By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Not sure I agree that Ollie necessarily got the best out the youngsters. There was an increasing amount of Olliebingo going in places with them being brought in for a half or game and dropped again immediately after. They both have had somewhat different briefs and McClaren's squad is much less expensive than Ollies, with far more first team players coming in from U23's this year than we have had before. Equally the outward loans seem to have been more structures this time around as well, with seemingly much greater follow up than previously.
Different ways to get the best out of kids, Holloway went with the idea of giving them a game or two then coming out of the side then back in again to keep them fresh and eager which worked to a certain extent. MCClaren has gone a different route and either played them every week such as Eze and Lumley or not at all as with Smyth and Chair. Both styles have their good and bad points.
0
Getting away with it on 19:36 - Mar 3 with 3062 views
There's a massive difference between Premier League prices versus the Championship, so even if it was cheap by Premier League standards, it's still very expensive relative to what the norms are at Championship level. Even if the deal was more favourable towards us, it's still going to cost a lot.
In recent years, clubs who yo-yo between the divisions have been trying to change the way they offer contracts in a bid to remain competitive, by trying to convince players to take an automatic pay cut if relegated. This isn't easy though and probably comes with a lot of other caveats, such as huge incentives for promotion or very low minimum release clause fees.
In the past, it has largely worked in favour of the players if their club was promoted, with lots of players on huge incentives, either through their salary or bonuses, or both, getting massive hikes that their ability didn't warrant. And this is still true.
We've done a lot of work to reduce the image that we're a club willing handing out easy pay days for players, but even at this level, we probably still pay over the odds for Championship or lower level players. Matt Smith is a recent example and hint towards that, because we weren't able to shift him out to Millwall on loan as they felt his salary was excessive and they refused to cover it, but I suppose that is obvious when our recent accounts show a wage bill of £31m for 2017/18 versus £13m at Millwall. It will be interesting to see how this changes in the next couple of sets of accounts.
And yes, I agree we've looked tired in recent matches and this period, but I also think McClaren could have utilised the squad a little bit better to try and keep them fresher. The FA Cup game against Watford seemed a missed opportunity because we were out on our feet with 20 minutes to go, when we really needed the energy to throw the kitchen sink at it, which was a shame.
I can't dispute the cost of our loanees as I genuinely don't know what that would be, nor how it stacks up against other Championship sides. What we should remember however is the context those decisions were made in.
The FFP ruling came down at the end of July. It stipulated we couldn't bring players in unless we sent out players of the same monetary value. Knowing that the club had some serious decisions to make very quickly. With a few exceptions we had a mainly young, inexperienced squad. If we look tired now, imagine how we'd look if we didn't have the four players (OK three, if you discount Hemed) that were brought in. They contributed mightily during our winning run before Christmas. The extended injuries to two of them have also coincided with our bad form since. I strongly suspect that without them we'd be worse off points-wise, and be facing a run-in with a bunch of talented but exhausted and mentally fragile youngsters. As it is those kids are now playing a match or two a week elsewhere rather than staggering to the end of the season with the real possibility of relegation hanging over them. For that reason alone the loans, so far as I can tell, have been worth it.
[Post edited 3 Mar 2019 19:38]
4
Getting away with it on 21:48 - Mar 3 with 2914 views
Getting away with it on 19:36 - Mar 3 by VancouverHoop
I can't dispute the cost of our loanees as I genuinely don't know what that would be, nor how it stacks up against other Championship sides. What we should remember however is the context those decisions were made in.
The FFP ruling came down at the end of July. It stipulated we couldn't bring players in unless we sent out players of the same monetary value. Knowing that the club had some serious decisions to make very quickly. With a few exceptions we had a mainly young, inexperienced squad. If we look tired now, imagine how we'd look if we didn't have the four players (OK three, if you discount Hemed) that were brought in. They contributed mightily during our winning run before Christmas. The extended injuries to two of them have also coincided with our bad form since. I strongly suspect that without them we'd be worse off points-wise, and be facing a run-in with a bunch of talented but exhausted and mentally fragile youngsters. As it is those kids are now playing a match or two a week elsewhere rather than staggering to the end of the season with the real possibility of relegation hanging over them. For that reason alone the loans, so far as I can tell, have been worth it.
[Post edited 3 Mar 2019 19:38]
Next season will be the gauge of that though - those players come back, refreshed, more experienced, raring to go and we're away.
But (and it is a massive BUT), I can't help but feel that those we are hopeful for are ALL forward facing players. Where is the defensive shield for our suspect CBs and where are the CBs to play with Leistner next season?
Who are the defensive rocks coming through?
...also, we need to cut the non-playing staff to give us some scope within FFP; no point looking like a top end club if we are bargain basement fodder...
Next season will be the gauge of that though - those players come back, refreshed, more experienced, raring to go and we're away.
But (and it is a massive BUT), I can't help but feel that those we are hopeful for are ALL forward facing players. Where is the defensive shield for our suspect CBs and where are the CBs to play with Leistner next season?
Who are the defensive rocks coming through?
...also, we need to cut the non-playing staff to give us some scope within FFP; no point looking like a top end club if we are bargain basement fodder...
I already want next season to end...
Too true. It won't be easy but I believe/hope the club is preparing as best they can. Maybe they can scrape together enough to renew a couple of contracts, (Cameron and either Hall or Bidwell maybe?) Next season will definitely be when the coaching staff earns their corn. They'll have had a year to work with the players, to know their strengths and weaknesses and build a system that suits them.
0
Getting away with it on 00:07 - Mar 4 with 2758 views
well, this month has some alright games coming up, although I say that with the caveat we would make a meal out of getting a win away at Bridlington FC. we've had our month of hell, if we can't get much from March then i'll really start to worry for next season. The sides who look likely to be going up from League 1 don't look like mugs.
i really don't have much of a clue who would be a good appointment should things come to pass and McClaren was sacked in May after barely avoiding relegation.
[Post edited 4 Mar 2019 0:08]
“The thing about football - the important thing about football - is that it is not just about football.â€
0
Getting away with it on 01:14 - Mar 4 with 2720 views
Getting away with it on 17:34 - Mar 3 by VancouverHoop
Do any of us know how expensive the loanees are though? Yes they have Premier League cred but, Cameron aside, the other two hadn't established themselves there. Rangel was without a club so I'm guessing (like we all are) that it wasn't close to his Swansea contract. Lee Hoos suggested recently that the reason the loan players came in late was because we got the best price that way. So maybe not so expensive after all? Basically it's hard to construct an argument without basic factual information (unless you're Donald Trump.) We're just theorising.
What we do know for sure is we were transfer embargoed during the January window, and the team has had a match every 3.8 days since Boxing Day. They're tired and there's been very little time to practice. Any talk, about players, coaches or management needs to take that into account
Yes with the matches pretty much every few days McClaren in a recent post match interview said he wanted to get the players back out on the training ground. It seemed to be frustrating for him - it looks like we won't have been doing much of this since Christmas - probably essential for us to keep our shape and discipline.
Hopefully Cameron and Rangel back soon so we can finish the season well.
Between now and the summer I hope Lee Hoos looks at everyone that is working for QPR and determines whether they are performing and required at our club. Players, Managers and Coaches at 119 (up from 74 in 2011) and Other Staff at 55 (up from 40 in 2011) Total wages of $30.7m Way too many people employed delivering these kind of results.
I hope there is a clear out of people at the club this summer. (not including Freeman or any of our better players - just the non performers and non essential roles).
[Post edited 4 Mar 2019 1:16]
0
Getting away with it on 08:05 - Mar 4 with 2595 views
Yes with the matches pretty much every few days McClaren in a recent post match interview said he wanted to get the players back out on the training ground. It seemed to be frustrating for him - it looks like we won't have been doing much of this since Christmas - probably essential for us to keep our shape and discipline.
Hopefully Cameron and Rangel back soon so we can finish the season well.
Between now and the summer I hope Lee Hoos looks at everyone that is working for QPR and determines whether they are performing and required at our club. Players, Managers and Coaches at 119 (up from 74 in 2011) and Other Staff at 55 (up from 40 in 2011) Total wages of $30.7m Way too many people employed delivering these kind of results.
I hope there is a clear out of people at the club this summer. (not including Freeman or any of our better players - just the non performers and non essential roles).
[Post edited 4 Mar 2019 1:16]
Maybe the increase in coaching staff is what has brought about the transformation in the U23's and lower age groups. The fact that we are seeing crops of players coming through rather than one bright spark every four or five years is a testament to the improved coaching. Now that the stake has been placed in the sand, it is apparent that the future will depend on the players coming through and that, IMO, is not a place to skimp on. I would be fairly confident that Hoos isn't spunking money on unnecessary staff in an area we need to keep on top of.
Getting away with it on 08:05 - Mar 4 by Esox_Lucius
Maybe the increase in coaching staff is what has brought about the transformation in the U23's and lower age groups. The fact that we are seeing crops of players coming through rather than one bright spark every four or five years is a testament to the improved coaching. Now that the stake has been placed in the sand, it is apparent that the future will depend on the players coming through and that, IMO, is not a place to skimp on. I would be fairly confident that Hoos isn't spunking money on unnecessary staff in an area we need to keep on top of.
I'd guess thats where the increases staff has come from, when we went up in 2011 we gad very few coaches and scouts in the academy and very few scouts for the first team but that has changed significantly in the last few years
1
Getting away with it on 09:55 - Mar 4 with 2463 views
Getting away with it on 10:25 - Mar 4 by TacticalR
Is the number of dogs significant in this analogy? Just looking for clues.
Yep.
One Yorkshire Terrier One Pembroke Corgi One Jowly old English Bulldog One, eh, Chris Ramsey One Dutch Shepherd One West Country Spaniel One Lancashire Heeler
Basically the dogs are our managers and the shitty owners are us / the board. Excuse the poor analogy, been on the piss all weekend and was up at 4 for work.
I've learned a lot about dogs this morning. My job isn't very stimulating.
[Post edited 4 Mar 2019 12:21]
0
Getting away with it on 12:22 - Mar 4 with 2174 views
One Yorkshire Terrier One Pembroke Corgi One Jowly old English Bulldog One, eh, Chris Ramsey One Dutch Shepherd One West Country Spaniel One Lancashire Heeler
Basically the dogs are our managers and the shitty owners are us / the board. Excuse the poor analogy, been on the piss all weekend and was up at 4 for work.
I've learned a lot about dogs this morning. My job isn't very stimulating.
[Post edited 4 Mar 2019 12:21]
I'm even more confused. Isn't that seven dogs?
0
Getting away with it on 12:34 - Mar 4 with 2158 views
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
