match thread Reading (A)

[DE.]

1 hour ago, philipl said:

I know Armstrong gets the plaudits for a lovely strike from outside the area but Dack's goal was control guts and determination. 

If he were just a fancy soft touch, no way would he have ever scored that.

His tenacity and strength is something that sets him apart from other attacking midfielders for sure. I'm not sure how it would translate to the PL but it's absolutely perfect for the Championship.

[RV Blue]

7 hours ago, Harry The Bass said:

Holy crap - you mean we’re criticising Travis now? Jesus, lads gone from obscurity to being as good as a ball winning midfielder as I’ve seen at Ewood in years.

I’m not criticising him, I like him. Just wouldn’t say that he’s come on leap and bounds - he was a revelation when he came into the side (a year too late, I might add).

[1864roverite]

4 hours ago, roversfan99 said:

Would you agree then that during the course of the season, it would be very difficult (IMO impossible) to reach our play off objective without our striker contributing goals along the way?

It’s not impossible but it would be a disturbing thing if none of our strikers scored throughout the season

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

4 hours ago, philipl said:

I know Armstrong gets the plaudits for a lovely strike from outside the area but Dack's goal was control guts and determination. 

If he were just a fancy soft touch, no way would he have ever scored that.

I agree with you Phil but if you look closely he got a bit of luck with the deflection off the defender that foxed the goalie who was initially going the right way. Given the way he  managed to get the shot away whilst a defender was hanging on him like a cheap suit he deserved a bit of luck.

[USABlue]

5 hours ago, philipl said:

I know Armstrong gets the plaudits for a lovely strike from outside the area but Dack's goal was control guts and determination. 

If he were just a fancy soft touch, no way would he have ever scored that.

I would hazard a guess 97 out of 100 modern day players would have gone down looking for the penalty.  64 of them would have been rolling around 12 would be clutching their faces and 9 would squeal like a bitch.  Great goal from Dack.

[47er]

9 hours ago, magicalmortensleftpeg said:

Dack was cited as a player we brought in on the cheap and you changed the parameters to strikers only. We know he considerably overpaid for Brereton and Gally has to start scoring. But Mowbray has bought influential players for small amounts. How much did Johnson, Downing and Holtby cost?

I haven't changed anything, I've always lauded Dack as an outstanding buy. However, its not as impressive as Pukki for nothing is it?Player of the Month in the Premiership! I could have extended the criticism to defenders for that matter. The point is again, when we signed Brereton some on here claimed that £7M was not excessive anymore for an unproven Championship striker---I'm saying it is and Pukki proves it. How many Pukkis are out there"? We wouldn't know would we? Has our scouting system gone beyond Middlesborough to Finland yet? 

As for Johnson and Downing, good short-term signings, obviously.

In the end, its all about whether TM is the manager to take us up, I don't think he is. you presumably do---we'll see won't we?

[47er]

8 hours ago, The Hypnotic said:

Signings like Pukki are one in a million tbf. And I think Dack is up there as a one in a million signing anyway,

Thats two in a million then! 

[Paul Mani]

On 23/09/2019 at 22:43, 47er said:

I haven't changed anything, I've always lauded Dack as an outstanding buy. However, its not as impressive as Pukki for nothing is it?Player of the Month in the Premiership! I could have extended the criticism to defenders for that matter. The point is again, when we signed Brereton some on here claimed that £7M was not excessive anymore for an unproven Championship striker---I'm saying it is and Pukki proves it. How many Pukkis are out there"? We wouldn't know would we? Has our scouting system gone beyond Middlesborough to Finland yet? 

As for Johnson and Downing, good short-term signings, obviously.

In the end, its all about whether TM is the manager to take us up, I don't think he is. you presumably do---we'll see won't we?

Pukki is the exception to the rule, not the rule. If he were the rule then football clubs would be cash rich money making machines....

[47er]

10 minutes ago, Paul Mani said:

Pukki is the exception to the rule, not the rule. If he were the rule then football clubs would be cash rich money making machines....

And, in TM's case, Dack is very much an exception to the rule isn't he?

The more exceptions to the rule a manager can chalk up the better the manager is.

Additionally of course Norwich got promoted!

Edited September 25, 2019 by 47er

[Blue blood]

When Norwich's team beating City cost £6.5 million you see there is value to be had in the transfer market whether free transfers or small fees. 

[Stuart]

21 minutes ago, Blue blood said:

When Norwich's team beating City cost £6.5 million you see there is value to be had in the transfer market whether free transfers or small fees. 

It’s all about the manager, coaches and scouting team.

How does ours measure up?

[47er]

1 hour ago, Stuart said:

It’s all about the manager, coaches and scouting team.

How does ours measure up?

My point all along. Ours doesn't measure up. It should not be necessary to spend £12M on 2 Championship strikers let alone one ordinary, one bloody awful!

Other clubs have gone up without spending anything like that---Norwich and Sheffield UTD most recently.

No need for this waste and  if the right structures and personal were in place, we might even be able to afford some defenders of our own!

Edited September 25, 2019 by 47er

[magicalmortensleftpeg]

So we’re criticising the club for not signing cheap players and getting promoted. It’s not an easy thing to do. That does not justify the Brereton signing but I don’t think it’s fair to look at Pukki and then consider it easy to sign a 20 goal a season championship striker for nothing.

How much did Villa spend to get promoted by the way?

[JBiz]

Just now, magicalmortensleftpeg said:

So we’re criticising the club for not signing cheap players and getting promoted. It’s not an easy thing to do. That does not justify the Brereton signing but I don’t think it’s fair to look at Pukki and then consider it easy to sign a 20 goal a season championship striker for nothing.

How much did Villa spend to get promoted by the way?

And Leicester, Wolves, Cardiff, Newcastle, Reading, Southampton, Watford and Bournemouth?

Not to forget - the Boro’s, the Derby’s and many others who’ve spent a tonne and gone backwards (seem to remember a famous blue and white team doing something similar...)

In fact since Tony’s last promotion - I can only see Blackpool, Burnley and Norwich (the former Two twice) have achieved promotion by “not spending much”... even though Norwich and Stendl had 100k PW on the bench last season in Rhodes et al.

To quote one of my favourite albums of the last 20 years; “It was supposed to be so easyyyy”

Edited September 25, 2019 by Harry The Bass

[Mashed Potatoes]

53 minutes ago, Stuart said:

It’s all about the manager, coaches and scouting team.

How does ours measure up?

Pretty well. Last season after 8 games Norwich had 11 points; we have 13

[Hasta]

I still look at Josh King and remember we played him once every three games as a winger.

Wonder how much he would move for now?

[47er]

21 minutes ago, magicalmortensleftpeg said:

So we’re criticising the club for not signing cheap players and getting promoted. It’s not an easy thing to do. That does not justify the Brereton signing but I don’t think it’s fair to look at Pukki and then consider it easy to sign a 20 goal a season championship striker for nothing.

How much did Villa spend to get promoted by the way?

A lot ,which is why I didn't mention them.You can buy your way out but my point is you don't have to. 2 out of three promoted clubs spent less than us----fact.

And where did I say it was easy? it takes good structures, right personnel and some luck. Burnley did it without spending £12M on the entire team.

 

[47er]

6 minutes ago, Mashed Potatoes said:

Pretty well. Last season after 8 games Norwich had 11 points; we have 13

We're going up then! No point in my post. All sorted.

[Dreams of 1995]

1 hour ago, 47er said:

A lot ,which is why I didn't mention them.You can buy your way out but my point is you don't have to. 2 out of three promoted clubs spent less than us----fact.

And where did I say it was easy? it takes good structures, right personnel and some luck. Burnley did it without spending £12M on the entire team.

 

Sheffield United also had 7 players on loan last season, including their goalkeeper, for which some, including you, have lambasted Mowbray for.

Their loanees included: Henderson (fee), Hogan (fee), Woodburn (fee), Norwood (fee), Johnson, Madine & Dowell. They also bought Norwood in Jan for £2m and spent £5m on Egan. They didn't go up by spending nothing. In fact, the season before I think they spent about £5-10m as well, it's hard to tell in the days of "undisclosed fees".

Norwich City had Passlack on loan from Dortmund, Krul on PL wages in net, Hanley/Rhodes on the bench. Their squad was (is) years ahead of ours, probably because they'd been in the Premier League not long ago. They are paying big wages because were still in receipt of the parachute payments following from their recent relegation.

Make no mistake both clubs did not "spend nothing".

In fact, take a look at this article: https://www.planetfootball.com/quick-reads/how-every-every-pl-and-champ-clubs-wages-compare-to-their-league-finish/

This is based on the 2017/2018 accounts as they were the ones available at the time of writing (May 2019). You'll see Norwich City's wage bill was very high before they brought in the likes of Rhodes, Krul, Passlack etc etc.

Something to look at with that article is that all of the clubs with the high wage bills are clubs that have achieved promotion recently (Wolves, Fulham, Villa, NORWICH). Sheffield United's at the time of writing was low - this was their first season in the league - but since then had spent money on the players mentioned above, and if you think they came cheap then you are totally misjudging the football market.

 

 

[47er]

Just now, Dreams of 1995 said:

Sheffield United also had 7 players on loan last season, including their goalkeeper, for which some, including you, have lambasted Mowbray for.

Their loanees included: Henderson (fee), Hogan (fee), Woodburn (fee), Norwood (fee), Johnson, Madine & Dowell. They also bought Norwood in Jan for £2m and spent £5m on Egan. They didn't go up by spending nothing. In fact, the season before I think they spent about £5-10m as well, it's hard to tell in the days of "undisclosed fees".

Norwich City had Passlack on loan from Dortmund, Krul on PL wages in net, Hanley/Rhodes on the bench. Their squad was (is) years ahead of ours, probably because they'd been in the Premier League not long ago. They are paying big wages because were still in receipt of the parachute payments following from their recent relegation.

Make no mistake both clubs did not "spend nothing".

In fact, take a look at this article: https://www.planetfootball.com/quick-reads/how-every-every-pl-and-champ-clubs-wages-compare-to-their-league-finish/

This is based on the 2017/2018 accounts as they were the ones available at the time of writing (May 2019). You'll see Norwich City's wage bill was very high before they brought in the likes of Rhodes, Krul, Passlack etc etc.

Something to look at with that article is that all of the clubs with the high wage bills are clubs that have achieved promotion recently (Wolves, Fulham, Villa, NORWICH). Sheffield United's at the time of writing was low - this was their first season in the league - but since then had spent money on the players mentioned above, and if you think they came cheap then you are totally misjudging the football market.

 

 

I never said the those clubs spent nothing, merely that they spent less than we did and got better value for what they spent than we did. 

As for our loans you're taking liberties with my comments about Raya. I had no problem with borrowing Walton but I had  expected he would be in the squad alongside Raya not instead of him.

And there I'm finishing, I know from past experience I can never dim the enthusiasm or energy of the Glass Half-Full Brigade!

 

 

[Dreams of 1995]

Just now, 47er said:

I never said the those clubs spent nothing, merely that they spent less than we did and got better value for what they spent than we did. 

As for our loans you're taking liberties with my comments about Raya. I had no problem with borrowing Walton but I had  expected he would be in the squad alongside Raya not instead of him.

And there I'm finishing, I know from past experience I can never dim the enthusiasm or energy of the Glass Half-Full Brigade!

 

 

What a load of nonsense! It's got nothing to do with "glass half-full" (in fact, we aren't even speaking about Rovers here but other clubs so a slightly peculiar comment) it's do with the "facts", which is what you made out like you were putting forward, when actually it's only a fraction of the story.

Both clubs have spent more, especially Norwich. Their wage bill blows most teams in this league out of the water so this idea that they "over achieved" based on expenditure is wrong. In actual FACT they were underachieving before their good form hit.

If you want to end posts with "---------------fact" then I'd make sure they are actually "---------------------------------fact".

Quote from yourself: "Other clubs have gone up without spending anything like that---Norwich and Sheffield UTD most recently", when it turns out they have actually spent pretty similar figures to us, if not more, over the course of 3 years.

And there I'm finishing, I know from past experience I can never dim the enthusiasm or energy of the I Just Want A Reason To Moan Brigade.

[Mashed Potatoes]

Just now, 47er said:

I never said the those clubs spent nothing, merely that they spent less than we did and got better value for what they spent than we did. 

As for our loans you're taking liberties with my comments about Raya. I had no problem with borrowing Walton but I had  expected he would be in the squad alongside Raya not instead of him.

And there I'm finishing, I know from past experience I can never dim the enthusiasm or energy of the Glass Half-Full Brigade!

 

 

I doubt if Brighton would have wanted to loan Walton to us unless they were confident he was going to be playing regularly as first choice.

To know how much money clubs were spending last season we will need to see accounts to the end of June this year - I don't think ours are yet available ?

[Dreams of 1995]

4 hours ago, Stuart said:

It’s all about the manager, coaches and scouting team.

How does ours measure up?

Pretty good actually Stuart.

Our signings since promotion to the Championship:

Gallagher, Downing, Johnson, Holtby, Aradabiyo (loan), Walton (loan), Cunningham (loan), Brereton, Reed (loan), Palmer (loan), Rothwell, Armstrong, Rodwell, Chapman, Davenport.

15 signings I make it, of which 10 have improved the club (Brereton, Palmer, Rodwell, Chapman and Davenport excluded, although 2 unfairly due to injuries) which gives us a success rating of 66%.

Since our current manager/coaching/scouting team has been around we have improved year on year; our ambition has increased to where we are now once again discussing promotion; our youth players are being given first team chances...and succeeding; there is a better link between club and fans (although could be improved); and lastly, but more importantly, we have a manager with many faults, many pros, but at least the man has some damn good integrity and a real desire to improve this club which, for me, is just what I want.

 

 

Edited September 25, 2019 by Dreams of 1995

[Dreams of 1995]

Just now, Mashed Potatoes said:

I doubt if Brighton would have wanted to loan Walton to us unless they were confident he was going to be playing regularly as first choice.

To know how much money clubs were spending last season we will need to see accounts to the end of June this year - I don't think ours are yet available ?

I will put money now that Norwich/Sheffield Utd dwarf our wage expenditure. 

[Stuart]

Just now, Dreams of 1995 said:

Pretty good actually Stuart.

Our signings since promotion to the Championship:

Gallagher, Downing, Johnson, Holtby, Aradabiyo (loan), Walton (loan), Cunningham (loan), Brereton, Reed (loan), Palmer (loan), Rothwell, Armstrong, Rodwell, Chapman, Davenport.

15 signings I make it, of which 10 have improved the club (Brereton, Palmer, Rodwell, Chapman and Davenport excluded, although 2 unfairly due to injuries) which gives us a success rating of 66%.

Since our current manager/coaching/scouting team has been around we have improved year on year; our ambition has increased to where we are now once again discussing promotion; our youth players are being given first team chances...and succeeding; there is a better link between club and fans (although could be improved); and lastly, but more importantly, we have a manager with many faults, many pros, but at least the man has some damn good integrity and a real desire to improve this club which, for me, is just what I want.

Disagree with your list of players who have improved the club. It’s all about opinions though.

But the difference is the amount of money Mowbray has spent compared to how much Farke has - and their respective return on investment.