QPR to axe 26 players

[QPRDave]

What I what to know is, who's big Clair? And what's she done so bad that the club want her out?

.nutritionist...gone native......gotta go

[LanguedocFox]

Knew it wouldn't take long for this sh1t excuse for a rag to print something about us. What a paper they are!

There's a rather more balanced article in the Torygraph: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/foo...er-League.html

There's a thread about this on the Foxes Talk forum, and in between the (understandable, I suppose) gloats there are a number of largely sympathetic posts, including one that compares the dross that Hughes signed with the dross that Redknapp has signed. Consensus (for what it is worse) seems to be that Hughes signed more crappy players, but that Redknapp spent just as much and - more importantly - saddled QPR with some eye-wateringly large wages (Samba and Remy on a combined £200K a week are mentioned). I'm not qualified to say if that is true.

There is, incidentally, one piece of absolutely awful, stupid journalism in the Daily Heil piece (which is not repeated by the DT):
"They [QPR] now face major ramifications under the Football League’s Financial Fair Play rules, which could see them fined £40m if they are promoted or placed under a transfer embargo if they fail to go up."

This is, not to put too fine a point on it, gobsh!te: the figures (bad as they are) apply to last season - when you were in the Prem. FFP will only come into play this season, the figures for which will come out next year. Given that you've had a load of expensive players out on loan, plus parachute payments, the loss should be a lot less. City did some creative accounting to get our 2012-13 loss - also published this week - under control, so maybe TF needs to do something similar.

One other point made in the Foxes Talk thread is that Neil Walnut is largely innocent in all of this, having kept wages and other costs under control. Like most other City fans, I loath him with a vengeance, but there seems to be no denying that he is a good manager - at least in this division. Is there any chance of him being invited back to deal with the unfinished business?

[LanguedocFox]

.nutritionist...gone native......gotta go

Dave: you really should give people warning before you post something like that!

In all seriousness, that is one desperately sad picture.

[stainrodisalegend]

Would prefer cull to cut. Only ones I'd really worry about selling would be Barton, Green, Phillips, Simpson, Onouha and Austin. And Clint.

I'd keep Traore and Hoilett (unless we got decent wedge) and Faurlin if recovered. If Jenas will stay on lower wages don't have an issue with him as a squad player. Think it might be a season too many for Clint, though depending on managerial changes would very much like to see him promoted to a player/ coach role as its been one of my lasting regrets at Rangers that despite a couple of attempts with Waddock and Gregory we haven't managed to turn any of our better players into managers who might then have a passion and loyalty for the club. Would need to clear out a hell of the over-blown backroom team first, mind.

[MattyRangers]

If that is the case and we are covering x amount of his wages then it is hardly gonna break the bank compared to other signings.

Poor example for the newspaper to use.

Exactly mate. These papers are pony and just jump on anything without any real substance to cause waves.

All they've done for this is seen a headline about our debt & looked into how many players are out of contract at the end of the season, added this to the amount of players currently out on loan and said that this amount of people will be shipped out.

I take anything in that paper with a pinch of salt.

[LanguedocFox]

There is, incidentally, one piece of absolutely awful, stupid journalism in the Daily Heil piece (which is not repeated by the DT)

Apologies for the understatement: there are at least five specific example of lousey journalism in the piece - I just picked out the one which made my teeth itch.

[Nick]

.nutritionist...gone native......gotta go

Focking hell, I get it now. Get her out.. put her on the first coach going north, where she came from.

[stainrodisalegend]

There's a rather more balanced article in the Torygraph: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/foo...er-League.html

There's a thread about this on the Foxes Talk forum, and in between the (understandable, I suppose) gloats there are a number of largely sympathetic posts, including one that compares the dross that Hughes signed with the dross that Redknapp has signed. Consensus (for what it is worse) seems to be that Hughes signed more crappy players, but that Redknapp spent just as much and - more importantly - saddled QPR with some eye-wateringly large wages (Samba and Remy on a combined £200K a week are mentioned). I'm not qualified to say if that is true.

There is, incidentally, one piece of absolutely awful, stupid journalism in the Daily Heil piece (which is not repeated by the DT):
"They [QPR] now face major ramifications under the Football League’s Financial Fair Play rules, which could see them fined £40m if they are promoted or placed under a transfer embargo if they fail to go up."

This is, not to put too fine a point on it, gobsh!te: the figures (bad as they are) apply to last season - when you were in the Prem. FFP will only come into play this season, the figures for which will come out next year. Given that you've had a load of expensive players out on loan, plus parachute payments, the loss should be a lot less. City did some creative accounting to get our 2012-13 loss - also published this week - under control, so maybe TF needs to do something similar.

One other point made in the Foxes Talk thread is that Neil Walnut is largely innocent in all of this, having kept wages and other costs under control. Like most other City fans, I loath him with a vengeance, but there seems to be no denying that he is a good manager - at least in this division. Is there any chance of him being invited back to deal with the unfinished business?

Thanks for this, good read (your post, not the Daily Fail article). Though in fairness I can't really complain about newspapers and other fans having a gloat, we got the worst of all possible worlds - enough spending to make others jealous but not enough spending to buy success. Its very easy to be wise after the event but if our fiasco holds any lessons for other clubs it is surely that you either go out and blow everyone away buying top players (Man City, Chelsea) or you work out a structure and style you want to play in and bring in RELATIVELY cheap players to fit your system (Norwich, Swansea) so if you do go back down you haven't broken the bank and the nucleus of the team will stay.

[Jimmy Floyd Rabbit]

No way is Ravel on 10k a week. Minimum double that I'd say. 16-17 year old reserves are on that at a lot of PL clubs. He came as one of the most highly rated youngsters Manchester Utd have ever had. Either way he's on loan so peanuts.

[brightonr]

No way is Ravel on 10k a week. Minimum double that I'd say. 16-17 year old reserves are on that at a lot of PL clubs. He came as one of the most highly rated youngsters Manchester Utd have ever had. Either way he's on loan so peanuts.

I have no information and certainly no evidence as to what players earn and therefore couldn't agree or disagree with what you say.

But if you are right, then it's nothing short of disgraceful.

[stanistheman]

No way is Ravel on 10k a week. Minimum double that I'd say. 16-17 year old reserves are on that at a lot of PL clubs. He came as one of the most highly rated youngsters Manchester Utd have ever had. Either way he's on loan so peanuts.

Also, came with a lousy reputation and could just have easily gone down to the lower leagues or even non league (remember Leon -???- Jeanne)

[Marshy]

Ideal scenario this summer:

Cesar - Brazil win the world cup with Cesar starting and is then viewed as a hero back in his homeland. This then creates an attitude of money is no issue at a host of clubs over there who are then eager to get him in due to his hero status. No transfer fee but the club are able to get him off the wage bill.

Remy - After a cracking season at Newcastle Remys value hits the roof. Sold to a top premier league team for £20m+

Taarabt - Sold to AC Milan due to the loan with view to buy option. Club pockets £3-4m

All those out of contract are released apart from one or two (green depending on Cesar moving, hill, faurlin).

None of those in on loan are signed on permanent deals.

Granero - will be back at the club due to the injury he suffered earlier this season, send out on loan again.

I don't think Remy will fetch 20m.

I believe Spurs cut on Taarabt has expired, so we will get 7m Euros if he does go.

[Jimmy Floyd Rabbit]

I have no information and certainly no evidence as to what players earn and therefore couldn't agree or disagree with what you say.

But if you are right, then it's nothing short of disgraceful.

A pal of mine is a coach at Chelsea (for his sins) he's a QPR fan told me they have 17 year olds on 750,000 a year one African lad is on a million. Josh Machreachan (spelling?) is on 36,000 per week which in anyone's book is a disgrace.

[Nick]

A pal of mine is a coach at Chelsea (for his sins) he's a QPR fan told me they have 17 year olds on 750,000 a year one African lad is on a million. Josh Machreachan (spelling?) is on 36,000 per week which in anyone's book is a disgrace.

Your joking right??? That's madness!!!

[MattyRangers]

No way is Ravel on 10k a week. Minimum double that I'd say. 16-17 year old reserves are on that at a lot of PL clubs. He came as one of the most highly rated youngsters Manchester Utd have ever had. Either way he's on loan so peanuts.

Appreciate newspapers aren't the greatest source of info (massive understatement ) but a fair few seem to vouch for £10-£15k a week.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/west-ham/10578177/Ravel-Morrison-confused-over-West-Ham-Uniteds-stance-in-any-potential-move-or-new-contract-at-Upton-Park.html

Anyway that's academic really, original point was agreed in that he's only a loan so the Daily Mail clutching at straws using him as an example of our excessive spending..... Although plenty of other valid examples they can use