Worried about Pearson?

[Simpleton Gas]

Pearson knew the size of the club's debt when he took the job and he is also surely aware of the club's past history, including almost vanishing from the face of the earth in 1982 because of its inability to effectively manage its own finances. Unpaid creditors will need to be paid this time and players won't be willing to forego payment. Its a different reality now. 

The money surely goes back into the club and making sure BCFC are still a thing going forward. 

[Sarumred]

I'm sure Spurs don't want to sell Kane but virtually forced into doing so because, like Scott, doesn't wish to sign another contract and will leave for free at the end of his current one.

[Guest]

4 hours ago, Redrascal2 said:

But doesn't the issue arise of what the player wants in these matters. If Scott wants to play at a higher level and vastly improve his earnings would it benefit us to block that.

could have given it a go with us, until xmas brought in another stiker perm or temp then see where it took us and him. if we dont try we will never get there.

[Redrascal2]

6 minutes ago, wtf said:

could have given it a go with us, until xmas brought in another stiker perm or temp then see where it took us and him. if we dont try we will never get there.

But what if the player wanted to go in this window.

[Davefevs]

5 hours ago, Bris Red said:

Agreed. Yes we all know our FFP situation but at some point in this game you have to take a gamble, as you said keeping Scott this season, getting a couple of decent loans in and we could have been genuinely looking at a real assault at the top 6..

The thing now is Steve Lansdown doesn’t want to take anymore gambles at promotion. All of that was used up on LJ and MA, the wrong horses were backed and the rest is history. The board are IMO genuinely happy to tread water now at this level untill a buyer is found. Unless of course Pearson can work a minor miracle with the fairly limited tools he will be provided.

The question is firstly:

1. his much do those loans cost - fwiw the type of player you’re talking about (without naming) will likely cost more for the year than the cost for the same year as Dickie and Knight.
2. do they guarantee success?  I can answer that…nope.

Back to Q1, do you not bring in Dickie, McCrorie, Knight and Roberts to loan in a couple of PL loanees?  I don’t think it’s those four and a couple of loanees.

4 hours ago, Slack Bladder said:

I thought the whole idea of the academy was to produce players of our own, making us less reliant on buying players in. Especially journeymen

I believe this formula would work even better if we actually kept those products and build a team around them.

Anybody remember Man Us class of '92? Beckham, Scholes, Keane, Nevilles, Sharpe and so on. Good things can happen when you keep these kids together.

We haven’t brought in any journeyman - and by journeyman I mean someone at end of career coming in on a fat-wedge seeing their time out.

I don’t class James or Naismith as journeymen, and King didn’t come in on a fat-wedge, and has more than done enough to justify his time here. (Imho)

2 hours ago, Nogbad the Bad said:

Pretty obvious to me that what I consider to be proper managers like Cotts and Nige are best suited to the club, but they're not best suited to SL who will only accept them short term when the club is in a desperate position.

My concern is that SL may want to revert to his favoured type as soon as he feels he can, and either under funding Nige or setting completely unrealistic targets may be the catalyst for such a change. 

 

Nutshell.

My fear too at this current juncture.  Hope it all settles down.

[Glen hump]

2 hours ago, Nogbad the Bad said:

Pretty obvious to me that what I consider to be proper managers like Cotts and Nige are best suited to the club, but they're not best suited to SL who will only accept them short term when the club is in a desperate position.

My concern is that SL may want to revert to his favoured type as soon as he feels he can, and either under funding Nige or setting completely unrealistic targets may be the catalyst for such a change. 

 

Concerned as well, Steve loves a yes man.

[rednotblue]

Why will he not be backed? He's always been backed by SL.

I suspect NP is more hacked off at the lateness of the deal

[bcdc]

4 hours ago, downendcity said:

Yes they did and it enabled them to get to the position they have now, with us as a feeder club.

Just because we have sold them three players we are no more a feeder club for them than than Derby or Oxford  are feeder clubs for us. We have seen absolutely no hint that there are formal or informal relationships between us and other clubs to either develop players for them, or for them to develop players for us.
 

I’m repeating a point  made by others, but surely you can see that Premier League finances - as soon as a team get there - change the calculus of what ‘size’ a club is. For the moment, the resources Bournemouth have put them in a vastly more privileged financial status to any Championship club, absolutely irrespective of fan base, size of stadium or any other metric. 

[Bristol Oil Services]

I do worry about Nige, I worry about him wielding his billhook or axe on a Sunday morning in that small wood he's bought himself, after a game like last Saturday. Or just in general, wielding sharp tools whilst trying to do something with Bristol City. 

My advice to Nige would be, don't keep yer billhook sharpened, have a nice blunt edge to it. Unless that itself reminds you too much of Harry Cornick in front of goal.

[Glen hump]

50 minutes ago, bcdc said:

Just because we have sold them three players we are no more a feeder club for them than than Derby or Oxford  are feeder clubs for us. We have seen absolutely no hint that there are formal or informal relationships between us and other clubs to either develop players for them, or for them to develop players for us.
 

I’m repeating a point  made by others, but surely you can see that Premier League finances - as soon as a team get there - change the calculus of what ‘size’ a club is. For the moment, the resources Bournemouth have put them in a vastly more privileged financial status to any Championship club, absolutely irrespective of fan base, size of stadium or any other metric. 

I don’t think anyone is seriously suggesting we’re a feeder club for Bournemouth or there’s some sort of formal relationship with them.

[chinapig]

1 hour ago, bcdc said:

Just because we have sold them three players we are no more a feeder club for them than than Derby or Oxford  are feeder clubs for us. We have seen absolutely no hint that there are formal or informal relationships between us and other clubs to either develop players for them, or for them to develop players for us.
 

I’m repeating a point  made by others, but surely you can see that Premier League finances - as soon as a team get there - change the calculus of what ‘size’ a club is. For the moment, the resources Bournemouth have put them in a vastly more privileged financial status to any Championship club, absolutely irrespective of fan base, size of stadium or any other metric. 

I pointed out on the Alex Scott thread that Leeds had a deal with Aarons but were pipped by Bournemouth at the last minute.

Leeds are bigger than us and Bournemouth combined but they still lost out. That's the reality of competing with any Premier League club.

[Ivorguy]

2 hours ago, pongo88 said:

In the modern football world clubs like City have not choice but to sell good players. Financial considerations are one thing but gone are the days when a club can keep hold of a player who wants to move. Although Scott did not submit a transfer request, he’s refused a new contract. Moving to Bournemouth with increase his salary to a level far beyond anything City can pay, so why would he stay? Another factor is how the club attracts young players. The current policy enables them to get into the first team at an early age and the club makes it clear that if a Premier League club makes an acceptable offer it won’t block a move. If there was a policy of holding onto young players who could earn far more in the Premier League, then the incentive to join City would be less. 

We have to face it that this where decades of mediocrity, since the heyday of the old First Division, has left us.  Hoping against hope that one season everything will come together and we achieve promotion.  Hardly a plan that gives us encouragement.

[downendcity]

2 hours ago, bcdc said:

Just because we have sold them three players we are no more a feeder club for them than than Derby or Oxford  are feeder clubs for us. We have seen absolutely no hint that there are formal or informal relationships between us and other clubs to either develop players for them, or for them to develop players for us.
 

I’m repeating a point  made by others, but surely you can see that Premier League finances - as soon as a team get there - change the calculus of what ‘size’ a club is. For the moment, the resources Bournemouth have put them in a vastly more privileged financial status to any Championship club, absolutely irrespective of fan base, size of stadium or any other metric. 

I was responding to other posts that referred to us as Bournemouth's feeder club.

It is, as you say, all down to where we sit in football's food chain.

They have premier league money - we don't. That gives them financial muscle to cherry pick the talent from clubs like ours.

Unfortunately, even if Bournemouth was to be relegated back to the championship, premier league money will still give them the financial muscle to cherry pick from clubs like ours!

[Antman]

2 hours ago, Hot Air said:

Pearson knew the size of the club's debt when he took the job and he is also surely aware of the club's past history, including almost vanishing from the face of the earth in 1982 because of its inability to effectively manage its own finances. Unpaid creditors will need to be paid this time and players won't be willing to forego payment. Its a different reality now. 

The money surely goes back into the club and making sure BCFC are still a thing going forward. 

all of the debt is due to SL's financial management of the club over a considerable period of time. there seems to be a disconnect between SL's apparent ongoing largesse and the need to service a debt HE created.

If we are serious about the promised land of the prem, holding onto Scott for one season would be a shrewd investment you would have thought, and relatively worth it were Pearson to pull it off (lets face it it will take talent like Scott's to do this IMO)  with the view that he would/could be sold if we didn't make it.

Having that option seemingly taken away from him appears to have left him miffed - who can blame him. wait and see if he is given funds, if not then you might see a bit more overt critiscism ofthe management.

[Redland]

Since it has now been reported that Scott will be out injured for a couple of months it seems we wouldn’t have had him for the early part of the season even if he had stayed.

[The Humble Realist]

Conveniently curtis fleming on media duty ahead of the milwall game ...

[pongo88]

1 hour ago, Ivorguy said:

We have to face it that this where decades of mediocrity, since the heyday of the old First Division, has left us.  Hoping against hope that one season everything will come together and we achieve promotion.  Hardly a plan that gives us encouragement.

Ivor, you’ve suffered more than most of us but you still keep supporting City. This must mean something and, whatever it is, I’m sure it’s the  same for all City supporters. Far better than the modern trend of just buying a shirt of whatever team is doing well in the Premier League and “supporting “ them 

[Mr Popodopolous]

2 hours ago, Antman said:

all of the debt is due to SL's financial management of the club over a considerable period of time. there seems to be a disconnect between SL's apparent ongoing largesse and the need to service a debt HE created.

If we are serious about the promised land of the prem, holding onto Scott for one season would be a shrewd investment you would have thought, and relatively worth it were Pearson to pull it off (lets face it it will take talent like Scott's to do this IMO)  with the view that he would/could be sold if we didn't make it.

Having that option seemingly taken away from him appears to have left him miffed - who can blame him. wait and see if he is given funds, if not then you might see a bit more overt critiscism ofthe management.

I mean yes and no IMO.

The Championship is or had been an absolute clusterfock of a League for some years now financially. Some of that was inevitable for a club of our profile. Check how much Shahid Khan has out into Fulham last decade e.g. albeit they yoyo a bit.

We also quite heavily relied on Commercial Revenue which was decimated for 12-18 months, again SL has covered gaps as the wages had to be paid but football made nothing. All owners did eventually Mel Morris aside however.

Otoh we have done hard work, we have righted the ship and NP with Gould alongside for 18 months they did excellently, NP showed some real discipline and self-sacrifice so he needs backing now- he's really earned it. Not a splurge bit competitive yet sensible backing.

Oh yes and the Infrastructure too, at least some of that will have come out of SL's pocket?

Edited August 11, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[fisherrich]

7 hours ago, Nogbad the Bad said:

Pretty obvious to me that what I consider to be proper managers like Cotts and Nige are best suited to the club, but they're not best suited to SL who will only accept them short term when the club is in a desperate position.

My concern is that SL may want to revert to his favoured type as soon as he feels he can, and either under funding Nige or setting completely unrealistic targets may be the catalyst for such a change. 

 

Have to agree - Lansdown has lots of form at doing this. Have always said owners should not manage football clubs - Lansdown is a prime example. Next set of accounts will be interesting.

[marmite]

1 minute ago, fisherrich said:

Have to agree - Lansdown has lots of form at doing this. Have always said owners should not manage football clubs - Lansdown is a prime example. Next set of accounts will be interesting.

No, owners should not manage football clubs, as City with SL proves.

Having said that, it is his money, and if we ever do achieve the dream, be sure he will want it to be his name that shines brightest on the list of reasons why. He won't sit in the background.

[REDOXO]

5 minutes ago, marmite said:

No, owners should not manage football clubs, as City with SL proves.

Having said that, it is his money, and if we ever do achieve the dream, be sure he will want it to be his name that shines brightest on the list of reasons why. He won't sit in the background.

The faster City and Bears do something that involves proper silverware, the faster the bloke becomes Sir Stephen Lansdown. And good for him when it happens. It will happen eventually either way. 

Edited August 11, 2023 by REDOXO

[W-S-M Seagull]

On 10/08/2023 at 15:35, Henry said:

Hmm, not doing the pre match conference this early in the season is unusual 

He literally gave an interview the night before. 

I'm guessing he was most likely in a recruitment meeting. 

[Herta]

Can’t see him going anywhere 

Edited August 11, 2023 by Herta

[JP Hampton]

4 hours ago, rednotblue said:

Why will he not be backed? He's always been backed by SL.

I suspect NP is more hacked off at the lateness of the deal

Well a good opportunity to show his support for NP would have been in the same interview I mentioned earlier with Geoff T’. When asked about how Pearson was doing, SL hardly touched on Nige but talked about how well Mark Robins has done instead!! That
can’t do much for Pearson, being glossed over like that. 

[headhunter]

36 minutes ago, JP Hampton said:

Well a good opportunity to show his support for NP would have been in the same interview I mentioned earlier with Geoff T’. When asked about how Pearson was doing, SL hardly touched on Nige but talked about how well Mark Robins has done instead!! That
can’t do much for Pearson, being glossed over like that. 

I recall that interview and very same comment you refer to.

Nige described our recruitment policy under LJ as bonkers and SL does not like personal criticism. 

If he had any respect for Nige he'd have a one year contract extension on the table now.

FWIW I think SL already has his finger on the trigger and the ice will be thin for Nige if we're less than 1 PPG by the 2nd international break.

[fisherrich]

49 minutes ago, headhunter said:

I recall that interview and very same comment you refer to.

Nige described our recruitment policy under LJ as bonkers and SL does not like personal criticism. 

If he had any respect for Nige he'd have a one year contract extension on the table now.

FWIW I think SL already has his finger on the trigger and the ice will be thin for Nige if we're less than 1 PPG by the 2nd international break.

It’s my club and I will do what I want!!

[chinapig]

1 hour ago, headhunter said:

I recall that interview and very same comment you refer to.

Nige described our recruitment policy under LJ as bonkers and SL does not like personal criticism. 

If he had any respect for Nige he'd have a one year contract extension on the table now.

FWIW I think SL already has his finger on the trigger and the ice will be thin for Nige if we're less than 1 PPG by the 2nd international break.

He can't praise Nigel without in effect admitting that his own decisions got the club into the mess that Nigel had to fix.

Admitting he got things wrong is not something Steve seems willing or able to do. A case of 'I'm a billionaire so I must be right" perhaps.

[ray savino]

1 minute ago, chinapig said:

Admitting he got things wrong is not something Steve seems willing or able to do.

I do think that this can be a trait of a lot of very successful people in business, who seem to find it difficult to acknowledge criticism. SL has undoubtedly done a huge amount and spent a huge amount for the infrastructure of the club, not forgetting the Rugby club and basketball. We can all be grateful for that, however there seems no doubt some awful football decisions/strategy(or lack of) and key appointments under his tenure have been awful in many cases. I obviously don’t know the bloke personally, he seems a decent enough fella, but he does seem to bristle somewhat when challenged with the more negative perceived decisions he has been associated with. I can certainly recall a few slightly spikey responses when Geoff Twentyman confronted him with some more critical questions. Some responses have sometimes seemed a bit “it’s my money I’ve put in, I know best”, etc. 

I think he undoubtedly wants to do well, he deserves to with the amount of money he has put in, in what is an increasingly abnormal operating industry. However, certainly on a PR level it would be encouraging to the fans if he could admit his mistakes and that he acknowledges the efforts of the people trying to put it right it on the right path again.

I can understand if he’s exasperated at the slow or lack of on-field success over the years, but a lot of the key decision making has appeared ultimately down to him and his ability to choose the right managers and key club managerial staff at the right time. I really do think it would be great if we could find and expand investment in the club now, not only in money terms, but with ambitious, street-wise, football-world savvy people who can bring a bit more new found energy and ideas to the club at Board/Director level.

[Guest]

NP could well have "gone down the garden to eat worms" lets see if he is around today/this afternoon first; if not we should look towards the "its my club and I`ll do what I want" guy and bring out the bed sheets.

NP has certainly been keeping a low profile since AS left, today should clarify things.

[johnbytheriver]

3 hours ago, wtf said:

NP could well have "gone down the garden to eat worms" lets see if he is around today/this afternoon first; if not we should look towards the "its my club and I`ll do what I want" guy and bring out the bed sheets.

NP has certainly been keeping a low profile since AS left, today should clarify things.

I remember the home made wine craze of the late 70's and early 80's, i ended up face down in the garden talking to the cabbages, hope the same fate has not befallen Nige!