Brenda says it will take two or three years!

[Royal Lady]

I heard from a very reliable source that in our championship winning season Sonko was on 18k a week and was our highest earner at that time. That's well before we got any large amounts of tv money or money for getting into the Prem. So, how come we could afford that sort of wage then? Like I said, if Coppell hadn't given us two years in the Prem, I dread to think what our financial situation would have been like.

[Deathy]

I heard from a very reliable source that in our championship winning season Sonko was on 18k a week and was our highest earner at that time. That's well before we got any large amounts of tv money or money for getting into the Prem. So, how come we could afford that sort of wage then? Like I said, if Coppell hadn't given us two years in the Prem, I dread to think what our financial situation would have been like.

When was that deal agreed? Were we already looking like being up? Because then I can understand it, but there is no way he was on 18k a week when there were plenty better players in the team that should have been on a greater wage.

[prostak]

Not that I am that inspired by an 'ambitious' signing from Doncaster.

Who do you think we should've been bidding for, then? Who counts as an 'ambitious' signing? Bear in mind where the players for the promotion season came from when you answer.

[Ian Royal]

I heard from a very reliable source that in our championship winning season Sonko was on 18k a week and was our highest earner at that time. That's well before we got any large amounts of tv money or money for getting into the Prem. So, how come we could afford that sort of wage then? Like I said, if Coppell hadn't given us two years in the Prem, I dread to think what our financial situation would have been like.

I find that doubtful given the rest of the players and where Sonko came from.

Even so, one or two players on salaries like that is reasonable. £25k - £35k is a different matter, as is having lots at those wages.

[Pseud O'Nym]

I heard from a very reliable source that in our championship winning season Sonko was on 18k a week and was our highest earner at that time. That's well before we got any large amounts of tv money or money for getting into the Prem. So, how come we could afford that sort of wage then? Like I said, if Coppell hadn't given us two years in the Prem, I dread to think what our financial situation would have been like.

The audited accounts for that season have been in the public domain for some years now and you don't get more reliable sources than that.

Yes indeed we were spending beyond our means, which must have been sanctioned by SJM, presumably in because he believed we could gain promotion. If we hadn't been promoted then some severe cost cutting measures would have had to be applied, as they are being now following our failure to go back up.

[readingbedding]

I heard from a very reliable source that in our championship winning season Sonko was on 18k a week and was our highest earner at that time. That's well before we got any large amounts of tv money or money for getting into the Prem. So, how come we could afford that sort of wage then? Like I said, if Coppell hadn't given us two years in the Prem, I dread to think what our financial situation would have been like.

The audited accounts for that season have been in the public domain for some years now and you don't get more reliable sources than that.

Yes indeed we were spending beyond our means, which must have been sanctioned by SJM, presumably in because he believed we could gain promotion. If we hadn't been promoted then some severe cost cutting measures would have had to be applied, as they are being now following our failure to go back up.

100%
It's not difficult to get your head round it really.

[Ian Royal]

Part of the high wages that year will have been the bonuses paid out for wins, clean sheets and promotion though.

I suspect had we not romped the league and instead finished 7th, the wages would have looked signficantly lower in the accounts.

Of course that's just common sense talking.

[Row V]

SDR is looking for improvement over two or three games.

Are you prepared to wait two or three years watching the Royals getting stuffed?

By then we could be in Division Two. I thought Brenda was a positive lady. Strange how the reality soon sets in.

Forget two or three years Brenda because you will have been sacked long before that unless SDR sees rapid improvement.

You know it makes sense. Make sure you dust yourself off before Tuesday night.

Real Facts Real World

Welcome back Dodger, now can you and frimmers both oxf*rd off please?

EOT

[leon]

Sonko for 18K a week? Jesus christ. Was he also on penalty bonuses?

[stl_royal]

ill take two years of exciting young players, playing interesting football so long as we can stay in the championship...thats the most important bit to me really

[metalmicky]

WE NEED A SHEPHERD , TO SORT OUT THE SHEEP. FAST OR THE WOLVES WILL WIN ALL THE TIME.
MADMAN MUST SPEND NOW.

[Bluey]

Google ' political economy of football ', go to football clubs, and start comparing the turnovers,pre-tax profits, wages/ turnovers and employees of individual clubs and stop your pu'ckn guessin'.
Steve Coppell put together a crackin' side in 05/06 whick continued 06/07, then the book jugglin' started and down we went. Patience in getting the right blend is sometimes harder than finding a cold one at 4 in the morning.

' GO HARD YOU ROYALS '

[Northern Git]

Seems to me like there is one big problem with the 'Two to Three Years' plan.

Lets just for a minute speculate what may happen this season.

RFC start off with a poor run of form with the youngsters struggling to adjust to Championship football. Slowly the team adjusts, some players are dropped being replaced by more of the 'hungery youngsters', and we gradually creep up the league. A few of the youngsters start to shine (and I wont suggest who as I am sure we all have our own views on this) confidence increases, and by May we have finished a respectable 8th or so - just missing out on the play offs.

The season ends, Royals fans are feeling fairly happy and looking forward to the coming season with quiet confidence, and then the problems start.

Offers come in for the high achieving youngsters, probably from the teams just promoted to the premiership, more talk of 'cutting our cloth' 'loss of parachute payments' 'difficult economic conditions' 'we wont stand in their way' etc. and the teams assets are sold off again to 'balance' the books.

So we start year two of the TtTY plan weaker than this season.

I really don't see that BR can build and keep a stable and developing team over that period of time.

[Seal]

Southampton tried competing in the Championship with kids and look what happened to them.

Pretty football but no end product.

[The Real Sandhurst Royal]

Seal wrote:

Southampton tried competing in the Championship with kids and look what happened to them.


Pretty football but no end product.

They took four points of us last season and gave us a lesson in football at the Mad Stad.

[Seal]

Yes. And got relegated.

[Royal Rother]

Seems to me like there is one big problem with the 'Two to Three Years' plan.

Lets just for a minute speculate what may happen this season.

RFC start off with a poor run of form with the youngsters struggling to adjust to Championship football. Slowly the team adjusts, some players are dropped being replaced by more of the 'hungery youngsters', and we gradually creep up the league. A few of the youngsters start to shine (and I wont suggest who as I am sure we all have our own views on this) confidence increases, and by May we have finished a respectable 8th or so - just missing out on the play offs.

The season ends, Royals fans are feeling fairly happy and looking forward to the coming season with quiet confidence, and then the problems start.

Offers come in for the high achieving youngsters, probably from the teams just promoted to the premiership, more talk of 'cutting our cloth' 'loss of parachute payments' 'difficult economic conditions' 'we wont stand in their way' etc. and the teams assets are sold off again to 'balance' the books.

So we start year two of the TtTY plan weaker than this season.

I really don't see that BR can build and keep a stable and developing team over that period of time.

(Big sigh.) The reason he WILL be able to keep the young players is because we WON'T be desperate for money because we HAVEN'T spent all the money from recent transfers.

THAT is the vision.

Can you not see that?

[brendywendy]

What did we do with the TV money when we had it? Build a big media suite and expand the hotel? I know exactly what I'm talking about.

No. You don't, because you repeatedly refuse to accept the accounts when they are presented to you. You simply keep bleating the same old shit with no actual backing for it.

Birmingham, wolves, hull, stoke and burnley managed to buy players and most average less than us. How do you propose those equal and smaller clubs managed this? Genuine question.

Please do not insult anyone by mentioning leeds united. Thank you.

erm, rich benefactors, willing to put money in without hope of getting it back, and willing to back loans to finance teh day to day running of their club in the hope of some future success?

it comes down to- do you want that? or do you want to be run in a sustainable, self funding manner, without the need for rich arabs and americans.

im quite happy with the latter, RL and the others would like it the other way.

vive le difference

[Royal Lady]

Seems to me like there is one big problem with the 'Two to Three Years' plan.

Lets just for a minute speculate what may happen this season.

RFC start off with a poor run of form with the youngsters struggling to adjust to Championship football. Slowly the team adjusts, some players are dropped being replaced by more of the 'hungery youngsters', and we gradually creep up the league. A few of the youngsters start to shine (and I wont suggest who as I am sure we all have our own views on this) confidence increases, and by May we have finished a respectable 8th or so - just missing out on the play offs.

The season ends, Royals fans are feeling fairly happy and looking forward to the coming season with quiet confidence, and then the problems start.

Offers come in for the high achieving youngsters, probably from the teams just promoted to the premiership, more talk of 'cutting our cloth' 'loss of parachute payments' 'difficult economic conditions' 'we wont stand in their way' etc. and the teams assets are sold off again to 'balance' the books.

So we start year two of the TtTY plan weaker than this season.

I really don't see that BR can build and keep a stable and developing team over that period of time.

(Big sigh.) The reason he WILL be able to keep the young players is because we WON'T be desperate for money because we HAVEN'T spent all the money from recent transfers.

THAT is the vision.

Can you not see that?

And what if these youngsters WANT to move on to bigger and better teams? And throw little SHunt/Shorey wobblies if they don't get their way?

[The whole year inn]

Seal wrote:

Southampton tried competing in the Championship with kids and look what happened to them.


Pretty football but no end product.

They took four points of us last season and gave us a lesson in football at the Mad Stad.

They've just been beaten by Huddersfield Town in League one