Stoke show RFC how to run a Real Football Club

[Hoop Blah]

Personally, I find it hard to believe that:

a) Coppell became the only manager in history to choose not to spend money that was made available

b) Madejski, having offered Coppell riches beyond the dreams of avarice, completely U turned to the extent that future managers are offered nothing at all other than the oppotunity to reinvest about 10-15% of anything raised by sales

Both scenarios seem unlikely, particularly compared to the other, entirely plausible, scenario that Madejski did not make funds available to Coppell.

a) Wenger for one, and apparently Fergie too.

b) The way the club is run has changed quite a bit for various reasons plus the money that was available wasn't earth shattering amounts, just enough from within the budgets set out to bring in 2 or 3 Premier League players.

It's not rocket sicence.

[Pseud O'Nym]

Personally, I find it hard to believe that:

a) Coppell became the only manager in history to choose not to spend money that was made available

I take it you've never met any Arsenal fans?

b) Madejski, having offered Coppell riches beyond the dreams of avarice, completely U turned to the extent that future managers are offered nothing at all other than the oppotunity to reinvest about 10-15% of anything raised by sales

That's just silly. We'll never know how much was available, Madejski at the time said "a substantial war chest" whatever that might mean, but that was before the biggest recession in living memory. Things have changed.

Both scenarios seem unlikely, particularly compared to the other, entirely plausible, scenario that Madejski did not make funds available to Coppell.

But Coppell, completely out of character, telling a whopping great lie for no reason is entirely plausible?

[brendywendy]

Matt Taylor was all but a Reading player, the whole package had been agreed including wages but Coppell pulled the plug. O'Neil and Gary Cahill were also all but done deals. Those were mistakes made by Coppell - end of.

If true, howling decisions by coppell.

why question the truth of it though? isnt he on record as saying just such a thing at a fans forum, and also since he left

[brendywendy]

TBF we don't know that. Managers don't always tell the truth. Look at McDemott's protestations that we weren't in the maket for ALF.

We do know that - SC confirmed it at a Fans' Forum, and I've heard it from other sources also.

It's all down to who you believe and who you don't.

I find the suggestion that SJM is a completely innocent party in all the proceedings at Reading at best dubious.

so JM sanctions 4 million bids for scott brown and mensah, and also the attempt to get lescott, but you cant believe that he did the same for cahill etc?

is that just cos it doesnt fit with your thoughts on JM, or is there some other, more rational reason?

[brendywendy]

Personally, I find it hard to believe that:

a) Coppell became the only manager in history to choose not to spend money that was made available

b) Madejski, having offered Coppell riches beyond the dreams of avarice, completely U turned to the extent that future managers are offered nothing at all other than the oppotunity to reinvest about 10-15% of anything raised by sales

Both scenarios seem unlikely, particularly compared to the other, entirely plausible, scenario that Madejski did not make funds available to Coppell.

A) you mean apart from arsene wenger fopr the last million seasons?
B)we were in th eprem, and therefore had much bigger income than we do now,JM also had more disposable cash at that point. so yes, i think thats a fair assumption

they basically seem unlikely to you cos you are obsessed with this weird conspiracy theory schards

[Svlad Cjelli]

Matt Taylor was all but a Reading player, the whole package had been agreed including wages but Coppell pulled the plug. O'Neil and Gary Cahill were also all but done deals. Those were mistakes made by Coppell - end of.

If true, howling decisions by coppell.

why question the truth of it though? isnt he on record as saying just such a thing at a fans forum, and also since he left

He believed that his current squad of players was good enough to stay up, and that bringing in new players would cause more harm than good.

Yes, he got it wrong, but :

- the margin of error we went down by was so damn close in the end. No-one could predict Fulham's rise from the depths, as they were way behind us in January, and effectively down at half-time when we were at Wigan. I remember a conversation with someone at the club that January where I said we'd be Ok as long as we finished above Brum. We did, but we weren't OK.
- managers are paid to make just that sort of decision. Yes, SC was wrong in the end result, but who's to say whether a new player would have made things even worse?

[brendywendy]

as always svlad you can see exactly what he thought, and exactly why he thought it.
it may have ended up wrong in hindsight, but at the time it was evident why he did what he did.

[Schards#2]

Personally, I find it hard to believe that:

a) Coppell became the only manager in history to choose not to spend money that was made available

b) Madejski, having offered Coppell riches beyond the dreams of avarice, completely U turned to the extent that future managers are offered nothing at all other than the oppotunity to reinvest about 10-15% of anything raised by sales

Both scenarios seem unlikely, particularly compared to the other, entirely plausible, scenario that Madejski did not make funds available to Coppell.

A) you mean apart from arsene wenger fopr the last million seasons?
B)we were in th eprem, and therefore had much bigger income than we do now,JM also had more disposable cash at that point. so yes, i think thats a fair assumption

they basically seem unlikely to you cos you are obsessed with this weird conspiracy theory schards

So, thinking a manager's behaviour unusual as it differs from the behaviour of 99.99% of football managers throughout history, and thinking it odd that for one year only our chairman suggested an approach the polar opposite of what he has done since is a "weird conspiracy theory".

OK

[Z175]

Not content with going over the old ground of "why do we not spend money?" we are now raking over "why did we not spend money".

This is why we didn't...

"They have big ambitions to grow at the club"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/footbal ... 871949.stm

"a run of three defeats in the league, including Saturday's 1-0 loss at home to Dagenham & Redbridge,"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/14670814.stm

[Svlad Cjelli]

they basically seem unlikely to you cos you are obsessed with this weird conspiracy theory schards

So, thinking a manager's behaviour unusual as it differs from the behaviour of 99.99% of football managers throughout history, and thinking it odd that for one year only our chairman suggested an approach the polar opposite of what he has done since is a "weird conspiracy theory".

As is usual on HNA, both of those assertions are wild exaggerations.

The reality lies between the extremes of such hyperbole.

[brendywendy]

Personally, I find it hard to believe that:

a) Coppell became the only manager in history to choose not to spend money that was made available

b) Madejski, having offered Coppell riches beyond the dreams of avarice, completely U turned to the extent that future managers are offered nothing at all other than the oppotunity to reinvest about 10-15% of anything raised by sales

Both scenarios seem unlikely, particularly compared to the other, entirely plausible, scenario that Madejski did not make funds available to Coppell.

A) you mean apart from arsene wenger fopr the last million seasons?
B)we were in th eprem, and therefore had much bigger income than we do now,JM also had more disposable cash at that point. so yes, i think thats a fair assumption

they basically seem unlikely to you cos you are obsessed with this weird conspiracy theory schards

So, thinking a manager's behaviour unusual as it differs from the behaviour of 99.99% of football managers throughout history, and thinking it odd that for one year only our chairman suggested an approach the polar opposite of what he has done since is a "weird conspiracy theory".

OK

thats pretty lame chards. even for you.

any actual argument?

its not a competition you now, im just genuinely interested why/how you think like you do, and actual explanations would realy help rather than constantly trying to get one over anyone.

[Z175]

Just as a note to the "how to run a club".. a bit general football

Forest spent a lot of cash a couple of years ago and it didn't get them anywhere. Now McLaren's quitting because of the financial situation.

Their Chairman has "Invested"(STG) / "gambled" (RTG) £70m of his £300m fortune in the club and has realised, Madejski style, that pissing it away until he is bankrupt won't benefit forest in the long run.

McLarens outraged at only being able to spend £2m. Thats probably another 1% of the chairman's fortune down the drain.

If Wally does leave there will surely be even more abuse of the chairman. If Doughty packs it up this might have to go on the "clubs in crisis" / "Is administration a good thing?" threads.

[FiNeRaIn]

a) Wenger for one, and apparently Fergie too.

It's not rocket sicence.

I wouldn't attempt rocket science without some English lessons first.

But in all seriousness I know you are taking the piss when saying Fergie, so why bother? He's spent absolutely BUCKET loads in his time as Man Utd manager, look at what they've spent just this season alone ffs. This has to be the worst example ever.

[Terminal Boardom]

Just as a note to the "how to run a club".. a bit general football

Forest spent a lot of cash a couple of years ago and it didn't get them anywhere. Now McLaren's quitting because of the financial situation.

Their Chairman has "Invested"(STG) / "gambled" (RTG) £70m of his £300m fortune in the club and has realised, Madejski style, that pissing it away until he is bankrupt won't benefit forest in the long run.

McLarens outraged at only being able to spend £2m. Thats probably another 1% of the chairman's fortune down the drain.

If Wally does leave there will surely be even more abuse of the chairman. If Doughty packs it up this might have to go on the "clubs in crisis" / "Is administration a good thing?" threads.

And this would be a manager who has signed 5 players during the window of whom all have Prem experience Mediawatch said...

Forest have signed five players this summer, all of whom have played in the Premier League, and four did so last season. Depending on which figures you believe, they've spent something like £2-3million on transfer fees, and that's before you factor in the presumably not insubstantial wages of the likes of Jonathan Greening and Ishmael Miller.

Just what is his problem?

[Hoop Blah]

Just because Fergie has spent vast sums of money doesn't mean he hasn't not spent at times when he's had money available to him.

I can recall a number of times when he's said they've had money to spend but there's no value in the market etc etc so hasn't bothered.

Wenger has spent a shit load over the years too but it doesn't mean he's not refused to spend at various times as well.

[FiNeRaIn]

Just because Fergie has spent vast sums of money doesn't mean he hasn't not spent at times when he's had money available to him.

I can recall a number of times when he's said they've had money to spend but there's no value in the market etc etc so hasn't bothered.

Well yeah, Man Utd have top european players, there is far less chance of improvements being around.

Reading were relegation battlers full of championship players, PLENTY of improvements for players. Horrible comparisons.

[Hoop Blah]

There wasn't a comparison over the requirements, just a comment on Schards opinion that Coppell would've been the only manager in the history of the game not to spend money when it was made available to him.

Fergie has done just the same. End of comparison.

[brendywendy]

a) Wenger for one, and apparently Fergie too.

It's not rocket sicence.

I wouldn't attempt rocket science without some English lessons first.

But in all seriousness I know you are taking the piss when saying Fergie, so why bother? He's spent absolutely BUCKET loads in his time as Man Utd manager, look at what they've spent just this season alone ffs. This has to be the worst example ever.

doesnt matter how many seasons he has spent- hes on record as saying that he purposely didnt spend for a bit cos he couldnt see the value.which was the point. so......



oh, what ^^^he said

[Schards#2]

A) you mean apart from arsene wenger fopr the last million seasons?
B)we were in th eprem, and therefore had much bigger income than we do now,JM also had more disposable cash at that point. so yes, i think thats a fair assumption

they basically seem unlikely to you cos you are obsessed with this weird conspiracy theory schards

So, thinking a manager's behaviour unusual as it differs from the behaviour of 99.99% of football managers throughout history, and thinking it odd that for one year only our chairman suggested an approach the polar opposite of what he has done since is a "weird conspiracy theory".

OK

thats pretty lame chards. even for you.

any actual argument?

its not a competition you now, im just genuinely interested why/how you think like you do, and actual explanations would realy help rather than constantly trying to get one over anyone.

Well as neither you nor I or anyone else on here was party to discussions between Coppell and Madejski, I don't really have an argument, more an opinion.

My opinion is that if Coppell was offered significant funds and didn't spend them, it's out of character for Madejski and out of character for football managers in general.

I don't really understand why you thank that opinion's lame but you're more than entitled to you opinion. It's a discussion board.

[brendywendy]

no, you misunderstand. im asking why you disbelive numerous statements madeby coppel while at, and after he left the club, thats all you big gay bear.

im just not sure why he would fall on his sword for the chairman, even after he has nowt to do with him any more?
i just dont see it. youre right, its just an opinion, but one backed up by words from the mouths of those involved. which is surely better than ones backed up by a nagging feeling at the back of your head.

im not really interested in whs right/wrong, orwho is better, or more rational about RFC, i fully admit im irrational about it, its kind of what being a fan is all about for me.hence the 64-0 predictions before every match.
my main point was simply me wanting to uderstandwhy, and how you arrived at your stated opinion, is all.