Back from the game - QPR

[Wimb]

Systematically, the squad gets weaker and weaker with every transfer window as the best players are sold to be replaced by cheaper alternatives, the end result is inevitable. If this does not change, Mcdermott and/or his successor will do will to keep this club in this division in 4 years time. In the long term, you cannot defy gravity.

I know this is only a small point but how on earth were going to do anything other than replace Doyle, Kitson, Hunt, Sigurdsson, etc with cheaper alternatives?

I know it's a radical thought but some teams don't routinely sell every player who can demand a fee.

Or if they do, reinvest more than 1% of the proceeds in replacements.

Examine it carefully Schards and you'll see we've invested money, not just transfer fees but in wages and retaining players on big contracts. Add to that the only player in the last 18 months we've sold when we didn't 100% want too was Glyfi. What other 'gems' are you referencing.

[Hoop Blah]

I think Schards point is valid, although as Wycombe says we're not going to spend money on more expensive replacements for those we'll always have to say good bye to.

Bringing in some players that are better than the ones that are left would be a good start though. We've not seen many players come in that have really improved the side since we first got promoted to the Premiership. All we've really done is replace starting players with squad players and promoted the old squad players so we've seen a continual weakening of the team and squad.

McAnuff, Mills, Griffin and Armstrong are, I think, the only players we've signed that have immediately come in and commanded a first team spot. Kishanishvili should really be on that list but he didn't come straight into the side and he isn't yet a real addition to the squad as he's on loan.

The other players we've signed over the last few years (the Cisse, Bikeys, Howards, Tabbs, Hunts, Williams, Cummings, and Rasiaks) were all squad players who then became the next player to be elevated to the first team. Harte and Williams are oddities in that bunch though.

[Hoop Blah]

Examine it carefully Schards and you'll see we've invested money, not just transfer fees but in wages and retaining players on big contracts. Add to that the only player in the last 18 months we've sold when we didn't 100% want too was Glyfi. What other 'gems' are you referencing.

Not sure that bears much truth Wimb. For starters Sigurdsson is probably the only one we really wanted to sell as it was the club that basically told him he had to go. He wasn't the one looking to move on.

Yes we paid good money to hang on to some of the other players, but that is basically what the parachute payments are all about. We might've been able to cash in on them sooner, and in some respects I think we should've done, but that wasn't a massive gamble or investment by the club because it was all covered by the Premiership money. It was just using our financial advantage to try and go straight back up.

[Croydon Royal]

oh and one more thing that annoyed me about yesterday's perfomance. Our full backs are too old to attack, I don't think one of them ever got beyond their full back. In 4-5-1 this needs to happen, look how well Chelsea do it. God do we miss Bertrand

This is the point - if you play with one up front you can't have your full backs crossing from deep. You need full backs who get to the byline, to give yourselves a chance of getting men in the box and attacking the cross. I lost count of how many times Harte crossed the ball from deep in to a penalty area that only included Shane Long and 4 big QPR defenders. Surprise, surprise, every cross went straight through to the keeper.

[Wimb]

I can't argue against the notion that the players we brought in haven't been as good as the players they replaced, isn't that the point about going down a level? the very fact that players of that ability wanted to leave the club is that it's not the standard they want to play at.

My point in this thread has always been that I'm happy for Reading to go about player recruitment and development now the same way we did 6/7 years ago as it worked before. Maybe expectations have been raised but the blueprint and methodology remains pretty much the same as it was before.

I'll compare again. (don't want to be too Snowballesque though!)

Hahnemann - Signed on loan originally, having failed to get anywhere near Fulhams team
Murty - Signed by Burns as a Right winger, gradually because a fullback
Shorey - youngster who earned his trade for us in the third tier
Ingi - Championship experience with Wolves but ended up in the third tier with Brentford
Sonko - Hadn't played above league 1
Little - Classy winger, signed on a free transfer having spent time with us on loan
Convey - 700k to get him from America, had a mare of a first season.
Harper - 400k from Arsenal's youth team having made 5 appearances in senior football before spending 2 years in the third tier with us.
Sidwell - Class but still untested at tier 2 or higher having come through a Premier League academy.
Kitson - Cheap buy from Cambridge, talent was there but never tested at a higher level
Doyle - Who? when we signed him
Lita - First ever million pound man, we paid for the goals but again he hadn't played in the Championship before and had been cast off by Chelsea.
Hunt - Free from Brentford
Makin - free from Sunderland, experienced and steady
Gunnar - Championship journeyman.

What about the team and recent buys of today....

Feds - slept on Sonko's sofa before displacing Hahnemann and working his way into the Aussie national team.
Griffin - has played for years in the Premier League for top sides, captained Stoke to promotion from the Championship
Harte/Armstrong - Both have Premier League experience within the last 3 seasons
Mills - 2 million pound signing from a fellow Championship side.
Kizi - season long loan and a player Brian 'wants to buy' an International captain
McAnuff - A player with PL experience and has regularly moved for decent fees
Kebe - Is the Kebe, plucked from the French second division to be a genuine top player in this league and maybe above
Howard - plenty of experience at this level
Tabb - Same as the above, has also shown great versatility.
Karacan - came through a Premier League academy
Long - Has shown in patches his talent, goals in the PL and in the Championship
Church - another to come through a Premier League academy and has full international honours (Wales but still...)
Hunt - Scored 15 goals in a side that finished 3rd in the Championship and scored goals in the SPL.

I see plenty of similarities in the way we're building now to how we built back then and personally I'm more then happy to give that system another chance. It's a process rather then something instant and I'm judging the club from this season rather then the PL era or it's 'hangover'

Hoop has a point in that perhaps we should sign 1 or 2 more 'ready made' players that can hit the ground running, but that's not been our style and the risk/reward for those type of signings isn't spectacular for ANY club at this level.

As I've said before I understand the frustration but I hope other people see the theories behind the course we're on now.

[Hoop Blah]

I think it comes down to expectations and opportunities though Wimb.

I don't mind us building for the future and buying players to integrate over time into a successful side as that's the best way to build a club and a stable team. The frustration is that once we'd built it we let it fall apart by not adjusting that formula to replace players with good enough quality.

Where we are now I'd agree we're doing a lot of things right, however, this team needs an injection of some real top end Championship quality if we really want to be one of the better teams in the league (my thinking is that I always want us to be striving to improve and be the best we can). Those players we brought in before were built into a pretty solid team by two very good managers over quite a time.

We've just dismantled a very good squad without really doing much (over 3 or 4 seasons) to address it and prevent the slide.

[Stuka]

On the pitch, one of the worst performances I've been to in ages. Outclassed. But as it was said earlier let's take it on the chin and be done with it.

Reading fans not that bad. I was stood bottom right corner near a very cocky ball boy who was gesticulating and celebrating quite a bit in our faces but then the whole section errupted with "Have you ever met your dad?" which was funny at the time anyway.

[General B]

To quote Afers (RIP in peace) "Today will be an utter mong fest - glad I'm not going TBF".

Darn tootin'.

I don't go to a huge amount of away games these days, but I thought the spacker quota was signifcantly lower than on previous trips to Loftus Road. You actually had to look quite hard to see any grown men with in replica shirts.

[andrew1957]

Wimb,
Some good, positive, points made there, particularly with regard to the comparison Vs. the 2003 line-up.

The trouble is, comparisons of that sort with today's RFC do not factor in the sea change in attitude of the chairman, owing to the financial constraints the recession has put on his business empire, and the galling experience of seeing most of the prem windfall money being gobbled up in player wages. I don't think that Floyd is the only one who has lost a little love for the cause: I think that JM, to a certain extent, feels that way too.

Forgive the pun, but RFC today is a different ball game altogether.
This is not personal criticism of the man, but then we had a chairman who reputedly drove to Bristol personally, with a cheque book in his pocket to secure the services of Lita, who bankrolled the puchase of Kitson, etc,etc.
Today's chairman, in the same situation, will certainly not bankroll such deals, so the only way these could have happened, with today's mentality, would probably have involved the sale of a Sidwell/Murty/Harper/etc. to raise the funds internally.

Brian has got a horse trading job here. I think that Gylfi-like sacrifices are going to become more and more the norm, where our gems will be traded off in order to strengthen elsewhere within the squad.
How this new style of building pans out remains to be seen, but I just hope that posterity remembers Brian fondly, because I don't think that any Reading manager has ever had such tough fiscal constraints to work within.

Sadly, that isn't building, it's maintenance.

Even more sadly, what is happening is much worse, our gems are sold off and there is little or no trade off in terms of squad strengthening.

Systematically, the squad gets weaker and weaker with every transfer window as the best players are sold to be replaced by cheaper alternatives, the end result is inevitable. If this does not change, Mcdermott and/or his successor will do will to keep this club in this division in 4 years time. In the long term, you cannot defy gravity.

Sadly I agree. I have been recognised on here as an RTG and I have supported the chairman and the club against many of the unreasonable expectations of supporters BUT the sale of Sigurdsson seems to me to show that there has been a seed change in the Chairman's thinking. Selling your best player indicates to me that there is no longer any desire to compete at the top level.

We are in maintenance mode now - with the target each year of Championship survival. The current squad is probably good enough to survive - although could yet be dragged down into the relegation dogfight. On the other hand if Brian continues to work wonders we might possibly sneak 6th. The margins are so tight in this division that almost anything is possible. This is why selling your best player is so foolish. Having sold Sig to "balance the books" I fear we will also see the back of anyone who looks vaguely decent at the season end. Goodbye Kebe for example - if anyone comes in with a reasonable offer.

Swansea have much the same players as last year but have added one quality player in Sinclair. Now to me they are nailed on for a top 6 finish. Cardiff brought in Bellamy and are also nailed on top 6. QPR have Tarbaat. We sold ours. That tells you all you need to know about the respective ambitions of the clubs.

The only positive is that I have not seen many other quality players on show for the other teams we have played so far this season. That is why it will be so tight this season between probably 4th or 5th place and 24th place.

[Wimb]

I think it comes down to expectations and opportunities though Wimb.

I don't mind us building for the future and buying players to integrate over time into a successful side as that's the best way to build a club and a stable team. The frustration is that once we'd built it we let it fall apart by not adjusting that formula to replace players with good enough quality.

Where we are now I'd agree we're doing a lot of things right, however, this team needs an injection of some real top end Championship quality if we really want to be one of the better teams in the league (my thinking is that I always want us to be striving to improve and be the best we can). Those players we brought in before were built into a pretty solid team by two very good managers over quite a time.

We've just dismantled a very good squad without really doing much (over 3 or 4 seasons) to address it and prevent the slide.

Think we're in agreement there Hoop, the mistakes made understandable but had such consequences that we may never see the PL again... however I dare to hope lightening can strike twice

I like to think of the situation like a tactical retreat, we've conceded a lot of ground recently and stopping the enemy by throwing some of our less abled troops into the firing line. But behind the line's we're slowly building a force that can regain what we've lost and push on.

The only thing I'm really confused about is the feeling that selling Sig was such a negative move. How many Championship clubs, with gates of under 20k and no more parachute payments could possibly turn down £7 million plus future add ons. It's not a lack of ambition it's pure and simple common sense because in the short term it allowed us to shore up the defence and hopefully from January we've now got a few bob to buy a better striker or midfielder.

If Gylfi stayed and we didn't have the funds to bring in Kizi and Harte do you think we'd finish in the top 2? if the answer is yes then perhaps you've a right to be angry. However if you think the best we'd do is the playoffs then really there's no difference as it's a lottery in the playoffs no matter who you have, and there's a chance we might get in and up through them this year anyway. The most likely scenario would be for us to not be promoted this year and if the Sig repeated last years form then the player is going to want to move up a level here or abroad. I know that's not 'ambitious' in the short term but it makes more sense long term because you don't waste another season in a system that relies on him.

In baseball trades are often done with 'a player to be named later' and it's only after that player is revealed that you can really judge a move. In my opinion until Brian spends that money that we've been told is now available it's unfair to label the sale a lack of ambition or bad for the team long run.

[SHORT AND CURLY]

If you want a laugh look at this match report!

The prat of an author appears to ignore the elbows!
I wonder why?

http://www.fansnetwork.co.uk/football/q ... tch_report


The kick off was lofted forward by Rangers towards Hulse who flew towards the ball and smashed heads with Matt Mills. Luckily neither player was seriously hurt and play restarted with a Reading free kick.

There was more of the same to come within three minutes as Reading striker Shane Long hit the deck after a clash with Gorkss on the edge of the QPR penalty box. The Irishman complained bitterly to the referee Steve Tanner about the use of an elbow as a shining black eye started to show and so began an afternoon of refereeing decisions by committee – whenever a foul was committed Brian Howard, Shane Long and Jem Karacan immediately joined the referee for a discussion over what should be done. This lamentable tactic is a feature of Reading’s play under Brian McDermott and should have been brought to a halt by Mr Tanner straight away – instead he allowed it to continue and fester like a bed sore throughout the game undermining his own position.

[Hoop Blah]

If Gylfi stayed and we didn't have the funds to bring in Kizi and Harte do you think we'd finish in the top 2? if the answer is yes then perhaps you've a right to be angry. However if you think the best we'd do is the playoffs then really there's no difference as it's a lottery in the playoffs no matter who you have, and there's a chance we might get in and up through them this year anyway. The most likely scenario would be for us to not be promoted this year and if the Sig repeated last years form then the player is going to want to move up a level here or abroad. I know that's not 'ambitious' in the short term but it makes more sense long term because you don't waste another season in a system that relies on him.

I think the main issue is that as a Championship team coming off the back of making money for a few seasons thanks to the Premiership money we, as the 'well run club' we're told we are, should be able to afford an aging left back from the divisions below and a player not required from the league above without selling off the family silver.

It might not be that the club has enough money to do so, but realistically, if we want to compete at the level I think we should then we need that kind of 'small' investment.

I don't think we'd have to have turned down the £7m bid for Sigurdsson if we hadn't been trying to flog him off in the first place.

[STAR Liaison]

I think the main issue is that as a Championship team coming off the back of making money for a few seasons thanks to the Premiership money we, as the 'well run club' we're told we are, should be able to afford an aging left back from the divisions below and a player not required from the league above without selling off the family silver.

You would like to think so but in the current football wage climate I don't think that is possible. I think that if wages were in line with the matchday income we would be complaining about losing more than the gems. STAR was told at the start of last season that the budget was showing a hole in the 2010/11 season and hence I was not surprised that when there was a good offer for Sig it was snapped up. I have no information to back it but suspect that if the offer had not come in for the Sig then there would not only have been no Kish or Harte but quite possibly cut-backs in the non playing staff and maybe some of the youngsters as the books were not balancing, and the January window would have been something to dread.

[Victor Meldrew]

I think the main issue is that as a Championship team coming off the back of making money for a few seasons thanks to the Premiership money we, as the 'well run club' we're told we are, should be able to afford an aging left back from the divisions below and a player not required from the league above without selling off the family silver.

You would like to think so but in the current football wage climate I don't think that is possible. I think that if wages were in line with the matchday income we would be complaining about losing more than the gems. STAR was told at the start of last season that the budget was showing a hole in the 2010/11 season and hence I was not surprised that when there was a good offer for Sig it was snapped up. I have no information to back it but suspect that if the offer had not come in for the Sig then there would not only have been no Kish or Harte but quite possibly cut-backs in the non playing staff and maybe some of the youngsters as the books were not balancing, and the January window would have been something to dread.

So in a nutshell "not a very well-run club"?

[RoyalBlue]

I think the main issue is that as a Championship team coming off the back of making money for a few seasons thanks to the Premiership money we, as the 'well run club' we're told we are, should be able to afford an aging left back from the divisions below and a player not required from the league above without selling off the family silver.

You would like to think so but in the current football wage climate I don't think that is possible. I think that if wages were in line with the matchday income we would be complaining about losing more than the gems. STAR was told at the start of last season that the budget was showing a hole in the 2010/11 season and hence I was not surprised that when there was a good offer for Sig it was snapped up. I have no information to back it but suspect that if the offer had not come in for the Sig then there would not only have been no Kish or Harte but quite possibly cut-backs in the non playing staff and maybe some of the youngsters as the books were not balancing, and the January window would have been something to dread.

The latter might still be the case as one of our better players 'decides' that he wants a move. I'm certainly not holding out any real hope of proper net positive investment in the playing squad. At best expect more tales of the right players not being available, bids knocked back, gazumping etc. etc. and then a token loan or bargain base signing.

Promises of future signings hold about as much water as a Lid-Dem promise to vote against university tuition fees!

I think the main issue is that as a Championship team coming off the back of making money for a few seasons thanks to the Premiership money we, as the 'well run club' we're told we are, should be able to afford an aging left back from the divisions below and a player not required from the league above without selling off the family silver.

You would like to think so but in the current football wage climate I don't think that is possible. I think that if wages were in line with the matchday income we would be complaining about losing more than the gems. STAR was told at the start of last season that the budget was showing a hole in the 2010/11 season and hence I was not surprised that when there was a good offer for Sig it was snapped up. I have no information to back it but suspect that if the offer had not come in for the Sig then there would not only have been no Kish or Harte but quite possibly cut-backs in the non playing staff and maybe some of the youngsters as the books were not balancing, and the January window would have been something to dread.

So in a nutshell "not a very well-run club"?

To be fair, the only people I ever recall telling us that were the current business management team and their followers. How many independent reports ever said it directly, as opposed to parroting the club's own soundbites?

Of all those clubs who envied our business model, how many are named and on record as saying so?

[Ian Royal]

Hull?

Just watched the highlights.

Now pretty sure it was Howard who gave away the penalty, bad challenge. Were people saying it was Mills?
Harte far too easily caught flat footed by Taarabt's through ball, don't think Mills could do much more than he did, but Karacan should have been closer to the follow up from Fourlin(sp?) to make the ball first or at least pressure the shot.
Third one, not a bad save from Fed particularly but Smith allowed to follow up unchallenged. We really don't seem to track runners very well - I'm sure it was a problem that was happening earlier in the season and last season as well.

Good strike from Long, was it deflected it was hard to tell from that angle and seemed to have an odd flight from the way he kicked it if it wasn't?

Taarabt really looked a cut above, and a diving twat, just from 3 or 4 minutes highlights.

[Svlad Cjelli]

So in a nutshell "not a very well-run club"?

Why do people cling to the idea that a "well-run club" is one turning a profit? Considering the number of clubs that have failed in these circumstances (and most of them in pre-recession times) a "well-run club" is one flexible enough to be able to survive and stay reasonably competitive.

To be fair, the only people I ever recall telling us that were the current business management team and their followers. How many independent reports ever said it directly, as opposed to parroting the club's own soundbites?

Who else would know, other than the club and the people they tell? You only see independent reports about clubs in trouble - and you've see plenty of those when clubs are in trouble. Journalists aren't interested in sucess, just failure, so this very absence is a good thing.

Of all those clubs who envied our business model, how many are named and on record as saying so?

Wolves, for one.

[Snowball]

Good strike from Long, was it deflected it was hard to tell from that angle and seemed to have an odd flight from the way he kicked it if it wasn't?

I was right in line and it looked a clean strike. On TV it looks like the challenge is close. Didn't look that way live.

But then I was a few feet from the penalty and I "knew" Mills made the tackle. (It was Howard)

[under the tin]

I think Schards point is valid, although as Wycombe says we're not going to spend money on more expensive replacements for those we'll always have to say good bye to.

This is profoundly true.

You would like to think so but in the current football wage climate I don't think that is possible. I think that if wages were in line with the matchday income we would be complaining about losing more than the gems. ..... as the books were not balancing.....

[quote="Svlad Cjelli"]
Why do people cling to the idea that a "well-run club" is one turning a profit? a "well run club" is one flexible enough to be able to survive and stay reasonably competitive.

It's because of quotes like these that some of us feel that the club and the fans' expectations are being gently, subtlely, managed downwards, and where the club levels out at will be solely determined by its level of income.
I remain of the opinion that achieving break even is only possible with either a greatly scaled down operation, or by offering a successful, attractive football product that increases its volume sales (attendances, merchandise, etc.).
Where people like me get frustrated is when we remember that 8000 for a derby game Vs Aldersh*t/Brentford at EP was considered a good gate, and we get nearly twice that as an average now. I don't care if they're "plastics", or whatever else some want to refer to them as.
As Muhammad Ali once said in a Parkinson interview "I don't care if they come to boo me, they paid me money to do it"
We've come such a long way. What a waste to let those new fans drift away, and start buying Chelsea replica shirts again.

[Wimb]

Valid points again Tin but I wonder if maybe our anger should be less towards the club that tries to run itself in a 'financially prudent' mannor, and more towards the Premier League. Teams that are relegated will now get nearly £50 million over 4 years, how are clubs not in that bracket, or having a super rich money to the wind chairman expected to compete... If we didn't sell Gyfli then in all honesty where is the revenue going to come from?

Just doing some mental theory here, I realise all of the below is guesstimating so happy to challenge but it's interesting when you get down to thinking about how much running a Championship team must cost. For the purpose of this I'll assume that most senior Championship players in our squad will be at or around 10k a week.

ST holders will probably generate about 5 million or so a year if we get say 10,000 adults and a thousand or 2 concessions.

On average we're getting between 15-18 thousand so maybe over the course of the year on average we'll sell 4000 full price tickets at £22 bringing in £2 million more.

The current FL TV deal is worth £88 million a year to the football League, so at most we'd get what a maximum of £2 million a year from that? maybe add another £2 million in solidarity payments from the PL..

Merchandise revenues? well I can't really guess but if a replica shirt costs £40 by the time you take tax etc off maybe the club makes at most £25 per shirt? if 10,000 fans bought a shirt and say another £25 in the Megastore over a year then thats £500k.

Other matchday revenue if say 15,000 spent £10 each would be 3.5 million though that's not taking into account any of the costs which you could speculate would probably be about 1.5? so maybe a flat £2 million a season there.

Sponsorship+corporate sales? again not sure at all but as a guess maybe £2 million again

Overall that leaves guaranteed revenue of around 5m+2m+2m+500k+2m+2m = 13.5m and that's before taxes and such (not a business expert at all) but maybe 20%? so gives you about £11million to play with.

If we go by the theory that a typical first team player will earn around 500k then that just about funds a 22 man squad. On top of that you've got to fund the academy, pay the other backroom staff, directors etc, pay insurance, maintain the stadium, training ground car parks etc and I can't believe that all that will cost anything less then maybe £5 million every season.

I am utterly utterly open to people ripping apart those figures but I think they sound in the right ballpark and if that's the case how does a football club of our size hope to compete at the top end of this league against teams that from Parachute payments alone will get £15-12 million a season.

Again not making excuses for our club I just think we're another victim of the unsustainable and ridiculous nature of football finances.