Magnussen

[Cowshed]

1 hour ago, JoeAman08 said:

If we are spending it then I'm sure SL is alright with covering it. I don't know what you suggest we do if not buy young and develop them. Do we solely rely on our academy? Do we only sign players on free transfers(if we can afford their wages)? Do we rely more on loans from other clubs? How do we compete with parachute payments long term if not this way? In my mind, it's the only option we have. We will look for deals when we can find them like Brownhill but even lower league players are costing 7 figures(Bogle rumoured to be about 1m for half a L2 season, 3m for Roofe and 1.5m for O'Dowda and even the young guy at Exeter has been slapped with a 2m price tag). Point is, we can either spend the going rate as we have or we can try to compete and get better through loansand free transfers. There isn't much in between. People will use Preston as an example but they've got a location advantage and even then, how do they improve from here? They're in a similar position to last year and will struggle to find improvements because of their limited means. We've seen this with Ipswich. You can create a good team on a small budget but when you can't afford to keep players you are left with a task to replace them and stay relevant. 

Basically, if you want to be a self sustainable club in the championship you have to have some years at a loss. With Kodjia, Ayling, Agard and Williams sales we've probably taken home a max of 17.5m add on Adomah and Bolasie sell ons we are in the low 20s of millions in income. Add to that ticket sales and all that other stuff and our losses this year shouldn't be too bad. Take into account most clubs will be posting losses because that's the state of the championship. 

There is a ceiling on what Mr Lansdown can lose ... As you have pointed out. I think it would be savvier to spend money on players who really are going to play in the XI v bulking up the squad. 

Basically, if you want to be a self sustainable club in the championship ... Bristol City are miles from this - Check the last decades accounts. The summaries in particular are interesting. Its not some years of loss its a decade, and at times operating 100%+  past income.

Your opening line seems to indicate you do not want BCFC to be a self sustainable club.  

 

[JoeAman08]

3 minutes ago, Cowshed said:

There is a ceiling on what Mr Lansdown can lose ... As you have pointed out. I think it would be savvier to spend money on players who really are going to play in the XI v bulking up the squad. 

Basically, if you want to be a self sustainable club in the championship ... Bristol City are miles from this - Check the last decades accounts. The summaries in particular are interesting. Its not some years of loss its a decade, and at times operating 100%+  past income.

Your opening line seems to indicate you do not want BCFC to be a self sustainable club.  

 

I want them to be self sustainable I just realise that can't happen without initial investment. I don't think we are far off on understanding each other. I'd agree we maybe spent too much on players that wouldn't help too much this year but I don't think individually any of them are bad investments. My biggest concern with buying ready made first XI players is the wage which is the real killer towards losses. Tomlin, O'Neil and Matthews for example should've been a big help towards the first XI and if rumours are to be believed then they're on every bit of 50-60k a week combined. That's about 3m in itself whereas Magnusson, Brownhill, COD, Moore, Lucic and Engvall will be slightly more than half that(obviously an educated guess on my part). You could argue we've gotten more for our money in the young players already. 

We could probably go round and round on this but I get where you're coming from. I just think there is as much risk in that as what we did in the summer. Even our January signings outside of Wright have been mixed bags to this point and they were all meant to be more towards our first XI. At worst with the young signings we will get most of that back if sold on, imo and in most cases will make a profit if and when they move on. 

[Cowshed]

2 hours ago, JoeAman08 said:

I want them to be self sustainable I just realise that can't happen without initial investment. I don't think we are far off on understanding each other. I'd agree we maybe spent too much on players that wouldn't help too much this year but I don't think individually any of them are bad investments. My biggest concern with buying ready made first XI players is the wage which is the real killer towards losses. Tomlin, O'Neil and Matthews for example should've been a big help towards the first XI and if rumours are to be believed then they're on every bit of 50-60k a week combined. That's about 3m in itself whereas Magnusson, Brownhill, COD, Moore, Lucic and Engvall will be slightly more than half that(obviously an educated guess on my part). You could argue we've gotten more for our money in the young players already. 

We could probably go round and round on this but I get where you're coming from. I just think there is as much risk in that as what we did in the summer. Even our January signings outside of Wright have been mixed bags to this point and they were all meant to be more towards our first XI. At worst with the young signings we will get most of that back if sold on, imo and in most cases will make a profit if and when they move on. 

And wanting BCFC to be sustainable requires fans to moderate their expectations. Fans look at BCFC losing money season after season and Mr Lansdown structuring debts as being a normal, and they are satisfied with the status quo of Mr Lansdown lose money, lose money season after season in a never ending series of initial investments. Some of which are poor.

Kodja played when signed. There are big costly signings for BCFC in the clubs terms (not the rest) warming the bench and worse. Anybody wanting BCFC to be self sustainable should be looking at what are big signings playing week in week out ..

[robin_unreliant]

3 hours ago, Tipps69 said:

It's not beyond the realms of possibility that we could spend another £15m but this time on maybe 5 players instead of 15 or so.

Now we have a bigger squad what we really need is two or three quality additions that are ready now. Unfortunately they will command decent wages which is where it all breaks down. We can't/won't pay the kind of wages that proven players at this level can demand. So I doubt it will happen. We have to rely on the 'one's for the future' starting to come good instead.

[JoeAman08]

1 hour ago, Cowshed said:

And wanting BCFC to be sustainable requires fans to moderate their expectations. Fans look at BCFC losing money season after season and Mr Lansdown structuring debts as being a normal, and they are satisfied with the status quo of Mr Lansdown lose money, lose money season after season in a never ending series of initial investments. Some of which are poor.

Kodja played when signed. There are big costly signings for BCFC in the clubs terms (not the rest) warming the bench and worse. Anybody wanting BCFC to be self sustainable should be looking at what are big signings playing week in week out ..

Yes but you have to start somewhere. If you believe what they are saying about the project at the club, and I do, then this is the start of a self sustainable structure. I can't argue with what you say about the millions lost already in previous seasons. I can only argue that it seems SL has learned from his mistakes and now instead of pumping money into 28-30 year old journeyman he wants to put that towards 18-23 year olds where we can get good years out of them but still command a good fee if they want to leave. I only see our future getting brighter with this philosophy and it's a project which would usually take many years to start reaping the rewards but SL put forward millions to quick start it. 

[Tipps69]

1 hour ago, robin_unreliant said:

Now we have a bigger squad what we really need is two or three quality additions that are ready now. Unfortunately they will command decent wages which is where it all breaks down. We can't/won't pay the kind of wages that proven players at this level can demand. So I doubt it will happen. We have to rely on the 'one's for the future' starting to come good instead.

But we don't have 'ones for the future' that can play first team football at right-back, right-midfield or striker.

We could maybe use Lucic in goal & Brownhill in central midfield but unless we can find some real quality via the 'out of contract' route, it is going to cost us realistically more than £3m per player for a decent striker, central midfielder & right-midfielder (DC may save us a fortune there).

And as you say, any decent signings will probably require decent wages, in theory you get what you pay for.

I'd like to think that we're already aware of players that fit our criteria & the longer we establish ourselves in The Championship, the better our reputation grows & means we will be able to attract a better quality of player.

[Fiale]

Two relegation battles, I can see a few players having had enough and moving on during the closed season. I expect to see a few new signings and some of our less used players next season - if not then in all likely-hood they will also be asking to move on in the January window. You can play a squad game if you want, but that means those players need to get decent game time or there is no incentive to being at the club. 

[Charlie BCFC]

Quite like to see him at LB as he plays there for Iceland

[Tipps69]

24 minutes ago, Flint says No said:

Quite like to see him at LB as he plays there for Iceland

8 appearances in 2 years or more doesn't suggest that he's an accomplished left-back & when was the last time he actually played for Iceland?

I would hazard a guess that he's not their first choice left-back or maybe even not their 3rd choice left-back.

In fact, I'd say there's very little that suggests that he can competently play left-back at all.

[robin_unreliant]

4 hours ago, Tipps69 said:

But we don't have 'ones for the future' that can play first team football at right-back, right-midfield or striker.

We could maybe use Lucic in goal & Brownhill in central midfield but unless we can find some real quality via the 'out of contract' route, it is going to cost us realistically more than £3m per player for a decent striker, central midfielder & right-midfielder (DC may save us a fortune there).

And as you say, any decent signings will probably require decent wages, in theory you get what you pay for.

Yes but the point I was trying to make is that SL doesn't want to go down the route of adding a few players on higher fees. He pushed out the boat for £3m plus Tomlin's wages but I can't see him doing that 3 or 4 times. 

So I suspect it will be more young players/foreign players at lower fees or using the existing squad. That avoids cranking up the wage bill. Alternatively maybe the odd quality loan that only commits us to wages for one season?

[Tipps69]

6 minutes ago, robin_unreliant said:

Yes but the point I was trying to make is that SL doesn't want to go down the route of adding a few players on higher fees. He pushed out the boat for £3m plus Tomlin's wages but I can't see him doing that 3 or 4 times. 

So I suspect it will be more young players/foreign players at lower fees or using the existing squad. That avoids cranking up the wage bill. Alternatively maybe the odd quality loan that only commits us to wages for one season?

I fully understand what you're saying & I agree to an extent.

I'm sure that this is in part, part of the reason why LJ got given the job & why he hasn't been sacked (yet), SL clearly trusts LJ to build a squad using young players that can be developed & this also allows for us (Bristol City Football Club) to buy players slightly cheaper as they are players with potential & not the finished article & this also means that we can pay wages to go in line with this.

The problem has come from this summer onwards, on paper it looked like a fantastic option but the longer the season had been playing, the harder we found it & it has left LJ with very few options when it has come to players that he can rely on.

Don't get me wrong, I was fully behind the idea & it was the first time we had embarked on having an eye on the future but I think LJ will realise that he needs more 1st team ready players now, not 2 or 3 years into the future because if he ever goes through what he recently did, he probably won't have the 2 or 3 years to be able to use these players with an eye to the future.

And this is in part why most managers don't sign players with an eye on the future anymore unless they are a much bigger club than us & they can afford to have resources tied up on players for years to come. Most managers are now only concerned with the here & now because one bad run of results & they can be out of a job.

LJ would be silly if when it comes time to discuss player recruitment for the summer, he doesn't instantly ask for players who can produce now!! He can't afford to risk signing a goalkeeper, right-back, right-midfielder & striker with an eye to the future unless he has already got proven ability in those positions because we can't afford to go into another season without these positions filled with first team ready players.

When & only when he has a squad of players he can rely on can he afford to sign players for the future & I think January's window showed that, there was no potential signed in January only players at peak age, who had performed at a higher level than what we are (apart from Matt Taylor).

Maybe this is part of the reason why Des Taylor has left, to enable us to pursue a different type of player?

But I wouldn't be at all surprised if this season has meant that SL is made to rethink clubs current transfer philosophy.

[pnefcok]

On 3/20/2017 at 15:45, JoeAman08 said:

Yes but we didn't spend 6m on Engvall. That's the point, it's higher risk then because that's a fee we basically paid for 4 players. We did spend the money on the players so you'd assume we can afford it. 1.5m on Engvall for example is probably high for him personally but that's due to the country we are in and the fees being paid in this league. We want a player we'll have to pay double what he'd go for in Europe. It's the reality of the league. There are probably some decent deals in the lower league we should keep an eye out for like Preston does but I think Preston have a better location draw for many players. 

We may have a better location in terms of picking up scraps (good scraps) from several local Premier League clubs, but at the same time having all those clubs around us consistently hits our efforts to improve our crowds. This is where clubs like Bristol City, the Sheffield clubs and so on have a slight advantage, most people in the city support one of the city's teams, whereas right across Lancashire many (glory) fans decide they want to watch Liverpool, City or United instead, then there are several smaller sides like Bolton, Blackburn, Burnley, Blackpool, Preston etc. The competition for fans and players is fierce.

As for decent deals it comes down to the club having an understanding of value for money. Your lad O'Dowda is a perfect example (I'm not criticising him by the way). Whenever I've seen him on TV etc. he looks like a good prospect, and I'm sure he'll turn into a very good player for this level, but £1.5m and 8k a week I read on here (and he's not even scored yet)? We had our eye on him at the start of the summer but we simply won't pay that for one player, especially from the fourth tier. Instead since then we've signed 4 wide men. Robinson (200k - 8 goals, 2 assists, rejected £2.5m from Fulham in January), McGeady (loan - 5 goals, 7 assists, current Champ player of the month), then in January Horgan from Dundalk (free - 2 goals so far), and Barkhuizen from Morecambe (150k - 5 goals in 4 starts so far). Getting 4 good wingers in for a combined amount of 350k is simply miles better value and that's how our recruitment works.

Now of course, as we've already established, our location can help with transfers at times, but as far as I can see there's nothing else stopping Bristol City from implementing a similar better value for money recruitment system, but from the outside looking in you seem to have to spend a million or two per player at times, barring the odd exception (Brownhill and Wright ironically!).

[JoeAman08]

21 minutes ago, pnefcok said:

We may have a better location in terms of picking up scraps (good scraps) from several local Premier League clubs, but at the same time having all those clubs around us consistently hits our efforts to improve our crowds. This is where clubs like Bristol City, the Sheffield clubs and so on have a slight advantage, most people in the city support one of the city's teams, whereas right across Lancashire many (glory) fans decide they want to watch Liverpool, City or United instead, then there are several smaller sides like Bolton, Blackburn, Burnley, Blackpool, Preston etc. The competition for fans and players is fierce.

As for decent deals it comes down to the club having an understanding of value for money. Your lad O'Dowda is a perfect example (I'm not criticising him by the way). Whenever I've seen him on TV etc. he looks like a good prospect, and I'm sure he'll turn into a very good player for this level, but £1.5m and 8k a week I read on here (and he's not even scored yet)? We had our eye on him at the start of the summer but we simply won't pay that for one player, especially from the fourth tier. Instead since then we've signed 4 wide men. Robinson (200k - 8 goals, 2 assists, rejected £2.5m from Fulham in January), McGeady (loan - 5 goals, 7 assists, current Champ player of the month), then in January Horgan from Dundalk (free - 2 goals so far), and Barkhuizen from Morecambe (150k - 5 goals in 4 starts so far). Getting 4 good wingers in for a combined amount of 350k is simply miles better value and that's how our recruitment works.

Now of course, as we've already established, our location can help with transfers at times, but as far as I can see there's nothing else stopping Bristol City from implementing a similar better value for money recruitment system, but from the outside looking in you seem to have to spend a million or two per player at times, barring the odd exception (Brownhill and Wright ironically!).

 I don't doubt we could find more value for our money and I did mean it in a picking up younger players from academies. You have a young central midfielder you got for peanuts from united I think. Robinson I thought was a player when here but our manager at the time didn't play anyone outside the first 12. 

The problem with value for money is the competition for them. This is where I think your biggest advantage is. A lot of times in your deals you get players who won't have to relocate to get first team football. Therefore if it came between City and Preston for a young player from that area you're at an advantage. Maybe we should look to the London clubs for deals like these but again there are many clubs there looking for the same. We are 100 miles at least from these clubs. I may read too much into it and we dont have to spend millions on 1 young player but I do genuinely think we'll be down the pecking order on many of the bargain types mentioned. 

Preston do a fantastic job though and we're just an example of course. Blackburn and Wigan could be used for the same purposes of location. I do fear for Preston though if significant offers come in for their players. As we've shown, no amount of money guarantees any sort of success. 

[pnefcok]

43 minutes ago, JoeAman08 said:

 I don't doubt we could find more value for our money and I did mean it in a picking up younger players from academies. You have a young central midfielder you got for peanuts from united I think. Robinson I thought was a player when here but our manager at the time didn't play anyone outside the first 12. 

The problem with value for money is the competition for them. This is where I think your biggest advantage is. A lot of times in your deals you get players who won't have to relocate to get first team football. Therefore if it came between City and Preston for a young player from that area you're at an advantage. Maybe we should look to the London clubs for deals like these but again there are many clubs there looking for the same. We are 100 miles at least from these clubs. I may read too much into it and we dont have to spend millions on 1 young player but I do genuinely think we'll be down the pecking order on many of the bargain types mentioned. 

Preston do a fantastic job though and we're just an example of course. Blackburn and Wigan could be used for the same purposes of location. I do fear for Preston though if significant offers come in for their players. As we've shown, no amount of money guarantees any sort of success. 

Yeah Ben Pearson cost around 350k. As for Robinson he was mismanaged by Villa and should never have been sent to Bristol City due to the formation you were playing every single game at the time.

As for your last point, whilst our owner doesn't really spend much on transfers, he is worth around £800m so there's no need to sell anybody at all unless they are running their deal down like Bailey Wright or the offer is just too good to say no to. Everyone who we wanted to sign a long-term contract earlier in the season, except Wright unfortunately, signed one, so we most likely won't end up in a Barnsley type situation where everyone has 6 months left and a fire sale occurs.

[Natchfever]

On 21/03/2017 at 09:53, Tipps69 said:

I think it's pretty safe to assume that City won't see another transfer window like the one of last summer again (or anytime soon).

And I'd be very surprised if LJ looks to sign so many players with an eye to the future in any one window again.

But that being said, it wouldn't surprise me to see City's transfer record broken this summer & possibly not just the once!! From the outside looking in, I would say that we'll be looking for a right-back, right-midfielder (DC possibly), goalkeeper, left-back (maybe as LJ clearly rates JB highly), a central-midfielder (to maybe replace GO'N) & a striker (to replace TA).

But that being said, central-midfield maybe covered by JB (Josh Brownhill) or a now fully fit KS.

But realistically, for decent quality, we'll have to spend a decent amount of money on a goalkeeper, right-back & striker & all of which could cost us more than the £3m or so that is our current transfer record outlay.

It's not beyond the realms of possibility that we could spend another £15m but this time on maybe 5 players instead of 15 or so.

Surely dependent upon the division we find ourselves in next season?

We should be down a few quid on Engvall for starters, so will SL indulge Johnson yet again?

I can't see it myself.

[Tipps69]

3 minutes ago, Loon plage said:

Surely dependent upon the division we find ourselves in next season?

We should be down a few quid on Engvall for starters, so will SL indulge Johnson yet again?

I can't see it myself.

SL clearly trusts LJ & if he manages to keep us up then I believe there will be a different transfer policy implemented.

I'd doubt very much if we see much invested on 'players of the future' but 'players for now', we seemingly already need a goalkeeper (Lucic dependant), a right-back, right-midfielder (maybe Dave Cotterill) and a striker to replace Tammy.

You could add to that a central midfielder to replace GO'N but Brownhill may be the man for that position.

Engvall may not be a waste of money just yet, he's still only 20-ish & given a decent pre-season, he could be given an opportunity as there must of been a reason why we invested in someone so young.

Those positions I've mentioned above are the minimum needs if the team is to progress & I think SL & LJ will be aware that we need first team ready players to start the season & then maybe have youngsters there as back-up but to get first team ready players won't be cheap unless we acquire out of contract players.

SL has a reputation for backing his managers & another season in The Championship will mean our reputation is still growing however slightly but that would be 3 years in this division & would give us grounds to progress & the financial rewards that go with being in The Championship shouldn't be underestimated as it's £5m more than starting off in League One for starters plus you then have the extra sponsorship & gates.

I fully believe we will be in The Championship next season & that lessons will have been learnt by everyone connected & next season will be when we see the real Bristol City & we start to make strides into the championship away from the relegation positions by I guess only time will tell on that prediction.

[WarksRobin]

can’t  think why he moved really...

[Gilli74]

30 minutes ago, WarksRobin said:

can’t  think why he moved really...

Well he was not good enough for us apparently according to a lot of our fans ... 

[Major Isewater]

30 minutes ago, WarksRobin said:

can’t  think why he moved really...

Obviously he didn't like LJ. 

 

[Brann-red]

Hasn’t lost his appreciation of thatchers either !! Great response .. 

 

 

[Davefevs]

24 minutes ago, Brann-red said:

Hasn’t lost his appreciation of thatchers either !! Great response .. 

 

 

I was wetting myself reading this last night.  Hörður and Barn (Joe - twitter named Barn after previously been BarnDoorKodjia) have some great banter on twitter.  It would be hilarious to see CSKA walking out the CL theme tune, all the players with child mascots, and Hörður with Barn!

Was it Brentford who had an adult walking out with their team as part of a stag-do prank?

[Natchfever]

32 minutes ago, Brann-red said:

Hasn’t lost his appreciation of thatchers either !! Great response .. 

 

 

Brilliant fair play to him. Stadio Olimpico too mind.

[Brann-red]

6 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I was wetting myself reading this last night.  Hörður and Barn (Joe - twitter named Barn after previously been BarnDoorKodjia) have some great banter on twitter.  It would be hilarious to see CSKA walking out the CL theme tune, all the players with child mascots, and Hörður with Barn!

Was it Brentford who had an adult walking out with their team as part of a stag-do prank?

Yes it was 

 

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-5275583/amp/38-year-old-Brentfords-mascot-stag-prank.html

 

Not sure  much of a prank as I’d be well happy to be an adult mascot - wouldn’t bother me at all !!

 

[Selred]

45 minutes ago, GILLI said:

Well he was not good enough for us apparently according to a lot of our fans ... 

I still don’t believe he is.

Would pick Kelly over Magggers every time at the moment.

[Merrick's Marvels]

46 minutes ago, Selred said:

I still don’t believe he is.

Would pick Kelly over Magggers every time at the moment.

I agree.

For me it wasn't about whether Magnússon was a good player or not but whether he was suited to Championship football in England. As far as I'm concerned he's a classic example of Johnson's desire to pick "footballers" at the back at the expense of defenders who defend first at foremost. Wanting rid of Flint and replacing him with Webster is another example of this, although hopefully Webster will develop into someone who can do both .    

[Redbo]

3 minutes ago, Merrick's Marvels said:

I agree.

For me it wasn't about whether Magnússon was a good player or not but whether he was suited to Championship football in England. As far as I'm concerned he's a classic example of Johnson's desire to pick "footballers" at the back at the expense of defenders who defend first at foremost. Wanting rid of Flint and replacing him with Webster is another example of this, although hopefully Webster will develop into someone who can do both .    

Think Flint going had more to with him wanting to move no? Less about Johnson ‘wanting rid’. 

[Merrick's Marvels]

27 minutes ago, Redbo said:

Think Flint going had more to with him wanting to move no? Less about Johnson ‘wanting rid’. 

Johnson happy to see him leave before this summer, imo.

First game of last season he picked Wright and Hegeler(!!!) at centre back ahead of Flint - "he's had his head turned by Brum" was the reason given but this was a smokescreen, imo. If Brum had bid the right amount of money, we'd have sold him.

I agree that, this time round, the player probably did want to go - he made the completely understandable calculation that Middlesborough are likely to get to the Premier League much sooner than BCFC and time isn't on his side. 

[Tipps69]

1 hour ago, Merrick's Marvels said:

Johnson happy to see him leave before this summer, imo.

First game of last season he picked Wright and Hegeler(!!!) at centre back ahead of Flint - "he's had his head turned by Brum" was the reason given but this was a smokescreen, imo. If Brum had bid the right amount of money, we'd have sold him.

I agree that, this time round, the player probably did want to go - he made the completely understandable calculation that Middlesborough are likely to get to the Premier League much sooner than BCFC and time isn't on his side. 

Birmingham were making bids for Flint last summer under Redknapp & it’s highly likely that they were offering him a better financial package than what he was getting here, it would of also meant a move back to be closer to his roots & at the time Birmingham were spending a bit of money, the fact that Birmingham didn’t meet our valuation isn’t down to us or LJ & if Flint had made it known that he was interested in the move, LJ would of been naive to of not made alternative arrangements to cover the likely departure of Flint.

Can you imagine the amount of grief LJ would of got, having known for most of the summer that there was a strong possibility that Flint could be leaving & he hadn’t brought a replacement in?

It really does seem like no matter what LJ does, he can do no right in some people’s eyes.

Unless you have literally no other options, you cannot play someone who has been hoping for a move away, personally anyway.

[Merrick's Marvels]

39 minutes ago, Tipps69 said:

Birmingham were making bids for Flint last summer under Redknapp & it’s highly likely that they were offering him a better financial package than what he was getting here, it would of also meant a move back to be closer to his roots & at the time Birmingham were spending a bit of money, the fact that Birmingham didn’t meet our valuation isn’t down to us or LJ & if Flint had made it known that he was interested in the move, LJ would of been naive to of not made alternative arrangements to cover the likely departure of Flint.

Can you imagine the amount of grief LJ would of got, having known for most of the summer that there was a strong possibility that Flint could be leaving & he hadn’t brought a replacement in?

It really does seem like no matter what LJ does, he can do no right in some people’s eyes.

Unless you have literally no other options, you cannot play someone who has been hoping for a move away, personally anyway.

Not the case I'm afraid. I'm not his biggest fan but was discussing here specifically the type of defender he seems to prefer, that is all. Don't be looking for agendas where there are none.

As to the rest of your post, no idea what you're getting at, most of it seems irrelevant to the point under discussion - has Johnson been looking to "get rid" of Flint for a while.

Q: If Brum had met our valuation last summer, would we have sold him?

A: Imo Yes. Why? Imo one of the reasons would have been Johnson's desire as outlined in post #85.

That is all. This isn't a slag off everything he does post - for instance, I agree 100% with his decision to sell Magnússon. Well done LJ! Why? Again, see post #85.

[Tipps69]

38 minutes ago, Merrick's Marvels said:

Not the case I'm afraid. I'm not his biggest fan but was discussing here specifically the type of defender he seems to prefer, that is all. Don't be looking for agendas where there are none.

As to the rest of your post, no idea what you're getting at, most of it seems irrelevant to the point under discussion - has Johnson been looking to "get rid" of Flint for a while.

Q: If Brum had met our valuation last summer, would we have sold him?

A: Imo Yes. Why? Imo one of the reasons would have been Johnson's desire as outlined in post #85.

That is all. This isn't a slag off everything he does post - for instance, I agree 100% with his decision to sell Magnússon. Well done LJ! Why? Again, see post #85.

Birmingham / Redknapp knew full well that they could unsettle Flint, it was well known that Flint / City players were paid considerably less than the majority of players in the division, so by not meeting our valuation & making the player aware of what was personally on offer, it would unsettle the player & then as is the case in the majority of instances like this, the club end up allowing the player to leave because it’s counterproductive to have some on board that isn’t happy.

Luckily for us, Flint stayed pretty professional for the most part by not throwing his toys out his pram completely & insisting on the move, so it meant once the transfer window had shut, Flint knew he was going nowhere & LJ knew he would have a player with us for the next few months, so once Flint had got his head around it, he was available for selection for us.

And then by the time the January window had opened, Redknapp had been sacked, Birmingham were rubbish, Flint had played well & his valuation to us had increased & no one was willing to match our increased valuation.

Do you not think that if LJ had wanted rid of Flint, especially by the time the January window had opened, someone would of matched that summers valuation & he would of pushed for the club to accept the bid?

There is absolutely no evidence that LJ ever wanted Flint gone, LJ just did whatever any other manager would of done & took precautions to cover any possible eventuality, hence why Baker was brought in as a like for like replacement, that ‘first ball’ winner.

What I will say is that managers / clubs do develop new ways of trying to play (see CO’D’s comments on the official site about the team starting to play the way the club want to play) & it is easier for some clubs to buy the players required to play that system but I would hazard a guess that there weren’t many supporters who didn’t expect Flint to leave but that would of been more down to Flint’s desire to leave rather than LJ’s wish to get rid of him.

We’ve played with that ‘first ball’ winning centre half since Flint came in (once he settled) & have still had that option with Baker but now we are seemingly wanting to play more ‘football’ from the back & it wouldn’t surprise me if Baker was limited by the amount of game time he gets but that could also be down to who the opponents are & if we change our system to combat them.