|
Post by rickyqpr on Apr 14, 2019 11:13:30 GMT
There is much debate about whether the club is moving forward or not. To me, it breaks down into ‘on the field’ and’ off the field’.
Off the field I think there has been measurable progress, I think we are being correctly run for the first time in a long time. But I was more patient than I should have been with McClaren (I hate sacking and changing managers just to start all over again) but with hindsight the whole McClaren saga ‘On the Field’ was wrong.
It seems that he was appointed over the heads of Hoos and Ferdinand’s who were reluctant to let Holloway go. The 4 senior players recruited was probably in support of McClaren and the squad strategy was at best postponed, at worse regressed. I appreciate that after 4 games we were in trouble and needed something extra, but his reliance on the same core experienced players once we were out of the trouble has proved costly. The decision to loan out so many fringe youngsters made sense if that was the only way they were going to get game time, but in hindsight (again) very few have progressed out on loan.
Interesting though how the players who are going to be here next season, recalled by Eustace, have responded so well since being recalled.
So looking at our squad of players, in particular those player who are due to be here next year, have they regressed or progressed? It does not reflect well on McClaren IMHO.
Progressed
Lumley – grabbed his chance
Freeman – Valuation increased – key man under McClaren (and Holloway).
Chair – The loan that worked – very highly rated at Stevenage – we will need him next term
Luongo – We miss him so much when not available – lately used by McClaren in a deeper position – why?
Leistner – Bigger clubs looking at him, a great free transfer. But Lynch (and anyone else) preferred to him in final games – not McClaren’s finest hours.
Walker – well he made his league debut under Eustace yesterday – we may need Walker and Oteh next year!
Regressed
Ingram - Confidence shattered in first 4 games with a style that did not suit his game. He was our great hope following the Smithies departure.
Furlong – meant to be first choice right back, initial injury but has struggled under McClaren – been outstanding under Holloway and now Eustace
Goss – Loaned out, great hopes – can he regress any further?
Eze – Seems to have had his natural ability coached out of him – he will have his day though.
Scowen – Powerhouse for Holloway, remarkable return to form under Eustace – third rate under McClaren
Manning – Loaned out, recalled and then rarely used by McClaren. Fans singing his name yesterday playing at left back!
Smith – Did not fit in with McClaren’s set up, so rarely selected. When he did play, he was isolated and hopeless. So we tried to unload him, but we pay him too much apparently. Used wisely by Holloway. Worked his socks off in attack and defence at Millwall under Eustace. He made them regret not taking him on loan.
Oteh – Scored freely for the Under 23s – loaned out to a Walsall team in freefall, got a rare 20 minutes from the bench yesterday. Wasted loan.
BOS - Played well only to get dropped. The very thing that Holloway was slated for regarding the youngsters. Needed regular game time.
Kakay – Disappeared – another casualty who was supposed to be back up to Furlong.
Shadipo – Been injured for the bulk of the season
Smyth – Cannot get into the Accrington Stanley starting eleven.
Wheeler, Dieng, Hamalainen, Phillips, Owen – All loaned out and struggling for game time.
Out of Contract
Bidwell – works very hard, limited, but poor combination with Lynch – we cannot afford him now
Hall – at least he has played some games this season - never re-established himself under McClaren just an unused substitute – injured again now – may get 12 months deal.
Cameron – Steadied the ship until injury, but ageing and we cannot afford him
Cousins – Inconsistent – Good game/Bad Game – has not progressed -may get contract extension but by no means certain
Hamed – Left the club with McClaren, replaced by Eustace with a clone who is much better than the original. We cannot afford him.
Rangel - An important signing (although hard on Kakay). Seems he wants to stay at QPR, but he is aging and probably too expensive. Could be a useful dressing room presence for another year though.
Wszolek – said to be one of our most expensive earners – very popular with home supporters but can go missing away from home. We have a one year option, I doubt we can afford to exercise it though
Wells – I still like Wells, he works hard, but seems unlucky but now is low on confidence. We cannot afford to buy or pay him.
Lynch – Farewell!
With still a pretty big squad of players, the coach that we had great hopes of, seems to have only progressed a handful of players, ignored the youth and overworked players that will not be here next year.
In hindsight – poor init.
|
|
|
Post by londonranger on Apr 14, 2019 16:59:45 GMT
Thanks for a well thought through practical summary. Ricky
|
|
|
Post by Roller on Apr 14, 2019 20:00:28 GMT
On the face of it there has been no “on field” progress under McClaren. Back in November I wrote an article for AKUTR’s offering a very different viewpoint on his appointment as QPR’s manager, his brief and the events which subsequently transpired. Rather than try to re-word those thoughts, I’ll reproduce an edit of some of that article here, excluding some of the rather involved FFP arguments, to explain my take on this season.
Ian Holloway sacked after fulfilling his brief, Steve McClaren not only allowed to completely ignore his, along with the kids that he was brought in to nurture, but also encouraged to spurn the one opportunity we had to get ahead in our relentless battle against Financial Fair Play in favour of expensive loan signings. I thought that I understood the long-term strategy that Lee Hoos and Les Ferdinand had plotted, but after a period of calm and considered leadership, it now appears that Queens Park Rangers Football Club has reverted into being an incomprehensible maelstrom of contradictions.
Ian Holloway was appointed to guide the club through the essential, but potentially disastrous, process of shedding itself of its highest earners, introducing a swathe of the club’s youth players while ensuring that the club maintained its championship status. Irrespective of anyone’s views on Ollie and his style of management, there can be no argument regarding his success in achieving this which enabled us to stay within the stipulations of FFP; his reward was to be unceremoniously shown the door in favour of Steve McClaren.
According to Les Ferdinand, McClaren was appointed because “He has a fantastic reputation in the game for coaching and developing players. When you look at the average age of our squad, and the exciting young talent starting to emerge, he is the perfect fit for us. We want Steve to use his expertise and experience to help our players grow.” McClaren, who had clearly seen a lot of QPR’s matches in the second half of last season, added “The introduction of younger players has been a breath of fresh air and it’s exciting for the future.”
The starting eleven for QPR’s final home match last season featured six of those younger players, seven if you include Darnell Furlong, with two more on the substitutes’ bench; McClaren has pared that down to just two. Last season’s team boasted the most goal scorers aged 20 or under in the division, of those only Eze is currently playing first team football. Osayi-Samuel is a permanently unused substitute, while Smyth, Chair and Oteh can only watch from the side-lines while expensive loanees dominate our first team.
There is a train of thought that the loan signings were as a direct result of QPR’s poor start to the season. This is perhaps true in Cameron’s case, but definitely not with regard to the strikers. In a meeting at Harlington before the season started, McClaren made it perfectly clear that he was looking to bring in some players, particularly a forward, on loan to add some quality to the squad and Dave McIntyre revealed that QPR were looking to bring in both Hemed and Wells on his West London Sport website on the 10th August, after only one match of this season and over a week before QPR’s wretched trip to The Hawthorns.
In my last article I accused McClaren of turning a blind eye to QPR’s future and being more concerned with his own, but I now think it is possible that I’ve done him a disservice and that there is an explanation which makes sense of all of these contradictions.
I had expected us to use this season to try to get ahead of FFP and reduce the effect of losing our parachute payments next season, but I have concluded that this was never in the club’s plans. The last six months has been dominated by baffling mix-match of messages, statements and actions, but one scenario does make total sense of these facts, assumptions and reasoning. A scenario which explains why McClaren has been allowed to spend money the club can ill afford, a scenario which explains why the youth policy has been put on the back burner, a scenario which explains why the hitherto sound and careful planning of Lee Hoos and Les Ferdinand has been cast to the wind. This season we are mounting a serious attempt at winning promotion.
Rather than looking upon these events as a series of disassociated actions and reactions, they should be viewed holistically as a considered plan. Despite Hoos’ and Ferdinand’s reservations, Holloway, due to a combination of his natural enthusiasm, his love of the club and his guaranteed place in QPR’s folklore, was an excellent choice of manager to see QPR through the process of slashing the wage bill without compromising the squad as his standing with the fanbase bought him some time and understanding which would not have been afforded to many others. With that accomplished, McClaren, who was well regarded within the club’s hierarchy for providing the initial impetus for the club’s last promotion, was re-engaged behind a visage of developing the youth players which masked the club’s real intentions. It was, of course, McClaren’s work with the first team squad that had caught their eye with his ability to organise a solid defence his most telling contribution to that season.
Faced with the dismal prospect of having to frantically slash costs again for next season after our parachute payments have finally dried up, the board have gambled as much money as the FFP regulations will permit on trying to achieve the one outcome that will make all those financial arguments null and void. While we all knew that we need a new striker, considering how stringently the club’s budgets have been set in recent seasons I cannot believe that two loan strikers were sanctioned just to keep us stable in this division.
Similarly, the loan signing of Cameron when we already have perfectly acceptable players in his role, nor the attempt to extend Rangel’s deal now that Furlong has recovered from his injury are not sustainable for a club which is not only constantly compressing the headroom at the top end of its FFP limits but also needing to make another raft of dramatic cuts next season. Nothing else that I’ve read or that has crossed my mind really makes sense. We are not consolidating, developing our youth players nor preparing in readiness for the loss of our parachute payments; after carefully manipulating events, we’ve set the controls for the heart of the sun.
|
|
|
Post by bowranger on Apr 15, 2019 12:06:02 GMT
Cheers both Ricky and Roller - both really interesting and informative posts. Not much to add, but was amazed by these two bits:
- "Last season’s team boasted the most goal scorers aged 20 or under in the division." - "Dave McIntyre revealed that QPR were looking to bring in both Hemed and Wells on his West London Sport website on the 10th August, after only one match of this season and over a week before QPR’s wretched trip to The Hawthorns."
Did not know either of those, that's illuminating.
|
|
|
Post by harr on Apr 15, 2019 13:52:00 GMT
You have to give Ollie some credit for that first fact then. We seem to have shipped a few out this year that maybe we shouldn’t have, Manning and Smyth I thought could have both played a part, if not every week , some weeks. Chair looks a good prospect too, just need to get Eze playing like he did in 2018. Things are looking healthier. Not a big fan of Wheeler or Goss though, wouldn’t be really heartbroken if either left.
|
|
|
Post by rickyqpr on Apr 15, 2019 14:26:50 GMT
Cheers both Ricky and Roller - both really interesting and informative posts. Not much to add, but was amazed by these two bits: - "Last season’s team boasted the most goal scorers aged 20 or under in the division."- "Dave McIntyre revealed that QPR were looking to bring in both Hemed and Wells on his West London Sport website on the 10th August, after only one match of this season and over a week before QPR’s wretched trip to The Hawthorns." Did not know either of those, that's illuminating. Thanks Roller - great to be able to look back like that and determine the facts. I know that these loans were lined up before the dreadful first 4 games, but they certainly had the desired impact when they joined. I have said repeatedly though that throughout McClaren's career he seems to do ok when things are going right, but as soon as things derail, he does not seem to know how to correct things. After the poor start, he almost stumbled over a successful formation and kept it going doing the same things, using the same players - and in the end overworked the same players. But his substitutions seemed to take for ever, with several changes of mind before anyone actually came on to the playing area. I am not going over board about Eustace, but the last 2 games have seen us set up with horses for courses team selections, tactics and a game plan together with timely and sensible substitutions. This should not be such a revelation to us, but we have not seen it all season under McClaren and so it feels very refreshing. There is a risk that we over react to Eustace, just because he is doing the things that ought to be done, when we have been starved of such actions for so long. Even under Holloway, we could never be sure what the plan was, why he had dropped players or what he was trying to do. He made up for it with his enthusiasm and love of the club. What Eustace has done for 2 matches is what most clubs would expect, but not at our basket case of a club. But I hope he is allowed to run to the end of the season now so that the sample on which to judge is greater. Who was the last manager who managed and prepared a team well at QPR? Neil Warnock IMHO - but other than him - I go back to Jim Smith or even Terry Venables on this list ........ en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Queens_Park_Rangers_F.C._managers
|
|
|
Post by terryb on Apr 15, 2019 16:54:04 GMT
Cheers both Ricky and Roller - both really interesting and informative posts. Not much to add, but was amazed by these two bits: - "Last season’s team boasted the most goal scorers aged 20 or under in the division."- "Dave McIntyre revealed that QPR were looking to bring in both Hemed and Wells on his West London Sport website on the 10th August, after only one match of this season and over a week before QPR’s wretched trip to The Hawthorns." Did not know either of those, that's illuminating. Thanks Roller - great to be able to look back like that and determine the facts. I know that these loans were lined up before the dreadful first 4 games, but they certainly had the desired impact when they joined. I have said repeatedly though that throughout McClaren's career he seems to do ok when things are going right, but as soon as things derail, he does not seem to know how to correct things. After the poor start, he almost stumbled over a successful formation and kept it going doing the same things, using the same players - and in the end overworked the same players. But his substitutions seemed to take for ever, with several changes of mind before anyone actually came on to the playing area. I am not going over board about Eustace, but the last 2 games have seen us set up with horses for courses team selections, tactics and a game plan together with timely and sensible substitutions. This should not be such a revelation to us, but we have not seen it all season under McClaren and so it feels very refreshing. There is a risk that we over react to Eustace, just because he is doing the things that ought to be done, when we have been starved of such actions for so long. Even under Holloway, we could never be sure what the plan was, why he had dropped players or what he was trying to do. He made up for it with his enthusiasm and love of the club. What Eustace has done for 2 matches is what most clubs would expect, but not at our basket case of a club. But I hope he is allowed to run to the end of the season now so that the sample on which to judge is greater. Who was the last manager who managed and prepared a team well at QPR? Neil Warnock IMHO - but other than him - I go back to Jim Smith or even Terry Venables on this list ........ en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Queens_Park_Rangers_F.C._managers"I have said repeatedly though that throughout McClaren's career he seems to do ok when things are going right, but as soon as things derail, he does not seem to know how to correct things." *Edited after I had to rush off as a chauffeur! I do agree with this Ricky, but I don't think it just applies to McClaren, partly because managers are not given the time to recover. I can't think of many managers (at any club) that come back from an awful run of results/performances & Ian Holloway certainly didn't at Bristol Rovers, Leicester & Millwall. However, Ollie did at Rangers on at least two occassions. I'm sure that sucessful runs often follow a manager stumbling upon a formation or having to play an out of favour player that makes a difference, rather than anything that has been planned. I'm not going overboard about Eustace, but I'm very happy with him being in charge till the end of the season, giving the club time to make an appointment in the proper manner rather than the normal rush to fill a void. IF he is interviewed & is the best candidate, I would have no problem wuith that. IF other candidates are assessed as being better for the role, then I would have no problem with that either.
|
|
|
Post by bowranger on Apr 15, 2019 18:44:06 GMT
Lot of sense there. More broadly, I don't know if it's also partly to do with managers gravitating to 'their' players in tandem with them knowing they tend to have a pretty short shelf life at most clubs?
As in, if you've got a group of players who you either brought in yourself (and therefore likely to be more loyal to you) and/or have performed well for you as a group previously, maybe you put more faith in them to drag you out of a mire?
A lot of managers are only ever a bad run away from the sack, so it can make a lot of them risk-averse. It feels like a theme at QPR over the years - if you're going to get canned if it doesn't go to plan, do you follow the remit and integrate more young (BOS) or out of favour (Scowen) players into the mix, or do you go with the players who have done the business for you before?
Or to put it another way, if you're thinking about staying in work for another week, are your thoughts on saving your skin, or about what's best for QPR in two years time?
Which may partly be why Eustace is picking a horses for courses side (as Ricky says) as he's operating in a kinda hinterland. If he's being optimistic, he's auditioning for the job and that's simply trying to eek out results from a small sequence of games to demonstrate whether he can have an impact, which in turn means being pragmatic. And if he's pessimistic, he's been temporarily handed the reins at a higher level of football than he's ever managed at before, so it's only in his interest to make a good fist of it. He's probably off in a few weeks time, so having "his" players doesn't make much of a difference - which means you have the freedom to pick from the whole pool of available and players on the basis of "what line up makes sense to beat X side?" No baggage, no favourites, just game to game choices.
That could all very well be bollocks. But just came to mind.
|
|
|
Post by rickyqpr on Apr 16, 2019 10:22:36 GMT
It is true that very few football managers can turn a run of bad results. Plenty seem to be able to come in and get the new manager bounce, perhaps that is why changing the manager is so popular. But Bow, you make a very good point. Football management could be called fear management. They know a run of bad results and they will be out. Take unsuccessful big risks and the chop can come even quicker. So managers stick to what they know, and who they know. Old time managers always seem to bring in their own coaching team and then players who 'have done it for them in the past'. Very few trust the inherited players or the youth. As you say Bow, Eustace had nothing to lose. Played the game at Norwich the way McClaren would have done and faired even worse than McClaren in all probability. So throwing caution to the wind, safe in the knowledge that it will be his last game and that no-one loves him, he gives it a go. And guess what, it worked! Of course if you are right Bow, then he will get the job permanently and then immediately adopt a more conservative approach and fail miserably.
|
|
|
Post by harr on Apr 16, 2019 10:38:13 GMT
I would be amazed if Eustace got the job permanently even if we beat Blackburn.
|
|
|
Post by rickyqpr on Apr 16, 2019 11:00:23 GMT
I would be amazed if Eustace got the job permanently even if we beat Blackburn. I wasn't suggesting he should get the job, just that if he did get the role then he would probably operate under the same fear, caution and conservatism as the rest.
|
|
|
Post by harr on Apr 16, 2019 11:17:08 GMT
I would be amazed if Eustace got the job permanently even if we beat Blackburn. I wasn't suggesting he should get the job, just that if he did get the role then he would probably operate under the same fear, caution and conservatism as the rest. I know you wasn’t suggesting he should, that’s fine even if you were.
|
|
|
Post by londonranger on Apr 16, 2019 22:53:36 GMT
Seems to me that Ive read that he doesn't want the job.
|
|
|
Post by rickyqpr on Apr 17, 2019 8:25:46 GMT
Regarding managers who cannot address a slide...............Chris Houghton at Brighton. Achieved great things with them, FA Cup semi finalist, but yet another defeat last night, this time Warnock did for him.
|
|
|
Post by harr on Apr 17, 2019 8:32:16 GMT
I think Brighton are in big trouble, can’t find a win, away at Wolves Saturday and after that Man City, Spurs and Arsenal in there last four games. Only Newcastle at home is there best game
Still Warnock has got to find a couple of wins, they have Liverpool Saturday but a chance of points against Fulham after that.
Can he pull it off ?
|
|
|
Post by rickyqpr on Apr 18, 2019 17:28:47 GMT
I think Brighton are in big trouble, can’t find a win, away at Wolves Saturday and after that Man City, Spurs and Arsenal in there last four games. Only Newcastle at home is there best game Still Warnock has got to find a couple of wins, they have Liverpool Saturday but a chance of points against Fulham after that. Can he pull it off ? I don't like Cardiff - so I hope not. I would like to see Houghton get out of trouble. But IMHO, Cardiff have suffered incredible bad luck with decisions going against them. That may balance out in the run in and the luck may be with them. So yes, he can pull it off.
|
|
|
Post by Roller on Apr 19, 2019 10:04:51 GMT
Cheers both Ricky and Roller - both really interesting and informative posts. Not much to add, but was amazed by these two bits: - "Last season’s team boasted the most goal scorers aged 20 or under in the division."- "Dave McIntyre revealed that QPR were looking to bring in both Hemed and Wells on his West London Sport website on the 10th August, after only one match of this season and over a week before QPR’s wretched trip to The Hawthorns." Did not know either of those, that's illuminating. Thanks Roller - great to be able to look back like that and determine the facts. Only a few facts Ricky, along with a shed load of supposition! It will be interesting to see what Eustace does today. Does he stick with a winning team or continue with what looks like a "horses for courses" approach? I don't think that Blackburn play out from the back in the way that Swansea do, so will a high press be as effective? For so much of this season we knew the team before it was announced, but not today.
|
|
|
Post by Roller on Apr 19, 2019 19:48:07 GMT
Only a few facts Ricky, along with a shed load of supposition! It will be interesting to see what Eustace does today. Does he stick with a winning team or continue with what looks like a "horses for courses" approach? I don't think that Blackburn play out from the back in the way that Swansea do, so will a high press be as effective? For so much of this season we knew the team before it was announced, but not today. I have a bad feeling about today. Apart from rumoured injuries I was amazed to see how bad our starts are against Blackburn - not that stats prove anything.
With that in mind the stat about the number of our young goal scorers last season may need a bit of context. While we may have had more young players who scored a goal, how many did they actually score?. I have not checked but I would bet it would not be more than a couple each. Apart from a leaky defence our biggest issue in recent seasons - ever since the days of Austin in fact - is that we have not had a regular goal scorer. Unless we get someone who is knocking in 15 to 20 goals a season at least we are not going to progress far. We have had Freeman who has one of the best records in the division over the past 2 seasons for number of chances created but we just do not take them - apart from last week. and hopefully today.
Indeed they didn't score many, but neither did they play a lot and only one of them is an out and out striker. What they do show is that we are getting far better at recruiting younger players. We clearly can't afford to buy a proven 15-20 goals a season striker but if they all weigh in with between 5 and 10 goals next season we may not need one.
|
|