The bigger picture

[sh1t_ref_again]

Just now, Redrascal2 said:

So who do you think is responsible for the appointment of Ashton and Holden. 

We are very lucky to have a benefactor prepared to finance BCFC, so to think we should get rid of SL because he employed a CEO to run the business that decided to give DH the coaches job is just not reality.

I think DH should go (making my judgement of what I see on the pitch) as I don't think he has shown the aptitude for the job, he is just to inexperienced. All that means is when MA interviewed DH, the plans he has submitted, he has not been able to make work, but he was in a no lose situation, leave or stay and have a go. I think MA's is in a more difficult situation now, as if his role is blocking getting a proven manger we want, then his role or time at city will need to change.

This thread is OTIB at its worse, people who have no clue about how the club is run or its internal workings rushing to jump on the bandwagon and state their opinion as fact, so we should just get rid of the owner and / or the CEO. I am not saying I like MA, just like everyone else on here do not know enough to make an informed opinion.

 

[Davefevs]

16 minutes ago, The Bard said:

We've sunk a similar amount on Nathan Baker and comparatively Fam is a roaring success....

Haha, add in Baker that’s another £7m sunk.

[SE23Red]

6 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

But the head-coach and CEO signed him on this basis....it is what they said in the early days of him signing.  Goals record is absolutely fine, but what about being a good signing on the basis of walking for £0 in 4 months time?  Are you happy with that?  I’m not.

I'd be happy with it as part of a coherent plan of what we're trying to achieve this season.

But it's a real struggle to square it with starting the season with only one recognised LB and starting the second half of the season with none.

Either two people made these decisions independently or one person thinks they are in some way consistent. Either way it gives me no confidence in our football strategy!

[Numero Uno]

7 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Put it this way, if SL replaced MA with one CEO on £300k and one DoF on £240k (or any split of £540k you want to), I think we would make better corporate and football decisions.  You wouldn’t have conflicts of interest for starters.  You could have proper accountabilities.  A structure / reporting line of CEO > Head-Coach is a poor structure imho.

Not only that, he’d be paying the going rate for both posts and removing the conflict of interests at the same time.

[Numero Uno]

41 minutes ago, sh1t_ref_again said:

We are very lucky to have a benefactor prepared to finance BCFC, so to think we should get rid of SL because he employed a CEO to run the business that decided to give DH the coaches job is just not reality.

I think DH should go (making my judgement of what I see on the pitch) as I don't think he has shown the aptitude for the job, he is just to inexperienced. All that means is when MA interviewed DH, the plans he has submitted, he has not been able to make work, but he was in a no lose situation, leave or stay and have a go. I think MA's is in a more difficult situation now, as if his role is blocking getting a proven manger we want, then his role or time at city will need to change.

This thread is OTIB at its worse, people who have no clue about how the club is run or its internal workings rushing to jump on the bandwagon and state their opinion as fact, so we should just get rid of the owner and / or the CEO. I am not saying I like MA, just like everyone else on here do not know enough to make an informed opinion.

 

If you are able to make a judgement on the Manager based on what you see on the pitch without knowing his qualifications, seeing the training sessions or hearing the team talks why aren’t people allowed to form an opinion of the CEO based on his appointments, given their past records (or in Holden’s case no record at all), the injury and rehabilitation issues based on the information given and the concerns of one of the players himself, the contract situation we know we are in with Fam, the latest accounts, the interviews he has given and the public knowledge of his salary against the overall performance and stated objectives of the club? What is the difference?

[The Bard]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

Haha, add in Baker that’s another £7m sunk.

£3.9 million fee plus £20k a week for 4 years.  He's played 84 games in that time... That's £95k per game

 

Fam has played 150 games and could still play another 18.  Scored 1 in 3 for us including a lot of sub appearances.  There are an awful lot of worse strikers that have 'got their sides into the Prem'.

[Davefevs]

4 minutes ago, The Bard said:

£3.9 million fee plus £20k a week for 4 years.  He's played 84 games in that time... That's £95k per game

 

Fam has played 150 games and could still play another 18.  Scored 1 in 3 for us including a lot of sub appearances.  There are an awful lot of worse strikers that have 'got their sides into the Prem'.

I’m not saying Fam is crap, he’s ok....but this whole situation is a farce.  The club’s strategy was to not let him leave on a free, and I’m worried that “will see his value on the pitch” was naive to say the least.

[The Bard]

3 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I’m not saying Fam is crap, he’s ok....but this whole situation is a farce.  The club’s strategy was to not let him leave on a free, and I’m worried that “will see his value on the pitch” was naive to say the least.

I think he will probably win us a couple of games between now and the end of the season.  I suspect he had hopes of moving in January but he's a solid citizen and will get his head round the situation.  He knows if he does well he will be more attractive to other clubs. 

The reason for seeing his value on the pitch is the knowledge that he was worth very little in terms of a transfer and then we would have had to have signed a replacement who wouldn't have been cheap.   

[1960maaan]

If this crazy situation actually somehow worked in our favour, they'll be calling it a master stroke rather than the complete mess it is.
In some crazy World we get to the summer and get to sign the players we want back, on reduced contracts, Fam takes a cut and we head towards next year with a great squad going forward .

Nah, can't see it either.

[Redrascal2]

2 hours ago, sh1t_ref_again said:

We are very lucky to have a benefactor prepared to finance BCFC, so to think we should get rid of SL because he employed a CEO to run the business that decided to give DH the coaches job is just not reality.

I think DH should go (making my judgement of what I see on the pitch) as I don't think he has shown the aptitude for the job, he is just to inexperienced. All that means is when MA interviewed DH, the plans he has submitted, he has not been able to make work, but he was in a no lose situation, leave or stay and have a go. I think MA's is in a more difficult situation now, as if his role is blocking getting a proven manger we want, then his role or time at city will need to change.

This thread is OTIB at its worse, people who have no clue about how the club is run or its internal workings rushing to jump on the bandwagon and state their opinion as fact, so we should just get rid of the owner and / or the CEO. I am not saying I like MA, just like everyone else on here do not know enough to make an informed opinion.

 

Do not disagree with a lot of what you say.  But if you need a thorough knowledge of the internal workings of the club to post an opinion on the City forum then I don't think there will be many posting. Certainly I don't have that and never will. 

[steviestevieneville]

18 hours ago, RalphMilnesLeftFoot said:

Seems to be unrealistic fans, expectations missing from the poll. 

Why is that? 

The Op's question is loaded and once again looks as if there is, a problem, but completely ignores that there may not be a problem and it's fans who a creating and exacbating one, during lockdown. 

 

Just a thought 

So you don’t see a major problem in how we’re coached , our recruitment policy or scouting ? 
hiding behind the , better the devil you know argument is wearing pretty thin imo. Business infrastructure wise , we’re very well run . Football infrastructure wise , we’re amateurish and that’s down to a lack of understanding of the game by the two men than run the show . Hence why I started the thread . 

[Robbored]

12 hours ago, Davefevs said:

I’m not saying Fam is crap, he’s ok....but this whole situation is a farce.  The club’s strategy was to not let him leave on a free, and I’m worried that “will see his value on the pitch” was naive to say the least.

The club quite rightly are not going to allow any player to hold a gun to their head and fro the outside that looks to be what Fam or his agent are doing. 

Ashton is an experienced negotiator and has a cap on how far he can go in terms of wages and has reached that limit and if Fam  won’t sign then what other option do City have? 

The ‘getting his value on the pitch’ might be seen as naive but it’s also a statement of indifference to Fam and his agent essentially saying that we’ll cope without you - a rather transparent tactic if you  like.

Personally I’m in the same camp as many other City fans in as much that Fam is an ok CF but not likely to set the world alight wherever he goes. If he signs then fine and if he goes that’s fine as well.............

[Davefevs]

19 minutes ago, Robbored said:

The club quite rightly are not going to allow any player to hold a gun to their head and fro the outside that looks to be what Fam or his agent are doing. 

Ashton is an experienced negotiator and has a cap on how far he can go in terms of wages and has reached that limit and if Fam  won’t sign then what other option do City have? 

The ‘getting his value on the pitch’ might be seen as naive but it’s also a statement of indifference to Fam and his agent essentially saying that we’ll cope without you - a rather transparent tactic if you  like.

Personally I’m in the same camp as many other City fans in as much that Fam is an ok CF but not likely to set the world alight wherever he goes. If he signs then fine and if he goes that’s fine as well.............

If MA knows the market (he tells us he does), he should’ve sold him.  Rumours are he tried to in the summer and the latest window.  He didn’t execute. For me last summer was at least 6 months too late anyway.  Once you get into the final year, the power shifts massively.

I appreciate COVID might be a mitigating factor, but at the point I’d have been looking to shift him (last Jan at latest) COVID wasn’t a “thing”. Last January you would’ve got say £6m for him?  Now we are gonna get zilch.

Hes (MA) missed the boat, he’s allowed himself to be led-on by Fam....and he’s ultimately cost the club several multiples of his own salary!

I genuinely would be gutted if we paid him £25-30k per week for say a 3 year extension.  That’s circa £4.5m over the next 3 years and then he walks for zilch.  I think there is better value out there, with longevity and / or sell-on value.  I’d take my chances in the summer of finding better and cheaper.  If our recruitment set up was any good, that player should already be being lined up.  Let’s see

[sh1t_ref_again]

14 hours ago, Numero Uno said:

If you are able to make a judgement on the Manager based on what you see on the pitch without knowing his qualifications, seeing the training sessions or hearing the team talks why aren’t people allowed to form an opinion of the CEO based on his appointments, given their past records (or in Holden’s case no record at all), the injury and rehabilitation issues based on the information given and the concerns of one of the players himself, the contract situation we know we are in with Fam, the latest accounts, the interviews he has given and the public knowledge of his salary against the overall performance and stated objectives of the club? What is the difference?

The difference is we actually get to see the output from the manager played out before us and are able to decide if we like how the team is set up, our tactics and what he does to respond within the game itself and the results. Although my issue with DH is more about the performance than simply if we win or lose. 

My issue with this thread, apart from the loaded poll, is people make all sorts or judgments on SL and MA performance, based on next to no facts and even with some facts without knowing of the whole picture, but fill in the blanks with assumptions to fit their agenda.

We don't know why he appointed DH (which I am very unhappy about), was it because others rejected the job or perhaps never offered it as they were not the right fit for the club at interview, perhaps they wanted to spend money the club thought was not prudent at this time, they did not believe in youth, or they could not work with MA - the only fact is we don't know the whole story and the thinking behind it.

On the injuries, we all find it strange and you don't need much before the conspiracy theorist have come up with all sorts of reasons why we have had them, i'm not saying its not the fault of the medical team or MA for not conducting an inquiry into it. Thought the player saying that, was never really confirmed what was said or meant, again the only fact is we don't know the whole story and if there is any fault or we are just plain unlucky.

Contract situations are a game of chess and brinkmanship, we are in such uncertain times with covid, perhaps the club are playing it the right way, time will tell. With Fam I think we made it clear he was not leaving in Jan as potentially we need him the 2nd half of the season, unfortunately at the moment he seems to have chucked his toys out the pram. But in these times you cannot be held to ransom, Walsh, will he recover from his injury, will he be any good again I would not rush and give a contract, but again the only fact is we don't know the whole situation and thinking behind value of new contracts

We don't know what objectives SL has set MA or if he has achieved them or not

I am not saying MA should stay at the club and think his role possible needs to be changed to attract a top manager, but some of the guff that is written is just ridiculous

As for SL, can't believe why anyone would want him to leave the club

[Alex_BCFC]

8 minutes ago, sh1t_ref_again said:

As for SL, can't believe why anyone would want him to leave the club

Because there are hundreds of mythical benefactors willing to come in and keep the club going whilst improving everything. Aren't there?

[Rob k]

23 hours ago, Kid in the Riot said:

£200m invested over a 20 year period that has seen 50 clubs play in the Premier League, many much smaller and less well-off clubs than us, suggests failure to me. 

Which of these managerial appointments would you consider to be successful?

July 1999-January 2000: Tony Pulis
January 2000-May 2000: Tony Fawthrop **
June 2000-July 2004: Danny Wilson
July 2004-September 2005: Brian Tinnion
September 2005-March 2010: Gary Johnson
April 2010-August 2010: Steve Coppell
August 2010-October 2011: Keith Millen
October 2011-January 2013: Derek McInnes
January 2013-November 2013: Sean O'Driscoll
December 2013-January 2016: Steve Cotterill
February 2016-July 2020: Lee Johnson
August 2020 - present: Dean Holden

It’s an utterly depressing list of failure that is 

[sh1t_ref_again]

4 minutes ago, Rob k said:

23 hours ago, Kid in the Riot said:

£200m invested over a 20 year period that has seen 50 clubs play in the Premier League, many much smaller and less well-off clubs than us, suggests failure to me. 

Which of these managerial appointments would you consider to be successful?

July 1999-January 2000: Tony Pulis
January 2000-May 2000: Tony Fawthrop **
June 2000-July 2004: Danny Wilson
July 2004-September 2005: Brian Tinnion
September 2005-March 2010: Gary Johnson
April 2010-August 2010: Steve Coppell
August 2010-October 2011: Keith Millen
October 2011-January 2013: Derek McInnes
January 2013-November 2013: Sean O'Driscoll
December 2013-January 2016: Steve Cotterill
February 2016-July 2020: Lee Johnson
August 2020 - present: Dean Holden

Expand  

It’s an utterly depressing list of failure that is 

Just remind me where we would be without his 200m investment? not sure there is much of a queue of billionaires waiting to give money away, 

[Rob k]

1 minute ago, sh1t_ref_again said:

Just remind me where we would be without his 200m investment? not sure there is much of a queue of billionaires waiting to give money away, 

So because he’s the richest we can’t question his decisions over our football club. I’m sorry but i think we have every right to Question some of those appointments especially when you can look at the likes of Millen, Tinnion, and now Holden as ask why do we keep making the same bloody mistakes. 

[BTRFTG]

15 hours ago, sh1t_ref_again said:

We are very lucky to have a benefactor prepared to finance BCFC, so to think we should get rid of SL because he employed a CEO to run the business that decided to give DH the coaches job is just not reality

Nail on head.

Amazing how City fans just don't get it. SL FINANCES City. He DOES NOT give them money or write-off debt. His very deep pockets allow him to keep the money circulating such we stay in business until such time as we begin to make profit from which we'll reduce debt and pay off creditors (yeah, I don't believe that either.)

At present, each and every  City fan out there carping at SLs behaviour (assuming they're 'fan' enough to actually attend home fixtures,) have SL to thank for the £200 he fronts each month for each of them, 12 months a year, such they may continue to indulge their passion. So you give grief to a bloke who doesn't know you though who stumps up that kind of dosh on your behalf? That's gratitude for you.

Contrary to our disproportionate sense of worth, City isn't an attractive proposition. Were it, we'd have been subject to numerous takeovers and bids from speculators over the years. As is, City exists wholly because of the beneficence of local businessmen. 50 years ago Harry Dolman was one of a select band wealthy enough to fund the club. Today, with football having lost all sense of reality, other than SL I can think of no other local individual interested in funding City. SL is in a league of his own. The problem with that, well if you don't like it what are you going to do about it?

Suppose SL decided to cede the club, without charge, to a fans trust subject to existing fans attending committing to fund losses for, say, the next 10 years. How many would be prepared to pay City £25k, NOW, to see that happen? You could count such fans on the fingers of both hands.

[Davefevs]

Just now, sh1t_ref_again said:

Just remind me where we would be without his 200m investment? not sure there is much of a queue of billionaires waiting to give money away, 

Just being pedantic, you use “investment” in your first sentence then “give money away” in the second.

One thing I’m sure on is that £200m is not a charitable donation....it is an investment.  I could be miles off track here but perhaps the investment is for non-football dividends, e.g. housing, local kudos etc.

Perhaps another owner might focus the dividend purely on football-returns....and those are achieved through good football decisions that are realised through attaining PL status.

SL has probably spread the risk in many respects by his approach, it’s what he does.

Another owner might’ve taken a different approach.

I’m grateful in some respects for what SL has done, but I’m blinkered to think there were alternative approaches.  In 20 years he hasn’t got us to the PL, other owners have with their different approaches.  Some have then slid into the abyss, some retained longevity.  We’ve done neither.  Boring old Bristol City.  In some respects stability is good, but others have proved you can have both.

[Banjo Island]

14 minutes ago, Rob k said:

It’s an utterly depressing list of failure that is 

Good grief little wonder weve endured dull boring uninspiring football for so long who the hell iactually responsible for that endless list of loosers

[sh1t_ref_again]

1 minute ago, Rob k said:

So because he’s the richest we can’t question his decisions over our football club. I’m sorry but i think we have every right to Question some of those appointments especially when you can look at the likes of Millen, Tinnion, and now Holden as ask why do we keep making the same bloody mistakes. 

Not saying we should not question and hope that we have a change in direction, which to some degree we had with MA coming in (not saying that was for the better ) its the wanting rid of SL I do't understand, rather than being happy we have a stable club.

Getting to the prem is not everything to all of us.

[sh1t_ref_again]

2 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Just being pedantic, you use “investment” in your first sentence then “give money away” in the second.

One thing I’m sure on is that £200m is not a charitable donation....it is an investment.  I could be miles off track here but perhaps the investment is for non-football dividends, e.g. housing, local kudos etc.

Perhaps another owner might focus the dividend purely on football-returns....and those are achieved through good football decisions that are realised through attaining PL status.

SL has probably spread the risk in many respects by his approach, it’s what he does.

Another owner might’ve taken a different approach.

I’m grateful in some respects for what SL has done, but I’m blinkered to think there were alternative approaches.  In 20 years he hasn’t got us to the PL, other owners have with their different approaches.  Some have then slid into the abyss, some retained longevity.  We’ve done neither.  Boring old Bristol City.  In some respects stability is good, but others have proved you can have both.

I only used investment as that was the wording from the original post.

If SL wants to make money, he would not have chosen BCFC, he has already proven to be far more astute at making much more than he could from the football club.

If there are some spin offs, then good

It always easy to look at others and say they have done it, but for every case that have there are more cases that have not

[Rob k]

7 minutes ago, sh1t_ref_again said:

Not saying we should not question and hope that we have a change in direction, which to some degree we had with MA coming in (not saying that was for the better ) its the wanting rid of SL I do't understand, rather than being happy we have a stable club.

Getting to the prem is not everything to all of us.

It’s not actually to me - but I’d like to experience it at least once, I’d give anything to have a season travelling to some random places in Europe following us for a season but that’s a million miles away from where we are today 

[pillred]

35 minutes ago, Alex_BCFC said:

Because there are hundreds of mythical benefactors willing to come in and keep the club going whilst improving everything. Aren't there?

I would imagine we are a fairly attractive proposition, how much it would cost to buy the club might put a lot of prospective new owners off would SL be willing to split his empire, it could be risky out there but the way things are going at the moment I'm almost feeling what have we got to lose, and yes I realise it could all go t**s up.

[Alex_BCFC]

6 minutes ago, pillred said:

I would imagine we are a fairly attractive proposition, how much it would cost to buy the club might put a lot of prospective new owners off would SL be willing to split his empire, it could be risky out there but the way things are going at the moment I'm almost feeling what have we got to lose, and yes I realise it could all go t**s up.

I very much doubt there is a long list. Especially right now I would imagine it would be zero.

[steviestevieneville]

1 hour ago, RalphMilnesLeftFoot said:

We're in the Champs, currently one on of our best ever runs outside L1 , we have a team full of youth and experience and internationals from all over.  There's no better the devil you know here.

It's recognising that for us, we are currently doing better than we have previously, more consistently.  We've had scant spells in the Prem, the last being  over 40 years ago.  In terms of Champs, barring a brief return to L1 under S'OD we've now been at our highest level, consistently since the mid 1960's

That doesn't scream amateur and involves looking at he bigger picture rather than concentrating on reactions to each game as if it's 'glory or death' we've gone from near certain bankruptcy to promotion from L2 and established and promoted in L1 to then yo yo in the champs to  being established in the Champs. It's not like others pathways, but it's certainly successful whichever metric you use. Is this our level? Who knows will see if we can push on from that and not end up with a flash in the pan Prem stint that sets us back years or nearly destroys us completely.

Managers will come and go as will players. However I feel as fans we sometimes cant see the wood for the trees and celebrate success that we are currently enjoying as a football club and forget where we have come from to get there. 

 

 

 

 

 

You haven’t answered the question , just a lot of waffle . Do you think the players are being coached well ? 
do you think our recruitment strategy & scouting are good enough to push us on ? 
stop banging on about the past . The business infrastructure Lansdown has put in place makes a mockery of our football infrastructure. We should be doing much better than we are for the £200m invested , and that’s down to poor footballing decisions 

[Major Isewater]

1 hour ago, RalphMilnesLeftFoot said:

We're in the Champs, currently one on of our best ever runs outside L1 , we have a team full of youth and experience and internationals from all over.  There's no better the devil you know here.

It's recognising that for us, we are currently doing better than we have previously, more consistently.  We've had scant spells in the Prem, the last being  over 40 years ago.  In terms of Champs, barring a brief return to L1 under S'OD we've now been at our highest level, consistently since the mid 1960's

That doesn't scream amateur and involves looking at he bigger picture rather than concentrating on reactions to each game as if it's 'glory or death' we've gone from near certain bankruptcy to promotion from L2 and established and promoted in L1 to then yo yo in the champs to  being established in the Champs. It's not like others pathways, but it's certainly successful whichever metric you use. Is this our level? Who knows will see if we can push on from that and not end up with a flash in the pan Prem stint that sets us back years or nearly destroys us completely.

Managers will come and go as will players. However I feel as fans we sometimes cant see the wood for the trees and celebrate success that we are currently enjoying as a football club and forget where we have come from to get there. 

 

 

 

 

 

I think it’s more a question of taking two steps forward and several bloody big ones backwards.

When We dispensed with the services of LJ , at least one season too late in my opinion, we were well placed to move up a level in terms of coaching staff and what did the brains at the helm do ? 
 

Got suckered in by the lovely human being Dean Holden , who is lovely by the way, and now we’re doing a Franz Klammer and somehow we’re worse than before. 
 

We all celebrate the success we have had but everyone, SL in particular, should be questioning why we have slipped back so dramatically in the last few months .

It’s far from gloom and doom but the football isn’t great and we are not getting the best out of a very talented squad.

 

[BTRFTG]

To the multitude of Gypsy Rose Lee posters questioning the club's strategy re Famara, answer me this:

Who would we have taken as his replacement in the January window and what, financially, would their lifecycle liabity be?

Would City have performed as well by letting him go and not replacing as will result from us retaining his services until summer?

Who will Famara sign for next and what will his lifecycle liabity be?

Assuming the above, how does that liability compare to what City purportedly offered in January?

In the summer what strikers will come to market, are there any superior to Famara, how will their lifecycle liability compare to that offered Famara in January?

If you are unable to answer the above then STFU. All you have is speculation and if that's your modus operandi be more creativitly optimistic. State we could have signed the best players in each position from world football. That we'd never have lost another game, each won won by 6 goals or more. That we'd leap into profit and go on to conquer inter-galactic football for millennia. It's as much sense as what's being babbled hereabouts.

On the other hand those running the club HAD to act, to take a decision. Hindsight will inform whether their decision proved correct. But that's the nature of the beast and the difference between those stepping up to take decisions and those who carp from the sidelines. Those without capacity to be brave or proffer constructive alternatives. 

 

 

[rednotblue]

23 hours ago, Kid in the Riot said:

£200m invested over a 20 year period that has seen 50 clubs play in the Premier League, many much smaller and less well-off clubs than us, suggests failure to me. 

Which of these managerial appointments would you consider to be successful?

July 1999-January 2000: Tony Pulis
January 2000-May 2000: Tony Fawthrop **
June 2000-July 2004: Danny Wilson
July 2004-September 2005: Brian Tinnion
September 2005-March 2010: Gary Johnson
April 2010-August 2010: Steve Coppell
August 2010-October 2011: Keith Millen
October 2011-January 2013: Derek McInnes
January 2013-November 2013: Sean O'Driscoll
December 2013-January 2016: Steve Cotterill
February 2016-July 2020: Lee Johnson
August 2020 - present: Dean Holden

Johnson Snr

Cotterill

Johnson Jnr

Those were successful appointments. 2 for promotion

1 for establishing City as a top half championship club