Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
Ashley

M Johnson - Gone back Man City?

Recommended Posts

Posted

He scored for Manchester City reserves the other night when did he get sent back? Paddy Agyemang told me who posts on here. I haven't seen anything to suggest he has gone back?

Posted

there's a few threads. a couple of weeks ago. he played against NEC reserves in his first game back and scored one of the greatest goals of all time.

Guest Col city fan
Posted

Who cares we paid his wages and he was not fit should have been sent packing in september.

Yet another waste of fvcking money.

Indeed....

Posted

Who cares we paid his wages and he was not fit should have been sent packing in september.

Yet another waste of fvcking money.

Daylight robbery paid his wages so Man City didn't have to whilst he had half a year off fitness training on £25000 a week. Hope he gets a Neil Danns tackle soon!

Posted

Another brilliant signing by Sven.

The contrast in signings by Sven/Pearson is astounding and I seriously can't see why people would rather have Sven.

Posted

Another brilliant signing by Sven.

The contrast in signings by Sven/Pearson is astounding and I seriously can't see why people would rather have Sven.

Konhesky, Nugent, Peltier, Beckford, Kasper, St Ledger, Danns. Svens signings haven't all been good but the spine of our team is made up of his signings. I love Nigel, and perhaps he is better fitted to the job than Sven, but how quickly you have forgotten what Sven did (or tried to do) for this club.

Posted

Another brilliant signing by Sven.

The contrast in signings by Sven/Pearson is astounding and I seriously can't see why people would rather have Sven.

So Kasper Nuge Konch and Beckford are a pile of shit too are they.

And pearson has never fvcked up in the transfer market has he.

Posted

It's a little wierd Pearson didn't play him and claimed he wasnt fit and/or ill and then he goes back, plays well (from what i've heard) and bags a good goal.

Reserve football is a different kettle of fish to 'business-end' (in fact, any period) Championship football though, isn't it?

Posted

does anyone actually know if we were paying his wages in full? I would of thought due to his injuries and fitness level in the past it would of been on a pay per play system, or Man City would of been paying at least 80% to try and get him some game time? and when he was injured we wouldn't of been paying his wage anyway club have insurances for this kind of thing.

Posted

Daylight robbery paid his wages so Man City didn't have to whilst he had half a year off fitness training on £25000 a week. Hope he gets a Neil Danns tackle soon!

i see people saying this. is there actually something in black and white that people have seen that says we had this in place?

goose, great minds etc...

Posted

Another brilliant signing by Sven.

The contrast in signings by Sven/Pearson is astounding and I seriously can't see why people would rather have Sven.

Sven wasn't a total disaster in the transfer market, likewise Pearson hasn't got everything right.

Guest Col city fan
Posted

Sven wasn't a total disaster in the transfer market, likewise Pearson hasn't got everything right.

Sven made some great transfers... Kasper, Nuge, Konch.. Our three best players this season.

But signing good players and getting them to gel as a team are two different things.

Posted

Konhesky, Nugent, Peltier, Beckford, Kasper, St Ledger, Danns. Svens signings haven't all been good but the spine of our team is made up of his signings. I love Nigel, and perhaps he is better fitted to the job than Sven, but how quickly you have forgotten what Sven did (or tried to do) for this club.

So Kasper Nuge Konch and Beckford are a pile of shit too are they.

And pearson has never fvcked up in the transfer market has he.

In his first year in charge Pearson cut our wage bill by a third and over the course of his reign he came close to breaking even on transfers (if we include the supposed fees for departures before he arrived, and the supposed fee for Mattock). On the other hand Sven increased our wage bill by a third in his first six months (and more thereafter) and spent more money on transfers than every manager since Taylor combined. Pearson took us from League One to 5th in the Championship, Sven never once got us into the play-offs. It's an unfair comparison, but one which - however you look at it - massively favours NP.

As for that list of players... Kasper, Konchesky, Peltier and St. Ledger make up four of the five men we might hold most responsible for our ropy defensive record (conceding thirteen in five games and having a worse goals-against record than any of the top six, unless I'm mistaken). Some of you may wish to blame the midfield, of course, of which Danns is the deepest lying player.

Yes I know I'm repeatiing myself - and I'm sure that several of the aforementioned will go on to be key players for City - but up to now tthey have underperformed. It amazes me that people continue espousing the virtues of all the individual components of a team which has so far failed to deliver. And, with reference to the likes of Beckford and Danns, when it has worked for them, it has been under the stewardship of Pearson - who, even in his second spell, has a better points-per-game average than Sven, without spending anything like the cash - and not his predecessor.

In terms of value for money, Sven really was one of the poorest managers in the history of this football club. That's not to say he achieved nothing, nor does it mean he wouldn't have gone on to put it right; nor even that it was judicious to get rid of him when we did, it's a fairly straightforward observation that his transfer policy came perilously close to blowing our best chance in a decade of competing at the top level.

As for Johnson, to me he represents everything that Sven got wrong: A wild, costly stab in the dark when a careful analysis of the team's shortcomings and a shrewd cut-price dip into the lower leagues might have adequately done the job.

Posted

The more signings you make the more likely you are to make a bad 1 Sven made plenty of good signings so no complaints from me.

i see people saying this. is there actually something in black and white that people have seen that says we had this in place? goose, great minds etc...

Yes there is surprisingly.

Posted

The more signings you make the more likely you are to make a bad 1 Sven made plenty of good signings so no complaints from me.

Yes there is suprisingly.

post it then.

Posted

In his first year in charge Pearson cut our wage bill by a third and over the course of his reign he came close to breaking even on transfers (if we include the supposed fees for departures before he arrived, and the supposed fee for Mattock). On the other hand Sven increased our wage bill by a third in his first six months (and more thereafter) and spent more money on transfers than every manager since Taylor combined. Pearson took us from League One to 5th in the Championship, Sven never once got us into the play-offs. It's an unfair comparison, but one which - however you look at it - massively favours NP.

As for that list of players... Kasper, Konchesky, Peltier and St. Ledger make up four of the five men we might hold most responsible for our ropy defensive record (conceding thirteen in five games and having a worse goals-against record than any of the top six, unless I'm mistaken). Some of you may wish to blame the midfield, of course, of which Danns is the deepest lying player.

Yes I know I'm repeatiing myself - and I'm sure that several of the aforementioned will go on to be key players for City - but up to now tthey have underperformed. It amazes me that people continue espousing the virtues of all the individual components of a team which has so far failed to deliver. And, with reference to the likes of Beckford and Danns, when it has worked for them, it has been under the stewardship of Pearson - who, even in his second spell, has a better points-per-game average than Sven, without spending anything like the cash - and not his predecessor.

In terms of value for money, Sven really was one of the poorest managers in the history of this football club. That's not to say he achieved nothing, nor does it mean he wouldn't have gone on to put it right; nor even that it was judicious to get rid of him when we did, it's a fairly straightforward observation that his transfer policy came perilously close to blowing our best chance in a decade of competing at the top level.

As for Johnson, to me he represents everything that Sven got wrong: A wild, costly stab in the dark when a careful analysis of the team's shortcomings and a shrewd cut-price dip into the lower leagues might have adequately done the job.

Ooh you nearly tricked me into thinking you were talking sense; good job I spotted you mentioning our best defensive players (bar Peltier who isn't a stand out player, but isn't awful like you seem to think) and saying they're our worst. :rolleyes:

Posted

does anyone actually know if we were paying his wages in full? I would of thought due to his injuries and fitness level in the past it would of been on a pay per play system, or Man City would of been paying at least 80% to try and get him some game time? and when he was injured we wouldn't of been paying his wage anyway club have insurances for this kind of thing.

You may be so right and hope you are.

But if we paid him 50p it was still a waste of fvcking money.

Posted

The more signings you make the more likely you are to make a bad 1 Sven made plenty of good signings so no complaints from me.

Even though Sven made some signings that have turned out to be good, he generally couldn't get them to play to their potential, Konchesky, Danns Beckford, SSL have all improved massively under NP as have Wellens and Dyer obviously not Sven's signings.

You could argue that NP has made Sven's signings into good signings by playing them in their correct position in a functional (if limited) formation and has got them playing with spirit and confidence, of all of Sven's signings only Nugent and Kapser really could be called a success by the time Sven was sacked, maybe Peltier too.

Posted

Ooh you nearly tricked me into thinking you were talking sense; good job I spotted you mentioning our best defensive players (bar Peltier who isn't a stand out player, but isn't awful like you seem to think) and saying they're our worst. :rolleyes:

This isn't a matter of opinion; it's fact.

Schmeichel, Peltier, Konchesky, Ledger make up 4/5ths of our defensive unit. Our defensive record is worst than anybody's in the top six. Our deepest lying midfielder, Danns, is also an Eriksson signing. If you want to add to that, then they've yielded four (or five?) goals between them all year, which is pretty low for a defence over the course of a season.

I too have seen some decent defensive performances from these players - tonight included - but over the course of a season that set of players haven't got the sort of record which wins promotions. As such it'd be a sorry set of circumstances if these were indeed our four best players. Okay, you might think we are in a sorry state of affairs! Even so, what I want to say is that it's hard to use them as four examples to suggest that Sven's signings were good ones.

I've been reasonably impressed by Konchesky and St. Ledger at times too. We were greatly impressed by Paris in 88-89, Walsh and Mauchlen from 89-91, Willis in 94-95, Rowett and Elliot from 00-02, Thatcher in 04-05, Bamba,Mee and Vitor last season... but they didn't function as part of a unit. That may change (as I think I said), but as it stands they remain quite clearly part of the problem. I can't see why you're so keen to brush that under the carpet.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...