by Royal1983 » 29 Apr 2010 08:50
by Harpers So Solid Crew » 29 Apr 2010 08:57
by Harpers So Solid Crew » 29 Apr 2010 08:58
readingbedding Does anyone think or know that once we were promoted, we could have offered Sidwell what he wanted.
It was about 25 grand a week wasn't it?
by Once were Biscuitmen » 29 Apr 2010 09:04
Dirk GentlyRoyal Lady Exactly right Mad Dog's Ghost - because if we're selling off our best players - there's not a hope in hell of us competing with other teams and getting into the Prem.
But that sums up exactly what's wrong with football today.
The teams we're competing with nearly all have some kind of unfair financial advantage.
Newcastle, West Brom & 'Boro, of course, have parachute payments. Cardiff is being run well over their means and are on the verge of financial catastrophe if this Malaysian saviour doesn't deliver. Leicester are being bankrolled by the same sugar-daddy who started off at Portsmouth. Forest are in the same situation with a rich sugar-daddy and so on.....
Until there's a level playing field financially, clubs which are run on a sustainable basis will never be able to compete with those who aren't - who have a sugar-daddy or who just steal from the taxman.
by Sun Tzu » 29 Apr 2010 09:17
Royal1983
on another note the parachute payments should have stopped last season... I am a cynic and see this as yet another excuse for Madejski to screw the club over and in that sense here comes league 1 next year!!
by Wycombe Royal » 29 Apr 2010 09:30
Once were Biscuitmen I remember Wycombe & co moaning at the time that we were basically cheating.
by SpaceCruiser » 29 Apr 2010 10:16
FiNeRaInSpaceCruiserFiNeRaIn How are we still needing to save
The answer is obvious - we won't have the parachute payments next year, so we're having to budget without that and we're still coming up short.
We should never have been banking on them anyway, we know the length of time we have them for. They aren't a lottery ffs.
kitson 5.5 million, doyle 6.5, hunt 5.5, bikey 3 mill, shorey 3.5 million - my apologies - its actually more than 20 million.
by Messiah » 29 Apr 2010 10:22
by brendywendy » 29 Apr 2010 10:41
Royal1983 If they are getting shot of under performing players then they need to keep Sig for over performing. Cops was the best manager to come to RFC but at the same time he was also the one who did not buy anyone in, on another note the parachute payments should have stopped last season... I am a cynic and see this as yet another excuse for Madejski to screw the club over and in that sense here comes league 1 next year!!
by brendywendy » 29 Apr 2010 10:42
Harpers So Solid Crewreadingbedding Does anyone think or know that once we were promoted, we could have offered Sidwell what he wanted.
It was about 25 grand a week wasn't it?
We could have done that, but it would have meant paying the likes of Doyle, Harper et all higher wages, I seem to recall on promotion our top earners were on about £18k a week, at least at the outset of the Prem campaign.
by readingbedding » 29 Apr 2010 10:56
by Once were Biscuitmen » 29 Apr 2010 10:57
Wycombe RoyalOnce were Biscuitmen I remember Wycombe & co moaning at the time that we were basically cheating.
Me? I don't think so.
by Wimb » 29 Apr 2010 11:45
Dirk Gently
That's true, an no-one's disputing that (except to ask who discovered those players? Wasn't it the Chief Scout?).
But the inactivity in the summer after we finished 8th, and also the following January, when SC refused to refresh the team despite having funds to do so, is what ultimately caused the relegation.
Without that we'd not have had to sell those players.
by Hoop Blah » 29 Apr 2010 11:47
by Messiah » 29 Apr 2010 11:50
Hoop Blah Regarding the comment about the Premiership being a busted flush and us losing money in it...
The two years in the Premier League are, I'm 99% sure, the only seasons we've made a profit since Madejski took over.
On beddings Sidwell point, we could've afford Sidwell at a time but he knew he was onto a winner if he didn't sign a new contract. I don't think he would've signed a new one with us on any realistic amount so that's kind of a moot point.
Dirk has it just about right in my book. Coppells reluctance to spend on 2 or 3 players at a time when we were at our most attractive and financially stable (after finishing 8th) was the biggest single factor in our demise. Add in the fact that we basically gave up on trying to better ourselves by turning our back on playing in Europe and the players knew they'd all acheived all they could at the club.
That took away the edge we had amongst a squad of players trying to prove a point individually and as a team. The end result, relegation.
by Wycombe Royal » 29 Apr 2010 11:51
Once were BiscuitmenWycombe RoyalOnce were Biscuitmen I remember Wycombe & co moaning at the time that we were basically cheating.
Me? I don't think so.
lol, no the fans of the actual club. Not the the artist of the same name.
by readingbedding » 29 Apr 2010 11:52
WimbDirk Gently
That's true, an no-one's disputing that (except to ask who discovered those players? Wasn't it the Chief Scout?).
But the inactivity in the summer after we finished 8th, and also the following January, when SC refused to refresh the team despite having funds to do so, is what ultimately caused the relegation.
Without that we'd not have had to sell those players.
Sorry Dirkers but /Spacey mode on Dolan's brother recomended Doyler I believe and Hunt played for Coppell at Palarse and Brentford iirc, as well as most of the other salable assets having been managed by SSC at his former clubs. Not to say the scouts didn't validate and have another look....
by Harpers So Solid Crew » 29 Apr 2010 11:55
Add in the fact that we basically gave up on trying to better ourselves by turning our back on playing in Europe and the players knew they'd all acheived all they could at the club.
That took away the edge we had amongst a squad of players trying to prove a point individually and as a team. The end result, relegation.
by SpaceCruiser » 29 Apr 2010 11:56
Hoop Blah Add in the fact that we basically gave up on trying to better ourselves by turning our back on playing in Europe and the players knew they'd all acheived all they could at the club.
by Harpers So Solid Crew » 29 Apr 2010 11:57
SpaceCruiserHoop Blah Add in the fact that we basically gave up on trying to better ourselves by turning our back on playing in Europe and the players knew they'd all acheived all they could at the club.
I quite disagree with that statement. They didn't exactly "turn" their back on Europe, Coppell basically said that we weren't ready to compete in Europe and that we would need a bigger squad to cope with competing on different fronts. It became a moot point when we drew at Blackburn anyway.
Users browsing this forum: Jammy Dodger, Vision and 333 guests