Political..

Yes I picked up on that

Another thing that struck me about the interview was that he emphasised a period of becoming established in the Championship.
Now I am all for stepping up in small increments to the promised land, but I am nervous of us getting so laid back that we end up back where we started.
I see nothing at all wrong with trying to achieve the next big step this season, and that means spending to acquire a squad that is capable of 1) competing for a play-off place, and 2) getting enough points on the board to prevent panic buys and negative club vibes.
Plus, if we do have any diamonds in our academy, the last thing we need is to bring them in to a struggling outfit.

Frankly we have done enough yo-yoing. Its time City struck upwards towards the elite.
I want it for Steve (both of em), I want it for us, the fans, and I want it for my old man (bless him).

 

I believe that SC is the sort of person who would want immediate promotion again this season. Perhaps that is where he may be at odds with SL and the Board who maybe see this as the second season of rebuilding BCFC.
I remember SL saying about a year ago, that his aim is for City to be in the Premier within five years. Thus he will see this season as another of rebuilding, both on the field with the first team and off the field with the new Williams. One could also add the development of more Under 21's into first team material. Yet another part of SL's aim to make City self sufficient financially.

So maybe SC, being an impatient man, is trying, like many City managers before him, to get SL to run before he is ready. And SL has learnt from bitter experience before, that this time he and the Club will not be pushed.

So the big question is which one out of SC or SL will crumble first? Or will there be a medium course that both are content with?

 

The problem with politics getting involved in any form of life, including football, is that it tends to more destructive than constructive. Rational dialogue and confirming the goals of all involved can win the day and that's why it is called diplomacy.

 

oops !

 

Lets hope for the latter

 

It could be wider football politics that affect the club rather than internal. With the stadium under revamp the capacity and thus revenue is down and spending on fees and wages may have to be capped for a season or two to comply with the FFP regulations. The last thing we want/need is a 10 ( or more) point penalty by breaching these rules. That is perhaps why JET and Cunningham (Probably our 2 biggest wage bills) have been allowed to leave.... Who knows, just wish the club would be a bit more upfront.

 

I don't think there is anything political as such - in the attached article SC makes perfect sense

http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/BRISTO...-sees-bigger/story-27531214-detail/story.html

 

Maybe it had nothing to do with internal politics and more to do with external ones. Maybe clubs see we have a rich owner and are bumping up the price and Cotts didn't want to make anything of it just in case other clubs follow suit.