Madejski's comments to BBC Radio Berkshire

[Schards#2]

It doesn't matter how much they cost as long as they do the job required. If Mooney scored 10-15 league goals then i'll be glad we got a bargain. We don't need 2-5M pound players to do the same. As long as they're good enough for the first team, by that i mean can change the game if needed, by making one through pass or shot that results into a game we draw instead of lose etc etc, then that is what's needed.

Do you believe that there is no correlation whatsoever between a player's value and their ability?

R. Santa-Cruz
Doyle

are two examples that are not. If you are looking for world class players then yes there is a difference. To make a difference to our team, then no.

There are odd exceptions but, as a rule, do you accept that there is generally a correlation between the value of a player and their ability and, therefore, replacing a player with one less than a tenth of their value is, on the balance of probability, likely to make the team weaker rather than stronger?

[Royal Rother]

Well, if we're not about to let Doyle or Lita go, I'd venture to suggest that a left back was far more important than another striker at this moment in time. I still fail to see why we can get 5 strikers for the CCC but survived with only 3 in the PL when we sent Lita out on loan. As long as people don't think that RFC's ambition is to get straight back to the PL, you can all carry on, but don't moan about it at the end of the season!

Me no understand. How does having 5 strikers show a lack of ambition?

When the quality is going backwards.

Come Monday, I expect us to have 4 forwards. The most proven and tested of which couldn't get near the side last season and we'll have sold the two that kept him out of the side despite not getting more than the odd chance here and there, let alone goals!

The new forwards might turn out to be even better, I hope thats the case, but we should really be in a position to be signing players a little more proven to supplement the gambles on the likes of Mooney.

Maybe it's just me, but signing relatively unknown players and seeing what they can do is more fun than signing proven players. That and giving home-grown youngsters a decent chance of course. (We can but hope on that one...)

[Sarah Star]

Surely the correlation is that players with a proven ability at a certain level cost more. That doesn't necessarily mean that value = ability.

We bought Dave Kitson for £150,000, he already had the ability to play well for us. We sold him for 5.5m after he'd proved it. Whether he can keep it up is a different matter.

[Alan Partridge]

If we would actually give more of a chance to 'home grown' players then I would agree. apart from 5 minute cameos out of position or cup matches at Dagenham or not even there in some cases! I am yet to see much impact or faith shown in them. Karacan not being involved at all thus far being the ultimate dissapointment .

Got high hopes for Mooney, if only because his goal record is better than Doyle's at Cork so he's got something about him. We'll see, presumably he'll play a part against Luton.

[kwik-silva]

If we would actually give more of a chance to 'home grown' players then I would agree. apart from 5 minute cameos out of position or cup matches at Dagenham or not even there in some cases! I am yet to see much impact or faith shown in them. Karacan not being involved at all thus far being the ultimate dissapointment .

Got high hopes for Mooney, if only because his goal record is better than Doyle's at Cork so he's got something about him. We'll see, presumably he'll play a part against Luton.

Do you mean the ones that come through the academy or younger players?? (Seeing as Karacan isn't 'home-grown) Plus I think he'll get his chance, he's only 19 but I just don't know when it will be

[Alan Partridge]

Well he wasn't born in Reading (South Lonodn) but he's been here for an awful long time, I would certainly classify him as home grown.

[Schards#2]

Surely the correlation is that players with a proven ability at a certain level cost more. That doesn't necessarily mean that value = ability.

We bought Dave Kitson for £150,000, he already had the ability to play well for us. We sold him for 5.5m after he'd proved it. Whether he can keep it up is a different matter.

Imagine a raffle where the first prize is an unnamed player valued at £5m, second prize is an unnamed player valued at £500,000.

Reading FC buys a ticket - which prize do you want them to win?

[Baines]

Surely the correlation is that players with a proven ability at a certain level cost more. That doesn't necessarily mean that value = ability.

We bought Dave Kitson for £150,000, he already had the ability to play well for us. We sold him for 5.5m after he'd proved it. Whether he can keep it up is a different matter.

Imagine a raffle where the first prize is an unnamed player valued at £5m, second prize is an unnamed player valued at £500,000.

Reading FC buys a ticket - which prize do you want them to win?

It'd be interesting to ask the same question if the two prizes were a £5m player or a £500K player plus £4.5m in cash.

[Southbank Old Boy]

Maybe it's just me, but signing relatively unknown players and seeing what they can do is more fun than signing proven players. That and giving home-grown youngsters a decent chance of course. (We can but hope on that one...)

I agree it can be more fun, but usually only when it pays off!!! Although I guess Bas Savage had his amusing qualities too

What would be nice is if we balanced it a little bit more, or in other words we actually signed a few proven players now and again to compliment the gambles and so if they fail it is less expensive to team in terms of performance.

[West Stand Man]

Surely the correlation is that players with a proven ability at a certain level cost more. That doesn't necessarily mean that value = ability.

We bought Dave Kitson for £150,000, he already had the ability to play well for us. We sold him for 5.5m after he'd proved it. Whether he can keep it up is a different matter.

Imagine a raffle where the first prize is an unnamed player valued at £5m, second prize is an unnamed player valued at £500,000.

Reading FC buys a ticket - which prize do you want them to win?

It'd be interesting to ask the same question if the two prizes were a £5m player or a £500K player plus £4.5m in cash.

An irrelevant question as the outlay for the club would be the same in both cases. Thus they would be getting a player for the value of their raffle ticket. Your question also makes the rash assumption that PRICE and VALUE are necessarily the same thing.
If the value of the 2 items is correct than clearly the higher value is the better prize. If, however, (as is the case with many footballers) it is the price that counts then the whole thing gets far more complex. Doyle's price was ~£80k, but his value is much higher. Bennett's price was ~£250k but his value was much lower.
Simple really isn't it ? No, actually it is very complex and that is why it takes specialists like Nick Hammond to do the deals and hope he gets them right at least some of the time.

[Baines]

But if we try to match up made-up land, with its bizarre raffles, and the real world, we could at least make a nod to the real world conditions where a club has to spend money on a player.

If Schards's point is simply that a £5m player is likely to be better than a £500K player, then that's pretty obvious and hardly worth stating. What's less obvious is whether that means that the club should be buying such a player.

[kwik-silva]

http://www.readingfc.premiumtv.co.uk/pa ... 48,00.html

Apparently we're searching for more signings, wow... I don't think its been posted, my bad if it has

[Royal Rother]

Also, as I believe that the financial bubble that football has existed in for the last few years (resulting in huge prices for players) is likley to burst quite dramatically in the next couple of years, keeping cash reserves would be a pretty sound business strategy at the moment.

[Big Ern]

http://www.readingfc.premiumtv.co.uk/page/NewsDetail/0,,10306~1371348,00.html

Apparently we're searching for more signings, wow... I don't think its been posted, my bad if it has

Don't get your hopes up, probably just loan signings...then again it worked for Hull last season.

[kwik-silva]

we don't normally have any loan signings

[BR2]

Also, as I believe that the financial bubble that football has existed in for the last few years (resulting in huge prices for players) is likley to burst quite dramatically in the next couple of years, keeping cash reserves would be a pretty sound business strategy at the moment.

Like the American economy people have been saying this for years but somehow it all keeps on going.
To some extent we have reversed the trend-we are buying players now for £600,000 or £200,000 whereas 10 years ago we were buying players for £800,000.
Not saying whether that is necessarily significant just pointing out that when the club had far less money we paid higher transfer fees-Asaba,Caskey,Butler,Forster et al.

[Man Friday]

I think if clubs think Player X or Y is worth £150K a week, fine - but I hope they won't feel agrieved when I don't put any money in the bucket when their sugar daddy pulls the rug financially, and they are left destitute.

It is clear to me that there is a polarisation of thinking amongst Reading fans at this time, a polarisation created by the last 2 Years; generally the 2 camps are:

1, Spend whatever you need to do in order to achieve as much as possible and hang the potential consequences and

2, Spend what we can reasonably afford to achieve as much as we can.

I would rather support Reading in the Championship then have the future of the club put on the line by profligate and unsupportable expenditure in attempting to compete against Chelsea or Man Utd.

And this is the main point of this discussion, and one that has sadly been lacking in amongst all the peurile name calling - where does the club want to be in the future, and what will it do to achieve that goal.

It seemed to me that previously we had but one goal - get into the Premiership; once that was achieved there was little in the way of strategic thinking or planning as to how to achieve the next goal, simply because we didn't appear to have a next goal other than survival in the premiership. What the club needs to do, for its fans, its players and its staff is set out a clear set of goals for the future and then plan to achieve those goals.

Mr Mad likes to say that he wants to run RFC as a business - well, do so then.

They might be the polarised views but how do you know where the club positioned itself? Personally I don't want the club to spend more than it can realistically afford to spend and I too would rather be watching Reading at whatever level we play at than trying to chase the Premiership dream by putting the clubs future at real risk.

But it's not the club is it? It's JM. Effectively JM is the club. That's why we're selling players for £5M but buying them for £200K. That's why JM has only loaned money to the club, not given it. As a club we're already at real risk as the club owes JM a very large amount of money.

[West Stand Man]

Also, as I believe that the financial bubble that football has existed in for the last few years (resulting in huge prices for players) is likley to burst quite dramatically in the next couple of years, keeping cash reserves would be a pretty sound business strategy at the moment.

Like the American economy people have been saying this for years but somehow it all keeps on going.
To some extent we have reversed the trend-we are buying players now for £600,000 or £200,000 whereas 10 years ago we were buying players for £800,000.
Not saying whether that is necessarily significant just pointing out that when the club had far less money we paid higher transfer fees-Asaba,Caskey,Butler,Forster et al.

But probably weren't paying them the same level of salary, so the whole cost of the contract was lower?

[Southbank Old Boy]

But it's not the club is it? It's JM. Effectively JM is the club. That's why we're selling players for £5M but buying them for £200K. That's why JM has only loaned money to the club, not given it. As a club we're already at real risk as the club owes JM a very large amount of money.

When I say "the club" I mean the club as a whole and that involves JM's money too. Not his personal fortune which I'm happy for him to keep for himself, but the yearly ins and outs of the club.

If JM is calling in his loans, which he apparently isn't, then that is part of those ins and outs. I think it's much more likely that part of JM's intended sale of the club will include him getting back the £25m he's currently owed.

[Geekins]

Imagine a raffle where the first prize is an unnamed player valued at £5m, second prize is an unnamed player valued at £500,000.

Reading FC buys a ticket - which prize do you want them to win?

I can see your point Schards, and there is a risk buying in someone who is only worth 200k, but our two biggest transfers have ended as flops (Fae and Halford), yet Doyle and Kitson have been excellent.

I would though want to win the 5m prize, sell it, and get the 500k one Damn, i sound like John Madejski!