We clearly are not signing anyone in January

[Big Foot]

NHunt - Kitson = adequate replacement in terms of quality, not different enough really, but you can't argue with his contribution when he has actually played.

Noel Hunt isn't fit to lace Dave Kitson's boots

[Big Foot]

A quick look on wikipedia also backs that up - Kitson scored a goal every 2.5 games for us and Noel Hunt is just under a goal every 4 games

I think Lloyd Owusu was more prolific than Noel Hunt

[brendywendy]

You've missed the point there brendy. I'll explain again later when I have more time...seems you need it.

ill wait with baited breath for you to come on and set me right mr blah

[Royal Lady]

A quick look on wikipedia also backs that up - Kitson scored a goal every 2.5 games for us and Noel Hunt is just under a goal every 4 games
I think Lloyd Owusu was more prolific than Noel Hunt

Ooh - you sound like Snowball!

[Snowball]

NHunt - Kitson = adequate replacement in terms of quality, not different enough really, but you can't argue with his contribution when he has actually played.

Noel Hunt isn't fit to lace Dave Kitson's boots

In Noel Hunt's first season for us, in his first 28 appearances totaling 1,762 minutes
he got 12 goals and 4 assists, a lot better than a goal every 2 games, actually a goal every 160 minutes.

One reason his minutes were down was his own bravery, twice taken off 25th and 27th minutes for head injuries

[Snowball]

Hunt finished his first season on 13 goals in 2,261 minutes

A goal every 205.5 minutes, or 2.28 games.

He had 5 assists, a rebound-assist and forced the OG that gave us the 1-0 win over Wolves.

I suspect that's the best goals-per-minutes of any RFC player that season.

[Hoop Blah]

and LOL at expecting us or any other team to improve the quality of their squad when relegated from the prem anyway- with that in mind id say our signings have been pretty fecking genius tbf, especially given the finances

The expectation, or hope, from me is that we sign a few players that improve the starting eleven we have when they sign, not on the squad before relegation. Obviously getting relegated and keeping a number of Premiership players means that we, or most other teams, aren't going to improve on a starting eleven that did ok for the most part in the Premiership.

Since we got promoted I think we've been through 11 transfer windows. In that time we've mainly purchased players to slot into the squad of a lower quality than those already in the starting eleven. Often that's with the hope that they improve and eventually win a place in the side, more often it's because we've just wanted to stick with what we've got (not always because to the finances either).

The expections to that rule, ie the players we've signed who we hoped would go into the starting eleven are (IMO):

McAnuff
Mills
Griffin
Armstrong
Fae
Mateovsky
Duberry (at a real push)
N Hunt (again at a real push as I think Coppell would've still seen LIta and Doyle as his 1st choice at the time)
Cummings (a real gamble and I think a last minute back up deals that didn't come off)
Bertrand
Howard

I don't think I've missed anyone off, and I've been a bit generous with a couple of them but that's, on average, one siging to improve the team each window. That's through a time when we've been promoted, relegated, lost a high number of good players, been worried by another relegation and been pushing for another promotion.

Personally I think most progressive clubs would be looking to improve the side more aggressively than that, especially considering the circumstance we've found ourselves in during the last 5 seasons.

For the record, the likes of Rosenior, Halford, Kebe, Rasiak, Bikey, Tabb and to a lesser extent Harte were (IMO) squad players bought in as short or long term prospects but have either paid off or not.

In previous times we brought in more players to strengthen the first eleven, not the squad. The likes of Murty, Hahnemann, Ingimarsson, Harper, Sidwell, Convey, Kitson, Lita, Murray, Goater, Brown etc were all first team players. Of course we still had the likes of Owusu, Morgan, Sonko, Mackie etc etc as investments but I do think the ratio was completely different and that's why we were on an upwards curve, unlike the last 4 season.

Here endith the lesson brendy (see why I needed more time!)

[Big Foot]

How many minutes did Kitson ever play for Reading? You can take 89 minutes off of one performance as he got red carded after 37 seconds of coming on at Man United and add to that a large number of sub appearances when he was injured/coming back from injury

[Snowball]

How many minutes did Kitson ever play for Reading? You can take 89 minutes off of one performance as he got red carded after 37 seconds of coming on at Man United and add to that a large number of sub appearances when he was injured/coming back from injury

Soccerbase says 130 (27) (about 134 x 90 minutes) for 60 Goals

[Snowball]

Closer estimate pulling together a few sources

11,259 Minutes 62 Goals A Goal every 182 Minutes KITSON
03,669 Minutes 18 Goals A Goal every 204 Minutes HUNT


That's a superb hit-rate for BOTH of them

[brendywendy]

and LOL at expecting us or any other team to improve the quality of their squad when relegated from the prem anyway- with that in mind id say our signings have been pretty fecking genius tbf, especially given the finances

The expectation, or hope, from me is that we sign a few players that improve the starting eleven we have when they sign, not on the squad before relegation. Obviously getting relegated and keeping a number of Premiership players means that we, or most other teams, aren't going to improve on a starting eleven that did ok for the most part in the Premiership.

Since we got promoted I think we've been through 11 transfer windows. In that time we've mainly purchased players to slot into the squad of a lower quality than those already in the starting eleven. Often that's with the hope that they improve and eventually win a place in the side, more often it's because we've just wanted to stick with what we've got (not always because to the finances either).

The expections to that rule, ie the players we've signed who we hoped would go into the starting eleven are (IMO):

McAnuff
Mills
Griffin
Armstrong
Fae
Mateovsky
Duberry (at a real push)
N Hunt (again at a real push as I think Coppell would've still seen LIta and Doyle as his 1st choice at the time)
Cummings (a real gamble and I think a last minute back up deals that didn't come off)
Bertrand
Howard

I don't think I've missed anyone off, and I've been a bit generous with a couple of them but that's, on average, one siging to improve the team each window. That's through a time when we've been promoted, relegated, lost a high number of good players, been worried by another relegation and been pushing for another promotion.

Personally I think most progressive clubs would be looking to improve the side more aggressively than that, especially considering the circumstance we've found ourselves in during the last 5 seasons.

For the record, the likes of Rosenior, Halford, Kebe, Rasiak, Bikey, Tabb and to a lesser extent Harte were (IMO) squad players bought in as short or long term prospects but have either paid off or not.

In previous times we brought in more players to strengthen the first eleven, not the squad. The likes of Murty, Hahnemann, Ingimarsson, Harper, Sidwell, Convey, Kitson, Lita, Murray, Goater, Brown etc were all first team players. Of course we still had the likes of Owusu, Morgan, Sonko, Mackie etc etc as investments but I do think the ratio was completely different and that's why we were on an upwards curve, unlike the last 4 season.

Here endith the lesson brendy (see why I needed more time!)

fair enough.
the way i look at it, one player to improve the first team, and one squad player per window is pretty good for a club like us,
evolution not revolution.

but io take your point(s)

[Hoop Blah]

Evolution not revolution is great, but I just feel we're evolving the wrong way.

In the same time as we've signed those 11 or so players above we've (effectively) lost Hahnemann, Murty, Rosenoir, Shorey, Sonko (through injury initially), Ingimarsson (age/injury), Bikey, Harper, Sidwell, Little, Soel, Convey, Hunt, Doyle, Kitson, Lita, Gunnarsson (age/injury), Cisse, Mateovsky, Sigurdsson and Oster who were all first team regulars to some extent or another. That's over 20 players.

I'm really pleased we're seeing the youngsters given a chance to stake their claim and kick on (the only way they'll really do that is through playing) but I do feel we've seen the proceeds of that evolution in our falling league position and declining quality of football. The players we're bringing in aren't improving the side so even with a decent manager getting more than the sum of the teams parts out of the players we're always going to be slipping to a degree.

It's just a matter of balance, and that also has to take into account the finances of course. Finding the right balance obviously isn't easy of course.

[brendywendy]

Hahnemann, Murty, Rosenoir, Shorey, Sonko (through injury initially), Ingimarsson (age/injury), Bikey, Harper, Sidwell, Little, Soel, Convey, Hunt, Doyle, Kitson, Lita, Gunnarsson (age/injury), Cisse, Mateovsky, Sigurdsson and Oster who were all first team regulars to some extent or another. That's over 20 players.

thats some list of players right there.(apart from oyster)

what have they got for us in transfers since we went up? from a combined total cost of about 7.5 million quid.

jesus.

still,
we had a laugh

[Bandini]

Noel Hunt isn't fit to lace Kitson's pre-drive drinks.

[westendgirl]

Evolution not revolution is great, but I just feel we're evolving the wrong way.

In the same time as we've signed those 11 or so players above we've (effectively) lost Hahnemann, Murty, Rosenoir, Shorey, Sonko (through injury initially), Ingimarsson (age/injury), Bikey, Harper, Sidwell, Little, Soel, Convey, Hunt, Doyle, Kitson, Lita, Gunnarsson (age/injury), Cisse, Mateovsky, Sigurdsson and Oster who were all first team regulars to some extent or another. That's over 20 players.

Isn;t that a little disingenuous? Counting the loss of 20 players against the acquisition of 11 whilst some of those 20 were also acquired in that time. You have Sidwell, Seol, Cisse and Matejovsky so you are counting an 'out' before several 'ins.'

BTW isn't it 9 transfer windows not 11?

I understand you points but you are overegging the pudding a little

[Hoop Blah]

I don't think it's disingenuous no. I'm talking about losing first team players and not really replacing them with players better than those left behind.

Within that 20 odd I listed you could argue there are a few that weren't genuine first team starters, although I'd obviously argue they were because they played significant number of games as such either before or after other first teamers had moved on or effectively been finished by injury. I left a couple out that could maybe slip into the same category to try and not over egg the situation. Likewise I've included the likes of Bertrand in the incoming list even though he was only a loan player.

Pretty sure it's 11 windows since we went up, but you might be right. I don't think it makes a lot of difference really though (IMO) as the point stays the same.

[ZacNaloen]

I don't think it's disingenuous no. I'm talking about losing first team players and not really replacing them with players better than those left behind.

This all comes back to money though doesn't it? The club doesn't have a lot of it so we don't aggressively build squads, for the last decade or so they've been built slowly. This is what got them into the premier league. They attempted to do the same once they were in the premier league. It's natural to keep doing what you do.

And it's what is happening now. Except this time, we aren't relying on keynote signings we are relying on the potential in the academy. These players are expected to improve over the next couple of years, with the players coming out of the academy improving as the academies reputation improves and eventually build a squad ready to push for promotion and keep us in the premier league (one day). What signings we do make are there to support these younger players. I can't speak as to whether this plan is going to be successful, I don't think anyone can. But it's obviously the current business plan.

With this in mind, you are conflating two eras. Conservative Coppell™ and Modern Mcdermott™. Coppell didn't want to change the squad at the end because he didn't want to upset the harmony, it's been made clear several times he had money available on better players he chose not to spend. I don't think Mcdermott is worried too much about that right now, he's adding pieces to the jigsaw one by one, he's found a solution to our conceeding goals problem in the form of Leigertwood (who I presume we are signing in the January). Now he needs to solve our scoring goals problem.


I have no idea long term how this strategy with the academy is going to work out, it seems to be it's relying too much on something that is very unpredictable once young players hit the adult game.

BUT.

What I know is that right now our league position is looking decent, we are in with a shout of the play offs and we are proving very difficult to beat. There is a player from the academy knocking on the door or already established in several positions on the pitch, once we find the piece to replace Gylfi's letter in the formula we'll start to look extremely dangerous again. If they pull it off this window, well, I'd quite like to go Wembley soon so I hope they do.

W = D + M + G

W = Winning

D = Defense
M = Midfield
G = Goals (was Gylfi )

I think we've got D and M worked out this year. Just gotta find G now.

[OldBiscuit]

Sack the board etc.

Yeah! and kill someone!

[under the tin]

This all comes back to money though doesn't it? Abso bloody lutely
The club doesn't have a lot of it so we don't aggressively build squads, for the last decade or so they've been built slowly. This is what got them into the premier league. Forget the premier league. It was a building process that goes right back to the Elm Park days
And it's what is happening now. Some like Hoop and I would suggest that a question mark be put after the term "building" Except this time, we aren't relying on keynote signings we are relying on the potential in the academy. That's fair enough. A lot of money has been sunk into the Academy. and our development of young players is unrecognisable from the old days
I can't speak as to whether this plan is going to be successful, I don't think anyone can. But it's obviously the current business plan.

With this in mind, you are conflating two eras. Conservative Coppell™ and Modern Mcdermott™. Coppell didn't want to change the squad at the end because he didn't want to upset the harmony, it's been made clear several times he had money available on better players he chose not to spend. I don't think Mcdermott is worried too much about that right now, he's adding pieces to the jigsaw one by one,
I agree we are talking about two eras, but the eras relate to the chairman, not the managers.
Go back over most of JM's tenure. Even when he was moaning about writing out £20 000 cheques every week at EP to keep the club afloat, serious money was found to acquire the Forster's, Moran's, Asaba's, Caskey's etc. The club was not breaking even when it moved to the new stadium, but even then, proper money was spent on the likes of Sidwell, Harper, Convey, Ingimarsson, etc.
McDermott is the first manager in our history who is working to a budget that is determined solely by what the club earns, with no reference to the chairman whatsoever.

I have no idea long term how this strategy with the academy is going to work out, it seems to be it's relying too much on something that is very unpredictable once young players hit the adult game.
That's the 64000 dollar question.
What I know is that right now our league position is looking decent, we are in with a shout of the play offs and we are proving very difficult to beat.

This is a truly mediocre league. Form is transient, so is league position.

[Hampshire Royal]

Isn't it odd (or perhaps it's a coincidence) that every time we have a decent league position it's because we're in a cr@p league. Some people were saying the same when in our first season in the Prem.