Tommy Conway

[FNQ]

5 minutes ago, Sleepy1968 said:

I'd buy him his bus ticket to Bournemouth, and I don't want him to leave. I just believe that a move away from Ashton Gate will be best for Tommy. He was clearly looking to move on before Manning came - at least one contract offer rejected - and now he's in a team that don't play to his strengths and is looking more and more 'hacked off' (you know what I mean) every week.

I don't see that we will continue to attract exciting young talent when we treat the exciting young talent we already have like that.

Bournemouth? I don’t think so. Take someone a lot better than Tommy to replace Solanke.

[Merrick's Marvels]

Wouldn't it be funny if he turned to Tinnion and said "It's either me or Manning, academy man. You can't have both".

[Natchfever]

3 hours ago, Sheltons Army said:

Diedhiou was incapable of playing with a partner.

Little game intelligence or enthusiasm to work in conjunction with a partner

Setting aside how we are currently playing , Id say TCs ideal partner would be mobile , athletic , good movement and intelligence ,not necessarily a significant physical presence 

So someone on every clubs radar

[Merrick's Marvels]

1 hour ago, Alessandro said:

This season we’ve got Mark Ashton flying high with Ipswich (another team overtaking us)

Yeah but only back to where they've been for most of the last 60 years.

Unlike Bournemouth, Brentford, Luton etc etc

Edited March 1 by Merrick's Marvels

[Natchfever]

3 minutes ago, Merrick's Marvels said:

Yeah but only back to where they've been for most of the last 60 years.

Unlike Bournemouth, Brentford etc etc

Yep.

Admirable club.

Having said that Bournemouth and Brentford find themselves looking down on them.

They dared to dream despite their size

( I know Bmuff cheated btw)

[Sleepy1968]

31 minutes ago, FNQ said:

Bournemouth? I don’t think so. Take someone a lot better than Tommy to replace Solanke.

Yeah, I know that. I was just using them as an example of a team better than us.

Edited March 1 by Sleepy1968
grammar

[robinforlife2]

Tommy has done okay, and has scored goal, but he isn't a key player who can't be replaced, or one who can walk into any club in this league, neither will he have premier league clubs jumping all over him. If he's not signing a new deal, just sell him to the highest bidder. I've no doubt, that give it 3/4 years, TC will be playing for someone like Swansea or Cardiff and be a bit part player. He isn't as good as he thinks he is, and he benefitted most from an unselfish Wells, who gifted him a number of goals last season, when he could have taken them himself. If we get 2/3m great. But he's not a player I'll be sad to see go. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

44 minutes ago, Merrick's Marvels said:

Yeah but only back to where they've been for most of the last 60 years.

Unlike Bournemouth, Brentford, Luton etc etc

Tbh Luton do have some top flight history unlike the other 2. Certainly don't disagree with the point, albeit Brentford harnessed a fairly unique model brilliantly.

[PHILINFRANCE]

Assuming they don't get promoted, whether directly or through the playoffs, then he would probably be a good fit for Ipswich next season - a snip for them at just over £1M or so, given his contract status.

I compared him earlier to Patrick Bamford, and I think he would be able to prove himself under the guidance of their current manager - provided he stays, of course.

TC is, of course, well known to certain senior Ipswich staff members. 

[Lrrr]

17 hours ago, SydneyCity said:

I’m not saying that’s wrong as such, but it does support the narrative of Manning forcing the squad to bend to his style, rather than him bending to the players he has.

Why would he bend his style? He was brought in for his style 

[Back of the Dolman]

1 minute ago, Lrrr said:

Why would he bend his style? He was brought in for his style 

There does have to be give and take on both sides with that though.

If the players he currently has aren’t appropriate for the style he wants to play then to get the best results for the side you have to adopt a style that suits your squad.

[Davefevs]

9 minutes ago, Lrrr said:

Why would he bend his style? He was brought in for his style 

Was he?

I thought JL and Tins specified - front foot, high press, forward thinking, attacking football

Which of those match?

He is a - modern on-the-grass coach though

I’m not being facetious either.  He did not match the description of the style of football they wanted.  It’s buzzword bollox.  That’s not to say he is or isn’t a good head-coach.

Even LM himself uses some of those buzzwords, e.g. high-press, but he’s not being 100% truthful to them.

[1960maaan]

16 minutes ago, Lrrr said:

Why would he bend his style? He was brought in for his style 

IMO any coach, whoever and however they want to play must surely be flexible . How many jobs would there be where he would be able to walk in and the players fit his plan completely** ? How many teams can just buy a new squad ?
And now it seems our DoF is hands on with signings so we could have a Swiss Tony lite . 
 

Brighton is a brilliant example and we should follow that one . Choose a style and get a coach who plays that way when you need a new man in .

[Merrick's Marvels]

50 minutes ago, 1960maaan said:

Brighton is a brilliant example and we should follow that one . Choose a style and get a coach who plays that way when you need a new man in .

I think that's what Brain of Britain Tinnion thought he was doing.

Amazingly. (Not.) He was wrong.

Our current squad is painfully short of Manning's requirements. So persisting with " the dullest man in football" as Coach will require the sort of squad transformation that takes years. Years! And money - you ok with that, Guernsey? Expenditure?

What's worse, and is perhaps the biggest mistake Guernsey and Brain of Brian have made, is to think that supporters will put up with a dull style of play week after week.

They won't.

They didn't in the 70s, even though we were in the top flight of English football. Crowds declined, on account of a combination of conservative style and poor results, even though rather too many Bristolians only turned up because we were playing Liverpool, Arsenal, Man U. etc

The same will happen again. Play dull football against - not even the above - but agaonst Preston, Millwall and Brum year after year and Bristolian customers will disappear.

Genius.

We are lions led by donkeys.

Edited March 1 by Merrick's Marvels

[Major Isewater]

2 hours ago, robinforlife2 said:

Tommy has done okay, and has scored goal, but he isn't a key player who can't be replaced, or one who can walk into any club in this league, neither will he have premier league clubs jumping all over him. If he's not signing a new deal, just sell him to the highest bidder. I've no doubt, that give it 3/4 years, TC will be playing for someone like Swansea or Cardiff and be a bit part player. He isn't as good as he thinks he is, and he benefitted most from an unselfish Wells, who gifted him a number of goals last season, when he could have taken them himself. If we get 2/3m great. But he's not a player I'll be sad to see go. 

[SydneyCity]

1 hour ago, Lrrr said:

Why would he bend his style? He was brought in for his style 

That’s why I said “it’s not wrong, as such”.

(Although, if I’m being pedantic, it was stated that he was brought in to get the best out of the current squad)

Edited March 1 by SydneyCity

[W-S-M Seagull]

1 hour ago, Lrrr said:

Why would he bend his style? He was brought in for his style 

For me this is one of the terminal errors he has taken. Why wouldn't you play to the strengths of one of your best players? 

Instead Manning came in here and took Tommy aside and basically said forget everything you've been taught, forget who you are, I'm now remodeling you to try and fit you into my style and system. It's absolutely bonkers. To be fair to Tommy, he bought into it. He's still trying to buy into it but you can tell he is incredibly frustrated. 

He didn't join up with the 21s so he could gain the extra training time with Manning. 

You can see why he is pissed off. His euro chances are probably gone now. May not get that chance ever again. 

 

[SydneyCity]

7 hours ago, Sheltons Army said:

Our limited press , and slow build through the thirds resulting in and requiring a different threat or chance creating do absolutely nothing in utilising what he’s good at and his degree of natural instinct 

From what I understand, Celtic are one of the clubs interested and it may be similar for TC there.

Under Postecoglou, their forward - Kyogo - was prolific. The ball was moved into the box quickly and his movement and natural instinct meant he was always on the end of it for a goal.

Under Rodgers, Celtic are slow, and pass it around the back. Kyogo has been non-existent. His runs are futile and the ball simply isn’t getting to him in time.

Some on here have said TC isn’t suited to a lot of modern passing teams, but he is. Basically, any team that can get it to him, or his space, efficiently.

It’s actually quite depressing typing that out. We are at the stage where we can’t get a meaningful ball into the box

[bexhill reds]

2 hours ago, robinforlife2 said:

Tommy has done okay, and has scored goal, but he isn't a key player who can't be replaced, or one who can walk into any club in this league, neither will he have premier league clubs jumping all over him. If he's not signing a new deal, just sell him to the highest bidder. I've no doubt, that give it 3/4 years, TC will be playing for someone like Swansea or Cardiff and be a bit part player. He isn't as good as he thinks he is, and he benefitted most from an unselfish Wells, who gifted him a number of goals last season, when he could have taken them himself. If we get 2/3m great. But he's not a player I'll be sad to see go. 

No one is irreplaceable granted, and I appreciate that quite often your views can be contrary, but no one is stating that TC is the finished article, but to write him off at this stage in his career I think is very short sighted, you don’t get many strikers on top of their game at his age, he’s still learning his trade. His finishing ability will have lots of people looking at him as one to develop further.

Ultimately if he’s not going to sign, then we’ll have to sell, and undoubtedly he will have had his mate in his ear on what Prem earnings are, it’s just a crying shame that our current way of playing seems to have a complete aversion to creating any sort of meaningful chance unless it’s a corner, and I get why a young kid would be massively frustrated and to look elsewhere.

No issue about being “gifted” goals, if that’s what you believe, although again i think that’s perhaps a line to be deliberately obtuse, but all good striking double acts tend to have one of them scoring more than the other - Turner and Taylor is a good City example, you’ve still got to put them away.

I suspect if he was enjoying his football then he might be slightly less inclined to go, but there is nothing about the way we are playing him that suggests he is enjoying he football right now, and frankly I’d have to agree with him. What Manning is serving up is mostly dull and to opposition managers is seemingly very predictable football.

 

[Lrrr]

2 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Was he?

I thought JL and Tins specified - front foot, high press, forward thinking, attacking football

Which of those match?

He is a - modern on-the-grass coach though

I’m not being facetious either.  He did not match the description of the style of football they wanted.  It’s buzzword bollox.  That’s not to say he is or isn’t a good head-coach.

Even LM himself uses some of those buzzwords, e.g. high-press, but he’s not being 100% truthful to them.

You don't recruit a head coach as fixed in their way as Manning if you're not comfortable with them bringing their style of football with them as well, regardless of whether it being the on the grass style coach that is the main point you want.

[tin]

2 hours ago, 1960maaan said:

IMO any coach, whoever and however they want to play must surely be flexible . How many jobs would there be where he would be able to walk in and the players fit his plan completely** ? How many teams can just buy a new squad ?
And now it seems our DoF is hands on with signings so we could have a Swiss Tony lite . 
 

Brighton is a brilliant example and we should follow that one . Choose a style and get a coach who plays that way when you need a new man in .

It’s easy to say follow Brighton, Luton or whoever’s the latest club to overtake us. But in reality, Brighton have an owner who’s a Brighton fan, built a culture on excellence and openness and look where that’s led them. The coach is a small part of the big picture. 

Look at us under the Lansdowns. SL’s never been a City fan, he’s disposed of anyone who challenges his opinions and quashes openness and excellence. It’s his way or the high way. Despite the ironic naming of the HPC, there’s nothing high performance about us and that extends to Manning IMO. 

Edited March 1 by tin

[bexhill reds]

8 minutes ago, Lrrr said:

You don't recruit a head coach as fixed in their way as Manning if you're not comfortable with them bringing their style of football with them as well, regardless of whether it being the on the grass style coach that is the main point you want.

Sadly I think their decision was based on a 20 min spell against Oxford at the start of the year, before they eventually got beat 5-1.

[1960maaan]

12 minutes ago, tin said:

It’s easy to say follow Brighton, Luton or whoever’s the latest club to overtake us. But in reality, Brighton have an owner who’s a Brighton fan, built a culture on excellence and openness and look where that’s led them. The coach is a small part of the big picture. 

Look at us under the Lansdowns. SL’s never been a City fan, he’s disposed of anyone who challenges his opinions and quashes openness and excellence. It’s his way or the high way. Despite the ironic naming of the HPC, there’s nothing high performance about us and that extends to Manning IMO. 

My point was succession . They had a manager with a style , system and a way of playing. When he was cherry picked they got someone in with the same philosophy . Continuity there has been brilliant , Brentford too and they have done the same with players . That has nothing to do with who owns the Club , if they are a fan or not, it is good business practice. 

[tin]

1 minute ago, 1960maaan said:

My point was succession . They had a manager with a style , system and a way of playing. When he was cherry picked they got someone in with the same philosophy . Continuity there has been brilliant , Brentford too and they have done the same with players . That has nothing to do with who owns the Club , if they are a fan or not, it is good business practice. 

It has everything to do with who owns the club, I’m afraid. They set the direction, the culture, and everything else that follows. It’s no coincidence that Benham (the Brentford owner) worked for Bloom (the Brighton owner) in Bloom’s business, Premier Bet. You can read about that here. Both of them are very clever chaps. Where else do you think Brighton or Brentford would be now without them?

[1960maaan]

13 minutes ago, tin said:

It has everything to do with who owns the club, I’m afraid. They set the direction, the culture, and everything else that follows. It’s no coincidence that Benham (the Brentford owner) worked for Bloom (the Brighton owner) in Bloom’s business, Premier Bet. You can read about that here. Both of them are very clever chaps. Where else do you think Brighton or Brentford would be now without them?

Yes they set the direction but you made the point it was partly because Steve wasn't a City fan. What I'm saying is it's the idea well executed and not so much to do with our owner. If you have a plan, and Brighton clearly did , it isn't just the owner that makes that happen. They have been good at spotting the next Manager/Player that would be a good fit , that has nothing to do with who they support it's a good business model well executed. 
Steve could be the biggest hater of football since my Mrs, if he put the right people in charge of scouting the next manager that would exactly fit the brief, then hand overs would be almost seamless. 
 

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, Lrrr said:

You don't recruit a head coach as fixed in their way as Manning if you're not comfortable with them bringing their style of football with them as well, regardless of whether it being the on the grass style coach that is the main point you want.

So you’re saying they outwardly specified they wanted to recruit an on-the-grass coach to play the style I suggested above that I can’t be bothered to type again (as I find it a bit insulting ), and ended up with an on-the-grass coach to play completely different?

The only common ground was the on-the-grass bit?

This was a LM that said he wasn’t fixed in his thinking too!

This is a triangle of “porkies” between hierarchy / Head-coach / fans!!!

[Tomo]

Imo.. 

TC is young, raw, talented, unpredictable, unproven and still a long way away from being the 1st name on the teamsheet at Champ, let alone Prem level.

He can clearly leave in the summer and most likely get a much better deal than we can offer him.

Good luck to him but I hope he remains level headed during the journey.

[Lrrr]

14 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

So you’re saying they outwardly specified they wanted to recruit an on-the-grass coach to play the style I suggested above that I can’t be bothered to type again (as I find it a bit insulting ), and ended up with an on-the-grass coach to play completely different?

The only common ground was the on-the-grass bit?

This was a LM that said he wasn’t fixed in his thinking too!

This is a triangle of “porkies” between hierarchy / Head-coach / fans!!!

He was primarily recruited because he's an on the grass coach.

The play style bit also is obviously a big factor but we could have recruited an on the grass coach with different styles of play but we chose Manning with his style. 

[Davefevs]

Just now, Lrrr said:

He was primarily recruited because he's an on the grass coach.

The play style bit also is obviously a big factor but we could have recruited an on the grass coach with different styles of play but we chose Manning with his style. 

Of all the on-the-grass coaches we chose one that plays a fundamentally different style to the “job spec”?

You’re gonna have to try harder to explain the logic of that?

[Lrrr]

Just now, Davefevs said:

Of all the on-the-grass coaches we chose one that plays a fundamentally different style to the “job spec”?

You’re gonna have to try harder to explain the logic of that?