steve lansdown

[Nibor]

Before Bosman I was happy with us bring on young players as we could decide when and to who we sold to we could offer a player a contract if a other team wanted him we could negotiate a price.

Now if a player does want to sign he can just see his contract out or blackmail the club to sell him cheaply we can put sell on clauses in his contract but if he sees out his contract with the club or if he is a free agent and resign for the club we still don't get any further fee for him.

If Lita had 2 1/2 contract on him do you think we would have sold him and if we had it would be a lot more than a million.You quote Wilson Artus Plummer good prospect how much would they have been worth before Bosman we will be lucky to get a million for the lot of them.

A small team like City cannot offer the money that big clubs can until we can afford that type of money we are wasting our time with an academy

And that's the way I see the acadmy lark, We spend 100 of K for the academy but cant afford a good striker this club lives in cloud cuckoo land

But because you still refuse to accept the fact that even post bosman the academy more than stands up on it's own financially and in no way whatsoever affects whether or not we can afford to bring in players, I can only conclude you have an axe to grind for some reason.

[Guest ashtonyate]

But because you still refuse to accept the fact that even post bosman the academy more than stands up on it's own financially and in no way whatsoever affects whether or not we can afford to bring in players, I can only conclude you have an axe to grind for some reason.

I have no axe to grind except that my team has been stuck in the 3 division for 11 of the last 12 years about the same time as the academy has been running in my last post i told you all what i think about the academy now i am being told how wonderful the academy is and does not cost very much to run.with the compound interest since its conception it has lost money hand over fist now that's what I believe I would love for it to be run like the stadium company is then you would see how much money it cost to run

[scumbag]

read through this thread from the start and some of the utter rubbish being quoted is hilarious, compound interest....ha! funny

for starters ever before the bosman ruling though you didn't get the true value for players though, if a player becomes out of contract you have never got their true worth, just look at Wayne Allison a few years back City wanted £1m for the player, he joined Swindon in the end at a Tribual set £475k, which was an utter discrace! another example was Mickey Bell we got him from Wycombe for a Tribual set £150k! utter and total bargain,

it has always been the same situation with players that once their contract is running out you either sell them early for their true value or lose them for peanuts at a Trib, fact is now it only effects players under the age of 23, nothing has changed really since the Bosman has come in to affect the development of young players, if nothing else the system is now more correctly regulated and the producing club get a better deal than they have in the past.

The fact is the Academy is a Success, it has taken a while to fully get going as a young player needs to going through the whole academy process to get the full benefits, however since the introduction of the likes of Matt Hill, Danny Coles and Joe Burnell, the talent coming through has improved no end, the latest lot of young players such as Artus, Plummer, Myrie Williams, Wilson and Cotterill are all VERY VERY talented young players, players we couldn't have brought to the club or produced without the academy system, playing for a centre of excellence they would have had a lesser quality of training and would have been playing a lots lower standard of opponents. Plummer, Wilson and Artus are likely to form the spine of our team over the next couple of season if we can keep them at the club, all 3 have received interest from higher level clubs and each if continue on their current tracks will end up in the Premiership at some point in their careers hopefully with us, either way they are each likely to attract £1m+ fee's at some point, anyone having seen them play for the Reserves will have seen the quality of the 3, Wilson possibly being the most under-rated of the trio.

The Academy did cost alot of money to initial setup at Clifton College close to £1m for the first 2 seasons, however once those facilities have been setup the running costs for this are now running at around less than 20% of that figure PRIOR to the move to St George now those facilities are being used instead it is now being pretty much paid for by the UWE and the academy is now longer a significant cost to the club as majority of the staff being used for the Academy are employed by St George.

Alot of the big deal made out of this is that the initial money invested into the Academy should/could have been used for first team matters, as has been shown in the past, that is like throwing money into a big black hole with little to Zero return. alot of the money that has been put into the Academy has come directly from John Laycock who played a key role, he was someone who believed in Youth Development and invested high amounts of cash directly into Academy for the long term aim. He wasn't a person who was willing to constantly spend money on players and only invested so much with the condition it was for the future youth development of Bristol City.

We are now in a position where money isn't needed to be put into the academy to keep it running, due to the prior mentioned UWE sponsorship and FA grants, the only money that is put in now by the club is for improvements.

Believe me or ingore me Mr Yate, however this is the current situation with the academy, it's doing it's job, Feel free to ask me how I know so much, I can point you in the direction of Tony Fawthorp.

[SE23Red]

Before Bosman I was happy with us bring on young players as we could decide when and to who we sold to we could offer a player a contract if a other team wanted him we could negotiate a price.

Now if a player does want to sign he can just see his contract out or blackmail the club to sell him cheaply we can put sell on clauses in his contract but if he sees out his contract with the club or if he is a free agent and resign for the club we still don't get any further fee for him.

If Lita had 2 1/2 contract on him do you think we would have sold him and if we had it would be a lot more than a million.You quote Wilson Artus Plummer good prospect how much would they have been worth before Bosman we will be lucky to get a million for the lot of them.

A small team like City cannot offer the money that big clubs can until we can afford that type of money we are wasting our time with an academy

And that's the way I see the acadmy lark, We spend 100 of K for the academy but cant afford a good striker this club lives in cloud cuckoo land

Why let the fact that we had agreed a fee for a very good striker get in the way of your argument? Or that the manager has apparently been backed every time he has been to the chairman to ask to spend money on a player? Including twice in the last transfer window. As I said before it is not either/or we see money spent on both the first team and the academy.

I have no axe to grind except that my team has been stuck in the 3 division for 11 of the last 12 years about the same time as the academy has been running

But the thing you never establish is why you blame the academy for that fact. In that period we have probably had on average two academy graduates in the senior squad of 16. So why are you not so passionately against the journeyman pros you seem to favour who must surely take 90% of the responsibility for us not getting promoted?

I'd say we have failed to get promoted despite having the academy, not because of it.

[Nibor]

with the compound interest since its conception it has lost money hand over fist

No. It. Hasn't.

If you think it has, please show the maths, and don't forget before you start spouting £1m a season all over again to show them net of sponsorship, grants and everything else. There is no way on god's earth they come to the well over £4m we've made on transfer fees from academy players, and that's just the start of it.

Besides which, the money spent on the academy would not otherwise have been invested in the first team wage bill in any case.

[Guest ashtonyate]

No. It. Hasn't.

If you think it has, please show the maths, and don't forget before you start spouting £1m a season all over again to show them net of sponsorship, grants and everything else. There is no way on god's earth they come to the well over £4m we've made on transfer fees from academy players, and that's just the start of it.

Besides which, the money spent on the academy would not otherwise have been invested in the first team wage bill in any case.

If we believe that the academy has hardly cost the club anything where has the money gone over the last 8 year because we have not been spending it on players i think the most we spent is on Miller 325k.

We have had good support with play offs, freight rover, and over the last 8 years we owe the banks more money Lansdown and the board have bailed us out since we came down the team has been under performing even though the gates have held up.

If you look at the team on the pitch over the eight years since we came down and the money we owe it does not add up. I seen teams like Southend Colchester and many others go past us so where is the Money going if its not in the academy? which i said in the first place Lansdown is a very average chairman

[scumbag]

If we believe that the academy has hardly cost the club anything where has the money gone over the last 8 year because we have not been spending it on players i think the most we spent is on Miller 325k.

We have had good support with play offs, freight rover, and over the last 8 years we owe the banks more money Lansdown and the board have bailed us out since we came down the team has been under performing even though the gates have held up.

If you look at the team on the pitch over the eight years since we came down and the money we owe it does not add up. I seen teams like Southend Colchester and many others go past us so where is the Money going if its not in the academy? which i said in the first place Lansdown is a very average chairman

feel free to totally ignore my posting which has completely counters everything you have just said.

alot of money has been spent on players, people such as Wilkshire, Heffernan, Brooker, Partridge, Noble, Fontaine, Wilson, Betsy haven't come in cheaply plus the likes of stewart, Bridges, Jevons, Showumini, Weale, McAllister, Johnson Jnr and others who have come in on "Free Transfers" which although have no fee, have instead received hefty signing on fee's, too say that money hasn't been spent on the 1st team playing squad is nothing short of short-sighted and pathetic!

which seems to sum up your views, seem very happy to hammer something without actually knowing what you are talking about, like a few on here which seems to explain PM's I've received from people telling me not to waste my breath trying to enter the Academy debate

[Nibor]

If we believe that the academy has hardly cost the club anything where has the money gone over the last 8 year because we have not been spending it on players i think the most we spent is on Miller 325k.

We have had good support with play offs, freight rover, and over the last 8 years we owe the banks more money Lansdown and the board have bailed us out since we came down the team has been under performing even though the gates have held up.

If you look at the team on the pitch over the eight years since we came down and the money we owe it does not add up. I seen teams like Southend Colchester and many others go past us so where is the Money going if its not in the academy? which i said in the first place Lansdown is a very average chairman

This pattern seems somewhat familiar. You make a bunch of stupid statements, I and others explain why they're stupid and ask you to substantiate them, and you ignore it and make a slightly different bunch of stupid statements. Repeat ad nauseum.

Let's try this once more. If you think the academy has made a loss, as you stated above, then show us the bloody figures instead of making incorrect and unfounded statements.

And since you seem to have trouble understanding I'll also repeat: HAD WE NOT HAD AN ACADEMY NO MORE MONEY WOULD HAVE BEEN SPENT ON BRINGING PLAYERS IN.

Since you're so interested in where the money has gone why don't you tell us... when was the last time you looked at the accounts? The money is going on WAGES. It always has been.

Here's a fact for you. In the financial year ending May 05 our wage bill was FOUR POINT TWO MILLION POUNDS. Do you understand now why your pissing and moaning about the drop in the ocean we wisely invest in the academy is so utterly ludicrous?

[NickJ]

He .......had a squad with a wage bill near double what we have now.

That's nowhere near being accurate.

It has reduced yes, but more like by about 10-15%, off the top of my head.

I would hazard a guess that apart from Forest we have the highest wage bill in the division, and have probably been among the top 3 or 4, at least, for the entire 8 years we have spent in this division.

That says to me that there must have been some poor decision making, on the part of both managers who have requested players and the board who have sanctioned their wages.

I personally feel that one way, albeit a relatively minor one, to reduce wage costs would be to stop this business of bringing in loan players, not one of whom under GJ's reign has in my opinion added anything. I would much prefer to see the academy and reserves given an earlier chance. One thing that Wilson did, was to bring those players through a lot earlier than they seem to be at the moment.

[Nibor]

That's nowhere near being accurate.

Fair enough, I'll rephrase it. He had a significantly higher wage bill.

We'll never know the exact figures for player wages.

[NickJ]

Fair enough, I'll rephrase it. He had a significantly higher wage bill.

We'll never know the exact figures for player wages.

Agreed. Combination of some ludicrous salaries not in a small way influenced by the Sky Digital money, to be fair, but also by a ridiculously large squad - thankfully cut now, but still twice as big as it would have been in the good old (1976 promotion) days when you could virtually name City's first team and lone sub from 14/15 players.

Going a bit off topic, but I mean, what is the sense of a system that says there will be 5 subs every week, 2 of whom will definitely not take any part in the game? And a disciplinary policy that says players will regularly pick up bans for inoccuous offences? Because at the end of the day, we're paying for it.

[SE23Red]

I personally feel that one way, albeit a relatively minor one, to reduce wage costs would be to stop this business of bringing in loan players, not one of whom under GJ's reign has in my opinion added anything. I would much prefer to see the academy and reserves given an earlier chance.

Agreed it would be good to see some of the talent starting to figure in the squad at least in the coming months. However I can understand the problem GJ has - the expectation levels are so high at City that anything other than automatic is being talked about on here as failure. To introduce a young player who is not quite ready could cost him a lot of goodwill with the fans and possibly his job (not that I think a failed playoff campaign will do for GJ for a couple of years yet!)

However frustrating some of the loan signings have been they have been a couple of years further on in their development than the 17 year olds in the exciting crop of talent that is next off of the City Academy production line.

One thing that Wilson did, was to bring those players through a lot earlier than they seem to be at the moment.

Funny, I always thought he was quite reluctant to bring them through! He inherited a squad with Doherty, A Brown, Hill, Burnell, Amankwaah, Clist, Hulbert and M Brown already having played a part the previous season. In his time we saw Woodman, Fortune, Coles, Lita and Rosenior come through but only Danny Coles established himself. Leroy and Liam, as good as they were, were given just two starts each.

Johnson showed far greater faith in the inconsistent Cotterill than Wilson did in either of those two.

[Guest ashtonyate]

read through this thread from the start and some of the utter rubbish being quoted is hilarious, compound interest....ha! funny

for starters ever before the bosman ruling though you didn't get the true value for players though, if a player becomes out of contract you have never got their true worth, just look at Wayne Allison a few years back City wanted £1m for the player, he joined Swindon in the end at a Tribual set £475k, which was an utter discrace! another example was Mickey Bell we got him from Wycombe for a Tribual set £150k! utter and total bargain,

it has always been the same situation with players that once their contract is running out you either sell them early for their true value or lose them for peanuts at a Trib, fact is now it only effects players under the age of 23, nothing has changed really since the Bosman has come in to affect the development of young players, if nothing else the system is now more correctly regulated and the producing club get a better deal than they have in the past.

The fact is the Academy is a Success, it has taken a while to fully get going as a young player needs to going through the whole academy process to get the full benefits, however since the introduction of the likes of Matt Hill, Danny Coles and Joe Burnell, the talent coming through has improved no end, the latest lot of young players such as Artus, Plummer, Myrie Williams, Wilson and Cotterill are all VERY VERY talented young players, players we couldn't have brought to the club or produced without the academy system, playing for a centre of excellence they would have had a lesser quality of training and would have been playing a lots lower standard of opponents. Plummer, Wilson and Artus are likely to form the spine of our team over the next couple of season if we can keep them at the club, all 3 have received interest from higher level clubs and each if continue on their current tracks will end up in the Premiership at some point in their careers hopefully with us, either way they are each likely to attract £1m+ fee's at some point, anyone having seen them play for the Reserves will have seen the quality of the 3, Wilson possibly being the most under-rated of the trio.

The Academy did cost alot of money to initial setup at Clifton College close to £1m for the first 2 seasons, however once those facilities have been setup the running costs for this are now running at around less than 20% of that figure PRIOR to the move to St George now those facilities are being used instead it is now being pretty much paid for by the UWE and the academy is now longer a significant cost to the club as majority of the staff being used for the Academy are employed by St George.

Alot of the big deal made out of this is that the initial money invested into the Academy should/could have been used for first team matters, as has been shown in the past, that is like throwing money into a big black hole with little to Zero return. alot of the money that has been put into the Academy has come directly from John Laycock who played a key role, he was someone who believed in Youth Development and invested high amounts of cash directly into Academy for the long term aim. He wasn't a person who was willing to constantly spend money on players and only invested so much with the condition it was for the future youth development of Bristol City.

We are now in a position where money isn't needed to be put into the academy to keep it running, due to the prior mentioned UWE sponsorship and FA grants, the only money that is put in now by the club is for improvements.

Believe me or ingore me Mr Yate, however this is the current situation with the academy, it's doing it's job, Feel free to ask me how I know so much, I can point you in the direction of Tony Fawthorp.

glad you think that compound interest is a joke it can add one hell lot of money to the original debt It cost nearly one million pounds a year to set up plus about 425k a year to run up until it moved to st George and now it cost about 200k a year to run if you believe Lansdown which i am reluctant to do most of this money is still owed, so the 4 million we are said to have got from sales may have paid the debt of i don't know As for a spine of Plummer Wilson and artus playing for us you are joking all 3 will be gone long before that happens if they are any good.

[Guest ashtonyate]

glad you think that compound interest is a joke it can add one hell lot of money to the original debt It cost nearly one million pounds a year to set up plus about 425k a year to run up until it moved to st George and now it cost about 200k a year to run if you believe Lansdown which i am reluctant to do most of this money is still owed, so the 4 million we are said to have got from sales may have paid the debt of i don't know As for a spine of Plummer Wilson and artus playing for us you are joking all 3 will be gone long before that happens if they are any good.

QUOTE(SteveL @ Aug 8 2004, 8:47 PM) *

The academy costs for the last 2 years were:-

2003 £672k

2004 £654k

We do receive some grants which we would get even if we did not have an academy and we do look to generate income from elsewhere towards it,which again we could possibly get without the academy, so I have not netted those off against the above.

Steve.

PS I do not have previous figures to hand.

Just though I would post this from S L from a few years ago

[jellyred]

Round round,

like a record baby,

right round,

round round

[scumbag]

glad you think that compound interest is a joke it can add one hell lot of money to the original debt It cost nearly one million pounds a year to set up plus about 425k a year to run up until it moved to st George and now it cost about 200k a year to run if you believe Lansdown which i am reluctant to do most of this money is still owed, so the 4 million we are said to have got from sales may have paid the debt of i don't know As for a spine of Plummer Wilson and artus playing for us you are joking all 3 will be gone long before that happens if they are any good.

that only applies if the money directly for the academy wasn't directly invested for Academy means, which it was, specific money from John Laycock was directly invested into the club to take into account running costs for the academy, something that I mentioned in my last posting but you have ignored completely, therefore if there is no amount for interest to be payable on, there is no interest to be paid.

the academy was costing around £200k BEFORE the St george move and the Academy itself is no a self paying enterprise as it is pretty much totally funded by UWE and Grants, this was also mentioned in my previous posting.

You are also basing figures given by the chairman years ago, figures which are accountable as "lies" or "not something you believe" that is just your view, not fact, fact that is written down in accounts,

as for your comments regarding Plummer, Wilson and Artus you have quite obviously not seen them play in person, so quite obviously can't judge I've watch them all on various occasion in Youth Cup games and Reserve game and all 3 are EXETREMLY PROMISING PROSPECTS, personally I can't understand how they aren't closer to the first team, however Artus has been on the bench,

overall and looking at your recent comments, i think you have just proved that you don't actually know what you are talking about and are attempting to use speculation as fact and as a basis to back up your views, views which I'd like to add, no one else is actually agreeing with?

[scumbag]

QUOTE(SteveL @ Aug 8 2004, 8:47 PM) *

The academy costs for the last 2 years were:-

2003 £672k

2004 £654k

We do receive some grants which we would get even if we did not have an academy and we do look to generate income from elsewhere towards it,which again we could possibly get without the academy, so I have not netted those off against the above.

Steve.

PS I do not have previous figures to hand.

Just though I would post this from S L from a few years ago

#

these figures actually prove nothing at all, these figures were quoted from when the Academy was still in the development stage where the club were still developing thier initial facilities and aren't based totally on running costs which are now significatly lower.

it's like saying I built a House over 2 years for £75k per year, then the next 2 years it was £35k to refine it and now it is cost £2000 per year to maintain it, your quotes figures and views are very incorrect and don't even make to much sense.

[Nibor]

Just though I would post this from S L from a few years ago

Did you also keep the one he posted later where he said the cost was vastly reduced?

Do you realise that even at those questionable figures which I believe SL himself later corrected in reply to another one of your anti academy rants, they only represent a very small fraction of the amount we spent on wages? £4.2m for the 04/05 financial year alone.

How on earth you can say that spending one seventh more on buying mediocre expensive crap like Peacock for the first team but depriving ourselves of players like Lita, Cotterill, Hill, Coles etc etc would have made us more likely to go up is beyond me.

On top of which the money that was invested in the academy, as we've repeated over and over but failed to get through your head, would NOT have been invested in the first team. Backing the creation of the academy was something Laycock chose to do, he wouldn't have (and didn't) choose to add even more to the money we were pissing away each year on journeyman transfer signings.

[Guest ashtonyate]

Did you also keep the one he posted later where he said the cost was vastly reduced?

Do you realise that even at those questionable figures which I believe SL himself later corrected in reply to another one of your anti academy rants, they only represent a very small fraction of the amount we spent on wages? £4.2m for the 04/05 financial year alone.

How on earth you can say that spending one seventh more on buying mediocre expensive crap like Peacock for the first team but depriving ourselves of players like Lita, Cotterill, Hill, Coles etc etc would have made us more likely to go up is beyond me.

On top of which the money that was invested in the academy, as we've repeated over and over but failed to get through your head, would NOT have been invested in the first team. Backing the creation of the academy was something Laycock chose to do, he wouldn't have (and didn't) choose to add even more to the money we were pissing away each year on journeyman transfer signings.

Most moneys given to this club from board members are in the form of loans and at the end of the day must be paid back also i think you will find the club is paying interest to the board members who lent the money,

What have you got against players we buy you make them out to be mercenaries but most football teams are made up of journeymen people like Mccome johnson and are more important to the club than lita rosenior because they are here.

You think the academy players are wonderful in truth they can't wait to get away for the big money, they don't give a monkeys tose for the City.

[bh_red]

Most moneys given to this club from board members are in the form of loans and at the end of the day must be paid back also i think you will find the club is paying interest to the board members who lent the money,

What have you got against players we buy you make them out to be mercenaries but most football teams are made up of journeymen people like Mccome johnson and are more important to the club than lita rosenior because they are here.

You think the academy players are wonderful in truth they can't wait to get away for the big money, they don't give a monkeys tose for the City.

do you even know what you are arguing against? because it seems each time someone has proven you wrong your change the subject.

funny thing is you were moaning about exactly the same rubbish 18months ago and no one listened to you then.

now you are taking it out on journeymen,

for the record in recent years a number of people who have invested into the club have walked away after writing off large amounts of what they have been "owed"

[Nibor]

Most moneys given to this club from board members are in the form of loans and at the end of the day must be paid back also i think you will find the club is paying interest to the board members who lent the money,

You're yet again completely ignoring the point - the money invested in the academy would not have been invested in the first team regardless so your argument is worthless.

What have you got against players we buy you make them out to be mercenaries but most football teams are made up of journeymen people like Mccome johnson and are more important to the club than lita rosenior because they are here.

You think the academy players are wonderful in truth they can't wait to get away for the big money, they don't give a monkeys tose for the City.

All players are mercenaries.

The ones we brought in during the period of time you refer to in your post were several times as expensive as the academy players and nowhere near as good. That's what I have against them.

£600k for Lee Peacock's transfer fee... let's say another £50k for his agent and £100k signing fee... then 4 years of 4 grand a week. That's one player and it's enough to fund the academy - which has produced many players better than he will ever be - for more than 7 years at it's current costs.

Exactly how you can keep a straight face slating the academy's cost and saying we should have spent more on the first team when we've wasted many, many times as much money on crap journeymen like the above?

If you're going to reply then please try and actually respond to the points made instead of pulling your usual trick of ignoring them and making yet more illogical, unfounded statements.

[SE23Red]

Most moneys given to this club from board members are in the form of loans and at the end of the day must be paid back also i think you will find the club is paying interest to the board members who lent the money,

What have you got against players we buy you make them out to be mercenaries but most football teams are made up of journeymen people like Mccome johnson and are more important to the club than lita rosenior because they are here.

You think the academy players are wonderful in truth they can't wait to get away for the big money, they don't give a monkeys tose for the City.

So what you want to see is a squad packed full of people who don't want to better themselves. Well I for one wouldn't want to watch such a team.

[old_man_terry]

Most moneys given to this club from board members are in the form of loans and at the end of the day must be paid back also i think you will find the club is paying interest to the board members who lent the money,

What have you got against players we buy you make them out to be mercenaries but most football teams are made up of journeymen people like Mccome johnson and are more important to the club than lita rosenior because they are here.

You think the academy players are wonderful in truth they can't wait to get away for the big money, they don't give a monkeys tose for the City.

all players are the same, they all want big money moves to bigger clubs fora better wage?

everytime someone succesfully counters your views to just divert the subject?

I'm sorry but really must be one bored person who just has to moan about something but yet doesn't actually know what you are moaning about?

[jellyred]

You think the academy players are wonderful in truth they can't wait to get away for the big money, they don't give a monkeys tose for the City.

Bit of a sweeping statement there yate. I'll think you'll find that almost every footballer or anyone in business is the same, get offered more money to work somewhere with more prospects, wouldn't YOU want to go?

Also those journeyman footballers you are so proud of at City, didn't Peacock up and leave on a bosman as he was offered more money somewhere else?

[Guest ashtonyate]

Bit of a sweeping statement there yate. I'll think you'll find that almost every footballer or anyone in business is the same, get offered more money to work somewhere with more prospects, wouldn't YOU want to go?

Also those journeyman footballers you are so proud of at City, didn't Peacock up and leave on a bosman as he was offered more money somewhere else?

Yes but the ones you have come through our Academy system you would hope would put a bit back in the club that has given them there chance which is not happened had lita stayed we would be i a lot better position now than taken the money for him but he would not sign a new contract so we had to sell him.

I will say we are bring on better players now than a few year ago but they leave before we get any real service from them.the ideal of an academy is that the players stay and put a bit back by play in the first team not leave as soon as possible like Golbourne and anysa?[preston] and may be Plummer.

Peacock would have staid had we wanted him to be we diden't, buying players is like buying anything you must do your home work and make sure it will do what you want it to do.Peacock did have a couple of good season here. I am not changing the argument all these points are part of the same argument and why I am not happy with the academy system.

[bh red]

Yes but the ones you have come through our Academy system you would hope would put a bit back in the club that has given them there chance which is not happened had lita stayed we would be i a lot better position now than taken the money for him but he would not sign a new contract so we had to sell him.

I will say we are bring on better players now than a few year ago but they leave before we get any real service from them.the ideal of an academy is that the players stay and put a bit back by play in the first team not leave as soon as possible like Golbourne and anysa?[preston] and may be Plummer.

Peacock would have staid had we wanted him to be we diden't, buying players is like buying anything you must do your home work and make sure it will do what you want it to do.Peacock did have a couple of good season here. I am not changing the argument all these points are part of the same argument and why I am not happy with the academy system.

what? Peacock was offered a new contract at City but rejceted it and joined Sheffield Wednesday, because he was offered a better deal by them.

the purpose of the ACADEMY is to produce the players with the abiility to be good enough to play for the 1st team, the academy has, is and will continue to do that, your agruement which you are moving again is nothing to do with the failing of the Academy, once the players have signed their professional contracts they are dealt with in the same manner as the club, if they decide they want to leave whether under contract or out of contract that is not the fault of the ACADEMY, that is down to the player, but that is the same situation whether the player is from the academy or not, that is a problem with football in general and always has been.

[jellyred]

Yes but the ones you have come through our Academy system you would hope would put a bit back in the club that has given them there chance which is not happened had lita stayed we would be i a lot better position now than taken the money for him but he would not sign a new contract so we had to sell him.

I will say we are bring on better players now than a few year ago but they leave before we get any real service from them.the ideal of an academy is that the players stay and put a bit back by play in the first team not leave as soon as possible like Golbourne and anysa?[preston] and may be Plummer.

Peacock would have staid had we wanted him to be we diden't, buying players is like buying anything you must do your home work and make sure it will do what you want it to do.Peacock did have a couple of good season here. I am not changing the argument all these points are part of the same argument and why I am not happy with the academy system.

They can only put back in as long as they are here, if the club accept an approach from another club, especially premiership or decent championship then you can't say 'they should stay its only fair' the fair bit is us getting a decent fee for them.

Yes, in an ideal world all our academy players would stay for all their careers and be fantastic however, this is the real world and not some Roy of the Rovers fantasy. I do not begrudge any of our younger academy players leaving to better themselves, what I do not like are the older players that decide to go on a bosman meaning we get ###### all. BTW we did want Peacock but he had signed a pre contract with Sheffield Weds before we offered. Although to contradict myself a bit you also have to accept that all players (and people in general as said before but obviously ignored) want to better themselves.

[robinmad]

that only applies if the money directly for the academy wasn't directly invested for Academy means, which it was, specific money from John Laycock was directly invested into the club to take into account running costs for the academy, something that I mentioned in my last posting but you have ignored completely, therefore if there is no amount for interest to be payable on, there is no interest to be paid.

the academy was costing around £200k BEFORE the St george move and the Academy itself is no a self paying enterprise as it is pretty much totally funded by UWE and Grants, this was also mentioned in my previous posting.

You are also basing figures given by the chairman years ago, figures which are accountable as "lies" or "not something you believe" that is just your view, not fact, fact that is written down in accounts,

as for your comments regarding Plummer, Wilson and Artus you have quite obviously not seen them play in person, so quite obviously can't judge I've watch them all on various occasion in Youth Cup games and Reserve game and all 3 are EXETREMLY PROMISING PROSPECTS, personally I can't understand how they aren't closer to the first team, however Artus has been on the bench,

overall and looking at your recent comments, i think you have just proved that you don't actually know what you are talking about and are attempting to use speculation as fact and as a basis to back up your views, views which I'd like to add, no one else is actually agreeing with?

your right Plummer Wilson and Artus are all three fantastic prospects the problem GJ has is there are lots of senior players at the club who he would play before all three of them , if you look at the deffence Wilson is probably 5/6th choice and Artus is 5/6 th choice in midfield this can not be a healthy situation in a leugue one club , i have wached Artus and Wilson play many times and i think they would be playing in many other first team squads in our league and at BCFC they rarely start for our reserves too many average players to bring youngsters through me thinks

[Guest ashtonyate]

They can only put back in as long as they are here, if the club accept an approach from another club, especially premiership or decent championship then you can't say 'they should stay its only fair' the fair bit is us getting a decent fee for them.

Yes, in an ideal world all our academy players would stay for all their careers and be fantastic however, this is the real world and not some Roy of the Rovers fantasy. I do not begrudge any of our younger academy players leaving to better themselves, what I do not like are the older players that decide to go on a bosman meaning we get ###### all. BTW we did want Peacock but he had signed a pre contract with Sheffield Weds before we offered. Although to contradict myself a bit you also have to accept that all players (and people in general as said before but obviously ignored) want to better themselves.

Apart from Cottrell do you think we have had a good fee for any of the players that have left

[jellyred]

Apart from Cottrell do you think we have had a good fee for any of the players that have left

Yes I do.