BRISTOL CITY: Manager Steve Cotterill believes gaps are growing in the Championship every season By a_Stockhausen please log in to view this image Steve Cotterill. BRISTOL City boss Steve Cotterill reckons the gap between teams in the top and bottom halves of the Championship is bigger than ever before and growing with every passing season. An experienced Championship manager, having worked at Stoke, Burnley, Portsmouth and Nottingham Forest previously, Cotterill is in a good position to make comparisons. And he believes a number of factors, including increased parachute payments for clubs coming down from the Premier League, have combined to accentuate the differences between the haves and have-nots in the English second tier. Since gaining promotion from League One at the end of last season, City's results suggest a sharp demarcation between those sides occupying the upper reaches of the Championship and those struggling at the other end of the table. Although the Robins have played all of the sides in the top half, with the exception of Derby County, they have won only once, at Middlesbrough in August. A modest return of six points from 11 games against sides currently in the top 12 (City have also drawn against Ipswich, Cardiff and Hull) demonstrates the size of the task facing Cotterill and his players when they come up against bigger clubs. City's manager said: "I think there is a big difference (between the top and the bottom half) over the course of a season. "I don't necessarily think the gap is always that big on the day and teams in the lower half can maybe bridge that on occasions. "But over a period of time, when you play Saturday, Tuesday and Saturday, there will be a difference. That's when you find there is a big gap. "Those clubs with the bigger squads and wage bills generally end up around the top of the table." His contention is certainly borne out by results with just 13 instances of sides in the current top 10 losing to teams below them this season. Of those sides in the top half, nine have been in the Premier League in the recent past as opposed to just four of the bottom 12. With so many Championship sides benefitting from lucrative parachute payments, City are struggling to compete financially. The Ashton Gate wage billed has been slashed since relegation to League One in 2013 and the Robins represent a small fish in a big pool this season. Bigger and wealthier rivals are better equipped to compete in the transfer market and run with larger squads and City's current position, just above the relegation zone, accurately reflects their wage bill. Cotterill added: "It's difficult when you come up against those stronger squads, those that can change three or four players without it making a difference to them. "You notice the difference when you have a tough week, when you have to play on a Saturday, a Tuesday and then a Saturday. "That is when it becomes really difficult for us. We had that scenario when we played Reading earlier in the season and they were able to freshen their team up with three or four different players. We couldn't do that and we looked tired that day." City's manager will look to bolster his squad in January, but the mid-season window seldom offers value for money and Cotterill's transfer activity will once again be defined by budgetary considerations. He added: "We have a lot of young boys who are still learning their way and it's going to be a gradual progression. "That's what it is and we are where we are. You can ask me all you like about signing players, but we're working to a budget." http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/BRISTO...ill-believes/story-28277161-detail/story.html
I think we've all heard this before somewhere, we know about working to a budget but why were you able to offer £6m & £8m for strikers when you had these same restrictions.
does not say what the budget is however as I see it the new rules on "parachutes related payments" will give us £3m in 2016/17 ? if still in the championship up from £2.3m Current clubs on parachutes Fulham Cardiff QPR Wigan Reading Hull Burnley...
Doesn't explain why other clubs that have had parachute payments recently have fared so badly.... Blackpool QPR (relatively) Bolton Blackburn
Because the budget and salary could allow it if the offers were acceptable, but wages/salary being demanded have been outside of the budget.
Because there are clubs there that have massive debts, and even with parachute payments they will continue to make continual huge losses e.g. Bolton. Its the type of stupidity that only seasons ago Bristol City were also pursuing. Spending money there is no way of paying back, but in Citys case Mr Lansdown has wiped off/restructured debts across companies.
Nope, we made the bid, could afford it but the players chose to go somewhere else. Damn the person who gave players the freedom of choice!!
It all sounds daft to me. I have never liked the parachute payments which are essentially handed out for failure and create an unfair advantage for those that receive them. The words of SC do ring true but is it the real truth or just a mixed up version of the same statements we have been hearing from Ashton Gate for too many years? Telling the supporters why you are not able to compete is one thing but actually going out and doing something to reverse the situation is another and it takes a leap of courage to succeed. Frankly I am getting a bit tired of hearing why my team aren't quite the finished article and, if we listen to the management, we have no way of getting out of the hole of being non-competitive. Would I be far off the mark to say that all the happenings with Bristol Sport (aka lots of other things) is the chance for Lansdowne to make Ashton Gate, and all who live there, more cost effective in the overall situation? Is there a way within this mega-group for monies to be transferred from within to help the plight of Bristol City and if there isn't I would suggest they call Roman A, or some other foreign investor who is responsible for all this over spending, and find out how they get away with technical fraud? The FFP people have a strange way of looking in both directions when it comes to the clubs that have money and only one way when it comes to the have nots. Overseas money has destroyed the structure and enjoyment of the sport and like a lot of other pleasant memories from the past they have vanished beneath the waves forever and the tide has gone out. What is it about today's world that makes money and corruption the only way to get ahead and to hell with common sense being the guiding light? Shut the doors and turn off the lights when you exit because it appears our Bristol City have given up on themselves, and you, based on these kinds of statements coming from the boardroom. If you want me to sympathise with your plight then this is the wrong way to tug my heart strings and my suggestion would be to get off your backsides, stop whinging, and start being part of the solution rather than a forecaster of doom and gloom. By default Bristol City and Steve Cotterill are bemoaning that the FFP rules are strangling them to a slow death and I know we have all seen this coming down the road for a long time so why haven't they done something? If we had done what was needed the season after the playoff final perhaps we wouldn't be in this mess and possibly could have been receiving parachute payments for a failure like so many of our current opponents. You got what you wanted Bristol City and it is so clear that you haven't got a clue how to sustain that level that you wished for last season and this latest diatribe proves the point. Facts they may be but I'm tired of hearing the same old rhetoric because all they achieve is grumps like me complaining constantly about their football club but at least it get's me out of bed in the morning. Have a nice day one and all.
I think you're barking up the wrong tree Mike, as Cliftonville put it up a few comments. We are addressing the situation that got out of hand trying to get there last time. We've reduced the wage bill and what they are saying is regardless of the offer (not effected by FFP) they want players to play within the wage structure. You've got to get the balance right, Southampton done it by having a great academy and making a fortune on players. This is being addressed but will take a few years yet to get anywhere near Southamptons level. Bournemouth done it by offering big signing on fees and lower wages, but you need to be careful you don't get some up their arse player takes big signing on fee (Nicky Hunt) and do ****all for it. This takes time which I don't think anyone has the patience for.
Patience is indeed the problem with a lot of supporters. My issue is that we always seem to be starting at a level where it is very difficult to get out of the mire. The FFP is a major hurdle for teams that don't get any help on the financial front and have to compete with others who get huge financial support for getting relegated. Sounds a bit one sided to me. On sort of the same front I watched Liverpool today and heard the Southampton fans booing Llalana, and the commentator said he couldn't understand why when his and Lovren's transfer fees supported the assembly of their new squad. Your comment on how Southampton have built themselves in to a contender for Premier League sustainability. Not too good tonight but you get the point as to how it needs to be done and I suppose the old age question comes to mind as we ask do we get the stadium first or do we invest in players capable of better things? I have no idea what the answer is for Bristol City, but I think it's time we came up with them and put them in place. Who would want to run a football team EH?
with just 13 instances of sides in the current top 10 losing to teams below them this season .. .. .. this is a broad statement OVER the 18 games to date, of teams in the top 12 to get 70% of their points from teams playing in the bottom 12 .. QPR 13, Cardiff 7 , Reading 12,and Hull 14 have failed, Fulham in 13th have 15 points. a broad statement because it does not allow fully for all teams having had the opportunity to have played the same number of teams, bottom teams, when teams were actually in the bottom ...there will have been teams in that middle 8 group that have been top 12 or bottom 12, 3 or 4 times so far this season. the points above is based on a team being allotted top 12 or bottom 12 group for a period of 4 games, currently games 19 -22. TOP 5 points from bottom 12 Sheff 25, Brighton, Burnley 22, Midds, Derby 20pts and Brentford in 6th with 18.. MKD HAVE 93% OF THEIR POINTS FROM BOTTOM TEAMS!
