Our Model - It doesn’t work

[DaveInSA]

I go about three games a season. Maybe I’m not best placed to say this. 

But today was rubbish. 

Cardiff had no threat. Were generally awful. And yet, we were worse.

There’s nothing positive about this club. We’ll have 4-5 new players for 2024-2025.

Season tickets will be bought.

Manning will be god.

and if we’re not in the bottom 3 this time next year I will be amazed.

nothing in that game was good offensively. Zero. We could play for 165 years and not score. It was piss poor. 

 

.

[Midlands Robin]

An elephant in the room here is the Brentmister General over there in Ipswich. When we discuss the philosophy of a club and buzz word bingo, he always comes to mind. Now I know a lot of people will suggest that even a broken clock is right twice a day but there's a bit more to what Ashton has done than that 

I wanted him gone as did most of us. Even SL hinted in his post Ashton interview that it wasn't working well. 

So what did Ashton do? He gets the Ipswich job and repeats almost to the letter everything he did here  He sacks an experienced manager with a strong track record  He appoints a coach with almost no experience. He floods the team with signings apparently regardless of if they're needed or not. He even goes as far as recruiting 90 percent of the staff he worked with here 

What does that get him? Promotion to the Championship and the very real possibility of back to back promotions returning Ipswich to the Premier League.

What's the difference? McKenna is clearly a better manager than LJ and they have a board focused solely on the success of Ipswich Town football club. That's it really.

Whatever our current operating model, we need to stop farting about, get people at the top who are ruthless bastards determined to succeed at all costs and get people below them who know exactly what they're doing within the game. 

Simple really.

[Harry]

41 minutes ago, Cowshed said:

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.

On point 1, our technical director would disagree with you. 
He says so on this video at 4:38. 

Re point 2, De Zerbi has a very different playing style to Potter. 
De Zerbi plays deep possession football, possession through central areas and then crosses from high in opposition territory. He is also consistent in his approach against all levels of opposition. Potter tried higher territorial possession, more wing play and he frequently altered his block dependent on opposition. 
Brighton have a clear recruitment strategy, but their managers are able to cultivate their own playing philosophy. 

Edited March 2 by Harry

[SuperRed]

20 plus years of the clueless Lansdown family and charlatans and idiots employed by them in positions of authority. Summed up by the current self-serving Tecknical Director.   “High Performance” my ***.  No surprise any “success” under Lansdown has been with managers with the balls to do their own thing in spite of the mess around them. 

Edited March 2 by SuperRed

[Cowshed]

59 minutes ago, Harry said:

On point 1, our technical director would disagree with you. 
He says so on this video at 4:38. 

Re point 2, De Zerbi has a very different playing style to Potter. 
De Zerbi plays deep possession football, possession through central areas and then crosses from high in opposition territory. He is also consistent in his approach against all levels of opposition. Potter tried higher territorial possession, more wing play and he frequently altered his block dependent on opposition. 
Brighton have a clear recruitment strategy, but their managers are able to cultivate their own playing philosophy. 

In 2016 Lee Johnson stated similar and it was not present throughout the FC. What Brian Tinnion is referring to there is what may be the intent in the future, its not been the reality of the past eight years. 

Being pedantic the academy doesn't start at U8. Development teams play at that age. In City's foundation stages up to U11 teams are not playing one way. Bristol City have not had one style through U9 - 16, and U18 - U23 (now 21's) to the first team from Lee Johnsons time up to Nigel Pearson. 

From SGS to the HPC, and having a family member, and ex players in the academy since 2015 I have seen BCFC using varying approaches to the football. Football that has frequently differed significantly to the XI. 

If there was a playing model driving those years .. There wasn't.  

No, De Zerbis football differs. It is not totally different, or abandoning fundamentally what had occurred before. There is a clear continuance of principles over a long term.  

 

Edited March 2 by Cowshed

[exAtyeoMax]

2 hours ago, Glasgow Red said:

I dont remember too many people at the time being upset with his sacking. We had been awful for months before. Just as bad if not worse than Mannings last 6 games. People need to learn to have perspective.

Fair, you did!

I was extremely upset by his replacement though. When the situation around his sacking came to light I was really upset. 

[Ecko]

3 hours 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. 

Pin this. Spot on. Fair play Harry.

[Gert Mare]

3 hours 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. 

Har, we had the right manager, but old dopey bollocks and numb nuts fired him.

No one with half a brain is going to take the job and be micromanaged by Jon and his sidekick “Call me Gaffer now please lads” Mr 7-1 defeat at Swansea.

Edited March 2 by Gert Mare

[DaveF]

3 hours ago, Harry said:

It’s time for Manning to depart, in my opinion. 
 

Good post, I think your overall point is right.

This part interested me though as a month or so ago you were extremely positive with regards to some of the changes Manning had made. I was wondering what has made you so keen to get rid of him after the initial positivity? Do you no longer see any potential there?

[RollsRoyce]

I think this is an excellent post, and I agree with many elements of it. I slightly disagree about having a football direction, in that we should be recruiting Bristol City players, and when coaches change, they adapt, evolve and improve those players. Brighton, Brentford and Luton have signed players to a formula for years. Coaches have come in and used those players differently, but there is a common theme when you watch those teams. We were still signing players 4 years ago who had nowhere near the physical attributes a Prem League club would accept. Rennie stated we had 3 players who met Prem League level fitness/physical levels when he joined. 

But the key point, and you made it in another post, is that we do not have people in the key positions that are the best, or close to the best at those individual roles. I fully appreciate Pearson was not for everyone, but when we had Pearson and Rennie in the building, we had a very high level of expertise in their area of competence. We needed to build on that, and then evolve and develop. What we have done is make a catastrophic clear out, and have lost the positive areas of their influence, and not built any foundation of success. We have regressed dramatically, and that means there are decisions to be made. Unfortunately, the people making the ultimate decisions are not competent to make them, made worse by a lack of recognition on their part of their own lack of ability (proven over 2 decades). 

Pearson was not perfect, but you could see, that it could be evolved, developed and directed toward something important. We were on the right road, it was still bumpy, but needed tweaking not destroying. I would loved to have seen Pearson with McKenzie or Walsh.

But here we are, Jon L will be in defensive mode, they made a call and it has been a disaster. They , rather incredibly, believed Tinnion, yes the same " Judge me on Tinnion" who extraordinarily has gone from the failed manager, to being the man the Lansdowns defer to for football matters. Over and above Scudamore, Pearson or Alexander. It is almost surreal. How can, a very able and successful person, possibly get their football decisions so wrong, consistently for 2 decades?

It is a very big mess, and sadly, it is all self inflicted. 

 

 

[Superjack]

3 hours ago, Harry said:

Not necessarily. 
Steve doesn’t need to sell. He just needs to get ******* real and drop the idea that he can achieve success HIS way. You can’t. Get a manager who can, allow him to do it, and call off your dogs 

Well... he hasn't for the last twenty years, so, with respect, I think it is idiocy to entertain the idea that he will suddenly have an epiphany now. 

So, yes, absolutely we need new ownership.

[Harry]

1 hour ago, Cowshed said:

What Brian Tinnion is referring to there is what may be the intent in the future, its not been the reality of the past eight years. 

Bristol City have not had one style through U9 - 16, and U18 - U23 (now 21's) to the first team from Lee Johnsons time up to Nigel Pearson.   

 

So you’re telling me that Tinnion was lying in that interview then? Because he definitely said it. 
Am I to believe you or him? 
to honest, I think I’ll believe you Mr Cowshed. 
So that’s another thing Tinnion has lied about then. 

45 minutes ago, DaveF said:

Good post, I think your overall point is right.

This part interested me though as a month or so ago you were extremely positive with regards to some of the changes Manning had made. I was wondering what has made you so keen to get rid of him after the initial positivity? Do you no longer see any potential there?

See my post earlier today on the ‘counterparts’ thread. 

[Cowshed]

5 minutes ago, Harry said:

So you’re telling me that Tinnion was lying in that interview then? Because he definitely said it. 
Am I to believe you or him? 
to honest, I think I’ll believe you Mr Cowshed. 
So that’s another thing Tinnion has lied about then. 

See my post earlier today on the ‘counterparts’ thread. 

I didn't say Brian Tinnion was lying.  He may be talking about the new future. BCFC have jumped from approach to approach. Bristol City have not been doing long terms. And this new future is another change to a change which won't be a long term either. 

There has not been a model guiding the football over the last few years. From the U9's through to U16's to the 21's to the XI teams were not playing the same way under Nigel Pearson. As was the case going back to Lee Johnson.

I will have a read of your earlier post.

 

[Harry]

7 hours ago, Cowshed said:

I didn't say Brian Tinnion was lying.  He may be talking about the new future. BCFC have jumped from approach to approach. Bristol City have not been doing long terms. And this new future is another change to a change which won't be a long term either. 

There has not been a model guiding the football over the last few years. From the U9's through to U16's to the 21's to the XI teams were not playing the same way under Nigel Pearson. As was the case going back to Lee Johnson.

I will have a read of your earlier post.

 

I believe you mate. I do. 
Which does mean that Tinnion is lying. Because he said it, at 4:38 in that video I shared. 
He said it. You categorically say it’s not true, based on your own experience and that of people you know that are part of the academy. And I do actually trust you. 
So my conclusion is that Tinnion has lied. 
He wasn’t talking about the future. He said it’s what we’ve got now. 

[Mike Hunt-Hertz]

[Three Lions]

14 hours 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. 

Do you think Mannings being told model only? No compromise like heres an airfix kit make a model spitfire, theres the instructions and hes opened the box and, Manning finds parts missing. Theres no wings Brian can we make some first and then make the spitfire? No spitfire now this is what we are doing  their good enough to fly to the top six get us a spitfire!!. 

[Davefevs]

55 minutes ago, Three Lions said:

Do you think Mannings being told model only? No compromise like heres an airfix kit make a model spitfire, theres the instructions and hes opened the box and, Manning finds parts missing. Theres no wings Brian can we make some first and then make the spitfire? No spitfire now this is what we are doing  their good enough to fly to the top six get us a spitfire!!. 

@Silvio Dante due diligence works both ways doesn’t it!

[Bristol Oil Services]

I'm just hearing a song for S82 in this thread here .....

 

"It's a model und it's not looking gùt

I'd like to take it home und try and understand wtf we're doing;

We play hard to beat

It works from time to time;

It only takes a soft goal from a corner to

Change things tactically at half-time .....

 

Tommy's out in nightclubs drinking just champagne,

And he's been checking out all the men (representing interested clubs)

He's playing Liam's game und you can hear us say,

It's not looking gùt, for Tommy they will pay

 

(Keyboard synthesiser )  ......  "

 

 

 

 

 

[Cowshed]

3 hours ago, Harry said:

I believe you mate. I do. 
Which does mean that Tinnion is lying. Because he said it, at 4:38 in that video I shared. 
He said it. You categorically say it’s not true, based on your own experience and that of people you know that are part of the academy. And I do actually trust you. 
So my conclusion is that Tinnion has lied. 
He wasn’t talking about the future. He said it’s what we’ve got now. 

The team’s formation yesterday in possession was? Three, something, something, one. I think players were inverted but they were moving so slowly after the first twenty minutes it was not evident.

In the second half City went two, something, something, one. At points in the second half Max O’Leary left his goal and joined in with small sided games at the back.

That’s three shapes at the back. And there were more. Multiple shapes going forward.

Teams across the FC are not collectively playing like that. They were not last month, or last year.

Err Brian? 

[Silvio Dante]

54 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

@Silvio Dante due diligence works both ways doesn’t it!

It’s possible I may have mentioned that on a few occasions since November…

[ExiledAjax]

57 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

@Silvio Dante due diligence works both ways doesn’t it!

It does. But if you're head-hunted then isn't it reasonable to assume that your new employer has a vision of how you can be integrated into their organisation? And to that they have that before they approach you.

I think a greater proportion of the responsibility of diligence falls on the Club rather than the manager (or indeed player in transfers). See Potter at Chelsea for another example where the Club didn't really think about how he could be integrated and what Potter + Chelsea  might look like.

[fisherrich]

16 hours 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. 

Bang on. This “model” was always doomed. Ive mentioned it numerous times like others. Lansdowns OUT!

[Davefevs]

6 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

It does. But if you're head-hunted then isn't it reasonable to assume that your new employer has a vision of how you can be integrated into their organisation? And to that they have that before they approach you.

I think a greater proportion of the responsibility of diligence falls on the Club rather than the manager (or indeed player in transfers). See Potter at Chelsea for another example where the Club didn't really think about how he could be integrated and what Potter + Chelsea  might look like.

I didn’t say it was 50:50!

But I also think managers jump to “promotion” too quickly.

[Silvio Dante]

5 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I didn’t say it was 50:50!

But I also think managers jump to “promotion” too quickly.

Yep and as I just said on another thread by doing so they can do themselves real damage long term. 
 

There appears to have been a bit of a tide turn now as even prior pro Mannings want him gone. So, he’s now going to be left with two sackings in two years and a major question mark over his one real success at MK Dons (ie was it Martins team - and that looks ever more likely).

He’s going to leave here a man with a lot of question marks, potentially enough to make a lot of clubs think twice over him. Had he stayed at Oxford and seen that job even into a playoff position at the end of this season before jumping and failing, those questions wouldn’t be there as much (and I’d also wager he’d have had an easier ride here)

[ExiledAjax]

18 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I didn’t say it was 50:50!

But I also think managers jump to “promotion” too quickly.

We know why they do it though. I don't blame them for it, and the whole industry needs a shift in attitude around what constitutes success/failure if there's to be a shift to a more patient model of career progression.

[Ian M]

Given that “Manning-ball” appears to be nothing like the style Tinnion says is now our identity, do we think our Technical Director knew this before head-hunting him or could he have looked at the top 6 clubs in Leagues 1 and 2 and jotted down the ages of their managers. 
 

“Exciting, young, head coach”

He’ll do.

[Monkeh]

6 hours ago, Ian M said:

Given that “Manning-ball” appears to be nothing like the style Tinnion says is now our identity, do we think our Technical Director knew this before head-hunting him or could he have looked at the top 6 clubs in Leagues 1 and 2 and jotted down the ages of their managers. 
 

“Exciting, young, head coach”

He’ll do.

Like the rest of our recruitment,

It's dart board and hope for the best,

[BCFC_Dan]

On 02/03/2024 at 19:57, Harry said:

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”.

This is the key bit for me.

It may or may not be a good idea to have a defined playing style throughout the club, but that's not what Bristol City does anyway. If there is a "club philosophy" then it's one of sticking signs on office doors and giving people fancy job titles and assuming that everything else automatically follows.

It's a club of talkers, not doers. One that talks about looking for potential added value in signings but actually just buys players at random from a few, known, clubs and actually takes very few risks. It's a club that talks about wanting a consistent playing style but performs a complete stylistic 180 in the middle of a season and expects a coach to implement his ideas with a squad he didn't select and no time to work with them. It's a club that sets itself up to fail.

I do think appointing Manning was a step in the right direction, and I'm hopeful that things would come good given time and support, but I'm not particularly confident that he'll get that. Most likely he gets replaced by another bright young thing who is also denied support until the club starts circling the drain again and is forced to appoint an old school manager who ignores the "club ethos". Once that guy has righted the ship he'll be packed off and replaced with someone who says what they're supposed to and we go round and round again.

[Red Skin]

Nice to have a thread that broadens out the scope of the discussion.

If I understand @Harry correctly, then I think what you were saying here is that OUR implementation of the model is completely out of whack.

Personally, I still believe that the model with the director of football defining a clubs footballing philosophy (and I'm being purposely vague) and having a say in recruitment of players and coaches to implement that philosophy is the correct one. Given that we cannot outspend other clubs, then you have to believe that having thriving academy aligned to that philosophy also makes sense. In terms of transition planning - players and coaches - it really is the only sensible option.

What's becoming increasely apparent to me is that:

 1. We do not have structure correct, or competent and experienced people in place to make it work. No surprises here really, but that's all I have to say on our particular setup as I don't have the detailed knowledge that clearly some of you have.

 2. Even if we had the implementation of model correct, changing from playing style A to playing style B is always going to take time and be a slow process in terms of player recruitment - both buying and selling. Two and three year contracts to see out etc.

 3. If you look toward the academy then you are talking about an even longer period to develop the players you need to fit the new style, albeit you can fast track this to a degree by buying in talent at a later stage in their development, ideally from clubs with a similar style to what to want to move to.

 4. Then there is the question of what kind of manager/coach should oversee this transition? If it's the incumbent manager that is playing style A, they have the challenge of recruitment bringing in players for style B and they will feel unsupported and undermined. If we recruit a coach to implement style B, then that coach will not have the players in the short term to implement it.  An almost impossible conundrum to solve and be successful in the short term for either coach.  

This isn't a quick fix. Brighton and Swansea had to reach almost rock bottom before they reset. Not so sure about Brentford's journey, but they haven't had an academy to factor in so that probably accelerated things for them, with Moneyball style recruitment.

I thought the thread on how Bergkamp and the Dutch players were only considering League 1 and League 2 teams to overhaul was interesting. Given that Swansea and Brighton rebuilds happen from lower reaches too, it makes you wonder how sensible and doable it really is to try and totally deconstruct things and overhaul everything for a team in the Championship. 

Unless we get very lucky, it's gonna take time and be painful.  Probably a couple of coaches, a DoF, and maybe even a relegation to achieve if we are serious about seeing it through.  So, those posters who say they didn't sign up for another rebuild and/or keep banging on about top 6 squad etc had better find a more healthy way to adjust to the new reality than getting increasingly furious.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited March 4 by Red Skin

[Barrs Court Red]

21 minutes ago, Red Skin said:

 

Unless we get very lucky, it's gonna take time and be painful.  Probably a couple of coaches, a DoF, and maybe even a relegation to achieve if we are serious about seeing it through.  So, those posters who say they didn't sign up for another rebuild and/or keep banging on about top 6 squad etc had better find a more healthy way to adjust to the new reality than getting increasingly furious.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It's not our first rodeo in the space though.  This is the 3rd different approach in 8 years and it frankly bores me that the only constant in that, is the involvement of people who make the wrong decisions.

IF I thought that we'd see this through, I'd probably grit my teeth and at least try and be enthusiastic, but given the context above, I can't see why anyone would think "this will have a pay off".  It wont. A wantaway owner covered by a bargain basement exec team is not going to lead to longevity in any approach, it's mad to think otherwise.