Stoke show RFC how to run a Real Football Club

[Svlad Cjelli]

That's only valid if the "academy players or cheap lower league players" aren't good enough - as you seem to assume they won't ever be - in fact, that seems to be a very pejorative comment.

So far they always do seem to have been good enough.

Meantime, I'm still waiting for an answer to the question (and this is aimed at you too, Schards) :

The average Championship salary bill in the Championship last season (09/10) was £14.75m, (on a salary/revenue ratio of 88%). We paid more than the average salary for the league - so over £15m, which was about £4m more than our total income. If we paid less we'd lose players a whole lot quicker than we do.

So please would you answer the glaring inconsistency that there is across all your arguments? At the same time you both want the club to spend more on players whilst also criticising them for running up an annual deficit!

What would you like the club to do?

[Wycombe Royal]

OK Schards, you want the club to spend more. Where is the money going to come from? Or do you want the club to build up huge debts by paying transfer fees we cannot afford and wages we cannot sustain?

And don't start going down the line of spending the money we are receiving from players sold as we know that is going towards the running of the club to try and ensure it breaks even.

[Schards#2]

OK Schards, you want the club to spend more. Where is the money going to come from? Or do you want the club to build up huge debts by paying transfer fees we cannot afford and wages we cannot sustain?

And don't start going down the line of spending the money we are receiving from players sold as we know that is going towards the running of the club to try and ensure it breaks even.

This is also for Dirk

We know from the club's own comments that the sale of Gylfi covered the anticipated losses for the end of 2010/2011. So, ignoring that we performed above expectations, had revenue from a wembley final e.t.c, that means we were OK as of the end of last season.

Since when, we have received around £12m in transfer fees and, presumably, lost two of the higher wage earners.

I don't want the club to go for broke but there are shades of grey. I see no reason who the club can't reinvest the wages and £3-£4 million on new players, (who knows, they might) without threatening the future of the club. I suspect they will spend less than £1m. To me, that demonstrates no ambition beyond staying financially viable.

If the acadamy players and the cheap purchases we may make were good enough, they would be playing at a higher level already. They will be players with potential but are not the finished article. It is not an unreasonable assumption that selling your best centre half and centre forward and replacing them with acadamy/cheap alternatives will weaken the team.

There is no magic wand or solution unless JM sells to a model owner who invests without requiring a return (unlikely), that's a reality. What I dispute is that ours is a perfect business model when, in fact, the logical conclusion of it is a worse team, lower gates, bigger black hole, more sales, worse team, lower gates etc, etc.

I may sound selfish but I would like to see a few teams fold altogether as this would make our business model make more sense and force other clubs to be less profligate and create a more level playing field. It's barely happened a handful of times in my lifetime though.

[Wycombe Royal]

The club are looking at the long term picture and whilst improving the balance sheet they also know that there is the possibility that we may not be able to rely on huge transfer income in the future to balance the books. We will spend more money before the end of August and also a bit more in the January transfer window. And it also seems to be forgotten that Leigertwood was bought for a fee that was probably around £1m (and his wages also won't be insignificant). I would also guess that Bongani's wage contribution is also fairly large as well as the loan fee we will also have paid to Spurs.

But these types of things always get forgotten.

[Svlad Cjelli]

FTR, I have no doubts that we're going to see a few new players in the next few weeks - of the value £2-3m or so.

And if we don't it won't be because we can't afford it or don't want to spend - it'll be because we can't get the right player at what we feel is the right price. Because we never allow ourselves to be blackmailed by clubs or players.

There is no magic wand or solution unless JM sells to a model owner who invests without requiring a return (unlikely), that's a reality. What I dispute is that ours is a perfect business model when, in fact, the logical conclusion of it is a worse team, lower gates, bigger black hole, more sales, worse team, lower gates etc, etc.

No-one's ever said our is a a perfect business model - I've certainly never said that. I just say it's the best (or "least worst") for a club our size operating within the constraints that football's lunatic financial model imposes on us

I may sound selfish but I would like to see a few teams fold altogether as this would make our business model make more sense and force other clubs to be less profligate and create a more level playing field. It's barely happened a handful of times in my lifetime though.

I'm not sure they'll go bust, but football is rapidly seeing sense and moving towards our model. The Financial Fair Play rules, scrapping of Football Creditor's Rule and other measures from DCMS all help - and just a general realisation that it has to stop is now dawning on more and more in the game. The fact that an England international like Upson was out of contract and had to compromise his wage demands is just one of the good signs.

[Royal Rother]

If the acadamy players... were good enough, they would be playing at a higher level already.

I can't get my head around that.

[Schards#2]

If the acadamy players... were good enough, they would be playing at a higher level already.

I can't get my head around that.

Really?

If our acadamy players were good enough to hold their own in the Championship, they would be in the squad or out on loan getting experience at this level.

[rhroyal]

I certainly think most other clubs would take greater steps than Reading will to fill the gaps.

I fully expect Reading to reinvest less than 10% of their incoming transfer fees. Just like last year.

You need an awful lot of luck or scouting/acadamy products far superior to every other team for that business model not to end in relegation.

Why do you look at "amount of money spent" as the only indicator worth considering?

What few people who look at just that one, single, indicator don't seem to grasp is that it's not about how much you spend. It's about how and where you spend, and RFC over the years has developed an ability to spend more effectively and more efficiently than just about any other club.

We're one of the few clubs (so far) realising that total spend is less important than how you use the money. But the whole of football is slowly waking up to that and coming closer to our way of thinking.

And, despite the same things being said every single season - about how the whole policy will doom us to relegation - it's a business model that continues to go from strength to strength.

2006/7 - 8th in Premiership
2007/8 - 18th in Premiership
2008/9 - 4th Championship
2009/10 - 9th Championship

In Mid Feb 2011, we were 12th before embarking on a sensational and completely unforseen run (which is great), but without that, it's a straight line in the wrong direction, how is this going from strength to strength?

It's not just about money, if you lose someone in a Bosman, it's just as damaging. But the reality is that if you sell or lose your top performers and replace them with acadamy players or cheap lower league players, your side will get progressively worse. Once in a while you will unearth a diamond but you cannot defy gravity for ever.

Once in a while, you can come back from 2-0 down to win but, if you give the opposition a 2-0 start every game, over time, you will lose more than you win and it will cost you.

You can't overlook a winning run though. I could argue that had it not been for those run of draws, we'd have had automatic promotion. That run was far below our average points per game. Cutting chunks out of the previous season is a ridiculous way to structure an argument; we won those games because we gelled as a team. We weren't lucky. In fact we were brilliant as a squad, away wins to Barnsley and Ipswich when down to bare bones are a testament.

So we made progress last season, even if you'd like to pretend otherwise. I'd also say that, within our business model and club size (attendances etc. - where out resources come from) top half Championship is about where we belong. The Premiership was a blip in this context. As stated earlier, it's a blip we failed to capitalize on and we could have had a better go at establishing up there. However, this supposed stagnation is us coming down from punching above our weight, back to the level we've been competing at for almost 10 years. It's rather short sighted to suggest that this decline will continue.

We'll continue to be a mid-upper Championship side if we continue running the model this way. We'll have fluctuations around that; a bad manager could take us down (as Rodgers nearly did) and a good manager could take us up (as BM nearly did). Same for most Championship clubs. To suggest that we're in eternal decline and heading down to League 1, based upon the logic that 4 years ago we were 8th in the Premiership and this trend is bound to continue, is not though out.

[Schards#2]

We'll continue to be a mid-upper Championship side if we continue running the model this way. We'll have fluctuations around that; a bad manager could take us down (as Rodgers nearly did) and a good manager could take us up (as BM nearly did). Same for most Championship clubs. To suggest that we're in eternal decline and heading down to League 1, based upon the logic that 4 years ago we were 8th in the Premiership and this trend is bound to continue, is not though out.

That's not the point i'm making though.

I'm saying that if, every year, the best performers leave to be replaced by acadamy players and cheap buys from the lower divisions then, over time, it is inevitable that the squad will be progressively worse and this will reflect in performances, results and league position. This business model is not one we were following prior to promotion.

[rhroyal]

If the acadamy players... were good enough, they would be playing at a higher level already.

I can't get my head around that.

Really?

If our acadamy players were good enough to hold their own in the Championship, they would be in the squad or out on loan getting experience at this level.

I disagree again, in way. Here and now short term, you're probably right. How long have you supported RFC though? How good was Sonko when he first arrived? How good was HRK initially breaking through the ranks? How good was Long 2 years ago?

Academy players can have potential and grow into Championship/higher level players. Surely when this is the case, cheaper, more experienced signings such as Harte and Griffin, or loan signings, are the way forward. It takes the pressure off youngsters and allows them to flourish on loan or working behind the scenes with the backroom staff.

This is what Khumalo has done for Morisson. What happens when Khumalo leaves? Hopefully Morisson is ready. If not, we repeat the process or eventually reach the conclusion that he isn't good enough. To reach that conclusion now after less than a year at the club is stupid though. Players breaking in and making such an impact at 17/18 is very rare, which is why Walcott, Oxlaide-Chamberlain and Wickham fetched such high fees.

To me, you're saying that if our academy players or youngsters had it in them, they would be in the squad already. Very flawed argument.

[Schards#2]

I disagree again, in way. Here and now short term, you're probably right. How long have you supported RFC though? How good was Sonko when he first arrived? How good was HRK initially breaking through the ranks? How good was Long 2 years ago?

Academy players can have potential and grow into Championship/higher level players. Surely when this is the case, cheaper, more experienced signings such as Harte and Griffin, or loan signings, are the way forward. It takes the pressure off youngsters and allows them to flourish on loan or working behind the scenes with the backroom staff.

This is what Khumalo has done for Morisson. What happens when Khumalo leaves? Hopefully Morisson is ready. If not, we repeat the process or eventually reach the conclusion that he isn't good enough. To reach that conclusion now after less than a year at the club is stupid though. Players breaking in and making such an impact at 17/18 is very rare, which is why Walcott, Oxlaide-Chamberlain and Wickham fetched such high fees.

To me, you're saying that if our academy players or youngsters had it in them, they would be in the squad already. Very flawed argument.

My point was that there are not, as of now, ready to step up to the mark and replace the likes of Mills and Long.

A point you seem to accept.

In my earlier posts, I did say they may well have the potential but that does not equate to being able here and now.

[rhroyal]

We'll continue to be a mid-upper Championship side if we continue running the model this way. We'll have fluctuations around that; a bad manager could take us down (as Rodgers nearly did) and a good manager could take us up (as BM nearly did). Same for most Championship clubs. To suggest that we're in eternal decline and heading down to League 1, based upon the logic that 4 years ago we were 8th in the Premiership and this trend is bound to continue, is not though out.

That's not the point i'm making though.

I'm saying that if, every year, the best performers leave to be replaced by acadamy players and cheap buys from the lower divisions then, over time, it is inevitable that the squad will be progressively worse and this will reflect in performances, results and league position. This business model is not one we were following prior to promotion.

Who were we signing before promotion? Lita and Convey are the only 2 big money signings I remember. Otherwise that squad was half made from cheap signings from lower divisions. We showed more ambition than now by keeping hold of Kitson, Sidwell and Shorey I'll admit.

It seems like people don't trust us to produce/develop talent at this club any to keep us competitive. We have an incredible track record over the last 10 years which argues to the contrary. Is there a better track record in the country? (I'm not just talking academy, I'm talking developing youngsters found through scouting networks too) And people say we can't expect it to continue. Why not? We're one of the best at it, We have academy kids impressing in pre-season and on loan in the football league yet again.

When we find parts of the squad which we can't fill this way, we also have a track record of signing proven talent at this level. People like to ignore this part, but Griffin, McAnuff, Leigertwood and Zurab fit this description over the past couple of years, not to mention another typical RFC signing in Harte.

Which leads to another point; why do people assume that we're not going to reinvest a decent amount of the Long money? If McD sees the opportunity to enhance the squad, he'll do it. He has done throughout his reign. Can people please wait 3 weeks for the end of the end of the transfer window before opening up this debate again?

[Royal Rother]

If the acadamy players... were good enough, they would be playing at a higher level already.

I can't get my head around that.

Really?

If our acadamy players were good enough to hold their own in the Championship, they would be in the squad or out on loan getting experience at this level.

You said "a higher level" not this level. (Don't do a Frimmers on me please.)

Thing is there are a lot of considerations when it comes to selecting young players for regular 1st team appearances.

BM might look at Obita and Taylor, Arnold and Ugwu, Walcott and D'Ath and believe they are better footballers than what we have in equivalent positions. But if doesn't think they are physically and emotionally mature enough to deal with the pressures and the bumps and bruises just yet, he will keep them in the nurturing environment of the Academy for a while longer, whilst gradually introducing them to the 1st team squad and allowing them to grow from youths into men. It doesn't take a long but exposing young players to the full rigours of pro football too early can damage them.

[rhroyal]

I disagree again, in way. Here and now short term, you're probably right. How long have you supported RFC though? How good was Sonko when he first arrived? How good was HRK initially breaking through the ranks? How good was Long 2 years ago?

Academy players can have potential and grow into Championship/higher level players. Surely when this is the case, cheaper, more experienced signings such as Harte and Griffin, or loan signings, are the way forward. It takes the pressure off youngsters and allows them to flourish on loan or working behind the scenes with the backroom staff.

This is what Khumalo has done for Morisson. What happens when Khumalo leaves? Hopefully Morisson is ready. If not, we repeat the process or eventually reach the conclusion that he isn't good enough. To reach that conclusion now after less than a year at the club is stupid though. Players breaking in and making such an impact at 17/18 is very rare, which is why Walcott, Oxlaide-Chamberlain and Wickham fetched such high fees.

To me, you're saying that if our academy players or youngsters had it in them, they would be in the squad already. Very flawed argument.

My point was that there are not, as of now, ready to step up to the mark and replace the likes of Mills and Long.

A point you seem to accept.

In my earlier posts, I did say they may well have the potential but that does not equate to being able here and now.

Thankfully there are 3 weeks of the transfer window left and we just cashed in on Long. Don't jump to conclusions that nobody is coming in. I expect to see some strengthening before the end of the window.

[Schards#2]

[quote="Royal Rother
You said "a higher level" not this level. (Don't do a Frimmers on me please.)

Thing is there are a lot of considerations when it comes to selecting young players for regular 1st team appearances.

BM might look at Obita and Taylor, Arnold and Ugwu, Walcott and D'Ath and believe they are better footballers than what we have in equivalent positions. But if doesn't think they are physically and emotionally mature enough to deal with the pressures and the bumps and bruises just yet, he will keep them in the nurturing environment of the Academy for a while longer, whilst gradually introducing them to the 1st team squad and allowing them to grow from youths into men. It doesn't take a long but exposing young players to the full rigours of pro football too early can damage them.

A higher level than academy football

[Schards#2]

I disagree again, in way. Here and now short term, you're probably right. How long have you supported RFC though? How good was Sonko when he first arrived? How good was HRK initially breaking through the ranks? How good was Long 2 years ago?

Academy players can have potential and grow into Championship/higher level players. Surely when this is the case, cheaper, more experienced signings such as Harte and Griffin, or loan signings, are the way forward. It takes the pressure off youngsters and allows them to flourish on loan or working behind the scenes with the backroom staff.

This is what Khumalo has done for Morisson. What happens when Khumalo leaves? Hopefully Morisson is ready. If not, we repeat the process or eventually reach the conclusion that he isn't good enough. To reach that conclusion now after less than a year at the club is stupid though. Players breaking in and making such an impact at 17/18 is very rare, which is why Walcott, Oxlaide-Chamberlain and Wickham fetched such high fees.

To me, you're saying that if our academy players or youngsters had it in them, they would be in the squad already. Very flawed argument.

My point was that there are not, as of now, ready to step up to the mark and replace the likes of Mills and Long.

A point you seem to accept.

In my earlier posts, I did say they may well have the potential but that does not equate to being able here and now.

Thankfully there are 3 weeks of the transfer window left and we just cashed in on Long. Don't jump to conclusions that nobody is coming in. I expect to see some strengthening before the end of the window.

History would suggest you will be dissapointed.

I would be happy with £3-4 million being spent, I expect less than £1m.

[Vision]

I disagree again, in way. Here and now short term, you're probably right. How long have you supported RFC though? How good was Sonko when he first arrived? How good was HRK initially breaking through the ranks? How good was Long 2 years ago?

Academy players can have potential and grow into Championship/higher level players. Surely when this is the case, cheaper, more experienced signings such as Harte and Griffin, or loan signings, are the way forward. It takes the pressure off youngsters and allows them to flourish on loan or working behind the scenes with the backroom staff.

This is what Khumalo has done for Morisson. What happens when Khumalo leaves? Hopefully Morisson is ready. If not, we repeat the process or eventually reach the conclusion that he isn't good enough. To reach that conclusion now after less than a year at the club is stupid though. Players breaking in and making such an impact at 17/18 is very rare, which is why Walcott, Oxlaide-Chamberlain and Wickham fetched such high fees.

To me, you're saying that if our academy players or youngsters had it in them, they would be in the squad already. Very flawed argument.

My point was that there are not, as of now, ready to step up to the mark and replace the likes of Mills and Long.

A point you seem to accept.

In my earlier posts, I did say they may well have the potential but that does not equate to being able here and now.

To be honest though, neither does spending hefty sums on supposedly proven players as we've discovered to our cost equate to being able either. Mills himself was dump for the first 6 months he came here despite being proven whereas in the same time frame you could argue Glyfi,McCarthy,Karacan even Pearce had a far more immediate impact on the fisrt team.

There is no perfect solution and you're right the risk we take is in not being able to replace the big players we sell and having a team which cant compete at this level. That clearly hasnt happened yet and in fact this season past was better than previously despite selling the best young player to come through our ranks in years. Even then though, ultimately the worse case scenario for us would be endangering our championship status rather than our actual future.

[Here for the KEBE]

[quote="rhroyal
I disagree again, in way. Here and now short term, you're probably right. How long have you supported RFC though? How good was Sonko when he first arrived? How good was HRK initially breaking through the ranks? How good was Long 2 years ago?

Academy players can have potential and grow into Championship/higher level players. Surely when this is the case, cheaper, more experienced signings such as Harte and Griffin, or loan signings, are the way forward. It takes the pressure off youngsters and allows them to flourish on loan or working behind the scenes with the backroom staff.

This is what Khumalo has done for Morisson. What happens when Khumalo leaves? Hopefully Morisson is ready. If not, we repeat the process or eventually reach the conclusion that he isn't good enough. To reach that conclusion now after less than a year at the club is stupid though. Players breaking in and making such an impact at 17/18 is very rare, which is why Walcott, Oxlaide-Chamberlain and Wickham fetched such high fees.

To me, you're saying that if our academy players or youngsters had it in them, they would be in the squad already. Very flawed argument.[/quote]

I agree- many fans forget even 12 months ago when Long failed to hit a barn door week in, week out. We were crying out for a striker and he was even getting booed by certain fans. HRK is a similar scenario and the less said about Sonko's first few months as a Reading player the better. So the answer to the next black hole is potentially through some of our younger players- I'd love to see Church prove people wrong. The worry to me is the investment other clubs are making. Forest signing Derbyshire and Ipswich getting Andrews on loan- what is stopping up from a similar type of loan? A couple of signings could make Reading a top 2 team in my opinion, alongside the reinstatement of McCarthy in goal and the concern is that the club are unwilling to take the risk. Both 2008/09 and 2010/11 seasons I'd advocate that we were 1/2 players away from regaining Premier league status- last season The Sig and 3 years ago, an attacking midfielder would have done it

[Ian Royal]

2006/7 - 8th in Premiership
2007/8 - 18th in Premiership
2008/9 - 4th Championship
2009/10 - 9th Championship

Or if you look at it in more detail.

07/08 - 18th in Prem
08/09 - 4th in Chump
Jan 10 - 22/23 in Chump - our recent nadir
May 10 - 9 in chump
10/11 - 5 in Chump

So in fact we reached the bottom of our drop following relegation and are now back on the up / at our "natural" level of around 4th - 12th.

As for our academy players being ready for this level, well no, currently they aren't because they haven't really played at it. However we've seen with Gylfi it can only take half a dozen games to get up to decent speed in some cases. So it's quite possible that by the end of the season that some of the likes of Church, HRK, Obita, Taylor, McCarthy, Andersen could have proven themselves to be good enough and be regulars or semi-regulars.

[Schards#2]

I disagree again, in way. Here and now short term, you're probably right. How long have you supported RFC though?

Just over 40 years