Our Model - It doesn’t work

[GrahamC]

1 minute ago, NcnsBcfc said:

Why we have the goalkeeping coach as our set piece coach is beyond me?

Do we expect PM to train defenders in the art of defending and attacking corners and free kicks.

Compared to other Championship clubs we don't really seem to have much of a coaching set up at first team level at the present.

To be fair I think he did this under both LJ & Pearson too.

We have Hogg, who seems completely invisible plus the mystery that is Kalifa Cisse, one minute he’s involved in the recruitment side, next he seemingly disappears then when NP gets the push he’s suddenly involved with the first team.

I have absolutely no idea what he adds, never seen any footage of him running a session whereas it was fairly obvious Fleming & Euell both did.

[exAtyeoMax]

24 minutes ago, Harry said:

The ‘Model’ is supposed to be one where everything at the club is ‘aligned’.
It says that all of our teams from the under 8’s through to the first team will play the same way. 
I’m not sure that’s quite such a good idea but hey ho. 
But the most crucial element for me is that the model says that the first team will play a certain way and that we have a ‘Technical Director’ to oversee this and ensure it’s on track and everything is aligned.

I've been saying about this for ages and how does it work with regard to LM and how he can coach/manage the team.

[petehinton]

The ‘we don’t need a ceo under the new structure’ still rattles me every time I think about it. Talk about leadership vacuum. Don’t need a ceo/day to day leader & figurehead. Who in their right mind, no matter the size of the business, thinks that. ******* class. 

[NickJ]

4 minutes ago, Glasgow Red said:

Steve Cotterill was sacked because he was about to get us relegated from this division. The amazing League One season seems to alter peoples memory.

 

2 minutes ago, Harry said:

If you read carefully you’ll see that I said he left at the right time. 
 

You are both wrong, Cotts was shafted, big time, because he was too popular for the Lansdowns liking, and because Crayon Boy wanted his mate in charge. Backed properly as he deserved to be we wouldn't have been in that position.

[The Original OTIB]

20 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

Condensed Version:

We need new ownership 

I'm holding out for a hero ....

[Glasgow Red]

2 minutes ago, NickJ said:

 

You are both wrong, Cotts was shafted, big time, because he was too popular for the Lansdowns liking, and because Crayon Boy wanted his mate in charge. Backed properly as he deserved to be we wouldn't have been in that position.

Do you have any proof of this? Otherwise I'm not really sure how you can say I'm wrong. 

[Cardy]

Harry has nailed it & the fact that so many roads now lead back to Sid is hugely concerning.

[ExiledAjax]

I've asked our last two CEOs, and our current COO, whether there are any plans to review the make up of the board(s).

No. There are not.

[Kid in the Riot]

3 minutes ago, NickJ said:

You are both wrong, Cotts was shafted, big time, because he was too popular for the Lansdowns liking, and because Crayon Boy wanted his mate in charge. Backed properly as he deserved to be we wouldn't have been in that position.

Have you heard the Cotts/Mark Ashton in David Lloyd story tho??

[NickJ]

Just now, Glasgow Red said:

Do you have any proof of this? Otherwise I'm not really sure how you can say I'm wrong. 

Cotts had deals lined up to sign Harry Maguire and Andre Gray, the fees agreed were very high by our standards at the time but bargains, both subsequently scuppered by the directors.

Some will say we couldnt afford the fees - but we subsequently paid more for Massengo, for Kalas, for Baker, and so on.

You want proof? 

[Henry]

2 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

Have you heard the Cotts/Mark Ashton in David Lloyd story tho??

Do tell…

[Barrs Court Red]

Just now, Henry said:

Do tell…

Yeah @Kid in the Riot share 

[NickJ]

2 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

Have you heard the Cotts/Mark Ashton in David Lloyd story tho??

Sort of Will if we both heard the same thing but doesn't change the Maguire/Gray situation.

[italian dave]

19 minutes ago, Harry said:

 Not really. The club were still getting Pearson to adhere to the club’s philosophy.  Pearson didn’t have free rein. Name 1 thing or indeed 1 person that changed in the recruitment area during Nigel’s 2.5 years. 
None. We were still committed to doing the same things. Nige brought his own experience and respect to the playing staff that were presented to him, but the model above him was still majorly flawed. 

And, there was an unanticipated, urgent, short term imperative that took priority during NP’s time. For 2.5 years that was more important than the philosophy. ? 

[ZiderMeUp]

21 minutes ago, Harry said:

 Not really. The club were still getting Pearson to adhere to the club’s philosophy.  Pearson didn’t have free rein. Name 1 thing or indeed 1 person that changed in the recruitment area during Nigel’s 2.5 years. 
None. We were still committed to doing the same things. Nige brought his own experience and respect to the playing staff that were presented to him, but the model above him was still majorly flawed. 

Agree with the vast majority of what you’re saying but Danny Simpson, Andy king and James wouldn’t have been targeted but for Pearson, so not strictly true.  
 

 

[italian dave]

4 minutes ago, NickJ said:

Cotts had deals lined up to sign Harry Maguire and Andre Gray, the fees agreed were very high by our standards at the time but bargains, both subsequently scuppered by the directors.

Some will say we couldnt afford the fees - but we subsequently paid more for Massengo, for Kalas, for Baker, and so on.

You want proof? 

Yes please.

Not because I’m doubting you.

Just because I’ve heard so many versions of this, all from people convinced theirs is the genuine one, that it would be good to have some evidence of at least one! 

[Harry]

5 minutes ago, ZiderMeUp said:

Agree with the vast majority of what you’re saying but Danny Simpson, Andy king and James wouldn’t have been targeted but for Pearson, so not strictly true.  
 

 

If you read carefully you’ll see that I said “limited involvement”. 
Yes, upon arrival Pearson was allowed to bring in a couple of ‘his own’. But thereafter he was restricted by the ‘model’. 
 

And I can also assure you, Nige wanted to renew James’ contract but ‘the club’ didn’t. 
And that’s where the disagreements started 

Edited March 2 by Harry

[Mr Popodopolous]

What were the fees and wages again? Maguire and Gray.

I'm gonna have a look at the amortised fee and wages added but minus certain other costs..because our Accounts show position before Transfer Activity so maybe it would've been more doable than I think, penny pound pound foolish as we sacked a manager, hired another, signed a host of loanees.

Albeit depth wise how far could we have gone had we made these deals on the proposed terms? I'm taking the squad before additions and trying to work backwards.

Edited March 2 by Mr Popodopolous

[Harry]

6 minutes ago, italian dave said:

Yes please.

Not because I’m doubting you.

Just because I’ve heard so many versions of this, all from people convinced theirs is the genuine one, that it would be good to have some evidence of at least one! 

I understand what Nick says does have truth to it. There was meddling. There always is at this club. 
However, the SC sacking was done to death years ago and this thread wasn’t started as a discussion point for the Cotts sacking. 
Its about what doesn’t work and what should work going forward. 

Edited March 2 by Harry

[1960maaan]

20 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

Alot were angry, because he didn't have backing, he had deals agreed with the likes of Harry Maguire only for the club to go back in because they thought why could get a better deal

And little or nothing has changed , we seem to have lost a CEO when Steve L elbows him out of the way to take over the Scott deal . 

We accidentally had a good set up for 5 minutes. Gould was a great buffer between Nige and Steve , I think things could have been different if it wasn't for Gould getting his dream job .... selfish ****t

[slartibartfast]

45 minutes ago, Harry said:

For the last few years, Bristol City FC has been attempting to create its own ‘model’. Their idea of the optimum way to run a football club to provide it with the best chance of success. 
 

The ‘Model’ is supposed to be one where everything at the club is ‘aligned’.
It says that all of our teams from the under 8’s through to the first team will play the same way. 



 

 

Oh, come on H, fairs fair .......... our first team ARE playing like our under eights !

[Simon bristol]

The system might work, we just have people incapable of working it. And i don’t think theres a lot wrong with the academy either, at least when nige was giving people chances.

[JP Hampton]

“Get out there and employ a manager with cahuna’s, one with a CV that demands respect from his players“

Trouble is managers with cahunas don’t fare well at Bristol City, but I agree it’s exactly what we need right now. 
 

We weren’t ready for this new model and we’re now paying for it. 

Edited March 2 by JP Hampton

[Davefevs]

@Harry sorry, but I kinda disagree with bits of your OP.  Not hugely, but enough to reply.  Happy that you maybe covered in posts elsewhere in this thread, but OTIB is posting too much for me to read everything!  Or maybe this is kinda what you meant???

I think we had a football structure of RG and NP (and DR on fitness) that had a vision of what was needed to reach the PL.  That vision turned into a strategy / plan to get there.

Re Academy - I think it was less about playing one-way all the way up the age ranges, but recognising what was needed to develop young players of the capability to play in the first team and / or at the next level.  We saw the u21s adopt different systems / formations, but they pressed like Nige’s first team, they played a bit more pragmatically (direct?) than a lot of other academy teams.

I think that readied them for first team exposure (training initially), as there was less of a bridge to gap.

Re Recruitment - more profile based, but aligned to principles of being able to run, compete, power and pace. Then add technical ability.

I don’t think it was about a playing system per se, and subsequent managers would follow.

BT was involved in this, but not understanding it enough, so that when he has to take it on, he can’t articulate it.

And I think that is where JL, GM, and BT misunderstood the plan, why it was created the way it was.  They’ve fallen for buzzwords, without understanding them.  Which is criminal from Tins point of view, if he thinks LM matched the brief.  The other two I can sort of forgive.  They aren’t the alleged football expert.

So when I hear JL say “we’re now gonna play the same way through the academy now, 1) it shows ignorance of what has been happening and means 2) he has no idea what it really meant going forward.  So he’s pissing in the wind.

And when I hear BT say “we’re gonna play the same way through the academy”, but then adds “like we have been doing”, again I think, he didn’t really get what Nige meant.

And therefore at every pull of the lever, the club gets further and further from the vision and the plan put in place.  And they don’t know what they’re aiming for, so don’t know how to rectify.

FFS

[The Bard]

11 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

@Harry sorry, but I kinda disagree with bits of your OP.  Not hugely, but enough to reply.  Happy that you maybe covered in posts elsewhere in this thread, but OTIB is posting too much for me to read everything!  Or maybe this is kinda what you meant???

I think we had a football structure of RG and NP (and DR on fitness) that had a vision of what was needed to reach the PL.  That vision turned into a strategy / plan to get there.

Re Academy - I think it was less about playing one-way all the way up the age ranges, but recognising what was needed to develop young players of the capability to play in the first team and / or at the next level.  We saw the u21s adopt different systems / formations, but they pressed like Nige’s first team, they played a bit more pragmatically (direct?) than a lot of other academy teams.

I think that readied them for first team exposure (training initially), as there was less of a bridge to gap.

Re Recruitment - more profile based, but aligned to principles of being able to run, compete, power and pace. Then add technical ability.

I don’t think it was about a playing system per se, and subsequent managers would follow.

BT was involved in this, but not understanding it enough, so that when he has to take it on, he can’t articulate it.

And I think that is where JL, GM, and BT misunderstood the plan, why it was created the way it was.  They’ve fallen for buzzwords, without understanding them.  Which is criminal from Tins point of view, if he thinks LM matched the brief.  The other two I can sort of forgive.  They aren’t the alleged football expert.

So when I hear JL say “we’re now gonna play the same way through the academy now, 1) it shows ignorance of what has been happening and means 2) he has no idea what it really meant going forward.  So he’s pissing in the wind.

And when I hear BT say “we’re gonna play the same way through the academy”, but then adds “like we have been doing”, again I think, he didn’t really get what Nige meant.

And therefore at every pull of the lever, the club gets further and further from the vision and the plan put in place.  And they don’t know what they’re aiming for, so don’t know how to rectify.

FFS

Jeese that's depressing.  You've articulated exactly why we're going to struggle ongoing.

 

[The Bard]

28 minutes ago, Simon bristol said:

The system might work, we just have people incapable of working it. And i don’t think theres a lot wrong with the academy either, at least when nige was giving people chances.

Which is the key to making the academy work.

For every Alex Scott there's a Sam Pearson.

[Shauntaylor85]

1 hour ago, Harry said:

For the last few years, Bristol City FC has been attempting to create its own ‘model’. Their idea of the optimum way to run a football club to provide it with the best chance of success. 
 

The ‘Model’ is supposed to be one where everything at the club is ‘aligned’.
It says that all of our teams from the under 8’s through to the first team will play the same way. 
I’m not sure that’s quite such a good idea but hey ho. 
But the most crucial element for me is that the model says that the first team will play a certain way and that we have a ‘Technical Director’ to oversee this and ensure it’s on track and everything is aligned. 
 

Personally, at this level of football, I don’t think that works. 
The scene is such that, any manager coming into the club should be of a certain ‘type’ and conform to a certain set of principles. 
The club have created a philosophy (call it an identity if you like) as to how they want to play football and any manager should align (there’s that word again) with that. 
 

The Technical Director runs the recruitment side of the business. 
He determines what players we sign and what manager and coaches we sign. He will try to conform to the club principles and appoint managers and coaches who will ‘fit’ and sign players who will ‘fit’. 
 

We see this sort of model at the top end of the game. Many of the biggest clubs run on a Director of Football type of model, where the manager has only limited say in the player recruitment and is basically just tasked with getting on with it, with the rather expensive tools he is provided. 
 

This doesn’t work at our level. We see this in all it’s gory (yes, not glory) with the Tinnion/Manning appointment. 
 

We have a club philosophy that desires to play in a certain way and players have been signed to attempt to slot into that style. 
We now have a manager who has been appointed who clearly likes to adopt a very different philosophy. 
I don’t blame Manning for this. We approached him. He didn’t apply for this job. He had a clear and evident CV, a body of work behind him, that was obvious to anyone who bothered to look that was at odds with our own club model. 
 

Furthermore, this new manager, whilst not having players who can play his way, doesn’t have very much say in how to fix this. 
His first transfer window and we make 4 permanent signings - 3 of which we wanted before the new manager got here. So the new manager arrives, doesn’t have players he wants and then the ‘club model’ signs 3 players that ‘the club model’ wanted. 
 

This is a huge issue for me. We are attempting to recreate models that have had success at places like Brighton, Brentford and even bloody Luton. But whilst those clubs had certain recruitment models, they didn’t dictate a ‘playing philosophy’ throughout the club. They just had very thorough and clever scouting and recruitment modelling. It didn’t dictate the playing style. Whenever there was a manager change the new boss still has his own free reign in terms of how he played and the recruitment model would then have to ‘align’ with the managers philosophy - not the other way round. 
 

When Dean Smith took over from Mark Warburton, he did things differently and they recruited accordingly. Likewise when Frank then took over from Smith, he had different philosophies on pressing, defensive positioning, midfield solidity etc. and the club then recruited accordingly. 
Luton played a certain way under Jones, but when Edwards arrived he harnessed what was already good but brought his own style to it and the club then recruited accordingly. 
 

What we have at Bristol City is a dictatorial model, whereby the Technical Director and Recruitment Team have defined a model and anyone that arrives at the club must buy-in to that model. There is no wavering. Yes, a new manager might have a bit of a say in some signings but generally they are targeted based on our defined modelling. 

Surely it’s obvious to anyone that this just doesn’t work. The talk of ‘everything at this club is aligned, from the under 8’s to the first team’ is just a false platitude. It’s a strapline that they think is clever “hey look at us, we’ve got an identify and model, we’re unique”.

That might work well at Barcelona or Man City but it’s pointless in the championship. It’s not what will actually bring success on the pitch. 
 

To achieve success on the pitch at this level you need a manager who is allowed to run the first team in his own way. Who won’t be dictated to by inferiors who spout about an identity and an alignment throughout the club. 

It’s time for Manning to depart, in my opinion, but it’s also time for the club to drop the nonsense and stop acting like a billy big bollox. The club think that they have a clever way of doing things and that it’s the only way of separating themselves from the challenging division we are in. 
It’s not clever. It’s nonsense. Drop the bullcrap. 
 

The way to achieve success was evident to us a few years ago when a man called Steve Cotterill was appointed. I wasn’t his biggest fan when he got here, and I also think the time was right for him to go, but the period he was here, there is no denying that he’s been the only manager in recent years that’s done things his own way and said “balls” to the ownership and ‘model’. 
Cotterill worked with an experienced Chief Scout and identified the best available players and signed them to fit a way of playing that HE wanted. 
None of this “we’re all aligned from the u8’s to the tea lady”. 
Just an experienced manager with an experienced chief scout, putting together a squad that would play to the managers identity, not the clubs identity. 
 

It’s time to ditch the bullshit. 
Get out there and employ a manager with cahuna’s, one with a CV that demands respect from his players, let him bring in the players that HE wants, not players that the ‘club’ have targeted for the last few windows. Let him put his own team together to play the way that HE wants. 
 

The current model stinks. There are people in positions of authority that have real negative impact on this club who are not fit for purpose. 
We need a board of directors who can appoint a respected manager, who in turn will be empowered to bring in his own trusted recruitment team or chief scout, sign his own players and have zero meddling from unqualified  nobodies. 
 

Our model is shit. And we will get nowhere with it. 

Totally bang on. The club is rotten from top to bottom.  It needs change, big change and that comes with new ideas and passion. I cannot believe we are a club aspiring to be in the PL and we have Tinnion and Manning. Seriously? Sack them both 

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, NcnsBcfc said:

Why we have the goalkeeping coach as our set piece coach is beyond me?

Do we expect PM to train defenders in the art of defending and attacking corners and free kicks.

Compared to other Championship clubs we don't really seem to have much of a coaching set up at first team level at the present.

Maybe because he’s good at it?

The main reason, explained in the past, by Bents, is that it’s the keepers job to set the defence at set-pieces, where he wants them to be, distances, etc, hence why a GK coach is a good person to help.

1 hour ago, ExiledAjax said:

Employ the right people.

Get your governance sorted - ie get your son off the board. Give him the observer role he deserves and settle that.

And at the very least accept some investment (if anyone can be persuaded) from someone who can bring some fresh ideas.

Why doesn’t he just concentrate on Fever Pitch?

[Mr Popodopolous]

Just pulled up the 2015-16 Accounts.

Prior to Transfer Activity.

However it doesn't include the wage bill so if we literally assume no Transfer activity...

Perhaps it would've been more doable than I first thought. £6.3-6.4m in wages and £1.9m in Player Trading.

Then add £0.8m in remaining FFP Headroom in 2015-16 (the 1 year rule).

The challenge is to add Maguire and Gray, not leave the squad too thin and spend in wages and amortisation no more than £9m.

Edited March 2 by Mr Popodopolous

[Cowshed]

1 hour ago, Harry said:

For the last few years, Bristol City FC has been attempting to create its own ‘model’. Their idea of the optimum way to run a football club to provide it with the best chance of success. 
 

The ‘Model’ is supposed to be one where everything at the club is ‘aligned’.
It says that all of our teams from the under 8’s through to the first team will play the same way. 
I’m not sure that’s quite such a good idea but hey ho. 
But the most crucial element for me is that the model says that the first team will play a certain way and that we have a ‘Technical Director’ to oversee this and ensure it’s on track and everything is aligned. 
 

Personally, at this level of football, I don’t think that works. 
The scene is such that, any manager coming into the club should be of a certain ‘type’ and conform to a certain set of principles. 
The club have created a philosophy (call it an identity if you like) as to how they want to play football and any manager should align (there’s that word again) with that. 
 

The Technical Director runs the recruitment side of the business. 
He determines what players we sign and what manager and coaches we sign. He will try to conform to the club principles and appoint managers and coaches who will ‘fit’ and sign players who will ‘fit’. 
 

We see this sort of model at the top end of the game. Many of the biggest clubs run on a Director of Football type of model, where the manager has only limited say in the player recruitment and is basically just tasked with getting on with it, with the rather expensive tools he is provided. 
 

This doesn’t work at our level. We see this in all it’s gory (yes, not glory) with the Tinnion/Manning appointment. 
 

We have a club philosophy that desires to play in a certain way and players have been signed to attempt to slot into that style. 
We now have a manager who has been appointed who clearly likes to adopt a very different philosophy. 
I don’t blame Manning for this. We approached him. He didn’t apply for this job. He had a clear and evident CV, a body of work behind him, that was obvious to anyone who bothered to look that was at odds with our own club model. 
 

Furthermore, this new manager, whilst not having players who can play his way, doesn’t have very much say in how to fix this. 
His first transfer window and we make 4 permanent signings - 3 of which we wanted before the new manager got here. So the new manager arrives, doesn’t have players he wants and then the ‘club model’ signs 3 players that ‘the club model’ wanted. 
 

This is a huge issue for me. We are attempting to recreate models that have had success at places like Brighton, Brentford and even bloody Luton. But whilst those clubs had certain recruitment models, they didn’t dictate a ‘playing philosophy’ throughout the club. They just had very thorough and clever scouting and recruitment modelling. It didn’t dictate the playing style. Whenever there was a manager change the new boss still has his own free reign in terms of how he played and the recruitment model would then have to ‘align’ with the managers philosophy - not the other way round. 
 

When Dean Smith took over from Mark Warburton, he did things differently and they recruited accordingly. Likewise when Frank then took over from Smith, he had different philosophies on pressing, defensive positioning, midfield solidity etc. and the club then recruited accordingly. 
Luton played a certain way under Jones, but when Edwards arrived he harnessed what was already good but brought his own style to it and the club then recruited accordingly. 
 

What we have at Bristol City is a dictatorial model, whereby the Technical Director and Recruitment Team have defined a model and anyone that arrives at the club must buy-in to that model. There is no wavering. Yes, a new manager might have a bit of a say in some signings but generally they are targeted based on our defined modelling. 

Surely it’s obvious to anyone that this just doesn’t work. The talk of ‘everything at this club is aligned, from the under 8’s to the first team’ is just a false platitude. It’s a strapline that they think is clever “hey look at us, we’ve got an identify and model, we’re unique”.

That might work well at Barcelona or Man City but it’s pointless in the championship. It’s not what will actually bring success on the pitch. 
 

To achieve success on the pitch at this level you need a manager who is allowed to run the first team in his own way. Who won’t be dictated to by inferiors who spout about an identity and an alignment throughout the club. 

It’s time for Manning to depart, in my opinion, but it’s also time for the club to drop the nonsense and stop acting like a billy big bollox. The club think that they have a clever way of doing things and that it’s the only way of separating themselves from the challenging division we are in. 
It’s not clever. It’s nonsense. Drop the bullcrap. 
 

The way to achieve success was evident to us a few years ago when a man called Steve Cotterill was appointed. I wasn’t his biggest fan when he got here, and I also think the time was right for him to go, but the period he was here, there is no denying that he’s been the only manager in recent years that’s done things his own way and said “balls” to the ownership and ‘model’. 
Cotterill worked with an experienced Chief Scout and identified the best available players and signed them to fit a way of playing that HE wanted. 
None of this “we’re all aligned from the u8’s to the tea lady”. 
Just an experienced manager with an experienced chief scout, putting together a squad that would play to the managers identity, not the clubs identity. 
 

It’s time to ditch the bullshit. 
Get out there and employ a manager with cahuna’s, one with a CV that demands respect from his players, let him bring in the players that HE wants, not players that the ‘club’ have targeted for the last few windows. Let him put his own team together to play the way that HE wants. 
 

The current model stinks. There are people in positions of authority that have real negative impact on this club who are not fit for purpose. 
We need a board of directors who can appoint a respected manager, who in turn will be empowered to bring in his own trusted recruitment team or chief scout, sign his own players and have zero meddling from unqualified  nobodies. 
 

Our model is shit. And we will get nowhere with it. 

Harry Bristol City don't have a philosophy that dictates teams from U8's through to the first team will play the same way.  

Brighton from 2019 with the appointment of Graham Potter to Zerbi in 2022 till now have very much had a dictated playing philosophy throughout their FC.