Here he is. The Messiah is to blame

[phantom]

14 hours ago, BTRFTG said:

Steve Lansdown has personally committed over £214m of his own money to ensure Bristol City FC remain trading such we may occasionally have an afternoon of fun at AG.

And you, what have you contributed to keep City trading?

This sort of comment always intrigues me

Of course the value of investment from SL can never be called out

But what would you say if SL has invested 10% of the money available to him, but a supporter has invested 90% of their money available -who has made the bigger commitment?

[BigAl&Toby]

Hold on. This is drifting off topic. It’s not meant to be about Nige. It’s all about the Lansdowns.

You remember them. They who can’t do a thing wrong. They who dig deep and put their own funds in. All out of an altruistic value.

Or they who’ve invested big time in an asset. A cash cow. They who’ve deliberately identified an under performing asset and who now own - lock, stock and barrel - some very valuable freeholds in BS3.

Ashton Vale anyone? How many acres did Steve ride his Trojan Horse into there?

Might seem extreme and provocative - and it is and it’s meant to be - but I don’t buy the vision. I don’t see it.

How can anyone be so successful in part of their life and make, what seems  to be, an almighty **** up in another.

Discuss….

Oh and twasn’t cider. Twas Elvis Juice and Hazy Jane….

[BigAl&Toby]

21 minutes ago, phantom said:

This sort of comment always intrigues me

Of course the value of investment from SL can never be called out

But what would you say if SL has invested 10% of the money available to him, but a supporter has invested 90% of their money available -who has made the bigger commitment?

@phantom that’s a flawed argument.

Flawed in so much as it doesn’t suit the argument. The one that The Ls are there only to be thanked.

They’ve made us proud. Not of course in football or dare I say it, sporting, terms.

Just proud that “the city” can attract the likes of Muse, Elton ******* John, the Killers et Al.

So much better these days than when the non-football highlights were Billy Graham and the Rolling Stones.

In Steve the blind believe. Onwards to the promised land…..

[Red-Robbo]

24 minutes ago, phantom said:

This sort of comment always intrigues me

Of course the value of investment from SL can never be called out

But what would you say if SL has invested 10% of the money available to him, but a supporter has invested 90% of their money available -who has made the bigger commitment?

 

I would be amazed if any supporter invested 90% of their disposable income. Who would that be? A tramp with an executive box and shirt sponsorship?  

I don't think Lansdown really has great judgement on football matters, but there are worse owners - and better ones - out there. I think the fact that he is based in Guernsey is irrelevant. Some highly successful clubs have owners based in different continents. My hope is he starts to takes advice from people with a sound knowledge of the game. But that hasn't happened so far.

There was nothing wrong with the Pearson appointment of course. Welcomed by the vast majority of supporters and even seen as something of a 'coup'.  It's some of the errors from before that have stymied Pearson.  That said, I honestly can't see losing to a L1 side in the League Cup as a reason to blame Lansdown, who had zero to do with the team selection, coaching or tactics. 

I'm with @italian dave on this one. We could have worse, but Lansdown's poor decisions have meant his PL aspirations remain as elusive as ever. 

 

[BTRFTG]

14 hours ago, Davefevs said:

There were other ways to run Bristol City.

Non-falsifible, nugatory statement so expand and explain as to how you think City might have been run, with or without SL?

[BTRFTG]

14 hours ago, frenchred said:

Most of that was spunked by him to make up for mistakes made by............ Him! 

Possibly, but its his club and his money to do with as he wishes.

[BTRFTG]

14 hours ago, Merrick's Marvels said:

His time and money which, pro rata, represents a greater percentage of his disposable resources than £214M does of Lansdown's, I'd imagine.  For starters. 

Since when did a percentage of disposable resources fund a football club? That's the argument deployed by our wilderness brethren in explaining how they're the 6th biggest club in the country, tents and all...... 

[Winterstoke toad]

47 minutes ago, phantom said:

This sort of comment always intrigues me

Of course the value of investment from SL can never be called out

But what would you say if SL has invested 10% of the money available to him, but a supporter has invested 90% of their money available -who has made the bigger commitment?

Not just that but the fact is most of the he money he’s had to put in is because he ran the club so badly .

[Davefevs]

26 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

Non-falsifible, nugatory statement so expand and explain as to how you think City might have been run, with or without SL?

You could read my posts in this thread (some in response to others)?  It’s all there.  

[phantom]

29 minutes ago, Red-Robbo said:

 

I would be amazed if any supporter invested 90% of their disposable income. Who would that be? A tramp with an executive box and shirt sponsorship?  

It wasn't a literal example, just a direction of that many of us make a bigger commitment financially from what we have available to us

[BTRFTG]

15 hours ago, BigAl&Toby said:

@BTRFTG I guess you’re in the “there’s none so blind camp”…..

Me? Season ticket payments for more years than I can remember. For several of us.

Oh and shares. From 1982. When Steve and his mate Pete were planning how they’d make billions in their bedrooms….. When Steve didn’t see the merits of putting his money in…..

Ha I hear you say. **** all then….

As a proportion of wealth and income? Don’t know…..

But hey. If you’re happy with the decisions that The Messiah has made and the week in, week out inconsistent shit show then carry on.

I expect more. Steve’s only interest is Steve.

How do you see his “investment”? A success?

 

Ok, calculate that **** all. Its important as contracts and bills aren't paid with goodwill nor percentage of disposable income.

I could compound up all my 'coppers' admittances since 65 and STs thereafter, the 1/15th of my annual student income in share investment to keep them going, the pies and beers I've consumed over the years and do you know what? It wouldn't cover one week's wages for Kalas.

I'm uncertain from where your assumptions derive, save they're all flawed? In 82 SL was still sitting around a kitchen table getting the nascent HL off the ground, so uncertain what monies he might have had to invest? As for my thinking SL is some type of Messiah I certainly don't and never have, certainly not since he refused to answer my shareholder question re the funding of Tony Pulis' High Court action. You assume I think his investment a success. Well, in respect of the fact the club still exist, that it has use of safe and high quality training and playing facilities, that development of women's and community diverse football related activities are up there with the best (where once there were none,) that there's a vision of attempting to make Bristol an attractive sporting destination - yes, they're all successes of which SL should be proud.

But I'm a realist. We were mid table second tier when started in 65, pretty much where we are now. In the interim we've had 4 years in the top flight but plenty in leagues lower. I'd argue we're today in our rightful place in the pyramid. The fact we aren't higher - i don't think SL has anything to be proud or ashamed of in that respect.

[BigAl&Toby]

31 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

Non-falsifible, nugatory statement so expand and explain as to how you think City might have been run, with or without SL?

@BTRFTG in one word?

Better.

But hey if you’re happy with where we are, the Lansdown’s involvement and what he now has and BCFC doesn’t then ok.

I’m not. Never have been. He’s little if any interest in BCFC or sport generally. Apart from how it will further his ambitions and how he’s viewed by his adoring “support”.

And of course how much more he’ll eventually gain. From his investment. I suspect he’s been well advised by his Merchant Venturers……

How much do you think his freeholds in BS3 are worth now…….

[BTRFTG]

12 hours ago, The Dolman Pragmatist said:

that mob of jokers who took over in the early 80s, Scott Davison

Great point. Did SL supposedly ever play keyboards in some long-forgotten, one-hit-wonder pop band in which only fans of Popmaster might hold an interest? No and for that lack of charisma alone he's a failure and should go.....

[Red-Robbo]

12 minutes ago, phantom said:

It wasn't a literal example, just a direction of that many of us make a bigger commitment financially from what we have available to us

 

I know Phants. But now I'm chuckling at the thought of some bloke sitting in the executive lounge sipping fine wine, then going back to a tent in Leigh Woods...  

[glynriley]

28 minutes ago, Winterstoke toad said:

Not just that but the fact is most of the he money he’s had to put in is because he ran the club so badly .

Indeed. We had a period of austerity after his first dalliance with Mark Ashton (the McInnes era).

Lo and behold, he not only re-employed him, but gave him the keys to the safe.

And here we are again...

[BTRFTG]

1 hour ago, phantom said:

This sort of comment always intrigues me

Of course the value of investment from SL can never be called out

But what would you say if SL has invested 10% of the money available to him, but a supporter has invested 90% of their money available -who has made the bigger commitment?

Clearly SL. Players are paid in £ not sentiment. Were players and suppliers happy to be paid in sentiment you'd have a point save that's not how the world works 

Am I 'more committed' travelling to AG than a supporter living on Duckmoor Road? Of course not, my choice where I live and if that requires a far greater commitment in time and resource that's a matter for me and me only.

[Alex_BCFC]

He’s not done as well as hoped given the amount of money he’s put in. But I don’t see a load of people rushing in to take over and he’s ever said he’d consider offers etc. No one has ever come forward. Reason for that is it’s just spunking money up the wall generally. We are fortunate we have someone who can keep us going given what has happened to other clubs.

[spudski]

13 minutes ago, BigAl&Toby said:

@BTRFTG in one word?

Better.

But hey if you’re happy with where we are, the Lansdown’s involvement and what he now has and BCFC doesn’t then ok.

I’m not. Never have been. He’s little if any interest in BCFC or sport generally. Apart from how it will further his ambitions and how he’s viewed by his adoring “support”.

And of course how much more he’ll eventually gain. From his investment. I suspect he’s been well advised by his Merchant Venturers……

How much do you think his freeholds in BS3 are worth now…….

I was always under the impression SL had nothing to do with the Merchant Venturers?

Have things changed since Red Trousers days?

[BTRFTG]

19 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

You could read my posts in this thread (some in response to others)?  It’s all there.  

I'm going through in order but all you've said is there are other ways in which the club might have been run. No Sh*t Sherlock.

As per the OP, what stopped any of those criticising SL from buying the club and running it how best they think fit to achieve the success they believe City merit? And if the answer is lack of money, de facto SL's clearly demonstrated he's far more suited to the task given he's managed to clear that first hurdle.

[Selred]

1 hour ago, BigAl&Toby said:

How can anyone be so successful in part of their life and make, what seems  to be, an almighty **** up in another.

 

Many many people. Especially when it comes to Football.

I reckon when he eventually sells, he won't break even. 

[BTRFTG]

19 minutes ago, BigAl&Toby said:

@BTRFTG in one word?

Better.

But hey if you’re happy with where we are, the Lansdown’s involvement and what he now has and BCFC doesn’t then ok.

I’m not. Never have been. He’s little if any interest in BCFC or sport generally. Apart from how it will further his ambitions and how he’s viewed by his adoring “support”.

And of course how much more he’ll eventually gain. From his investment. I suspect he’s been well advised by his Merchant Venturers……

How much do you think his freeholds in BS3 are worth now…….

SO WHY DON'T YOU DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT?

The puzzling thing for me is why SL bothers in the first place? I've watched us since 65 and if I had his wealth would I invest in the club? Like hell would I give thankless and potless idiots the chance to abuse me for funding their hobby to the tune of several thousands of pounds each per season.

[Red-Robbo]

1 minute ago, Selred said:

Many many people. Especially when it comes to Football.

I reckon when he eventually sells, he won't break even. 

 

TBF very, very few people do. Those that do either achieve it by stiffing the club they own in some way, or by buying into an existing big "brand" and profiting from the non-football activities. 

[Davefevs]

7 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

I'm going through in order but all you've said is there are other ways in which the club might have been run. No Sh*t Sherlock.

As per the OP, what stopped any of those criticising SL from buying the club and running it how best they think fit to achieve the success they believe City merit? And if the answer is lack of money, de facto SL's clearly demonstrated he's far more suited to the task given he's managed to clear that first hurdle.

Better football structure fit for the needs of modern day football, succession planning of key people, critical analysis of recruitment, better budget control, etc.

[BTRFTG]

1 minute ago, Davefevs said:

Better football structure fit for the needs of modern day football, succession planning of key people, critical analysis of recruitment, better budget control, etc.

You signally miss the point. You might well have said scrap the academy and buy the best 22 players covering each position in the world each season.

We all see the mistakes that have been made, but its his club, his money, his mistakes not ours. If fans want to act as though they own the club and have a say in the matter, then they should fund it.

[Mr Popodopolous]

2 hours ago, Davefevs said:

I think if we look at the 17/18 team, several have gone on and played at a higher level / better clubs, or were from pedigree.

Flint - went to Boro who were bigger / better than us at the time

Baker - had come from PL pedigree Villa

Magnússon - went to CSKA Moscow (CL team)

Brownhill  - went to PL Burnley

Bryan - went to PL Fulham

Reid - went to PL Cardiff

I didn’t include Fielding / Steele, Wright, Pack, Smith and Paterson from the cup nor others like O’Dowda, Diedhiou, etc. But Paterson was a top player at that time too, so that’s 7 bloody good players.  Diedhiou had come from Lg1 in France.

When I look at this, we obviously over-achieved in the League Cup, and for a period we were flying in the Champ, but we finished 11th.  So, I wouldn’t say he over-achieved with that set of players.  That was the squad to get to the play-offs and sneak up with.  We blew it.

The 18/19 side on a similar basis:

Webster - went to PL Brighton

Kalas - had come from PL Chelsea

Kelly - went to PL Bournemouth

Brownhill - went PL Burnley

Weimann - had come from PL pedigree

Add in Paterson, Baker and Diedhiou (as per 17/18).

We went closer, finishing 8th.

Id say that that was a better achievement than 17/18 in some respects…but it was starting to rack up in terms of £££s spent….and when we did lose Webster, Kelly and Brownhill eventually we used the money poorly, and are counting the cost now.  Although in 19/20 I though Johnson managed to get good results over performance, but that was the worrying sign, that it would catch up with us.

But those two sets of seasons and the players are chalk and cheese to what we have now imho.

It’s a good debate no less.

 

Good post. I'd also argue that he didn't get the best out of Nagy, Massengo, Wells.

Arguably but less clearcut, could have deployed players such as Kalas, Benkovic DaSilva, Henriksen, Eliasson better in his final year too. Surely Moore in a back 3 had he not loaned him out could have enabled a bit of a higher line?

Was unlucky with Afobe of course, which in turn knocked Palmer down a notch as he was only really looking the part when playing behind Weimann and Afobe.

Losing DaSilva for half a season didn't help either, think Kalas and Nagy both got medium term injuries quite early and Smith of course was in an injury hit spell over a year or 2 which pushed into 2019-20.

Do agree with this post overall though, and crucially the two seasons in q ie 2017/18 and even 2018-19 we had some strong Cup run/big Cup tie experience through the squad which would have served us well in the playoffs.

Consider:

2018-19- Reached Round 5 of the FA Cup, beating (relegation bound) Huddersfield of the PL and losing narrowly but playing very well 2nd half to top 7 PL Wolves.

2017-18- Enough said really! The run spoke for itself.

2016-17- 4th Round League Cup, won our 3rd Round tie FA Cup.

2015-16- Okay we went out of both early but nearly beat WBA of the PL away, almost in fact.

2014-15- FA Cup, 4th Round in which we played and perhaps should have beaten West Ham!

Won the JPT too of course, trip to Wembley is useful experience.

2013-14- JPT again one game in particular- 19k in a Bristol derby early in the season, big Cup tie atmosphere for a relatively small competition.

Plus we beat (newly promoted to PL) Crystal Palace in the League Cup.

Fielding, Flint, Smith, Pack, Bryan, Reid- these were all here in 2013 and still by 2017-18 still indeed most were mainstays, invaluable experience to fall back on! I know Reid's path was more mixed.

Brownhill of course too...joined 2016 but did he feature in the relatively okay 4th Round run in 2016-17? Certainly in the run of 2017-18! Wright joined January 2017 but was a regular in THAT run of 5 seasons ago. Magnússon only joined in 2016 but he may have had experience of the reasonable run in 2016-17 too.

By 2018-19, of course Flint, Magusson, Bryan and Reid had gone but we still had Fielding and the midfield duo plus Brownhill taking a more prominent role..Wright was still on the books.

Overall not just ability wise, but Cup run nous transferable to play-offs, the time to strike really was in one of those two seasons.

Edited November 11, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[WarksRobin]

39 minutes ago, BigAl&Toby said:

@BTRFTG in one word?

Better.

But hey if you’re happy with where we are, the Lansdown’s involvement and what he now has and BCFC doesn’t then ok.

I’m not. Never have been. He’s little if any interest in BCFC or sport generally. Apart from how it will further his ambitions and how he’s viewed by his adoring “support”.

And of course how much more he’ll eventually gain. From his investment. I suspect he’s been well advised by his Merchant Venturers……

How much do you think his freeholds in BS3 are worth now…….

Out of curiosity, would you be happier with the pre-development Ashton Gate, playing in League 2 but run (financially) sustainably?

IMO it’s fine to question the Lansdown legacy and how well the club is run on their watch but your posts are unnecessarily rude and come across as jealous rants.

[Davefevs]

9 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

You signally miss the point. You might well have said scrap the academy and buy the best 22 players covering each position in the world each season.

Ridiculous response.  

We all see the mistakes that have been made, but its his club, his money, his mistakes not ours. If fans want to act as though they own the club and have a say in the matter, then they should fund it.

so we aren’t allowed to comment on a forum.  Ridiculous response, again.  
 

How dare you call Andi Weimann “flappy”, was it your £2m that funded it. Very hypocritical of you!

jeez

 

4 minutes ago, WarksRobin said:

Out of curiosity, would you be happier with the pre-development Ashton Gate, playing in League 2 but run (financially) sustainably?

IMO it’s fine to question the Lansdown legacy and how well the club is run on their watch but your posts are unnecessarily rude and come across as jealous rants.

Chipping in, might we have done things in a different order, achieve promotion then build?  (I know promo wasn’t guaranteed either way)

[spudski]

Running and owning a football Club, is like being Prime Minister in Government.

You aren't going to please everyone.

And like Ministers in Government...you question the motives as to why they are doing it. 

You can't win. You'll always displease someone. 

However...you do win, where it counts, if power, connections, legacy and money are your main driving points.

The 'plebs' of society still vote for the same idiots in Government, regardless of party. They moan about their lot in life. Things never change. The system stays the same. It goes on...whilst those in charge rub their hands in glee. Because they know the system protects them and is in their favour.

The same in many ways for a football club owner. The fans can moan, they can show their displeasure. Moan about every aspect of the club. Moan about the prices. Put up with mediocre quality in food, drink, merchandise etc etc.  But they still turn up, they still pay their money, they still put up with mediocrity and over priced items etc. And the owners know they can get away with it.

Those moaning...still turn up and support what they aren't happy with.

Mental when you think about it.

The only way things will ever change, is if the majority actually physically did something about it.

If people refused to vote. The leaders would have to listen and change the system.

If fans stopped attending, the owners would have to listen or change.

It's pretty simple...but we are programmed to follow regardless, and just moan about our lot.

So in conclusion...the OP has his little rant. We all add our bit. But nothing will change. 

Simple as that.

 

[elhombrecito]

If anyone actually believes that Steve Lansdown has made a profit from his ownership of Bristol City, or will in the future, they are deluded. A cash cow it is certainly not.

 

[BTRFTG]

9 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

 

Chipping in, might we have done things in a different order, achieve promotion then build?  (I know promo wasn’t guaranteed either way)

Why is it a ridiculous response?

You said there are other ways in which the club could have been run. Both the failed and underperforming Chelsea and Man City pretty much adopted the model I proposed when purchased and that surely brought them success? Premier clubs these days largely buy talent they want when needed rather than develop, so what's ridiculous?