Ambition At Bcfc

[Bristol Boy]

Clearly you're right about the "fit and proper persons" issue, although of course Lansdown would pass the tests currently being suggested by various football organisations, having run a very successful company previously.

It's not about the fit and proper persons issue, although clearly important in terms of a takeover, for me it's about being good at it.A visionary and a leader.I don't doubt SL's compitance and I've never stated that.He is clearly a clever man to have acheived thr success in his given field.That hasn't been replicated in Football.

Given our performance in comparison to the others that I intially stated and to those that Code Red listed, you would have to ask why they have succeeded and we haven't.The only thing I can think of is leadership.

By "they..were far greater in both size and complexity", you must mean you've run several businesses with turnovers of more than £6 million and with more than 23 direct competitors of similar size (and a further 68 indirect competitors of varying size) in a highly regulated (equivalent to 3 points for a win) environment. Oh, and with 12,000 very angry and vociferous customers.

I don't want to get into huge personal detail, however, as you asked-Business with turnovers up to £319m and I have worked as a Director & Senior Manager in companies that have turned over £9bn.Thousands of competitors and millions of customers some of whom in terms of complaining and being vociferous, make AG resemble a library. Far more heavily regulated than Football ever will be, never mind is.I've managed over 500 staff-via line managers spread throughout the UK & Ireland and if you think Football is regulated try woking for BT, Transco and the like

I'm at a loss. Name the industry/industries? Software development maybe? Can't see financial advice being more complex, although I can see it having the turnover. Stockbroking I guess, although you still don't have as many competitors directly affecting your actions.

Construction, Logistics, Motor & Electronics.

What staggers me is that people continually bash Lansdown. Leaving aside other issues such as the east end, at least Lansdown has put made very respectable amounts of money upfront for all of the managers that he has employed.

Got it in one.He has employed them and therefore, the buck stops with him.Any manager of any business will get stick from stakeholders in that business if it doesn't perform and the plaudits when it does.Nothing different here.I fully agree that he has supported them all with the possible exception of Tinnion who didn't have half the abckroom staff that DW or GJ has.

Yes there have been some bad decisions by him since he has taken over and i'd like to think he has learnt from that but what more could or should he do. We have spent big sums of money, (of which I am well aware some has come from selling players) but other chairman around us don't even do that. We have brought poor players that have not lived up to their potential, how can he be judged on that?

He can't HIS manager can and that's why it's always that bloke that gets the sack.

[brizzlered1]

[Bristol Boy]

anyone can be a chairman with the gift of perfect hindsight. SL's biggest decisions were:

1. Sacking Wilson (wrong i thought at the time - now believe it was right, based on what i've heard about him letting the booze culture florish - fans mostly agreed at the time this was right thing to do)

Finished 9th-7th-3rd-3rd-Spent £2m on transfer fees while smaller clubs eased past us with 25% of our wag budget-Right decision

2. Appointing tinnion (right i thought at the time - about 70% of us agreed too - but now obviously wrong)

Could have worked as it did for Tilson at Southend.Cost cutting and the removal of backroom staff didn't help.BT said himself the cheap alternative

3. Appointing Johnson (right decision)

We don't know that yet.I'm not saying it's bad but only time will tell.

.... and backing each of those managers whenever they wanted to buy a player.

We don't know that's what happend although, as far as Wilson goes, I'd agree.

The first two managers and their players let us down. Especially the players. Yes - the buck stops with the chairman, but i don't think any of his major and minor decisions have deserved the failure we've seen - it just happened that way, because at the end of the day its just 11 overpaid thick blokes playing another 11 overpaid thick blokes, and ours didnt win enough matches.

Those "thick blokes" finished 3rd two seasons on the trot.I they're overpaid then who decides the wages-The Chairman and he has to justify why we are overpaying people and the likes of Colchester & Crewe, who don't have flown past us.

And **** me they should have - because we paid them enough money (and yes - the chairman does set the salaries - but only because he has to secure the players the manager of the time wants).

if there's an alternative to SL - somebody show me who, and maybe i'll back him. In the meantime - am happy we have a chairman who says the right stuff, makes decisions i mostly agree with, and appears to care as much about this club as i do. Those three things are important - not that many chairmans have them.

Bit of a sweeping generalisation there and many, many Chairman have outinvested SL and definetly out acheived him.I've no problem with SL or GJ but I want to see some acheivement and some trophies in the cabinet before I start praising them to the rafters.

[SE23Red]

Since we dropped out of the old First division in 1979/80 we have have spent 20 out of 27 seasons in the THIRD/FOURTH divisions and of the 7 seasons we did spend in the SECOND (or Championship) division we suffered 3 relegations, finished in the bottom half 3 times and finished 9th in the remaining season.

I don't think we're a BIG club but given the fan base, stadium,city size, then promotion to the Championship - and staying up - is not an unreasonable goal. And this will be the 14th year since we completed as season in the (now) Championship without being relegated. I don't accept that wanting higher level football after waiting 14 years ....is wanting instant success

The point is that - of course SL wants promotion - but has he got the correct decision making skills and vision and to lead us there.

I remember so many clubs with smaller gates, less money, leaving us behind and you have to ask why - would you be happy to spend another 5 y in this division.

You state that people don't know how difficult it is to run a club - the clubs below have been run ok and we started above them at the relevent time:-

When we played our first season in the 2nd div after promotion in'90 we finished above : Newcastle, Blackburn,Portsmouth,Charlton,Wolves,WBA,Ipswich,Leicester,Watford

When we played our first seaon in the 3rd div after promotion in 1984 we competed with:

Derby,Reading,Wigan,Bolton,Hull, Plymouth, PNE, Burnley, the last 2 were relegated to the 4th

and don't get me started on Colchester, Southend, Luton, Barnsley,

Do you not find it strange how you point out on the one hand how we have stood still for so many years, and on the other hand point out how many teams have gone past us? If you only look at one side of the story (of other team's success) you miss the number of teams that were above us back then who are below us now. Wouldn't you be just a litle bit happier if you spent as much time being thankful that we are not another Oxford than focusing all the time on the likes of Wigan?

[Bristol Boy]

[CodeRed]

Do you not find it strange how you point out on the one hand how we have stood still for so many years, and on the other hand point out how many teams have gone past us? If you only look at one side of the story (of other team's success) you miss the number of teams that were above us back then who are below us now. Wouldn't you be just a litle bit happier if you spent as much time being thankful that we are not another Oxford than focusing all the time on the likes of Wigan?

Oh dear............so we should be grateful that we are doing better than - Oxford ! a non league club for most of their history (when they were called Headington United) that entered the league for the first time in 1962 IIRC and have never been in the same situation as BCFC as regard to Catchment, history, Fanbase, ground, infrastructure, investment......even when Maxwell was Chairman he never invested much, he was just on an ego trip.

Sorry I set my standard higher than Oxford.

Actually we're a doing a lot better than Rochdale, Hartlepool, Torquay, Exeter etc so that all right then, great job SL - keep it up

Can you actually think of a club/city with the crowds/revenue/investment that City get who have done consistently worse than us over the last 14 years since we last played in the 2nd div/(or whatever you want to call it)Championship without actually getting relegated

[SE23Red]

Oh dear............so we should be grateful that we are doing better than - Oxford ! a non league club for most of their history (when they were called Headington United) that entered the league for the first time in 1962 IIRC and have never been in the same situation as BCFC as regard to Catchment, history, Fanbase, ground, infrastructure, investment......even when Maxwell was Chairman he never invested much, he was just on an ego trip.

Sorry I set my standard higher than Oxford.

Actually we're a doing a lot better than Rochdale, Hartlepool, Torquay, Exeter etc so that all right then, great job SL - keep it up

Can you actually think of a club/city with the crowds/revenue/investment that City get who have done consistently worse than us over the last 14 years since we last played in the 2nd div/Championship (or whatever you want to call it)

It is not the fact that it is Oxford that I was highlighting it is that for every team that have gone past us on the way up another has to have passed us on the way down.

No standing still is not successful, and I'd prefer that each season was more successful than the last until we are winning back to back Champions League titles but coming on here and listing all the clubs who have done something in the last ten years is just futile.

[Bristol Boy]

Oh dear............so we should be grateful that we are doing better than - Oxford ! a non league club for most of their history (when they were called Headington United) that entered the league for the first time in 1962 IIRC and have never been in the same situation as BCFC as regard to Catchment, history, Fanbase, ground, infrastructure, investment......even when Maxwell was Chairman he never invested much, he was just on an ego trip.

Sorry I set my standard higher than Oxford.

Actually we're a doing a lot better than Rochdale, Hartlepool, Torquay, Exeter etc so that all right then, great job SL - keep it up

Can you actually think of a club/city with the crowds/revenue/investment that City get who have done consistently worse than us over the last 14 years since we last played in the 2nd div/(or whatever you want to call it)Championship without actually getting relegated

Yeh and on top of that "at least we're better than the Rovers and if you don't like it go and support someobody else"........Think that's covered it

Better than Oxford....****ing hang me

Still, if you set your standards that low, no wonder you can be happy clappy.

It is not the fact that it is Oxford that I was highlighting it is that for every team that have gone past us on the way up another has to have passed us on the way down.

No standing still is not successful, and I'd prefer that each season was more successful than the last until we are winning back to back Champions League titles but coming on here and listing all the clubs who have done something in the last ten years is just futile.

Don't talk nonsense.

Futile?

Hardly-Comparing us to the likes of Oxford-now, that's futile.

Question-What's the difference between us & Middlesboro?

Answer:Steve Gibson

[Keepers Ball]

do I think your out to get him, don't over estimate your own importance sonny,as for your opinions keep them coming, once promotion is gained you'll be one of the few that will be walking around trying to look happy.

Nothing to do with importance.Going by your reply to my opinion it seemed you were upset that I dared to question Johnson's capabilities.

And its got Fig all to do with Stewart and Phillips though I do believe Johnsons handling of the Stewart affair is ridiculous.

The reason why I don't think he'll get us up by judgement is simply that..his judgement.

His loans have been useless and I'm not overly impressed with his signings bar McCombe and McCallister.

Savage anyone ?

Once promotion is gained I'll be one of the few that will be walking around TRYING to look happy ?????

[CodeRed]

It is not the fact that it is Oxford that I was highlighting it is that for every team that have gone past us on the way up another has to have passed us on the way down.

wrong again - what club (with reasonanable claims to be a better than League 2 club) has passed us on the way down?

The only possible one I can think of below us is Brighton - and they have just been in the championship after beating someone or other in the playoffs!

In fact of ALL the clubs (with reasonanable claims to be a better than League 2 club) who have ended up in the 4th division (like City) and from memory they are:

Cardiff, Wolves,Burnley,Preston,Plymouth,Hull,Portsmouth, Fulham .....all ended up in div 4 after City

and guess who's never got back into at least the Championship.

We all support the club and to be fair SL is in some respects getting flak for the failures of those who have gone before.....

but the frustration is that other similar clubs are doing more...with less...and doing it quicker, in fact I've shown that - pound for pound - I can't think of a club who's progress has been slower.

Can you?

or anyone else?

and still some say well done SL everythings fine etc Brooker Showumni are back etc but the fact is that the past few months have shown we ARE short of cover. We DO have the money to do something about it, we have had the time.......but we havn't succeded in doing anything and we will have to rely on luck with injuries. Time will tell if the club are right or will it be 9th time unlucky?

CodeRed

[SE23Red]

Question-What's the difference between us & Middlesboro?

Answer:Steve Gibson

And how does that help us exactly?

Or is it a new forum game? My go - What's the difference between us and Chelsea?

[SE23Red]

but the frustration is that other similar clubs are doing more...with less...and doing it quicker, in fact I've shown that - pound for pound - I can't think of a club who's progress has been slower.

Can you?

Well in the last 10 years Grimsby, Huddersfield, Bradford, Brighton, Millwall, Wimbledon, Port Vale, Oldham, Tranmere (the list goes on) all started above us and are now below us. Or does demonstrably moving down the leagues not count when you are measuring slow progress?

[CodeRed]

Well in the last 10 years Grimsby, Huddersfield, Bradford, Brighton, Millwall, Wimbledon, Port Vale, Oldham, Tranmere (the list goes on) all started above us and are now below us. Or does demonstrably moving down the leagues not count when you are measuring slow progress?

Since we last competed in the Championship - without getting relegated - 14 years ago Wimbledon, Oldham,Bradford, have played in the top flight and Millwall reached an FA cup final, the others have all played more Championship football during that period than we have. So I still maintain that we've been the longest suffering fans in football.

Attendance wise only Hudd get anywhere near us (and Brighton - when they get their new stadium- have the potential to go all the way).........the others don't have anywhere near our potential although interestingly 3 of them have found the money for new stadiums.

CodeRed

Edit - I'm not sure about P.Vale, too lazy/late to check it out - at least they are making a profit now!

[Bristol Boy]

And how does that help us exactly?

Or is it a new forum game? My go - What's the difference between us and Chelsea?

If you don't get, I can't be bothered to explain

[SE23Red]

Since we last competed in the Championship - without getting relegated - 14 years ago Wimbledon, Oldham,Bradford, have played in the top flight and Millwall reached an FA cup final, the others have all played more Championship football during that period than we have. So I still maintain that we've been the longest suffering fans in football.

Hold on. You started this thread celebrating the teams who have been more successful than us (Wigan and the like) because they have been promoted and we have not. Now you are celebrating the clubs who have fallen from grace because they were there to start with. Well I guess if you choose to look at it that way maybe you are one of the longest suffering football fans in the world. I don't think it has much to do with supporting Bristol City though...

[CodeRed]

Hold on. You started this thread celebrating the teams who have been more successful than us (Wigan and the like) because they have been promoted and we have not. Now you are celebrating the clubs who have fallen from grace because they were there to start with. Well I guess if you choose to look at it that way maybe you are one of the longest suffering football fans in the world. I don't think it has much to do with supporting Bristol City though...

No - I'm saying in both cases the groups of clubs have had more success or played more times at a higher level than us over the last 14 years. (except P.Vale)

And you fired me up by implying that we should be grateful because we had done better than Oxford !!

CodeRed

[Tom Fleuriot]

Question-What's the difference between us & Middlesboro?

Answer:Steve Gibson

Middlesbrough are an interesting club to compare us with;

Average attendances (random sample)

1993/4 (both mid-table, D2 old money)

Boro - 10,400

City - 8,856

1984/85

Boro - 4th bottom, D2 old - 5,135

City - 5th, D3 old - 8,507

1977/78

Boro - 9th bottom, D1 old - 19,874

City - 6th bottom, D1 old - 23,357

So we've had similar attendances, and if anything City have been higher until the advent of the Premier League (I don't know the all-time average attendance).

How's this for a stat?

Season in top-flight:

Bristol City 9

Middlesbrough 55

Let's take off 10 for Steve Gibson (although I think it's closer to 8. But then you can look at Wigan, Fulham etc and say history's irrelevant, so...)

I see the key point as 1994-5 (which is when Gibson took over). That's the season Boro got promoted and we finished 4th or 5th bottom in the same division. Gibson then had Prem money, while we were busy cycling through journeyman players and poor managers.

Because as far as I recall Gibson;

Initially invested large amounts of money in the team, to see his club go down (albeit after seeing them reach two cup finals)

Appointed a rookie manager who was clearly out of his depth and left hime in charge of the club for several years

Has splashed out cash on players such as Maccarone, Xavier, Ricketts, Riggott, Christie, Juninho (the second time around).

Has invested large amounts of money in his academy, with a resulting high standard of young players coming through.

Gibson's record as chairman seems to be little different from Lansdown in terms of learning curve and decisions made. Indeed you could argue that had Lansdown wasted a similar proportion of our budget on players with the success rate of those above, many City fans would be baying for blood.

A difference is the decision to move to a new stadium, but Gibson made that decision secure in the knowledge that he had a team historically in the top 30 in the country, Lansdown doesn't have that luxury.

The difference between City and Middlesbrough, if you ask me, is that one has been in the top flight or near the top flight all their life, and the other hasn't, both barring a few blips. If you look at the decisions made, I don't see a huge difference between Lansdown and Gibson, apart from guaranteed income levels and the speed with which Lansdown recognised Tinman's deficiencies compared with Gibson's reluctance to part with Robson.

And re: your experience, I don't doubt your managerial expertise and hope you don't feel I'm having a dig. But I would say that managing BT is more akin to managing Man Utd. Unless you were involved in companies like TalkTalk as start-ups? And even they had more brand awareness than City, with a clearly defined customer route. And in telecoms and logistics, turnaround time in decision making is faster. In my (lower level) experience of the industries, if a new idea doesn't work we tend to spot it pretty quickly as the product doesn't get delivered or is manifestly lower quality. IN football, you have to wait longer to see results, and you can't have a win-win where all clubs increase their profits in the league position sense.

Sorry, long post :noexpression:

(edit - grammar)