New Signings ?

[SteveRoyal]

Who knows?

Nobody.

[Ian Royal]

Goater, Forster, Butler (past his prime) Henderson(?) < Doyle, NHunt, Long, Church & Mooney
Hahnemann & Ashdown > Federici, Hamer & Andersen
Shorey, Murty, Brown, Williams & Mackie < Rosenior, Armstrong, Bikey, Ingimarrson, Pearce & Cisse
Sidwell, Harper, Hughes, Salako, Watson, Murray ~ Harper, Matejovsky, Kebe, Karacan, Tabb, Gunnarsson, SHunt, Henry

The midfield is pretty close, but it's the difference between 1 very good player and lots of pretty good players.

[Hoop Blah]

Only thing your not accounting for there Ian is the form, confidence and motivation of the players in the two squads.

Coppell took over a squad that was on the up, out to prove themselves and with everyone seemingly happy to stay and fight for the cause. I don't remember anyone thinking they're just hanging around waiting for their rightful move back to the Premiership.

Yes, Coppell took over a team that had taken a bit of a knock with Pardew leaving, but nothing like the effect of relegation from the Premiership one season then one of the clubs worst runs of home form the season after which ulitmately cost us promotion.

[brendywendy]

To be fair though Coppell took over a squad that didn't really need any emergency repairs, hence our manager being poached for a bigger job and not walking away after an largely aging first eleven suffered from quite demoralising 18 months of form.

This preseason Rodgers faces losing his best players as opposed to Coppell who was taking over a side on the up with no players in the side that were likely targets for Premiership clubs.

Totally different situations and I don't think comparing them is really that easy or helpful.

As much as Royalee obviously tries to get a rise out of a few people on here, he is largely consistent in his opinions and often makes a decent amount on good points too. I don't reallly see why anyone would think he'd be on Rodgers back as quickly as being suggested to be honest.

Beacause the three highest finishes in the club's 138 year history wasn't good enough to prevent the previous incumbent from being slated and ridiculed.

He didn't exactly have the same starting point as any of our previous managers though did he?

LOL

daft argument, since with whatever starting point you care to mention we never made it up before

[brendywendy]

Rodgers has a better starting point than Coppell did IMO. He might be slightly worse off in goal, but he's as good in attack and midfield if not better and much better off in defence. And it is now easier to attaract a better calibre of player and teh club is more well off financially.

Oh please - Shorey and Murty vs Armstrong and Rosenior is a no contest. Hahnemann was in his prime when Coppell took over and we had Sidwell in midfield who's better than anyone we have in the squad to play there right now. Yes the centre backs are probably better now (although Williams was still a regular and performing well when Coppell took over), but to say Rodgers is in a far better position is absolute rubbish.

I knew we'd stop agreeing after a while.

i 100% agree with royalees post above

[Royalee]

He didn't exactly have the same starting point as any of our previous managers though did he?

LOL

daft argument, since with whatever starting point you care to mention we never made it up before

My point is that having the highest finishes in our history does not necessarily mean he was the best manager we've ever had. IMO McGhee and Pardew improved us far more from the beginning to end of their reigns in terms of the progress we made than Coppell. Both started with us a lot lower down the pecking order, making us a much more difficult prospect to manage at the time.

[papereyes]

And Coppel not speaking a foreign language meant we didn't look abroad at Iceland, France, USA, Mali, Cameroon, Ireland, Senegal or Czech Republic ? Noit sure where the logic is in that !!

Did we really look 'abroad' for half of those?

Ingi, Sonko and others were from clubs he'd already managed and came in from English clubs.
USA had been at Fulham while Convey had been on trial at Spurs the summer before he came here (and of course, there's a lack of a language barrier)
You have Doyle and Long but Hunt was doing the rounds of English lower league clubs.

Also, the ones that came from the continent were the ones that are arguably the least succesful.

[brendywendy]

He didn't exactly have the same starting point as any of our previous managers though did he?

LOL

daft argument, since with whatever starting point you care to mention we never made it up before

My point is that having the highest finishes in our history does not necessarily mean he was the best manager we've ever had. IMO McGhee and Pardew improved us far more from the beginning to end of their reigns in terms of the progress we made than Coppell. Both started with us a lot lower down the pecking order, making us a much more difficult prospect to manage at the time.

just give it up mate
hes left, stop stabbing him in the back!


the argument is irrelevant as its impossible to measure
the only true measure we have is who took us up, and if you think im going to give any more credit to pardew for that than i absolutely have to, youre sadly mistaken!

[Royalee]

just give it up mate
hes left, stop stabbing him in the back!


the argument is irrelevant as its impossible to measure
the only true measure we have is who took us up, and if you think im going to give any more credit to pardew for that than i absolutely have to, youre sadly mistaken!

I prefer to rank managers based on success, not whether I agree with the way they wished to take their careers and whether or not they seem like a likeable chap I could have a beer with down the pub.

I'll stop 'stabbing him in the back' if you stop overrating Coppell for what in reality was a failed reign given the potential which was there.

[Hogmeister Royal]

just give it up mate
hes left, stop stabbing him in the back!


the argument is irrelevant as its impossible to measure
the only true measure we have is who took us up, and if you think im going to give any more credit to pardew for that than i absolutely have to, youre sadly mistaken!

I prefer to rank managers based on success, not whether I agree with the way they wished to take their careers and whether or not they seem like a likeable chap I could have a beer with down the pub.

I'll stop 'stabbing him in the back' if you stop overrating Coppell for what in reality was a failed reign given the potential which was there.

You have got to be kidding! If that was failure, then it's hard to think of any manager anywhere at all who would ever be deemed a success - and if Buck manages to get anywhere near SSC's level of "failure", he'll be an absolute hero.

[Hoop Blah]

I prefer to rank managers based on success, not whether I agree with the way they wished to take their careers and whether or not they seem like a likeable chap I could have a beer with down the pub.

I'll stop 'stabbing him in the back' if you stop overrating Coppell for what in reality was a failed reign given the potential which was there.

You do a disservice to the good points you often raise when you come out with rubbish such as that last bit.

[Royalee]

First season objective reach playoffs - fail
Second season objective reach playoffs/push for promotion - fail
Third season objective reach playoffs/push for promotion - success
Fourth season objective stay up - success
Fifth season objective stay up - fail
Sixth season objective go back up - fail

A failure.

[Alan Partridge]

First season objective reach playoffs - fail
Second season objective reach playoffs/push for promotion - fail
Third season objective reach playoffs/push for promotion - success
Fourth season objective stay up - success
Fifth season objective stay up - fail
Sixth season objective go back up - fail

A failure.

Biggest load of shit posted on here in all honesty.

You'd think Reading were Real Madrid.

By this judgement just about every single manager in RFC's history is a failure.

[Royalee]

I don't think Reading are Real Madrid, I just don't get why someone gets so much acclaim for one promotion and one relegation over 6 years.

[Alan Partridge]

I don't think Reading are Real Madrid, I just don't get why someone gets so much acclaim for one promotion and one relegation over 6 years.

Wasn't just a promotion was it though really? I agree with you on certain aspects regarding Coppell, last season towards the end there was little to defend him on.

106 points and a league championship and then 8th place in the millionaires back garden, not bad is it really?

Was never going to be easy for Coppell taking over from Pards, read some nonsense that 'if Pards had stayed we'd have gone up' Not for me. We'd beaten Wimbledon who finished last, Forest who survived just about, drew with Rotherham another club near the bottom and got a decent point at Ipswich, we had a threadbare squad that a few injuries into Coppell's tenure left us with 1 fit forward and Ricky Newman at centre half. It needed a rebuild and it took Coppell some time to do it whilst slowly changing the style of play and reintroducing a more attack minded formation.

Last season Reading finished 4th, completely agree the secnd half of the season was dismal but still 4th place was as good as it got under anyone else in the clubs history really.

As for the relegation a club like Reading cold never sustain top half in the Premiership, it was a minor miracle Reading finished 8th. Have to look at the obscene money spent by the likes of Sunderland, Portsmouth and the rest just to survive or get to somewhere near midtable. Reading as a club (not Coppell) would never ever spend that sort of money. In order for Reading to truly join the party they would need promotion and then new owners with massive pockets. To throw it away as a relegation similar to the Burns/Bullivant 'achievement' doesn't take into consideration the opposition the club was up against. Reading hardly disgraced themselves either unlike Derby who again spent way more than Reading did.

[Royalee]

I don't think Reading are Real Madrid, I just don't get why someone gets so much acclaim for one promotion and one relegation over 6 years.

Wasn't just a promotion was it though really? I agree with you on certain aspects regarding Coppell, last season towards the end there was little to defend him on.

106 points and a league championship and then 8th place in the millionaires back garden, not bad is it really?

Was never going to be easy for Coppell taking over from Pards, read some nonsense that 'if Pards had stayed we'd have gone up' Not for me. We'd beaten Wimbledon who finished last, Forest who survived just about, drew with Rotherham another club near the bottom and got a decent point at Ipswich, we had a threadbare squad that a few injuries into Coppell's tenure left us with 1 fit forward and Ricky Newman at centre half. It needed a rebuild and it took Coppell some time to do it whilst slowly changing the style of play and reintroducing a more attack minded formation.

Last season Reading finished 4th, completely agree the secnd half of the season was dismal but still 4th place was as good as it got under anyone else in the clubs history really.

As for the relegation a club like Reading cold never sustain top half in the Premiership, it was a minor miracle Reading finished 8th. Have to look at the obscene money spent by the likes of Sunderland, Portsmouth and the rest just to survive or get to somewhere near midtable. Reading as a club (not Coppell) would never ever spend that sort of money. In order for Reading to truly join the party they would need promotion and then new owners with massive pockets. To throw it away as a relegation similar to the Burns/Bullivant 'achievement' doesn't take into consideration the opposition the club was up against. Reading hardly disgraced themselves either unlike Derby who again spent way more than Reading did.

As I have already said countless times, those two seasons were excellent, but in the grand scheme of things, the norm was underachievement and failure. You don't get extra points carried over to the next year for outstanding performances in one season - the better managers always take that into account and remain focused even in periods of large success.

[brendywendy]

just give it up mate
hes left, stop stabbing him in the back!


the argument is irrelevant as its impossible to measure
the only true measure we have is who took us up, and if you think im going to give any more credit to pardew for that than i absolutely have to, youre sadly mistaken!

I prefer to rank managers based on success, not whether I agree with the way they wished to take their careers and whether or not they seem like a likeable chap I could have a beer with down the pub.

I'll stop 'stabbing him in the back' if you stop overrating Coppell for what in reality was a failed reign given the potential which was there.

LOL
LOL

and thrice LOL


you are truly mental.

good night

[Alan Partridge]

Again though it's not really failure.

What did you expect from reading in their 2nd season of the Prem? Staying up would have been an achievement, they didn't quite manage it. It was hugely disappointing but a club like Reading sadly simply don't belong in the PRemiership and it was always going to be immensely difficult to keep them there fora sustained period.

Reading finished 4th last year, many predictions mine included thought they'd find it a hell of a lot tougher than it was for long periods of the season. A failure for them would have been what Derby did, or what the likes of Ipswich, QPR, Sheff Wed, Coventry and all these ex Prem sides have done since relegation, not make the playoffs.

Again if you are expecting Rodgers to just come in and Reading suddenly play great for 46 games and romp home to promotion I think you'll be severely dissapointed and telling us what a failure the season has been. Just like Coppell did when he took over from Pards there needs to be time to readjust and re model the squad and probably the philosophy of how he wants the team to play. What Rodgers has which Coppell didn't is a pre season and also a club that is held in much higher regard than it was 5 years ago.

[Hogmeister Royal]

Or to look at it another way...

First season objective reach playoffs - good try, close but no cigar
Second season objective reach playoffs/push for promotion - good try, close but no cigar
Third season objective reach playoffs/push for promotion - outstanding success beyond anyone's wildest dreams
Fourth season objective stay up - outstanding success beyond anyone's wildest dreams
Fifth season objective stay up - desparately unlucky to go down on goal difference (due mainly to the most amazing great escape act by Fulham, aided and abetted by Portsmouth being in cup final)
Sixth season objective go back up - good try, close but no cigar

Verdict: A period of glorious achievement unparallelled in the club's history.

[Royalee]

Again though it's not really failure.

What did you expect from reading in their 2nd season of the Prem? Staying up would have been an achievement, they didn't quite manage it. It was hugely disappointing but a club like Reading sadly simply don't belong in the Premiership and it was always going to be immensely difficult to keep them there fora sustained period.

That's where we differ in opinion then - I think we have everything in place to stay there in the long term.