Tight old Reading

178 posts
P!ssed Off
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 3132
Joined: 08 Dec 2012 16:47

Re: Tight old Reading

by P!ssed Off » 19 Mar 2016 19:14

Tshibola's progression another positive. Though agreed, at there not being many.

trueroyal1871
Member
Posts: 404
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 13:07
Location: The Mongdejski Stadium

Re: Tight old Reading

by trueroyal1871 » 21 Mar 2016 16:26

The Royal Forester But, how much would we have to spend to be trying in your eyes? You would not get much in the way of a striker on a permanent signing would you?
It was a gamble that didn't work out, but the Thai's did TRY to sort out the striker situation. If we had paid 2.5 million on a permanent signing, would that have trying? What if he did not work out either, still being paid, but not playing next season?


Decent quality strikers in this division cost around £3 - £5 million at least so that is what they should expect to spend. Obviously it depends on them actually having the money to spend and also being willing to spend it. I thought all of the loans we had were a very short sighted way of making progress as you're not actually building a squad, you're just trying to plug holes and hope because they've got a bit of quality you'll get promoted and then you can worry about making permanent signings if you go up.

It would have been much better to bring in a few quality permanent signings with the plan to add more in each of the next few windows with the long term plan of building a squad capable of challenging for promotion. I would have been a lot happier if we spent that money on a permanent signing at least then if it didn't work out you have some sort of resale value. I'm prepared to be patient and give the manager time to build the squad he wants with players that actually want to be at the club because they've committed themselves to permanent contracts.

User avatar
Vision
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 5054
Joined: 15 Apr 2004 20:53

Re: Tight old Reading

by Vision » 22 Mar 2016 09:18

trueroyal1871
The Royal Forester But, how much would we have to spend to be trying in your eyes? You would not get much in the way of a striker on a permanent signing would you?
It was a gamble that didn't work out, but the Thai's did TRY to sort out the striker situation. If we had paid 2.5 million on a permanent signing, would that have trying? What if he did not work out either, still being paid, but not playing next season?


Decent quality strikers in this division cost around £3 - £5 million at least so that is what they should expect to spend. Obviously it depends on them actually having the money to spend and also being willing to spend it. I thought all of the loans we had were a very short sighted way of making progress as you're not actually building a squad, you're just trying to plug holes and hope because they've got a bit of quality you'll get promoted and then you can worry about making permanent signings if you go up.

It would have been much better to bring in a few quality permanent signings with the plan to add more in each of the next few windows with the long term plan of building a squad capable of challenging for promotion. I would have been a lot happier if we spent that money on a permanent signing at least then if it didn't work out you have some sort of resale value. I'm prepared to be patient and give the manager time to build the squad he wants with players that actually want to be at the club because they've committed themselves to permanent contracts.


I just think we went about it the wrong way round. I think McShane, Quinn and Sa would qualify as permanent quality signings and few would argue against the fact that 2 of them have been very good signings. A couple more of that ilk supplemented by a couple of loans would have been more sensible.

I think it was a case of the club in the summer looking at the 3 promoted teams and what their strategies were last season. We don't have Bournemouth's money (or the intention to risk busting FFP). We also didn't have the existing Premier League squad pedigree that Norwich had. So we went with Watford's more short term approach. Sadly though I'm not sure having more loan players than actual places available for them is condusive to success 99% of the time regardless of Watford being the exception that proves the rule.

In the end , even though of course it would be foolish not to pay attention to what other clubs do, any success Reading have had in my lifetime has been from through blazing our own trail. From Branfoot (out), to Pardew, Coppell and McDermott we've always done it our way and it's rarely been simply a case of saying X amount of £'s will get you a 20 goal a season striker or a keeper/defender that will guarantee a substantial number of clean sheets.

Generally it's been our way to nurture, produce and develop multi million pound players rather than go out and buy them. In the end of course that may not prove to be a recipe for success at the Top Table, (although to a higher degree it's what Southampton do)

From my personal point of view, and I realise it's probably not a popular view, if that makes us "tight old Reading" then so be it. I can easily live with and support that.

User avatar
Maneki Neko
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 30200
Joined: 06 Jul 2015 00:19
Location: JAPAN! fcuk you all.

Re: Tight old Reading

by Maneki Neko » 22 Mar 2016 09:21

yarp^

User avatar
The Sum of the Parts
Member
Posts: 119
Joined: 20 May 2015 15:35
Location: "The Sum of the Parts - the evolution of the perfect team" - Publication April 9th 2016

Re: Tight old Reading

by The Sum of the Parts » 22 Mar 2016 09:27

royalp-we Sorry, when I said shaking things up I was more referring to a match day; let's face it most weeks we can basically predict what the management are going to pick for any match day squad; and the opposition can see it too.


So the words "settled team" mean nothing to you?

Everyone, absolutely everyone, knew who would start for Coppell's 106-point team every week. Do you reckon they'd have been even more successful if he'd swapped things around every game to keep the opposition guessing, then?


User avatar
Maneki Neko
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 30200
Joined: 06 Jul 2015 00:19
Location: JAPAN! fcuk you all.

Re: Tight old Reading

by Maneki Neko » 22 Mar 2016 09:28

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

User avatar
The Sum of the Parts
Member
Posts: 119
Joined: 20 May 2015 15:35
Location: "The Sum of the Parts - the evolution of the perfect team" - Publication April 9th 2016

Re: Tight old Reading

by The Sum of the Parts » 22 Mar 2016 09:39

trueroyal1871
The Royal Forester But, how much would we have to spend to be trying in your eyes? You would not get much in the way of a striker on a permanent signing would you?
It was a gamble that didn't work out, but the Thai's did TRY to sort out the striker situation. If we had paid 2.5 million on a permanent signing, would that have trying? What if he did not work out either, still being paid, but not playing next season?


Decent quality strikers in this division cost around £3 - £5 million at least so that is what they should expect to spend. Obviously it depends on them actually having the money to spend and also being willing to spend it. I thought all of the loans we had were a very short sighted way of making progress as you're not actually building a squad, you're just trying to plug holes and hope because they've got a bit of quality you'll get promoted and then you can worry about making permanent signings if you go up.

It would have been much better to bring in a few quality permanent signings with the plan to add more in each of the next few windows with the long term plan of building a squad capable of challenging for promotion. I would have been a lot happier if we spent that money on a permanent signing at least then if it didn't work out you have some sort of resale value. I'm prepared to be patient and give the manager time to build the squad he wants with players that actually want to be at the club because they've committed themselves to permanent contracts.


It's not just the cost of the transfer fee.

The annual average salary of a Reading player in the year ended 30/6/14 was approx. £450,000 - and that's an average of the whole squad, including kids, so a high-scoring striker would be on a lot more than that. So as well as your transfer fee which can be accrued over 3 years, you need to add on probably about £75 a year on wages. Your "£3-5" million has now turned into a financial commitment of "£5.625-7.625" million over a 3.5 year contract - and that's excluding employment costs.

It's salary that disables clubs in Reading's position, not transfer fees.

User avatar
Vision
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 5054
Joined: 15 Apr 2004 20:53

Re: Tight old Reading

by Vision » 22 Mar 2016 09:55

The Sum of the Parts
royalp-we Sorry, when I said shaking things up I was more referring to a match day; let's face it most weeks we can basically predict what the management are going to pick for any match day squad; and the opposition can see it too.


So the words "settled team" mean nothing to you?

Everyone, absolutely everyone, knew who would start for Coppell's 106-point team every week. Do you reckon they'd have been even more successful if he'd swapped things around every game to keep the opposition guessing, then?


Not that I necessarily agree with their point and I get what you're saying but It's hardly a fair comparison. If the current team was winning most weeks like the 106 team then there would be no need to change it.

But it isn't.

User avatar
Hoop Blah
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 13937
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 09:00
Location: I told you so.....

Re: Tight old Reading

by Hoop Blah » 22 Mar 2016 11:38

You don't have to spend big on star players to succeed at this level. Of course it helps if you can invest heavily on a few decent players but it's improving your weaknesses and not having that weak link in a side that really makes you stronger.

I've always maintained that you get what you pay for in terms of quality, but a look down the top scorer list in this division shows that you can pick up players more than good enough at the prices we're used to paying as long as you can then keep those players and get them to perform within your team [without weak links].

We can't spend money we don't have though, and doing so won't guarantee us success.


Victor Meldrew
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 6716
Joined: 12 Apr 2005 19:22
Location: South Coast

Re: Tight old Reading

by Victor Meldrew » 22 Mar 2016 12:08

Vision
trueroyal1871
The Royal Forester But, how much would we have to spend to be trying in your eyes? You would not get much in the way of a striker on a permanent signing would you?
It was a gamble that didn't work out, but the Thai's did TRY to sort out the striker situation. If we had paid 2.5 million on a permanent signing, would that have trying? What if he did not work out either, still being paid, but not playing next season?


Decent quality strikers in this division cost around £3 - £5 million at least so that is what they should expect to spend. Obviously it depends on them actually having the money to spend and also being willing to spend it. I thought all of the loans we had were a very short sighted way of making progress as you're not actually building a squad, you're just trying to plug holes and hope because they've got a bit of quality you'll get promoted and then you can worry about making permanent signings if you go up.

It would have been much better to bring in a few quality permanent signings with the plan to add more in each of the next few windows with the long term plan of building a squad capable of challenging for promotion. I would have been a lot happier if we spent that money on a permanent signing at least then if it didn't work out you have some sort of resale value. I'm prepared to be patient and give the manager time to build the squad he wants with players that actually want to be at the club because they've committed themselves to permanent contracts.


I just think we went about it the wrong way round. I think McShane, Quinn and Sa would qualify as permanent quality signings and few would argue against the fact that 2 of them have been very good signings. A couple more of that ilk supplemented by a couple of loans would have been more sensible.

I think it was a case of the club in the summer looking at the 3 promoted teams and what their strategies were last season. We don't have Bournemouth's money (or the intention to risk busting FFP). We also didn't have the existing Premier League squad pedigree that Norwich had. So we went with Watford's more short term approach. Sadly though I'm not sure having more loan players than actual places available for them is condusive to success 99% of the time regardless of Watford being the exception that proves the rule.

In the end , even though of course it would be foolish not to pay attention to what other clubs do, any success Reading have had in my lifetime has been from through blazing our own trail. From Branfoot (out), to Pardew, Coppell and McDermott we've always done it our way and it's rarely been simply a case of saying X amount of £'s will get you a 20 goal a season striker or a keeper/defender that will guarantee a substantial number of clean sheets.

Generally it's been our way to nurture, produce and develop multi million pound players rather than go out and buy them. In the end of course that may not prove to be a recipe for success at the Top Table, (although to a higher degree it's what Southampton do)

From my personal point of view, and I realise it's probably not a popular view, if that makes us "tight old Reading" then so be it. I can easily live with and support that.


I agree with nearly all of that apart from Pardew in what is now Div1.
He had a hefty cheque-book to go out and buy the top goalscorers at our level or below-Cureton and Butler come to mind.
It worked and to some extent it worked similarly with Blackman both (eventually) on the pitch and very profitable when it came to selling and it has worked for Peterborough and to a lesser extent Brentford but those sides aren't now competitive because, have bought from lower down, they then sell.

Nobody knows what approach the Thais will take in the Summer.
Incidentally Watford (Deeney and Ighalo) and Bournemouth (King, Afobe and Wilson) have been successful with their striker signings and of course a good striker or two will score more goals to get you out of a hole (or even promoted) whereas this season Sa, Kermorgant, Rekkels, Vydra and Cox have hardly set the world on fire. nor has Brian's favourite Kanu when played (wrongly IMHO) through the middle.

If Samuel were not our player he is the type I would want us to be going for and both he and Tish (barring injuries) look as though they could play a big part for us next season.

User avatar
Vision
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 5054
Joined: 15 Apr 2004 20:53

Re: Tight old Reading

by Vision » 22 Mar 2016 12:40

Victor Meldrew
Vision
trueroyal1871
Decent quality strikers in this division cost around £3 - £5 million at least so that is what they should expect to spend. Obviously it depends on them actually having the money to spend and also being willing to spend it. I thought all of the loans we had were a very short sighted way of making progress as you're not actually building a squad, you're just trying to plug holes and hope because they've got a bit of quality you'll get promoted and then you can worry about making permanent signings if you go up.

It would have been much better to bring in a few quality permanent signings with the plan to add more in each of the next few windows with the long term plan of building a squad capable of challenging for promotion. I would have been a lot happier if we spent that money on a permanent signing at least then if it didn't work out you have some sort of resale value. I'm prepared to be patient and give the manager time to build the squad he wants with players that actually want to be at the club because they've committed themselves to permanent contracts.


I just think we went about it the wrong way round. I think McShane, Quinn and Sa would qualify as permanent quality signings and few would argue against the fact that 2 of them have been very good signings. A couple more of that ilk supplemented by a couple of loans would have been more sensible.

I think it was a case of the club in the summer looking at the 3 promoted teams and what their strategies were last season. We don't have Bournemouth's money (or the intention to risk busting FFP). We also didn't have the existing Premier League squad pedigree that Norwich had. So we went with Watford's more short term approach. Sadly though I'm not sure having more loan players than actual places available for them is condusive to success 99% of the time regardless of Watford being the exception that proves the rule.

In the end , even though of course it would be foolish not to pay attention to what other clubs do, any success Reading have had in my lifetime has been from through blazing our own trail. From Branfoot (out), to Pardew, Coppell and McDermott we've always done it our way and it's rarely been simply a case of saying X amount of £'s will get you a 20 goal a season striker or a keeper/defender that will guarantee a substantial number of clean sheets.

Generally it's been our way to nurture, produce and develop multi million pound players rather than go out and buy them. In the end of course that may not prove to be a recipe for success at the Top Table, (although to a higher degree it's what Southampton do)

From my personal point of view, and I realise it's probably not a popular view, if that makes us "tight old Reading" then so be it. I can easily live with and support that.


I agree with nearly all of that apart from Pardew in what is now Div1.
He had a hefty cheque-book to go out and buy the top goalscorers at our level or below-Cureton and Butler come to mind.
It worked and to some extent it worked similarly with Blackman both (eventually) on the pitch and very profitable when it came to selling and it has worked for Peterborough and to a lesser extent Brentford but those sides aren't now competitive because, have bought from lower down, they then sell.

Nobody knows what approach the Thais will take in the Summer.
Incidentally Watford (Deeney and Ighalo) and Bournemouth (King, Afobe and Wilson) have been successful with their striker signings and of course a good striker or two will score more goals to get you out of a hole (or even promoted) whereas this season Sa, Kermorgant, Rekkels, Vydra and Cox have hardly set the world on fire. nor has Brian's favourite Kanu when played (wrongly IMHO) through the middle.

If Samuel were not our player he is the type I would want us to be going for and both he and Tish (barring injuries) look as though they could play a big part for us next season.


Actually VM I'd say by the time we'd got promoted and then followed up with a 2nd tier play-off campaign, Pardew had eschewed the "throwing good money after bad" (Partly with promised ITV Digital money that never materialised) for a more sports science approach. Indeed I think Butler was the last of the big money signings (Cureton was a 250k steal so hardly counts in the big spending bracket) and his influence on the side was on the wane by the time that season came to fruition.

It's a prime example of what I say by going our own way and actually demonstrates my point. We'd had several seasons under Burns and Pardew where we drastically overspent without success. The promotion season with Niall Clarke in tow we were stronger , faster, fitter than anyone else which allied to some talented players meant we were pretty formidable. I've told this story before but I vividly remember an away game against a very expensively assembled Wigan side where we just ran all over them. After the game Wigan manager Paul Jewell just couldn't believe how we'd done it and had a long chat with Pardew afterwards. Wigan changed tack from there and almost immediately appointed a sports scientist as opposed to spending massively as they had been doing.

User avatar
Maneki Neko
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 30200
Joined: 06 Jul 2015 00:19
Location: JAPAN! fcuk you all.

Re: Tight old Reading

by Maneki Neko » 22 Mar 2016 13:40

good use of eschewed

Victor Meldrew
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 6716
Joined: 12 Apr 2005 19:22
Location: South Coast

Re: Tight old Reading

by Victor Meldrew » 22 Mar 2016 13:49

Just on that point about sports science I wonder why every team doesn't adopt the fast , closing down type of game.
Allardyce for all of his apparently old-fashioned approach to the game is fanatical about a scientific approach.

Barcelona, Bayern Munich, Dortmund ,Spurs, Leicester and Juventus et al all play a pressing game (which we did under Coppell and McD) with considerable success but presumably you need super-fit players who are also very talented players to make it work.
Liverpool are trying to play that way but it seems as though they can only keep it up for half a game.

When Brian does get his own squad we will see which way he goes-for the moment it all seems a bit of a mess and I'm not sure that for most of our games we really need to play a holding midfielder, especially one who is a strong tackler but so far lacks vision and dexterity in his passing.

BTW Rougier cost £325,000 before Pardew "eschewed". :wink:


User avatar
Vision
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 5054
Joined: 15 Apr 2004 20:53

Re: Tight old Reading

by Vision » 22 Mar 2016 14:51

Victor Meldrew Just on that point about sports science I wonder why every team doesn't adopt the fast , closing down type of game.
Allardyce for all of his apparently old-fashioned approach to the game is fanatical about a scientific approach.

Barcelona, Bayern Munich, Dortmund ,Spurs, Leicester and Juventus et al all play a pressing game (which we did under Coppell and McD) with considerable success but presumably you need super-fit players who are also very talented players to make it work.
Liverpool are trying to play that way but it seems as though they can only keep it up for half a game.

When Brian does get his own squad we will see which way he goes-for the moment it all seems a bit of a mess and I'm not sure that for most of our games we really need to play a holding midfielder, especially one who is a strong tackler but so far lacks vision and dexterity in his passing.

BTW Rougier cost £325,000 before Pardew "eschewed". :wink:


And before the promotion season. Which was my point. :wink:

These things do go in (touchline warm up) cycles though and once someone has a modicum of success then everyone tries to follow.

A few years ago "Possession" was King yet now Leicester could win the league with one of the lowest possession %'s around.

I remember one of the few things we agreed on back then VM was Coppell's almost "power play" tactic where we would commit players to attack and press high up for a sustained period before dropping off for bit and then going again later on. Watching Leicester you can see a similar thing going on.

User avatar
Extended-Phenotype
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 5887
Joined: 27 May 2011 10:43
Location: Oxford Road

Re: Tight old Reading

by Extended-Phenotype » 22 Mar 2016 15:32

Boo Leicester for direct football boooooo rubbish

User avatar
stealthpapes
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 7531
Joined: 05 Jun 2013 13:25
Location: proverbs 26:11

Re: Tight old Reading

by stealthpapes » 22 Mar 2016 15:39

Victor Meldrew Just on that point about sports science I wonder why every team doesn't adopt the fast , closing down type of game.
Allardyce for all of his apparently old-fashioned approach to the game is fanatical about a scientific approach.

Barcelona, Bayern Munich, Dortmund ,Spurs, Leicester and Juventus et al all play a pressing game (which we did under Coppell and McD) with considerable success but presumably you need super-fit players who are also very talented players to make it work.
Liverpool are trying to play that way but it seems as though they can only keep it up for half a game.

When Brian does get his own squad we will see which way he goes-for the moment it all seems a bit of a mess and I'm not sure that for most of our games we really need to play a holding midfielder, especially one who is a strong tackler but so far lacks vision and dexterity in his passing.

BTW Rougier cost £325,000 before Pardew "eschewed". :wink:


It's not only super-fit but there's more to pressing that just chasing, so they need to be switched on even when tired. It's not just chasing the ball all over the pitch, but in key places and at key times. And not just pressing pressing pressing but knowing what to do with it on the turnover.

Most teams actually employ vast amounts of sports science, but behind the scenes. It really is only an old guard that are resisting it and one's just fecked off to Jordan.

User avatar
Vision
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 5054
Joined: 15 Apr 2004 20:53

Re: Tight old Reading

by Vision » 22 Mar 2016 16:04

Extended-Phenotype Boo Leicester for direct football boooooo rubbish


Did someone say hoofball!

SCIAG
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 6362
Joined: 17 Jun 2008 17:43
Location: Liburd for England

Re: Tight old Reading

by SCIAG » 22 Mar 2016 23:19

Anyone remember when Sven brought Leicester to the Madejski during McDermott's first spell in charge? Yakubu was up front.

They passed it all around us, but couldn't create any good chances. We had Long, Kebe and Manset on the counter attack and we won 3-1, including "that" goal where Kebe ran the length of the pitch and pulled it back for Hunt to score.

I am 100% certain that match inspired the current Leicester side, so really Jimmy Kebe should get a Premier League winner's medal.

178 posts

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ankeny, Bing [Bot], Biscuit goalie, Google Adsense [Bot], Horsham Royal, Jammy Dodger, Keysfield, Orion1871, Richard, Royal Ginger, Sutekh and 543 guests

It is currently 29 Mar 2024 15:47