but situation then and now are different Johnson seems to be given a hell of a lot more time, resources and help compared to most other managers here,

and you can't reall pick and chose cotterlls record as bristol city manager speaks for itself and has an overall win rate of just over 45% lee johnson hasn't achieved that at any club he's been at

[Esmond Million's Bung]

13 minutes ago, spudski said:

We put in bids for over 10 £ million each, for two players when he was here...how is that not being backed and given resources? Perhaps his scouting was inept and his dealings with players and agents flawed?

How come players didn't want to come and play for him, yet in a struggling Club like we are now, we are able to attract players like we have in the January window?

They aren't going to sign for us, if they think we are awful.

You can make situations up to fit your argument. The fact is...SC blew it. It was his fault he failed. The WORST manager we've ever had results wise in the Championship...just 15%. That is a fact that you just want to gloss over because it doesn't fit in with your argument. Perhaps likewise, if you took your rose tinted specs off, he had decent players, that he openly admitted he couldn't do anything more with. Who's faults that? He brought them in, with a view to winning promotion and playing them in the Championship. Poor judgement on his part.

It's not 'personal' feelings...it's just knowing when a manager isn't the right fit for your club. And imo...SC wasn't in the Championship.

Plus...any manager that turns up on a fans door, and has it out with him, toe to toe on his door step, because he didn't like what he'd said about him, like he did when at Burnley, shows imo, how unprofessional he is. The blokes a loose cannon that lets emotion take over logical thinking.

Anyway...it's been done to death. Those are the facts...but still some fans will say he was the best thing since the invention of wet look gel.

Each to their own...we can agree to disagree, until the next time ;-)

Whilst we are quoting records, who is the manager who set the new standard for successive league defeats?.

[BigAl&Toby]

9 minutes ago, Nogbad the Bad said:

Hair cut and suits? So what indeed.

Do you like the cut of LJ's suits better, or have a particular fondness for his stubble? 

You're evidently another who didn't like Cotterill personally above all else so like spudski your tainted opinion is unyieldingly ungenerous, biased, and frankly so obviously prejudiced by dislike it's bordering on worthless.

Perhaps you've got something sensible to add to the debate based on SC's all round managerial record and his likely future in football management?

Do you really think City have a better manager in place now, and if so, based on what?

 

Wahay! Yep. I love stubble. I live in what many call Hipsterville. Or London in Somerset. We have a monthly independent market. All organic or galvanised tat.

No space there for an 80s throwback!

I've made it clear. I appreciated all SC did for us. But the emphasis is on did. He ****** it all up on his own. Like my ex-Mrs - great whilst it lasted.

But once it's over it's over. Remember the good times with fondness but look forward to even better times. 

Based on where we are now? No we probably don't have a better manager. Do though we have a better set up, squad and future? Without a doubt yes. And who knows, like Alan Dicks or Arsene or Sir Alex with a little patience - even if that means we go backwards to go forwards - we might - just might - go on to bigger and better things.

But hey if you want to relive SC's past successes feel free. 

 

[Monkeh]

4 minutes ago, Esmond Million's Bung said:

Whilst we are quoting records, who is the manager who set the new standard for successive league defeats?.

whoever was manager of Darwen in 1898/89 season, they lost 18 in a row

[BigAl&Toby]

5 minutes ago, Esmond Million's Bung said:

Whilst we are quoting records, who is the manager who set the new standard for successive league defeats?.

Lee Johnson.

Your point is what?

[Jack Dawe]

8 minutes ago, spudski said:

We put in bids for over £10 million, for two players when he was here...how is that not being backed and given resources? Perhaps his scouting was inept and his dealings with players and agents flawed?

How come players didn't want to come and play for himHow come players didn't want to come and play for him, yet in a struggling Club like we are now, we are able to attract players like we have in the January window?

They aren't going to sign for us, if they think we are awful.

You can make situations up to fit your argument. The fact is...SC blew it. It was his fault he failed. The WORST manager we've ever had results wise in the Championship...just 15%. That is a fact that you just want to gloss over because it doesn't fit in with your argument. Perhaps likewise, if you took your rose tinted specs off, he had decent players, that he openly admitted he couldn't do anything more with. Who's faults that? He brought them in, with a view to winning promotion and playing them in the Championship. Poor judgement on his part.

It's not 'personal' feelings...it's just knowing when a manager isn't the right fit for your club. And imo...SC wasn't in the Championship.

Plus...any manager that turns up on a fans door, and has it out with him, toe to toe on his door step, because he didn't like what he'd said about him, like he did when at Burnley, shows imo, how unprofessional he is. The blokes a loose cannon that lets emotion take over logical thinking.

Anyway...it's been done to death. Those are the facts...but still some fans will say he was the best thing since the invention of wet look gel.

Each to their own...we can agree to disagree, until the next time ;-)

The "facts" regarding Gayle and Gray, spud, are that Gayle opted to stay at PL Crystal Palace, before moving to Newcastle Utd. And Gray moved from Brentford to Burnley. Anything we say beyond that about those two we made bids for would be guesswork and informed by our 'personal' feelings about SC. In my opinion.

If Lee Johnson and Mark Ashton had been here in the summer of 2015, you reckon either Gayle or Gray would have come here? No, me neither.

I think your "wet gel" comment tells us all we need to know about your "not 'personal' " comment.....

 

[BigAl&Toby]

33 minutes ago, Esmond Million's Bung said:

Does that include relegation?.

Yep.

Difficult roads often lead to beautiful destinations

[BigAl&Toby]

7 minutes ago, Jack Dawe said:

The "facts" regarding Gayle and Gray, spud, are that Gayle opted to stay at PL Crystal Palace, before moving to Newcastle Utd. And Gray moved from Brentford to Burnley. Anything we say beyond that about those two we made bids for would be guesswork and informed by our 'personal' feelings about SC. In my opinion.

If Lee Johnson and Mark Ashton had been here in the summer of 2015, you reckon either Gayle or Gray would have come here? No, me neither.

I think your "wet gel" comment tells us all we need to know about your "not 'personal' " comment.....

 

I missed the "wet gel" comment.

Says it all. No place in the modern game, or indeed life today, for that look.

The bloke was a diplodocus.

[Robin1988]

1 hour ago, petehinton said:

if anything it's a worse deal. I think the term 12 month rolling is misinterpreted, it's not reviewed/renewed every year it's basically full time employment i.e you are constantly employed and have no 'end date'.

Head Coach and Manager are exactly the same thing too. I'm sure there's all kinds of clubs in the Prem that have 'head coaches' and 'managers' yet couldn't tell you what title is with what club, Poch and Pulis are both 'head coaches' but are they any different to Wenger/Pep...?

You have a set 12-month pay-off, assuming you get fired. Considering the average tenure for a manager is 1.31 years according to Sky, if anything it's a much better deal Pete.

Head coaches are very different from managers, it's not a British idea though so some clubs in this country use the term to pay lip service rather than adopting the whole philosophy of it. In practice, it should mean when the head coaches come and go, the rest of the club, backroom staff, recruitment policy, etc. etc. etc. stays the same. Some clubs over here do operate like that; look at Watford, for instance, although the way they work is unsurprising since they have an Italian owner who, unlike many foreign owners, is actually heavily involved in the club.

Ironically, we did adopt it properly, albeit very briefly. When SO'D left, the youth coaches stayed, Keith Burt stayed, and all the rest. Until Cotts came in, as manager, on a long deal, and gave Adam El-Abd a 3.5 year deal too.

[Esmond Million's Bung]

1 hour ago, BigAlToby&Liam said:

Lee Johnson.

Your point is what?

 My point was in reply to a poster quoting records as to how shit SC was and I am quoting records to how shit LJ is.

 

1 hour ago, BigAlToby&Liam said:

Yep.

Difficult roads often lead to beautiful destinations

Then with all of the respect that I can muster, you are really quite mad.

[Monkeh]

1 hour ago, Robin1988 said:

You have a set 12-month pay-off, assuming you get fired. Considering the average tenure for a manager is 1.31 years according to Sky, if anything it's a much better deal Pete.

Head coaches are very different from managers, it's not a British idea though so some clubs in this country use the term to pay lip service rather than adopting the whole philosophy of it. In practice, it should mean when the head coaches come and go, the rest of the club, backroom staff, recruitment policy, etc. etc. etc. stays the same. Some clubs over here do operate like that; look at Watford, for instance, although the way they work is unsurprising since they have an Italian owner who, unlike many foreign owners, is actually heavily involved in the club.

Ironically, we did adopt it properly, albeit very briefly. When SO'D left, the youth coaches stayed, Keith Burt stayed, and all the rest. Until Cotts came in, as manager, on a long deal, and gave Adam El-Abd a 3.5 year deal too.

He also signed smith Wilbrham freeman kodja brought smith in on loan,

his good signings far outweigh his bad ones

[spudski]

1 hour ago, Jack Dawe said:

The "facts" regarding Gayle and Gray, spud, are that Gayle opted to stay at PL Crystal Palace, before moving to Newcastle Utd. And Gray moved from Brentford to Burnley. Anything we say beyond that about those two we made bids for would be guesswork and informed by our 'personal' feelings about SC. In my opinion.

If Lee Johnson and Mark Ashton had been here in the summer of 2015, you reckon either Gayle or Gray would have come here? No, me neither.

I think your "wet gel" comment tells us all we need to know about your "not 'personal' " comment.....

 

The point I was making initially JD, was that SC was backed, and for anyone to say he wasn't, is ridiculous.

The fact that he chose to go for players that were not likely to come here, is his fault, no one else's. He should have done some due diligence in his scouting.

As for LJ and MA...they wouldn't have gone after either Gayle or Gray, as that is not the type of player we are going after. Neither was it meant to be when SC was here, but he left it so late to do his recruiting, that the Club had to back him as time was running out. Perhaps you should do a little digging and find out why our financial director left fella ;-)

As for the 'Wet Gel' comment...I thought it would be humorous, looks like it went down like a lead balloon and got turned into 'all we need to know comment'...glad you know my feeling and thoughts better than me JD ;-)

If you want a Fact...there are people on here who look at SC through rose tinted glasses and won't hear a word said against him regardless.

There are people, including me that will do it with every manager. So tbh...it's a pointless exercise.

[Portland Bill]

8 hours ago, RedLionLad said:

It means not a lot to some.

I know, amazing how some people forget these things so quickly. Or perhaps, they have only supported City since we went up............

[spudski]

2 hours ago, Monkeh said:

I'm not disagreeing with you in terms of results spud, but situation then and now are different Johnson seems to be given a hell of a lot more time, resources and help compared to most other managers here,

and you can't reall pick and chose cotterlls record as bristol city manager speaks for itself and has an overall win rate of just over 45% lee johnson hasn't achieved that at any club he's been at

That's because LJ is still working with what the Club have asked him to do.

If SC had done the same, perhaps he would have been given longer too...but he chose to ignore what the Club were asking of him.

As for picking and choosing...I'm not. Managing a team in the Championship, is far different to managing a team in League 1. What he achieved in League 1 has no comparison to what he achieved in the Championship.

He was outstanding in results for us in league 1 and absolutely pathetic in the Championship for us.

It is what it is mate ;-)

[Jack Dawe]

16 minutes ago, spudski said:

The point I was making initially JD, was that SC was backed, and for anyone to say he wasn't, is ridiculous.

The fact that he chose to go for players that were not likely to come here, is his fault, no one else's. He should have done some due diligence in his scouting.

They were highly unlikely to come here, we can agree on this, spud. And that was Cotts' responsibility, yes.

As for LJ and MA...they wouldn't have gone after either Gayle or Gray, as that is not the type of player we are going after. Neither was it meant to be when SC was here, but he left it so late to do his recruiting, that the Club had to back him as time was running out. Perhaps you should do a little digging and find out why our financial director left fella ;-)

You asked "how come players didn't want to come and play for him" then compared this to us now signing players this January. Which sounded like you were saying Gayle and Gray had turned Cotterill down, when they had simply turned Bristol City down. 

As for the 'Wet Gel' comment...I thought it would be humorous, looks like it went down like a lead balloon and got turned into 'all we need to know comment'...glad you know my feeling and thoughts better than me JD ;-)

It's a personal comment, his personal appearance choices have nothing to do with his ability to manage a football club. To try and claim your judgment of SC is "not 'personal' " is laughable. You tripped yourself up there.

If you want a Fact...there are people on here who look at SC through rose tinted glasses and won't hear a word said against him regardless.

That's not a fact, that's an opinion. Try and learn the difference, fella.

There are people, including me that will do it with every manager. So tbh...it's a pointless exercise.

 

[WolfOfWestStreet]

4 hours ago, CityLew said:

We could have been playing in league one if Cotts had stayed.

And we'd be in league two if he hadn't taken over from that clown SOD. At least cotts gave us the opportunity to balls up in the championship. Lee johnsons had such an easy ride he should have been run out of town ages ago. 

[Robin1988]

1 hour ago, Monkeh said:

He also signed smith Wilbrham freeman kodja brought smith in on loan,

his good signings far outweigh his bad ones

Again you're putting words in my mouth, I've been a big advocate of SC for a long time. Lansdown's inability to keep his eye on the ball in the summer of 2015 started a snowball rolling which we only fixed with MA's arrival. Just to be clear, his willingness to bankroll this club, his genuine love of City and what he's done for the club since the turn of the century is equally as important as his questionable record with managers and philosophies IMO.

[Robin1988]

1 hour ago, spudski said:

The point I was making initially JD, was that SC was backed, and for anyone to say he wasn't, is ridiculous.

The fact that he chose to go for players that were not likely to come here, is his fault, no one else's. He should have done some due diligence in his scouting.

As for LJ and MA...they wouldn't have gone after either Gayle or Gray, as that is not the type of player we are going after. Neither was it meant to be when SC was here, but he left it so late to do his recruiting, that the Club had to back him as time was running out. Perhaps you should do a little digging and find out why our financial director left fella ;-)

As for the 'Wet Gel' comment...I thought it would be humorous, looks like it went down like a lead balloon and got turned into 'all we need to know comment'...glad you know my feeling and thoughts better than me JD ;-)

If you want a Fact...there are people on here who look at SC through rose tinted glasses and won't hear a word said against him regardless.

There are people, including me that will do it with every manager. So tbh...it's a pointless exercise.

So much of this is just not true, which is a rarity for you Spudski.

Targets were identified and not acted on, it's difficult to judge whether someone is likely to sign for you or not when you never put a bid in because them upstairs are too busy going on holiday. It's not so much SC wasn't supported financially, it was just more akin to a brewery hosting a badly-organised piss up.

You're better than picking up on Gray & Gayle and using them as a stick to beat SC with. They were last-chance saloon targets because we'd missed out on so many others in the mean time. Both bids went in during mid-late August. You of all people can't think that's when you move on your first, second or even third choices.

Weeks before that, at Yeovil, SC had dropped a hint to his frustration with the board. That one or two-minute soundbyte was heavily planned so as to get SC's message across without full-on attacking anyone. To borrow from your own phrase book, that is a fact.

Even if you want to put aside any 'ITK' dick measuring (but that would be boring), consider this.

Summer 2014, we have a transfer window God himself would've been proud of, which was assisted by MA (as he has since confirmed on RB). Fast forward 12 months, and a post-MA, Keith Dawe-headed universe. SC hints at being frustrated with the board, we sign a load of dross on loan and panic bid for Gayle and Gray. SC gets the chop, MA enters stage left. Roll on January, shock horror - we're signing players again. Rinse and repeat last summer and January just gone.

Of course, depending on whose perspective you prefer to sympathise with, you'll probably say the crucial variable in our transfer success/failure is either Cotterill or Ashton.

But logically, considering how much control MA has over transfers at the club, why do so many people overlook the connection between his absence and our frustration?

[Esmond Million's Bung]

30 minutes ago, cynic said:

I though it was 8 consecutive league games ?

Doesn't really matter I suppose...

 

it is a record and an embarrassing one to boot.

But hey according to at least one relegation to keep this manager would be quite acceptable.

 

[BigAl&Toby]

1 hour ago, Portland Bill said:

I know, amazing how some people forget these things so quickly. Or perhaps, they have only supported City since we went up............

Hope that's not aimed at me PB?

Many years since my old dad made a seat thing that he'd hang over the barriers in the old enclosure for me to perch on.

I haven't forgotten the good that SC did and his successes. Then again I've not forgotten how it ended either.

Rose tinted glasses? Not me. 

[spudski]

4 minutes ago, Robin1988 said:

So much of this is just not true, which is a rarity for you Spudski.

Targets were identified and not acted on, it's difficult to judge whether someone is likely to sign for you or not when you never put a bid in because them upstairs were too busy going on holiday. It's not so much he wasn't supported financially, it was just a brewery hosting a badly-organised piss up.

You're better than picking up on Gray & Gayle and using them as a stick to beat SC with. They were last-chance salloon targets because we'd missed out on so much in the mean time. Both bids went in during mid-late August. You of all people can't think that's when you move on your first, second or even third choices.

Weeks before that, at Yeovil, SC had dropped a hint to his frustration with the board. That one or two-minute soundbyte was heavily planned. To borrow from your own phrase book, I know that for a fact.

Even if you want to put aside any 'ITK' dick measuring, anyone can use a bit of logic based on the facts available to everyone. Consider this, if you don't want to engage the above.

Summer 2014, we have a transfer window God himself would've been proud of, which was assisted by MA (as he has since confirmed on RB). Fast forward 12 months, and a post-MA, Keith Dawe-headed universe. SC hints at being frustrated with the board, we sign a load of dross on loan and panic bid for Gayle and Gray. SC gets the chop, MA enters stage left. Roll on January, shock horror - we're signing players again. Rinse and repeat last summer and January just gone.

Of course, depending on whose perspective you prefer to sympathise with, you'll probably say the crucial variable in our transfer success/failure is either Cotterill or Ashton.

But logically, considering how much control MA has over transfers at the club, why do so many people overlook the connection between his absence and our frustration?

It maybe untrue in your world Robin, but not from where I'm coming from.

I did say the Gray and Gayle attempts were late, and that the board backed him for those bids.

Why would the board back him for those bids, which were massive...but not for the others that supposedly fell through? Ask yourself that question.

It had nothing to do with holidays...it had everything to do with agreed budgets, that SC deferred from. Why make a pre contract agreement with certain players, and promise so much, when you know the budget won't allow it. Then blame the board for not backing you, even though it was him who made an agreement that wasn't possible.

Ask yourself why SC screwed up his summer transfer targets and then puts the blame at the foot of the board, yet our next manager comes along and is backed fully.

SC was backed...he just screwed up with his targets and made agreements that the Club couldn't or wouldn't back for budget reasons.

I've no sympathy with SC or Burt...they screwed up and got greedy.

Our FD walked because of it.

We can agree to disagree on this point Robin...

[BigAl&Toby]

7 minutes ago, Esmond Million's Bung said:

it is a record and an embarrassing one to boot.

But hey according to at least one relegation to keep this manager would be quite acceptable.

 

That one EMB. Me?

C word needed. Context. If you are referring to me and an earlier comment I made please do so in context.

If LJ takes us down and things don't improve then he gets what he deserves.

The context point was regarding other situations elsewhere and the value that can be achieved through consistency and continuity ala Dicks, Wenger and Ferguson.

But hey if you like the consistent and seemingly continuity of hire and fire then carry on