Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it

[1971]

Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it - Characters and Leaders Needed, Ditch the Bad Apples

Steve Cotterill - talking about 1997/98

I felt that when I first came in to the club, the players were running the club. I thought there were a core of seven or eight players that were in a certain degree negative influences on some of the positive influences. I thought there were energizers and energy sappers, and there were more energy sappers than energizers, so within three days of getting promotion to the Conference, we needed to get rid of those energy sappers and take them away from the energizers. The first thing I went for was characters and not necessarily playing ability. You can fill a wheelbarrow full of apples but if you leave a bad one in the bottom you will definitely turn the rest. From the start of the Conference, there has not been a bad apple at the club because I could shape and mould my own team, and by getting rid of six or seven players, it allowed me to do major surgery, so that’s what I set about doing

Wise words indeed. We are in the same situation now, albeit we’ve been relegated rather than promoted; the only thing different I think is that we need to get rid of more than six or seven players

[hand_shandy]

Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it - Characters and Leaders Needed, Ditch the Bad Apples

Steve Cotterill - talking about 1997/98

I felt that when I first came in to the club, the players were running the club. I thought there were a core of seven or eight players that were in a certain degree negative influences on some of the positive influences. I thought there were energizers and energy sappers, and there were more energy sappers than energizers, so within three days of getting promotion to the Conference, we needed to get rid of those energy sappers and take them away from the energizers. The first thing I went for was characters and not necessarily playing ability. You can fill a wheelbarrow full of apples but if you leave a bad one in the bottom you will definitely turn the rest. From the start of the Conference, there has not been a bad apple at the club because I could shape and mould my own team, and by getting rid of six or seven players, it allowed me to do major surgery, so that’s what I set about doing

Wise words indeed. We are in the same situation now, albeit we’ve been relegated rather than promoted; the only thing different I think is that we need to get rid of more than six or seven players

Finding a manager of Cotterill's quality wouldn't go amiss either.

[London Exile]

Our new manager has the opportunity to get rid of the cancers in our dressing room.
A chance to mould of future and build the club back up

[duckers]

One of Yates' qualities was similar to Steve Cotterill's which was to employ players based on their character, its a shame for him and all of us that it started going t!ts up

[Robin]

Realistically we need to sign 10-12 players this summer, maybe more. Important the new man is in place within the next couple of weeks and we get 5-6 players signed on early to show the fans our intentions of an immediate return.

I'm sure there are some bad apples such as CBB, possibly Matt Richards/Matt Taylor/Troy Brown but I have a feeling none of them including Matt Taylor will be here next season. I want to see us keep Trev and put an experienced quality (and expensive) spine down the team then build around that.

[Alf]

The harsh reality of it is that, for a club like us, managers such as Steve Cotterill do not turn up on a regular basis at Conference level. He did everything he possibly could for the club and when he left we were in a good position for the Board to build and move on. Unfortunately, they decided not to take on this task and took the cheap option. Fact is, we are not going to get another Cotts and I doubt that we will bounce back next season or any other season. FGR have managed to eventually scrape into a play off place but this has cost money that our current Board could only dream of spending. There is probably as much money being thrown at teams in the Conference to get them into the league which is why I have said many times that the Conference is a more difficult league to get out of than div 2. I hope and pray we can do something next season but I am not putting any bets on us.

[Robin]

Alf some perspective, Barnet are top of the league a club smaller than us managed by Martin Allen, Macclesfield are a much smaller club than us and totally broke only just missed out on play offs, Dover who looked poor despite being well organised in the cup game finished top eight. Yes there are a few bigger clubs (only Wrexham, Rovers, Grimsby and Tranmere and one of those could go up this year), yes there are 2-3 clubs splashing the cash but we will have a good budget down there and team spirit/decent manager goes a long way in football!

[Alf]

I hope you are right Robin. Mine may be an overreaction to yesterday but I think many of us have seen this coming for a long time and last minute money throwing panic by the Board failed to save us. I think to go down without even reaching the last game of the season is a disgrace. There is a lot of anger and frustration around.......well, around me anyway!
There is no doubt in my mind that the decision to give Yates a new contract instead of getting in a new manager with a decent budget and time to put a team together has cost us and I can't believe this decision by the Board was ever unanimous. Before anyone suggests such is the case, this is not hindsight, these comments were made by many at the time.

[horlickfanclub]

Agree Alf. Too much money thrown away paying off Management has not helped.

[51/84]

Where did this throwing money at it come from Boardroom spin and peoples assumptions because thats what they would do

We lost money last season and according to the chairman we will make a bigger loss (£220K v £180K for 13/14)

So lets look at the facts
Yates was told last season to shift some out to bring others in- this he did not knowing that those he moved out 1 not first choice LB and the other by his own admission on at the top his game, were going to take on cult status

So having survived last season they cut the playing budget and reorganise
In a panic to secure a cup pay out ( would it have been C Palace) a gamble was taken
I paraphrase the financial directors words - Paul Buckle did everything required of him except get points without spending any extra money. Russ was he given any extra , the price of failing to invest was Gary J

So if by spending money you mean paying off 2 managers 2 1st team coaches an assistant manager and a chief scout - yes we did

[Alf]

That's exactly what I meant when I said that money was thrown at the situation. Paying off people when the money could have gone towards improving the squad.

[Reliant Robin]

...
There is no doubt in my mind that the decision to give Yates a new contract instead of getting in a new manager with a decent budget and time to put a team togethier has cost us and I can't believe this decision by the Board was ever unanimous. Before anyone suggests such is the case, this is not hindsight, these comments were made by many at the time.

Well unsurprisingly I am going to disagree with you Alf and I will back it up with hard facts. Imagine if you will a Cheltenham Town FC history without Mark Yates as manager. This would have meant CTFC relegated from the Football League soon after the Keith Downing/John Schofield era as the Club was already in serious decline once John Ward had left & matters were made critical during the Martin Allen era when the Club almost went into administration.

The hard facts are:

Cotterill win % Ward win % Schofield win % Allen win % Yates win %
46.27 ............... 36.72 ....... 11.11 ............. 21.31 ......... 35.8

As can be seen, and we know from the finances Mark Yates generated by rescuing the Club from oblivion with successive play offs and money-spinning Cup games v Premier League opponents, the Club was given a renewed lease of life under Yates. He wasn't given enough money at the start of the 2014/15 season and if he'd been given the funds subsequently wasted on paying off a succession of managers he would have assembled another team capable of challenging for League 2 honours. We certainly would not have got relegated under Yates. He got us to the top of the League at the start of this season and we thumped Swindon 5-0 in the Cup before the hostile element in our Supporters and on this Forum turned against him. It was not giving Yates a new contract that cost us, it was giving him the sack which has cost us. Those who learn from history will eventually come to realise that.

[RegencyCheltenhamSpa]

Agreed - fairly confident that had we kept Yates we'd be going to the last game of the season safe between 12th and 20th

[Oldun]

I am amazed that anyone can be certain that MY would have kept the club up! I am of the opinion (and it is just an opinion!) that he would not have done so. Everyone else is of course entitled to the opposite opinion but that is what it is....an OPINION!

[Alf]

...
There is no doubt in my mind that the decision to give Yates a new contract instead of getting in a new manager with a decent budget and time to put a team togethier has cost us and I can't believe this decision by the Board was ever unanimous. Before anyone suggests such is the case, this is not hindsight, these comments were made by many at the time.

Well unsurprisingly I am going to disagree with you Alf and I will back it up with hard facts. Imagine if you will a Cheltenham Town FC history without Mark Yates as manager. This would have meant CTFC relegated from the Football League soon after the Keith Downing/John Schofield era as the Club was already in serious decline once John Ward had left & matters were made critical during the Martin Allen era when the Club almost went into administration.

The hard facts are:

Cotterill win % Ward win % Schofield win % Allen win % Yates win %
46.27 ............... 36.72 ....... 11.11 ............. 21.31 ......... 35.8

As can be seen, and we know from the finances Mark Yates generated by rescuing the Club from oblivion with successive play offs and money-spinning Cup games v Premier League opponents, the Club was given a renewed lease of life under Yates. He wasn't given enough money at the start of the 2014/15 season and if he'd been given the funds subsequently wasted on paying off a succession of managers he would have assembled another team capable of challenging for League 2 honours. We certainly would not have got relegated under Yates. He got us to the top of the League at the start of this season and we thumped Swindon 5-0 in the Cup before the hostile element in our Supporters and on this Forum turned against him. It was not giving Yates a new contract that cost us, it was giving him the sack which has cost us. Those who learn from history will eventually come to realise that.

How do you explain the falling attendances over the past couple of seasons if everything was as wonderful as you seem to think?

[RegencyCheltenhamSpa]

...
There is no doubt in my mind that the decision to give Yates a new contract instead of getting in a new manager with a decent budget and time to put a team togethier has cost us and I can't believe this decision by the Board was ever unanimous. Before anyone suggests such is the case, this is not hindsight, these comments were made by many at the time.

Well unsurprisingly I am going to disagree with you Alf and I will back it up with hard facts. Imagine if you will a Cheltenham Town FC history without Mark Yates as manager. This would have meant CTFC relegated from the Football League soon after the Keith Downing/John Schofield era as the Club was already in serious decline once John Ward had left & matters were made critical during the Martin Allen era when the Club almost went into administration.

The hard facts are:

Cotterill win % Ward win % Schofield win % Allen win % Yates win %
46.27 ............... 36.72 ....... 11.11 ............. 21.31 ......... 35.8

As can be seen, and we know from the finances Mark Yates generated by rescuing the Club from oblivion with successive play offs and money-spinning Cup games v Premier League opponents, the Club was given a renewed lease of life under Yates. He wasn't given enough money at the start of the 2014/15 season and if he'd been given the funds subsequently wasted on paying off a succession of managers he would have assembled another team capable of challenging for League 2 honours. We certainly would not have got relegated under Yates. He got us to the top of the League at the start of this season and we thumped Swindon 5-0 in the Cup before the hostile element in our Supporters and on this Forum turned against him. It was not giving Yates a new contract that cost us, it was giving him the sack which has cost us. Those who learn from history will eventually come to realise that.

How do you explain the falling attendances over the past couple of seasons if everything was as wonderful as you seem to think?

Dire hoof ball on a pitch not fit for purpose after five years of the ground share.

[Reliant Robin]

How do you explain the falling attendances over the past couple of seasons if everything was as wonderful as you seem to think?

With some considerable ease, Alf.

Yates could only work with the money he was given, dictated by the number of punters coming through the turnstiles. Cheltenham people have not supported the Club in sufficient numbers over several years now, you only have to look at the difference between the number of people who went to the Millenium Stadium for the Rushden and the Grimsby matches, against the pitiful number who went to the Crewe final at Wembley. People have just not been interested in Cheltenham Town Football Club over many years - it was nothing to do with Mark Yates' appointment. I stand by what I said, and that was Mark Yates rescued the Club when it was already in decline by generating money and he gave it a temporary stay of execution. Look at the facts, think of what would have happened if Yates had not taken over when he did. Yates was the Messiah and you lot crucified him. We might have to wait another 2,000+ years for a 2nd coming

[Alf]

So the fact that people stopped coming to games was that all of a sudden 500+ people simultaneously decided that they didn't want to support the team any more? Nothing to do with the fact that they had just had enough of watching tedious performances. I would also add that other clubs with similar gates to ourselves prove to be successful.

[1971]

To get this back on track. It’s nothing to do with recent managers/players, comparative results, historical statistics, our budget (whatever that might be - does anyone really have reliable information about this?), the size of the club relative to others, non-playing events, supporters/attendances, or anything else I may have missed. It’s about drawing a line in the sand and moving forward to get the right ethos both on-pitch and off and any negative characters (bad apples) still contracted need to be moved on. Based on recent statements by Gary Johnson about the level of commitment and honesty of the players hopefully he will be make a swift and merciless cull of the bad apples a priority

[confused.com]

So the fact that people stopped coming to games was that all of a sudden 500+ people simultaneously decided that they didn't want to support the team any more? Nothing to do with the fact that they had just had enough of watching tedious performances. I would also add that other clubs with similar gates to ourselves prove to be successful.

Alf 500 did not simultaneously decide they didn't want to support the team any more. What the facts are, is that there were 500 less ST sold. The breakdown of the total sold is unknown to me, but I presume you do know ? However, from a business sense , I would be presuming some current ST holders did not renew, as well as some new ST being sold. Making up a net loss of 500.
Why those 500 did not purchase a ST is again an unknown quantity e.g I use to have 3, my two sons are now at Uni, so I didn't renew their's. They still come as often as they can, but I can instantly reduce the number to 498.
It is not all black and white.

[51/84]

so there we have it

Not one thing but many
Yates contract renewal in the summer with reduced budgets
Different backroom staff - reluctantly agreed ?
Chairman saying these signings will excite
Bad pitch which does not help

As for the comments about the playoff finals - millenium stadium v wembley
!st time novelty own transport, easy access
Wembley very expensive and relatively difficult

Cup matches v prem league - still difficult to sell out to our fans - why because no fan base had been built

Fan engagement and a wining team will bring the fans in but they then need to be fed and nutured and retained

[everyman]

We may not be able to buy quality but we can demand commitment from everyone who works for the club anything less is unacceptable.

[RegencyCheltenhamSpa]

so there we have it

Not one thing but many
Yates contract renewal in the summer with reduced budgets
Different backroom staff - reluctantly agreed ?
Chairman saying these signings will excite
Bad pitch which does not help

As for the comments about the playoff finals - millenium stadium v wembley
!st time novelty own transport, easy access
Wembley very expensive and relatively difficult

Cup matches v prem league - still difficult to sell out to our fans - why because no fan base had been built

Fan engagement and a wining team will bring the fans in but they then need to be fed and nutured and retained

Agreed. Great summary of the various things which have gone wrong, and important to note bad pitch is a factor as you - and indeed Gary Johnson - highlighted.

[ghandi]

I wonder how it all would have turned out if Yatesy had,nt "played away" ?