Lee Johnson thinks he did a good job at Barnsley

I'd imagine he'd have been on the verge of pissing about with one up top to prove how great a coach he is. Great coaches don't play 442 yer know.

 

It bothers me how he treated Patrick Cryne as if he'd followed the usual path he'd never have had the chance to manage his beloved Bristol and instead would have been lucky to get back in at Oldham.

He owes Patrick a lot.

 

No need for any of us to feel sorry for Patrick about what LJ did, when Patrick himself is still close to him.

 

It was a disgrace as well what attitude he had on the day of the Play off final. Despite being there only as Mr Cryne's 'special guest', he couldnt resist telling people he was also there looking for players for his new club. That showed no class whatsoever!

 

Spot on

 

Johnson actually thought that our fans booed him at Wembley because he left us.

In reality it was because he'd ever been here in the first place.

Sent from my SM-G850F using Tapatalk

 

Sick of hearing about the little lovely person. Gutted they didn't go down, now got a summer of The Bristol Post hinting at how many of our players they'll be signing. Jumped up little shitweasel. Has zero self awareness, and less humility. Complete and utter ******* fraud.,

 

Amen

Sent from my SM-G850F using Tapatalk

 

You are wrong, that was Parkin or McSeveney.

 

I'm afraid you'll be in a minority

I could give wankman who was also a worse manager than parkin

 

McSeveney definitely the worst Barnsley manager in my 50 odd years of following the Reds.

 

Im not old enough to know who John McSeveney or Jim Iley were (but dont shoot me for that though lol).
Nigel Spanker had some sort of credit before us didnt he, I think he did a decent job with the Blunts at 'Champship' level, so that means he looked like a good appointment on paper at least.
But Steve Parkin did sod all at this level and John Dennis really screwed up when appointing him. He was at promotion chasing Rochdale when he got the job, thats hardly a good CV is it ?

 

That appointment was pretty much a clue to the way we were going, and our current policy of signing players and managers from lower league.

To be fair to Parkin, he's been followed in and out by a procession of managers that haven't cut it at this level, or even league one.

Only Johnson got a move away, and Robins walked away, and neither of them pulled up any trees since they left.

We've had the odd manager that's had a good half season here and there, but apart from Hecky, who carried a good chunk of last seasons form into this one, they've all been pretty similar.

Even Ritchie went from hero to having Gordon Shepherd giving him grief to the press.



Sent from my SM-G850F using Tapatalk

 

A new manager is usually appointed because the board and fans have judged the results under the previous manager were just not good enough. A wise potential applicant would look at the reasons for the failure of the previous guy, or at the reasons the previous guy walked. The wise potential applicant would not be tempted by a job in which he has little or no chance of achieving anything.

You see the biggest factor in footballing success is the size of your budget as compared to your competitors in the same league. If the previous manager failed to meet expectations, then it is likely that his budget was too low and it is important to the new man's potential for achieving more is that he will be given a competitive budget. If a successful old manager walked away, it is important to determine that the board are not seeking to take advantage of the change in management to reduce the new manager's budget as compared to the successful old manager and as compared to the other managers in the same league. Without wishing to be too cynical here, boards do not wish to take the blame when the team is not doing as well as supporters desire. They are often perfectly aware that the results of their actions will significantly and adversely affect the chances of the manager to achieve success, but they do so because they face external financial pressures that push them in that direction. Nevertheless, taking the blame and the plaudits for on the field performances is seen as the job of the manager by all parties, players, supporters and media as well as the board. They all silently conspire in the plan to allocate blame and credit to the manager even though some find the whole process a little ridiculous.

Thus, when we look back at the performances of our past managers, we make no allowance for the quality of the team they inherited and the comparison of their budget with either their predecessor or the rest of the league. We look only at league position, promotion and relegation. It is clearly wrong, and to my mind, many good men got the job at the wrong time and their careers suffered because of their subsequent failure, just as a few got the job at the right time and received a career boost from their success. I argued throughout his bad run that Lee Johnson should not be sacked. I do not think that I saw anything in Johnson that anyone else did not see, but I had had seen too many leave for the wrong reasons and I thought that it was time that we stuck with one. Nevertheless, the board/owner was under huge pressure from fans at the time, and it is unusual for a board/owner not to yield to such pressure. That makes me wonder. It makes me wonder whether during negotiations to take Lee Johnson from Oldham, Lee Johnson told our board/owner how bad the team was and how long it would take to put it right. Having regard to that, I wonder if Lee Johnson was foresighted enough to include a minimum budget for player wages as part of his contract, and a minimum period for his contract term on pain of huge termination compensation. I do not know any of this for certain, of course, but it does seem to fit with what we know happened. It also looks like he negotiated the same deal at Bristol City.

To be honest, all of this is exactly how it should be. No-one should expect a new man to come into a struggling club, wave his magic wand, and right every wrong. It just does not happen. OK, some job holders are better at the job than others, but in football, most of the professionals know the same stuff and there are very fine margins separating one from the other. It is more likely that the differences are in the way that they can manipulate the boardroom in order to extract a larger budget.

 

I still think that Gudjon Thordarsson was appallingly treated considering what he inherited when he arrived.

 

Yes that was really harsh on Gudjon the Iceman, Risdale was just looking to get rid as soon as he could and bring his own choice in.
And he actually thought Paul Hart was a better choice !!

 

Lee Johnson can think what he wants, he's a deluded *****.