Summer Rebuild

[Unphased Royal]

Lol at QPR spending £113,000,000 and still being utter shite

[DaddyKuhl]

that's because transfer spend has a terrible correlation to success whereas wage spend has a very close correlation. And on wages we've been consistently right up there.

I wouldn't say it's a 'terrible correlation' as over a period of time, those who spend more tend to trickle upwards (QPR excepted)

[From Despair To Where?]

Obviously wages is a stronger correlation as it negates the effect of the Bosman ruling and gives a stronger impression of the real cost of a player. I made the original post in response to the misconception other fans seem to have that we are some sort of big spenders throwing money left right and centre when, in reality, the transfer spend has been covered by selling players and reducing the wage bill.

The interesting thing about that table is that even if you ignore sales and only look at the actual spend figure, we're still only 14th out of 24.

[Ian Royal]

that's because transfer spend has a terrible correlation to success whereas wage spend has a very close correlation. And on wages we've been consistently right up there.

I wouldn't say it's a 'terrible correlation' as over a period of time, those who spend more tend to trickle upwards (QPR excepted)

I'm pretty sure research data has been posted up over the years to show it's a very poor indicator of league position

[CountryRoyal]

We were (in relatively recent times) traditionally up there with the highest wages in the division, even before Zingarevic.

[Nameless]

We were (in relatively recent times) traditionally up there with the highest wages in the division, even before Zingarevic.

Is there an award for most ridiculous post of the season ?

[Hoop Blah]

We were (in relatively recent times) traditionally up there with the highest wages in the division, even before Zingarevic.

Is there an award for most ridiculous post of the season ?

Not ridiculous at all.

http://hobnob.royals.org/forum/viewtopi ... 2&t=120032

[CountryRoyal]

We were (in relatively recent times) traditionally up there with the highest wages in the division, even before Zingarevic.

Is there an award for most ridiculous post of the season ?

Is there an award for the most clueless poster?

[Snowball]

I forget the title of the book on football finance but there is a VERY high
correlation between spend on transfers/wages and league position,

OCCASIONALLY (as in quite rarely) a club manages to buck the trend for a season
(as Reading FC did in 2006-07, but generally, what is spent is a very good predictor
of final position

[CountryRoyal]

It's really so obvious I can't believe it's even a discussion.

Spending big doesn't guarantee success, just as much as spending small doesn't guarantee failure, but generally speaking most of the teams that do well have spent more on their squad be it wages, transfers, or both.

Better quality players can demand higher wages and command higher transfer fees, and whilst you get some plonkers spunking silly money on shite, if you looked at a sample id imagine that the majority of the time the more costly (wages/transfer) players were better. Whilst having better players doesn't necessarily guarantee you success, those that are successful will probably have them.

Yes you get your Blackpools and co, but they are the exception rather than the rule.

[From Despair To Where?]

Regardless of wage or transfer spend, I'd suggest Blackpool are a prime example of one of the ways how not to run a football club.

There was definitely something posted on here in the summer which showed that our wage bill was in the top 6 or 7 in the league, about £18m because I remember arguing that getting rid of Drenthe, Guthrie, Pearce, Karacan and Federici probably wiped about a third off the wage bill for last season.

How many players are left that we are paying £20,000+ a season? I reckon 5, Gunter, Williams, McCleary, HRK and Vydra.

[Extended-Phenotype]

that's because transfer spend has a terrible correlation to success whereas wage spend has a very close correlation. And on wages we've been consistently right up there.

I wouldn't say it's a 'terrible correlation' as over a period of time, those who spend more tend to trickle upwards (QPR excepted)

I'm pretty sure research data has been posted up over the years to show it's a very poor indicator of league position

That's because the transfer fee market carries such vast overspend anomalies it distorts coralation.

Pretty sure if you eliminated these spikes and compared 'sensible' spending vs no spending, the results would show a clearer coralation between spending and success.

[paultheroyal]

Speaking of rebuilds, where's Lacoste these days lol!

[Hoop Blah]

I forget the title of the book on football finance but there is a VERY high
correlation between spend on transfers/wages and league position,

OCCASIONALLY (as in quite rarely) a club manages to buck the trend for a season
(as Reading FC did in 2006-07, but generally, what is spent is a very good predictor
of final position

The way in which we dominated the league in 05/06 was obviously a bit of a freak our wage bill wasn't actually that low to make us much of an exception to the rule.

I'm not saying we didn't overachieve on the correlation, but our £12.5m wage bill (which was more than 100% of revenue!!) was well towards the top end of the division from what I can remember.

Similarly when McDermott took us up, we were one of the top payers in the league.

[Royalwaster]

Jamie Mackie out injured for 2-3 months .... looks like we were lucky with that one. Big wages, big injury ....

[CountryRoyal]

Regardless of wage or transfer spend, I'd suggest Blackpool are a prime example of one of the ways how not to run a football club.

There was definitely something posted on here in the summer which showed that our wage bill was in the top 6 or 7 in the league, about £18m because I remember arguing that getting rid of Drenthe, Guthrie, Pearce, Karacan and Federici probably wiped about a third off the wage bill for last season.

How many players are left that we are paying £20,000+ a season? I reckon 5, Gunter, Williams, McCleary, HRK and Vydra.

Yeah of course, I was just referring to how they went up. Equally they are a prime example of what happens when you don't spend anything and sell literally all of your players

As for earners now, don't know if we are paying piazons/johns wages but they won't be low, piazons in particular. McShane will be over 20k, Quinn will be quite high as well. Blackers was signed in the prem so will be decent. Wherever you look at our squad you could make a case for them having high wages.

[3points]

It's been a 4 weeks since the transfer window closed and in light of our recent upturn in form, I keep reading from fans of other clubs about how we've had loads of money to spend.

Can I just re-itterate 2 things for any non Reading fans who may be reading this:

We spent somewhere in the region of £4.5m in the transfer window, including the much talked about £2.5m loan fee for Vydra. We sold Hector for £4m. Therefore, our net spend was about £500,000. Hardly breaking the bank.

The departures of Drenthe, Guthrie, Pearce, Karacan, Federici and Pogrebnyak wiped something in the region of £170,000 a week off our wage bill. Our wage bill is lower than this time last year.

Whilst our budget is undoubtedly big for this division, we are hardly throwing around stupid sums of money or spending beyond our means. Been there, done that, learnt our lesson and got out of it the right way.

While not disagreeing with the sentiment about our level of spend, you also need to remember that "free transfers" are not free, as the player will get a big signing on fee instead of us paying a transfer fee. Pog's was £4m. So the likes of Quinn and McShane will definitely have cost us a few quid (but nothing like the fees for Gray, etc). Also, headline transfer fees are rarely paid (apparently only £5m of McCormack's fee was payable at the outset, the remainder is in add-ons and promotion related targets)

I'd be surprised if anyone other than Vydra and Williams are on more than £20k per week (perhaps Piazon as well, given the silly money Chelsea pay their reserves / academy players).

[Nameless]

As ever these discussions fall apart as people quote numbers as if they are facts rather than just complete guesses....

[CountryRoyal]

As ever these discussions fall apart as people quote numbers as if they are facts rather than just complete guesses....

It probably doesn't help when ignorant bellends like yourself add nothing but condescending, self-righteous tripe.

No offence m8 and all that.

[Nameless]

As ever these discussions fall apart as people quote numbers as if they are facts rather than just complete guesses....

It probably doesn't help when ignorant bellends like yourself add nothing but condescending, self-righteous tripe.

No offence m8 and all that.

No offence taken, given how little I'm bothered about your opinions....
Still think our recent spending has traditionally been high ?
The discussions on wages and spending have always been of little real value as they always centre around numbers people basically invent. But if you think stating absolutely that a player earns a certain amount means you are ITK or knowledgeable then fair enough.