LOL!From Despair To Where? wrote:His official squad photo
For those of a certain age, the music from the Hamlet ads basically sums up the melancholy resigned feeling I have towards Reading FC at the moment.
LOL!From Despair To Where? wrote:His official squad photo
Well it should be, if he adds a different style, that has to be a positive as the current style isn't working at all.Snowflake Royal wrote:Whether he adds a slightly different style or not isn't the question imo. We have Meite, Hoilett, Ince, Azeez, Camara and Ejaria already. Plus we just handed Abrefa a debut there.Hendo wrote:Snowflake Royal wrote:Only problem with this signing is that:
a) it's not a position we lack depth I think it is, tbh. We don't really have a pacey direct winger, apart from Meite and maybe Hoilett who are regularly available and have experience at this level. All the rest are inside forwards, such as Ovie, Ince and Hal
c) we should be very careful with signings because of our squad and financial limitations We would've had to get approval from EFL for this signing, so imagine that has been taken into consideration and he would be on a very small wage for a very small amount of time. Say he is on £5k/week, he is effectively on a 12 week contract, that is only a total of £60,000 - hardly going to break the bank.
b) it's clearly just a distraction from the manager question this is bollocks
Nothing to do with whether he's any good or not.
Six / seven players for two positions isn’t a lack of squad depth.
It isn’t going to break the bank and we got approval. That doesn't make it a good use of resources. Not spending the money could be more valuable. Or spending it where we are stretched (fullback, striker, centreback) more appropriate.
Yep.Mr Optimist wrote:LOL!From Despair To Where? wrote:His official squad photo
For those of a certain age, the music from the Panama ads basically sums up the melancholy resigned feeling I have towards Reading FC at the moment.
The same players that have got us 8 defeats in a row?Snowflake Royal wrote:Excellent example of how we got in this position. Just keep signing players and ignore the ones we're paying for the same spot on the team sheet because you don't want to consider them.
Not even that, only 3 month contract up to the end of the season.URZZZZ wrote:The same players that have got us 8 defeats in a row?Snowflake Royal wrote:Excellent example of how we got in this position. Just keep signing players and ignore the ones we're paying for the same spot on the team sheet because you don't want to consider them.
Aside, the problem was mainly paying average players excessive wages. This is a 6 month contract on, presumably, a lower wage. World of difference
Won't even be 6 months - imagine it is a deal that will end on the 7th May - so less than 3 months.URZZZZ wrote:The same players that have got us 8 defeats in a row?Snowflake Royal wrote:Excellent example of how we got in this position. Just keep signing players and ignore the ones we're paying for the same spot on the team sheet because you don't want to consider them.
Aside, the problem was mainly paying average players excessive wages. This is a 6 month contract on, presumably, a lower wage. World of difference
Because it's IanHendo wrote:Not even that, only 3 month contract up to the end of the season.URZZZZ wrote:The same players that have got us 8 defeats in a row?Snowflake Royal wrote:Excellent example of how we got in this position. Just keep signing players and ignore the ones we're paying for the same spot on the team sheet because you don't want to consider them.
Aside, the problem was mainly paying average players excessive wages. This is a 6 month contract on, presumably, a lower wage. World of difference
I'm really struggling to see how people are getting so angry with this.
Mainly because people were expecting one specific announcement from the club and instead got Barker instead. It's just general anger rather than annoyance at one budget deal.Hendo wrote:Not even that, only 3 month contract up to the end of the season.URZZZZ wrote:The same players that have got us 8 defeats in a row?Snowflake Royal wrote:Excellent example of how we got in this position. Just keep signing players and ignore the ones we're paying for the same spot on the team sheet because you don't want to consider them.
Aside, the problem was mainly paying average players excessive wages. This is a 6 month contract on, presumably, a lower wage. World of difference
I'm really struggling to see how people are getting so angry with this.
No one, me included, is angry about it. They're just questioning it's value and benefit.tidus_mi2 wrote:Because it's IanHendo wrote:Not even that, only 3 month contract up to the end of the season.URZZZZ wrote:
The same players that have got us 8 defeats in a row?
Aside, the problem was mainly paying average players excessive wages. This is a 6 month contract on, presumably, a lower wage. World of difference
I'm really struggling to see how people are getting so angry with this.
Benefit will only be quantified at the end of the season but if he is involved in say 3 or 4 match winning moments then job done.Snowflake Royal wrote:No one, me included, is angry about it. They're just questioning it's value and benefit.tidus_mi2 wrote:Because it's IanHendo wrote:
Not even that, only 3 month contract up to the end of the season.
I'm really struggling to see how people are getting so angry with this.
True.Stranded wrote:Benefit will only be quantified at the end of the season but if he is involved in say 3 or 4 match winning moments then job done.Snowflake Royal wrote:No one, me included, is angry about it. They're just questioning it's value and benefit.tidus_mi2 wrote: Because it's Ian
Absolutely but it looks unlikely that will happen. Not even convinced a heavy defeat tonight would see the trigger pulled - unless there is going to be something random happen tonight and he isn't even there.Snowflake Royal wrote:True.Stranded wrote:Benefit will only be quantified at the end of the season but if he is involved in say 3 or 4 match winning moments then job done.Snowflake Royal wrote: No one, me included, is angry about it. They're just questioning it's value and benefit.
We all agree the best way to get winning moments is to replace Pauno tho. Even if it means replacing him with a tub of lard.
That's the problem isn’t it. Stopping conceding. And that requires a change to our whole approach in defending from GK to midfield.Stranded wrote:Absolutely but it looks unlikely that will happen. Not even convinced a heavy defeat tonight would see the trigger pulled - unless there is going to be something random happen tonight and he isn't even there.Snowflake Royal wrote:True.Stranded wrote:
Benefit will only be quantified at the end of the season but if he is involved in say 3 or 4 match winning moments then job done.
We all agree the best way to get winning moments is to replace Pauno tho. Even if it means replacing him with a tub of lard.
In that case, the only way to get out of this is to try something different - the signing of Barker may be part of that.
Or it may just be 30k wasted on an inevitable slide to League 1 - however, the thought of a marauding Meite on one wing and pure pace on the other feels like it could offer a path out of this. If we stop letting in 3 goals a game.
surely we aren't going to bin off Ince after a couple of games and a couple of assists? Possibly could see Ince replace Swift at number 10Stranded wrote:Absolutely but it looks unlikely that will happen. Not even convinced a heavy defeat tonight would see the trigger pulled - unless there is going to be something random happen tonight and he isn't even there.Snowflake Royal wrote:True.Stranded wrote:
Benefit will only be quantified at the end of the season but if he is involved in say 3 or 4 match winning moments then job done.
We all agree the best way to get winning moments is to replace Pauno tho. Even if it means replacing him with a tub of lard.
In that case, the only way to get out of this is to try something different - the signing of Barker may be part of that.
Or it may just be 30k wasted on an inevitable slide to League 1 - however, the thought of a marauding Meite on one wing and pure pace on the other feels like it could offer a path out of this. If we stop letting in 3 goals a game.
Its as if we are still basing the club on Ron Gourley's Chelsea model.Snowflake Royal wrote:Excellent example of how we got in this position. Just keep signing players and ignore the ones we're paying for the same spot on the team sheet because you don't want to consider them.
I doubt it, he's looked ok. No doubt Barker will start on the bench on Saturday (assume he isn't eligible for tonight) and come on with 25 or so to go if the game allows.Hound wrote:surely we aren't going to bin off Ince after a couple of games and a couple of assists? Possibly could see Ince replace Swift at number 10Stranded wrote:Absolutely but it looks unlikely that will happen. Not even convinced a heavy defeat tonight would see the trigger pulled - unless there is going to be something random happen tonight and he isn't even there.Snowflake Royal wrote: True.
We all agree the best way to get winning moments is to replace Pauno tho. Even if it means replacing him with a tub of lard.
In that case, the only way to get out of this is to try something different - the signing of Barker may be part of that.
Or it may just be 30k wasted on an inevitable slide to League 1 - however, the thought of a marauding Meite on one wing and pure pace on the other feels like it could offer a path out of this. If we stop letting in 3 goals a game.
I think Barker will be plan b at best - start on the bench and throw him on when we are inevitably losing (prob after 86 mins knowing Pauno)
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], Royalscot, Semrush [Bot] and 149 guests