SC hasn't a clue.

[Hoop Blah]

you'd better report that faulty ignore button AGAIN.

Instead of behaving like a little child why don't you post something constructive?

How about answering my question from yesterday for a start?

So how much of this parachute payment did Coppell get to see? As from where i'm sitting, we didn't spend half of the fees we received for Kitson and Shorey, let alone touch any parachute payment.

Enlighten us? How much did he get?

[Royal Lady]

That's the whole point isn't it?? We don't know how much he got, but Mr Mad clearly didn't give him £30 million. And, as Schards has already said, we certainly didn't spend much of the money we got in transfers for Kitson and Shorey.

[Hoop Blah]

That's the whole point isn't it?? We don't know how much he got, but Mr Mad clearly didn't give him £30 million. And, as Schards has already said, we certainly didn't spend much of the money we got in transfers for Kitson and Shorey.

I have no idea how much of the parachute payments Coppell was given to spend, that's why I'm so interested to hear how much he did.

Schards seems to have that information so I was hoping he'd share it.

[Dirk Gently]

That's the whole point isn't it?? We don't know how much he got, but Mr Mad clearly didn't give him £30 million. And, as Schards has already said, we certainly didn't spend much of the money we got in transfers for Kitson and Shorey.

I think we're fairly certain, though, that money was (and is) available to SC, but he decided not to spend it - either because the right players weren't available at the right price (or salary levels), because the players who were available didn't fit the team work ethic etc, or because he didn't want to disrupt the core team.

[Woodcote Royal]

And I've met plenty of 2 year olds, and older, who absolutely loathe clowns.

Plus, why is someone a "two year old" because they mock someone else's quite strange beliefs?

Others would see them as opinions...............................and that would normally include those deemed fit to moderate.

[Royal Lady]

I haven't seen one other person agree with your "opinions" though Woodcote.

Lawrie Sanchez?
This year's squad better than the one that got 106 points?
and we don't miss Steve Sidwell?

[papereyes]

Coppell was the man who did it. I'd happily stand up and say that I think Pardew would have done it had he not been poached by West Ham. The person who replaces Coppell will almost certainly do it.

Pardew might well have taken us up to the top tier but I doubt he would have won 2 Manager of the Year Awards along the way.

Same here. My point remains that the club have things put in place that would see us in or around the Championship playoffs.

which is why:

Of course there were random spurts of good amongst the rubbish (exceptions to every rule) but to suggest that these flashes in the pan are in any way even vaguely comparable to the phenomenal sustained relative success we're still enjoying under Coppell is quite frankly laughable.

They weren't random. They really weren't.

[Woodcote Royal]

I haven't seen one other person agree with your "opinions" though Woodcote.

Lawrie Sanchez?
This year's squad better than the one that got 106 points?
and we don't miss Steve Sidwell?

So, in your opinion, seeing Lawie Sanchez, former Reading player, former Premiership manager, as a potential future manager of this club is worthy of mockery?

And, suggesting that our team should adopt a 4-5-1 formation is worthy of being called a village idiot on countless occasions?

Not that I'm overly bothered but just for clarification in terms of moderation.

[Agent Balti]

I haven't seen one other person agree with your "opinions" though Woodcote.

Lawrie Sanchez?
This year's squad better than the one that got 106 points?
and we don't miss Steve Sidwell?

So, in your opinion, seeing Lawie Sanchez, former Reading player, former Premiership manager, as a potential future manager of this club is worthy of mockery?

If Sanchez gets anywhere near an interview I will be hyper-ventilating. Former Reading player means absolutely nothing, nor should it. (Ergo, any claims for Parkinson to return should also be treated the same.) Sanchez pretty much blamed everyone bar the club tea lady for his demise at Fulham, was almost universally panned and (to me) doesn't seem to cut it as a top flight manager. As AP would say, No Fanks.

[Woodcote Royal]

And you are more than entitled to your opinion but, given the man's previous experience and former connections with the club, don't expect those with a say in the decision making process to be so dismissive if he applies for the job.

[Royal_Belly]

I haven't seen one other person agree with your "opinions" though Woodcote.

Lawrie Sanchez?
This year's squad better than the one that got 106 points?
and we don't miss Steve Sidwell?

So, in your opinion, seeing Lawie Sanchez, former Reading player, former Premiership manager, as a potential future manager of this club is worthy of mockery?

3

Yes!!

Lawrie Sanchez is not a proven manager in top flight football is he?! I also know that when ever the vacancy of Reading manager has arisen he has always applied and has always failed! If the chairman does bring in a manager like Lawrie Sanchez then it will show the lack of ambitions that he now has for this football club!

[papereyes]

That's the whole point isn't it?? We don't know how much he got, but Mr Mad clearly didn't give him £30 million. And, as Schards has already said, we certainly didn't spend much of the money we got in transfers for Kitson and Shorey.

I think we're fairly certain, though, that money was (and is) available to SC, but he decided not to spend it - either because the right players weren't available at the right price (or salary levels), because the players who were available didn't fit the team work ethic etc, or because he didn't want to disrupt the core team.

... and then that gets to the heart of why people might be voicing their misgivings.

Yes, we accept all those arguments, but when there's serious flaws to each of those three justifications for not spending money. Players were available - Cahill and O'Neill in the relegation season, Phillips (and Beattie?) the last summer. All were considered as 'right' and other reasons were used to justify not signing them. We have brought in a series of players that haven't fit the team work ethic - Fae, Halford being the major 2 (£5 million the pair) - so using that argument to justify not spending money loses a lot of its sting.

And the last one ... as an example: Coppell admitted in September that he thought he hadn't done enough to strengthen the team last season and then completely fails to strengthen the team in January - he wanted to be loyal to the core team and they let him down. Yes, we have a core team but they appear to be the players who often let us down the most. So even that argument is deeply flawed.

Half of the arguments on this board as to why we don't spend as much money as we possibly could boil down to 'we don't because we don't".

That isn't to say that we should spend, spend, spend but I think we should get down to a few salient facts - the club has money to spend, the club has more money to spend than it has spent and has a wage structure that is competitive at this level and could be competitive at the lower reaches of the level above. There are many reasons why we haven't utilised this money - some of which we cannot help (perception of club by others being the main one) and some of which we can.

I'd happily see a youth-based team come through but it would need two things alongside it to be competitive - a number of senior pros who have a real experience and a passion to keep going (but also accept that these players have a limited life span so, for example, get the two, three seasons out of Bryn then find a Bryn Jr) and a number of cherry signings that put a dash of class into the side.

Look at the team that went up - mostly players that we signed when young (Sidwell, Harper, Shorey, Sonko) or still young themselves plus a few older heads (Bryn, Oster, Little) and then players like Convey and Lita (who were at the time our 1st and =2nd most expensive players) brought in to add a touch of class.

[1871royals]

Another problem with Sanchez is people rate him because of his record with Wycombe.

He fluked a few cup runs but his league performances for them was poor. Pretty sure he was fired after a couple of mediocre mid table seasons.

I agree with the above poster if Sanchez got near the job I would have a heart attack.

[Woodcote Royal]

I haven't seen one other person agree with your "opinions" though Woodcote.

Lawrie Sanchez?
This year's squad better than the one that got 106 points?
and we don't miss Steve Sidwell?

So, in your opinion, seeing Lawie Sanchez, former Reading player, former Premiership manager, as a potential future manager of this club is worthy of mockery?

3

Yes!!

Lawrie Sanchez is not a proven manager in top flight football is he?! I also know that when ever the vacancy of Reading manager has arisen he has always applied and has always failed! If the chairman does bring in a manager like Lawrie Sanchez then it will show the lack of ambitions that he now has for this football club!

Firstly, I'm not even saying that Sanchez would be my first choice just that, if he applied for the job he woud probably, IMO, make the shortlist.

This may come as a shock but he wouldn't be the first to be appointed to a post having failed on several previous occasions.

You don't want Sanchez, fair enough, but that doesn't mean he won't be a serious contender should he apply....................because he would be.

[Royal Lady]

I haven't seen one other person agree with your "opinions" though Woodcote.

Lawrie Sanchez?
This year's squad better than the one that got 106 points?
and we don't miss Steve Sidwell?

So, in your opinion, seeing Lawie Sanchez, former Reading player, former Premiership manager, as a potential future manager of this club is worthy of mockery?

And, suggesting that our team should adopt a 4-5-1 formation is worthy of being called a village idiot on countless occasions?

Not that I'm overly bothered but just for clarification in terms of moderation.

Firstly, yes I do see touting Sanchez as a future manager as worthy of mockery - as we would certainly be taking another step back. Secondly, I haven't mentioned your thoughts on adopting a 4-5-1 formation and thirdly, wtf has any of this got to do with moderation? I just think you're a supercilious idiot. You're entitled to your opinions, but equally entitled to have them shot down in flames if other people don't agree - much like 100% of the rest of the posters on here. HTH.

[papereyes]

He fluked a few cup runs but his league performances for them was poor. Pretty sure he was fired after a couple of mediocre mid table seasons.

I thought he did pretty well in his first season? They were marooned at the foot of the table and he got them safe. Then the FA cup runs, then two mediocre seasons and then sacked.

And wiki, it say:

After finishing 12th in 2001-02 and 11th in 2002-03, the upward progress came to an end with collapse of the OnDigital TV deal and the subsequent loss of both revenue and subsequently players. After a poor start to the 2003–04 season Sanchez left the club on 30 September 2003

13th in 00/01, so gradual improvement with him at the helm.

[Royal Lady]

why would he be a serious contender this time around, when in the past he hasn't been shortlisted?

[cmonurz]

It's not relevant how serious a contender he might be. It isn't idiotic to suggest his name might be in the frame. Certainly the name of another former player, Phil Parkinson, gets thrown around on these boards as a possible future manager, and he has 'achieved' next to nothing.

[Royal_Belly]

So, in your opinion, seeing Lawie Sanchez, former Reading player, former Premiership manager, as a potential future manager of this club is worthy of mockery?

Yes!!

Lawrie Sanchez is not a proven manager in top flight football is he?! I also know that when ever the vacancy of Reading manager has arisen he has always applied and has always failed! If the chairman does bring in a manager like Lawrie Sanchez then it will show the lack of ambitions that he now has for this football club![/quote]

Firstly, I'm not even saying that Sanchez would be my first choice just that, if he applied for the job he woud probably, IMO, make the shortlist.

This may come as a shock but he wouldn't be the first to be appointed to a post having failed on several previous occasions.

You don't want Sanchez, fair enough, but that doesn't mean he won't be a serious contender should he apply....................because he would be.[/quote]

Lawrie Sanchez will not be a serious contender - my sources within RFC have always said that he has applied and always failed! If you are comparing managers who RFC have appointed at having failed on several occassions you could compare Coppell and Sanchez - and we all know who came top of the shortlist there! However, since the appointment of Coppell the club has grown slightly - Sanchez is not the man to take the club back up!

And IMO if the worst case scenario happens and Lawrie Sanchez does get the job - I would expect to see the attendences fall even more so!

[Woodcote Royal]

why would he be a serious contender this time around, when in the past he hasn't been shortlisted?

I tell you what, RL, I'm going to let you chew that one over for the rest of the day................