|
Post by Zamoraaaah on Mar 27, 2009 13:37:59 GMT
But again to be (semi) fair: The club have spent money. I would just argue that if they'd spent the same amount of money - differently - Scouting; lower division players, etc would have been far better off. Same money outlay...Bigger result; more assets. They're businessmen. Should appreciate that. I'm sure the brief is along the lines of: Be frugal, create saleable assets, get promotion, £££I'm also sure that is exactly what GP is attempting to the best of his abilities. He is doing what he knows from an ex agents point of view and sadly for us he is neither qualified or experienced enough to do it any other way.
|
|
|
Post by Zamoraaaah on Mar 27, 2009 13:43:21 GMT
I can't disagree with either of you. The problem is that in F1 if driver x is rubbish you replace him with driver y. An academy and a decent reserve team costs a lot of money and takes a lot of time and I'm not convinced that they will do either. I agree that the same money spent properly could have reaped bigger rewards but it hasn't been spent that way and i don't see it being spent that way unless they allow someone with a football background (Sousa) to teach them. I believe you are absolutely right SirPie.
|
|
|
Post by eusebio13 on Mar 27, 2009 17:00:51 GMT
If you look at the top four sides in this country only Chelsea have achieved there success without several self developed players and even they have Terry and are investing in youth development but Arsenal have young player sourced abroad but effectively at youth level, Liverpool have Carragher & Gerrard and Man Utd have a plethora of kids. In the end the club needs a thriving youth team in order to maintain its future development and the lack of a commitment to youth hierarchy is symptomatic of the short-termism being shown by the club.
|
|
|
Post by QPR Report on Mar 27, 2009 23:24:13 GMT
|
|
ingham
Dave Sexton
Posts: 1,896
|
Post by ingham on Mar 28, 2009 17:10:25 GMT
Many of the very good ideas above are really starting points. But we don't operate like that any more.
We daren't give the impression that we're beginners, partly out of vanity, partly because the present state of the club is the result of decades of 'investment', so if there's a promised land, this is it.
And if this isn't it, will spending tens of millions more get us there when it hasn't so far. When it is obvious that spending borrowed money raises expectations at the very moment the losses incurred as a result of the loans depletes the resources required needed to realise those expectations.
But lack of know-how, lack of experience, lack of talent and lack of success doesn't stop us making decisions, which is fine if we're used to making good ones, but we aren't.
The problem isn't that we know Sousa was a mistake. If we did, we'd know something at least.
But we have no idea. In football, decisiveness is making the right decision once. Busby. Ramsey. Revie. Clough. Paisley. Ferguson. Then the decision reverberates down the years, and is confirmed as time goes by. But we just go on making more and more decisions, under the impression that more decisions means more decisiveness.
Until our uncertainty is palpable, as we peer at each manager, and ask ourselves 'is this the special one?'
We might be lucky and land someone like Stein, who joined Dunfermline with six matches left knowing he had to win them all to keep them up, and he did it, and won the Scottish Cup the following season, before joining Celtic, and winning the European Cup with no signings at all, and just a squad of local lads to pick from.
But the reality of QPR is too small to enable us to act like Celtic, and the fantasy is too big for QPR to think like Dunfermline. Runaway expectations have eloped with runaway losses, and given birth to runaway prices for run of the mill football.
We'll get our manager, or another Jim Gregory. Eventually. Even if a team of chimpanzees hit typewriter keys at random over a long enough period of time, they'll eventually produce the complete works of Shakespeare without a single typo in a single attempt.
I haven't received my copy yet. But I can wait ;D.
|
|
|
Post by grumpyolde on Mar 28, 2009 19:35:20 GMT
QPR was bought because a group of business men could buy it for absolute peanuts. They believed that with a little bit of investment they could turn the club around, get to the Premier League, and make a fantastic profit. Unfortunately for them, and the long suffering fans of QPR. what they knew about football you could write on the back of a postage stamp in large letters.
Now we have had the C Club, W12, ciprianni's, players not much better than the ones already here, loan players from overseas big named clubs who were crap, and no increase in the size of the crowds.
I think a huge dose of reality has kicked in. Now we are in for the reverse of the cycle. The base of the club is being reduced and player numbers are going to be drastictly lower. I can't envisage many if any new signings and the club will be run on as low a budget as possible.
Is the grand four year plan still in place.?
As I said in an earlier post - QPR, a club owned by billionaires, being run as though it were going into administration.
|
|
ingham
Dave Sexton
Posts: 1,896
|
Post by ingham on Mar 29, 2009 17:26:40 GMT
Wondered if that price was significant, grumpyolde. 1p a share was quoted at the time. For them, comparatively little outlay, especially if the claim by the outgoing 'investors' that they haven't paid for them yet is correct, though that was some time ago.
They'd make a few million even if the shares rose by only a few pence.
An 'image' of movers and shakers in the boardroom, a chandelier or two, overpriced merchandise in the boutique, tickets at inflated prices, and stories about the richest Club in the world.
Might that attract the odd credulous buyer?
Well, business guru Alan Sugar bought Spurs, though I doubt that he'd have his own TV show on the strength of the shambles when he was there, and the state he left them in.
'There used to be a football club there', as their last successful manager said. But Sugar made £50 million personally on the share issue, so that's all right.
|
|
|
Post by cpr on Mar 29, 2009 17:53:17 GMT
"buy it for absolute peanuts" Don't think so.
|
|