How Long Will BM Last at this rate?????

[Ian Royal]

I don't recall McDermott ever saying he wanted more to spend or claiming it wasn't partly his decision to largely stick with what he had. Obviously he can't be too candid about the subject because he has to motivate and work with the players, and that's why I take very little notice of the cliched sound bites.

Zingaravich said that it was a decision they made, they being the decision making unit that it was implied McDermott was part of.

It still sounds like you're inferring Zingaravich is making stuff up!

Add in the fact that Coppell, McDermott, Madejski and Hammond have always said in the past that if they find a player worth buying for a reasonable amount for their ability and value to us, then the funds will be made available. Given Most of what we've seen says that Anton runs the club in the same way. I see no reason to believe Brendy's "say it until you give in" view that Hammond / Madejski / Zingaravich told McDermott he had £5m to spend, "like it or lump it".

Add in Coppell apparently saying he was surprised how little we spent (showing that he'd have expected more to be available). And I think the evidence stacks up pretty overwhelmingly, and fits in with McDermott's quotes, to be that he was amongst the decision makers in choosing how much we spent on bringing in new players this summer.

And if McDermott was given £5m, and thought it wasn't enough, then frankly its poor management not to have fought for more. It seems pretty damn unlikely he wouldn't have been listened to given his record and relationships with Hammond, Madejski and Zingaravich. And if they were bad enough that he would be ignored, he'd have been given the boot before Xmas, rather than them keeping faith in his abilities.

If he did think it was enough, then it's back to him not having done enough to try and improve his squad.

[Ian Royal]

IMO, Brian jacked in the 4-5-1 system too quickly. He gave up on Guthrie and Pog too early, ran Legs into the ground, stuck with Gorks too long, cut off his nose to spite his face with the handling of Pearce, ran with 4-4-2 against the wrong opponents, made the wrong changes too late in too many games and, as manager, is to be held somewhat responsible for us starting the season ill-prepared in terms of transfers.

That said, what was pissing me off was him failing to learn or change. He left it a bit late, but it's happened and I'm pleased.

Criticisms were justified and now vindicated, on the other hand sticking with Brian also looks like being a great decision.

So smiles all round, presumably.

In hindsight I agree, although at the time it did look like we were a bit toothless and unfamiliar with it and maybe we'd better off going back to the basics of last season. And it did seem to may be paying off with 5 draws and 1 win in the first 8 games with it.

But after that it all just fell apart with those 6 defeats in a row and a change back was definitely needed sooner than it happened.

Otherwise thoroughly agree with everything else.

[Wimb]

IMO, Brian jacked in the 4-5-1 system too quickly. He gave up on Guthrie and Pog too early, ran Legs into the ground, stuck with Gorks too long, cut off his nose to spite his face with the handling of Pearce, ran with 4-4-2 against the wrong opponents, made the wrong changes too late in too many games and, as manager, is to be held somewhat responsible for us starting the season ill-prepared in terms of transfers.

That said, what was pissing me off was him failing to learn or change. He left it a bit late, but it's happened and I'm pleased.

Criticisms were justified and now vindicated, on the other hand sticking with Brian also looks like being a great decision.

So smiles all round, presumably.

Sums it up very well, though apparently it wasn't his choice with Pearce, came from higher up.

[RFCSPACE]

IMO, Brian jacked in the 4-5-1 system too quickly. He gave up on Guthrie and Pog too early, ran Legs into the ground, stuck with Gorks too long, cut off his nose to spite his face with the handling of Pearce, ran with 4-4-2 against the wrong opponents, made the wrong changes too late in too many games and, as manager, is to be held somewhat responsible for us starting the season ill-prepared in terms of transfers.

That said, what was pissing me off was him failing to learn or change. He left it a bit late, but it's happened and I'm pleased.

Criticisms were justified and now vindicated, on the other hand sticking with Brian also looks like being a great decision.

So smiles all round, presumably.

Exactly. We were making the same mistakes week after week (and against our relegation rivals) which was why, at the time, I wanted him out. Things have changed, we play with a bit more variety and signs are good.

[melonhead]

IMO, Brian jacked in the 4-5-1 system too quickly. He gave up on Guthrie and Pog too early, ran Legs into the ground, stuck with Gorks too long, cut off his nose to spite his face with the handling of Pearce, ran with 4-4-2 against the wrong opponents, made the wrong changes too late in too many games and, as manager, is to be held somewhat responsible for us starting the season ill-prepared in terms of transfers.

That said, what was pissing me off was him failing to learn or change. He left it a bit late, but it's happened and I'm pleased.

Criticisms were justified and now vindicated, on the other hand sticking with Brian also looks like being a great decision.

.

agree with all of that, but think it was clear he'd have made changes sooner had the personnel been available
and had those personell been available we'd have got a few more results with that 4-4-2 formation

[melonhead]

I don't recall McDermott ever saying he wanted more to spend or claiming it wasn't partly his decision to largely stick with what he had. Obviously he can't be too candid about the subject because he has to motivate and work with the players, and that's why I take very little notice of the cliched sound bites.

Zingaravich said that it was a decision they made, they being the decision making unit that it was implied McDermott was part of.

It still sounds like you're inferring Zingaravich is making stuff up!

Add in the fact that Coppell, McDermott, Madejski and Hammond have always said in the past that if they find a player worth buying for a reasonable amount for their ability and value to us, then the funds will be made available. Given Most of what we've seen says that Anton runs the club in the same way. I see no reason to believe Brendy's "say it until you give in" view that Hammond / Madejski / Zingaravich told McDermott he had £5m to spend, "like it or lump it".

Add in Coppell apparently saying he was surprised how little we spent (showing that he'd have expected more to be available). And I think the evidence stacks up pretty overwhelmingly, and fits in with McDermott's quotes, to be that he was amongst the decision makers in choosing how much we spent on bringing in new players this summer.

And if McDermott was given £5m, and thought it wasn't enough, then frankly its poor management not to have fought for more. It seems pretty damn unlikely he wouldn't have been listened to given his record and relationships with Hammond, Madejski and Zingaravich. And if they were bad enough that he would be ignored, he'd have been given the boot before Xmas, rather than them keeping faith in his abilities.

If he did think it was enough, then it's back to him not having done enough to try and improve his squad.

my opinion is as valid as yours tbf.
i never said like it or lump it,youre allowed to think what you like unfortunately. always said brian was involved in the discussion, not sure how my "say it till you give in" attitude is any different to anyone elses. its my opinion, ill hold it until i see things that make me change it, just like you.

mcdermotts most recent transfer window quotes say specifically that they were looking at players, but hed have to wait and see what money was made available to see if we could do something, and he didnt think it would be alot. so the underlined seems made up to me.cos it doest sound like it is done how you describe.

think coppells quotes show exactly the opposite of what you say. hes brians mate, theyd just spent some time together, they speak to each other almost daily. not really sure coppell was going to come out and say that if it was brians decision to not spend more than 5m.

LOL at mcdermott telling AZ it wasnt enough. i already said im sure he was involved in the discussions.
im pretty sure that once they all realised that it would cost 40 million to rebuild the team, which would wreck the entire ethos wed worked hard to foster and still probably fail, then it was down to AZ to decide how much of his investors money they would spend on the squad.
everything brians said since then seems to me to say he didnt set the ammount, and maybe expected a little more.

[Hoop Blah]

Where have you got this mythical £40m from though?

We needed a bit more quality, not a whole squad. I'm sure McDermott could've spent a bit more astutely enough to make enough of an impact on the fine lines between success and failure we saw earlier in the season.

[Ian Royal]

Where have you got this mythical £40m from though?

We needed a bit more quality, not a whole squad. I'm sure McDermott could've spent a bit more astutely enough to make enough of an impact on the fine lines between success and failure we saw earlier in the season.

One more midfielder could have made all the difference and that certainly wouldn't have cost £35m.

Everything else has been selection, tactics and normal every day problems you'd get in any season.

[Extended-Phenotype]

IMO, Brian jacked in the 4-5-1 system too quickly. He gave up on Guthrie and Pog too early, ran Legs into the ground, stuck with Gorks too long, cut off his nose to spite his face with the handling of Pearce, ran with 4-4-2 against the wrong opponents, made the wrong changes too late in too many games and, as manager, is to be held somewhat responsible for us starting the season ill-prepared in terms of transfers.

That said, what was pissing me off was him failing to learn or change. He left it a bit late, but it's happened and I'm pleased.

Criticisms were justified and now vindicated, on the other hand sticking with Brian also looks like being a great decision.

.

agree with all of that, but think it was clear he'd have made changes sooner had the personnel been available
and had those personell been available we'd have got a few more results with that 4-4-2 formation

Both Guthrie and McAnuff were available for central roles.
Pog was available for the lone role.

[melonhead]

Where have you got this mythical £40m from though?

We needed a bit more quality, not a whole squad. I'm sure McDermott could've spent a bit more astutely enough to make enough of an impact on the fine lines between success and failure we saw earlier in the season.

if spending money is what keeps us up, then we needed to spend more than our rivals QPR and Saints for starters.
we needed 6 new players just to have any kind of squad at all.


if what everyone was saying - ie none of our players are premiere league class & we need to show some ambition and compete with the other teams then 40 million is my stab in the dark.never said it was anything other than plucked from the air. i used it in my imaginary conversation between BM and AZ, so carried on using it here.

if money is the way you go, then you surely have to outcompete your rivals
we decided it was not possible to finacially outcompete them, so went another way.

& tbf even 20 million would have been a daft high risk gamble

[melonhead]

Where have you got this mythical £40m from though?

We needed a bit more quality, not a whole squad. I'm sure McDermott could've spent a bit more astutely enough to make enough of an impact on the fine lines between success and failure we saw earlier in the season.

only if you believe he had more than the money he spent available
which i dont, as you know, due to him repeatedly saying he had a budget and spent it all.



for 5 million quid, to get the 6 players in that he did is nothing short of genius
imo

[melonhead]

IMO, Brian jacked in the 4-5-1 system too quickly. He gave up on Guthrie and Pog too early, ran Legs into the ground, stuck with Gorks too long, cut off his nose to spite his face with the handling of Pearce, ran with 4-4-2 against the wrong opponents, made the wrong changes too late in too many games and, as manager, is to be held somewhat responsible for us starting the season ill-prepared in terms of transfers.

That said, what was pissing me off was him failing to learn or change. He left it a bit late, but it's happened and I'm pleased.

Criticisms were justified and now vindicated, on the other hand sticking with Brian also looks like being a great decision.

.

agree with all of that, but think it was clear he'd have made changes sooner had the personnel been available
and had those personell been available we'd have got a few more results with that 4-4-2 formation

Both Guthrie and McAnuff were available for central roles.
Pog was available for the lone role.

guthrie wasnt.
the one person with the passing ability to make that system work.

as soon as he was back, and hapy again. he was in the squad, and the system was changed

[cmonurz]

if money is the way you go, then you surely have to outcompete your rivalswe decided it was not possible to finacially outcompete them, so went another way.

Why does it have to be so black and white?!

Either outspend our rivals or don't bother at all? That's ridiculous.

Whilst there is an element of risk to any purchase (just look at Gunter), a couple of £5-6m additions to the team - let's just say Zaha and Rhodes for arguments sake, absolutely would not have made the squad any worse, probably would have made it much better, and wouldn't have broken the bank or got near the £40m you have mentioned.

[Royal Rother]

Just caught up on this thread.

Looks like the same 4 or 5 people saying the same things over and over and over again.

[melonhead]

if money is the way you go, then you surely have to outcompete your rivalswe decided it was not possible to finacially outcompete them, so went another way.

Why does it have to be so black and white?!

Either outspend our rivals or don't bother at all? That's ridiculous.

Whilst there is an element of risk to any purchase (just look at Gunter), a couple of £5-6m additions to the team - let's just say Zaha and Rhodes for arguments sake, absolutely would not have made the squad any worse, probably would have made it much better, and wouldn't have broken the bank or got near the £40m you have mentioned.

for me its black and white
if it isnt for you then please continue to express your feelings in shades of grey.

imo the signing of pog was for 5 million, mcleary shorey and guthrie would also have got a very nice signing on bonus each, which doesnt take it all far off from your 12 million.

we needed 5-6 players too. not two. you cant go into a season with 1 RW, 3CM, 2CB, 1LB, 1RB and church as our 4th choice. so already youre talking ~25 million quid if you add two more 6 million players to what we already got. thats without thinking about the increased wages demanded by these higher price players.

& massive lol at saying it wouldnt have broken the bank.whos bank? cos im pretty sure AZ is a little more careful with the money of his consortia's investors than you are, and knows a little bit more about whats in his bank to spend on RFC than you
.


for me, if you take a decision to compete financially, then surely it follows that you need to outspend those around you
otherwise you actually arent competing financialy, but are simply increasing the risk to the club by over spending.
either you take that decision, and rebuild a side for the prem, and hope like hell that it all gels in time,
or you decide to continue with our prudent approach. spend on infrastructure, spend modestly on players in much the same way you would have done anyway, and hope that your team spirit and fight keeps you up.
if you stay up its cheers all round, if you go down, youve not lost anything, and your squad is still building and evolving.

i understand you disagree, and thats fine, please continue to do so.

('pparently saints have taken a loan this year so that they get effectively next years prem money to help them stay up.
thats the crazy kind o nonsense we have avoided, and rightly so.)

not only that but your massive spend to buy your prem status is 12 million of zaha and rhodes, two overpriced unproven lower league players who may not have actually made our squad better than it was? thats a pretty massive gamble.


im glad you arent in charge of my money, thats all ill say on that

[melonhead]

Just caught up on this thread.

Looks like the same 4 or 5 people saying the same things over and over and over again.

welcome to the team board

[BR2]

What I don't get melonhead is your constant towing of the party line and feeling that you have to defend everything that the club does.
You don't know whether Brian had a fixed budget or whether like previous managers he has to grovel to the chairman whenever he wants to buy somebody.
It's all guesswork on your part made up by extracting out-of-context statements and adding those up to imply a substantive truth.

When somebody like cmonurz comes on and suggests a couple of signings you pooh-pooh the idea as some massive gamble whereas it is what clubs do,they buy and sell players knowing that by the end of the season their business will be credited with £50 million or so.
There are very few businesses where such pots of gold are guaranteed and most of us find it difficult to understand why our club will not make signings that could ensure (or at least give us a chance of getting) another £50 million next year and the year after and so on.

We are in the bottom 3 and have won a paltry 4 league games all season so it is obvious that we need some better players and normally (everybody gets lucky now and again with a Doyle or a Shorey or even a Long) better quality costs more money.
Brian will be assessed by fans on how many points he has got at the end of the season and the intricacies of whether he had this or that money to play with is not our concern because we don't know the facts.

I think he has got lucky big time with these last 2 results and if he stays lucky for the rest of the season I will be very happy-I don't think he has done a very good team-building job and is fortunate (based on what happens in football) to keep his job.
He is too loyal to some players and ruthless with others and is generally only prepared to change things when it all becomes desperate.
Having said that,he is the most likeable of people and whether he means it or not says all the right things about the fans which makes us feel a bigger part of what is going on and engenders a "We are all in this together" feeling-fans love that and the more he says it,the more the fans will be behind him which is a very clever approach.

It is definitely too late for a managerial change,or will be next week when the Transfer window closes,so maybe it is time for this thread to close until the end of the season when the club will make a decision on his future.
For the time being we will get behind the team,not like Chelsea but like Southampton,because what we (well,most of us ) want is for RFC to remain a Premier League club and not throw away again this wonderful time of Reading playing all of the best teams in the country every week rather than praying that we get through to the 3rd round of the FA Cup and draw a team other than Barnsley away.

[melonhead]

What I don't get melonhead is your constant towing of the party line and feeling that you have to defend everything that the club does.

not toeing any line at all. its what i believe, based on the information i have. just like yours, cmonurz' and hoop blah's opinions.

You don't know whether Brian had a fixed budget or whether like previous managers he has to grovel to the chairman whenever he wants to buy somebody.
It's all guesswork on your part made up by extracting out-of-context statements and adding those up to imply a substantive truth.

just like everyone who is talking about it on this thread, and ive not implied it is substative truth at al. just said its my opinion, and what i base that opinion on. also said over and over ill hapily reconsider when new information comes to light

When somebody like cmonurz comes on and suggests a couple of signings you pooh-pooh the idea as some massive gamble whereas it is what clubs do,they buy and sell players knowing that by the end of the season their business will be credited with £50 million or so.

ive not poo poo'd anything, just said that i thought spending 12 million quid on two players from lower leagues is a massive gamble.
its what other clubs do. not us. and im not sure we are guaranteed 50 million. i think last year QPR got 42 million total, and their wage bill probably exceeds that for starters, so im not sure how that helps

There are very few businesses where such pots of gold are guaranteed and most of us find it difficult to understand why our club will not make signings that could ensure (or at least give us a chance of getting) another £50 million next year and the year after and so on.

we still have a chance of getting it. i know you dont understand, but for me its about risk, and our exposure to it, and im happy with the level of gambling we do.

We are in the bottom 3 and have won a paltry 4 league games all season so it is obvious that we need some better players and normally (everybody gets lucky now and again with a Doyle or a Shorey or even a Long) better quality costs more money.

QPR and Saints are in the same position as us, having spent miles more , which suggests its not as straightforward as you say, as does the cost of michu.

Brian will be assessed by fans on how many points he has got at the end of the season and the intricacies of whether he had this or that money to play with is not our concern because we don't know the facts.

no. until people know the FACTSSSSS theyll continue to assess the situation based on the information they do have.

[Woodcote Royal]

Southampton getting a 0-0 draw against a team we managed to beat (having been totally outplayed for the first 45 minutes I might add) just a few days after changing their manager has no bearing on where we would or wouldn't be now if we'd given McDermott the boot.

This is a recurring theme, HB, in your warped assessment process.

Any ounce of luck that comes our way devalues our success but any luck that goes against us is never mentioned again.

So, on the day Everton missed a number of chances and we took ours, surprise surprise!!! we won This happens a lot in football and is often the key reason for one team beating another. In fact, most observers, perish the thought, would see this as one team beating another not due to luck but because they played a better game of football. This is because to win a game one team has to put the ball in the net more times than their opponents whilst any number of near misses has no value whatsoever.

On the other hand, being denied victory because a referee allows an equalizing goal to stand when it was clearly and deliberately put into the net by a players hand would be deemed, by most of those with no hidden agenda, to be a case of bad luck for the team who should have walked away with 3pts.

The same could be said regarding Chelsea's offside goal and Man City injury time winner. Those 4pts alone would have put a nice dent in our twat factors case so no prizes for guessing why they always get glossed over.

[Victor Meldrew]

Southampton getting a 0-0 draw against a team we managed to beat (having been totally outplayed for the first 45 minutes I might add) just a few days after changing their manager has no bearing on where we would or wouldn't be now if we'd given McDermott the boot.

This is a recurring theme, HB, in your warped assessment process.

Any ounce of luck that comes our way devalues our success but any luck that goes against us is never mentioned again.

So, on the day Everton missed a number of chances and we took ours, surprise surprise!!! we won This happens a lot in football and is often the key reason for one team beating another. In fact, most observers, perish the thought, would see this as one team beating another not due to luck but because they played a better game of football. This is because to win a game one team has to put the ball in the net more times than their opponents whilst any number of near misses has no value whatsoever.

On the other hand, being denied victory because a referee allowed an equalizing goal to stand when it was clearly and deliberately put into the net by a players hand would be deemed, by most of those with no hidden agenda, to be a case of bad luck for the team who should have walked away with 3pts.

The same could be said regarding Chelsea's offside goal and Man City injury time winner. Those 4pts alone would have put a nice dent in our twat factors case so no prizes for guessing why they always get glossed over.

I think you have got a bit of an inferiority complex about RFC,Woodcote,feeling that everything goes against us-was Alf's first goal hand-ball and if it had not been given might we not have lost the game?.
When we played Everton as HB saidthey were all over us and the same v West Brom.
When Saints played Everton the other night Saints had most of the play,something that never happens with us,but only got 1 point.

I do take your point about ultimately football is about putting the ball in the net but as I see it you really need to create more than 2-3 chances per game to win matches -we have won the past 2 games by taking advantage of very few chances and my view is that we still need to significantly increase our chances per game to survive and win more matches.

To do that more regularly I think that we need better players-you might believe that what we have got is good enough-there rests a difference of opinion and time will tell over the coming months.