| Ownership of QPR 18:30 - Nov 9 with 12279 views | TopCat34 |
I know they "keep us running", but I'm afraid incompetence of this level shouldn't be tolerated especially when ST holders are paying 700+ for the privilege.
There's one long running theme of massive underachievement at QPR in recent years and it's he owners we have. They need to go. They are not fit for purpose and they cannot be trusted to put people in place. If Nourry is sacked is the direction ever going to improve? They've had 10 years to learn how to do it. You think by now you'd have learned something.
I think sacking Marti would be a death knell for this ownership. You can't keep papering over failure. |  | | |  |
| Ownership of QPR on 06:41 - Nov 13 with 2718 views | PunteR |
| Ownership of QPR on 14:58 - Nov 12 by ActonExile |
The whole situation at HQ is just plain weird.
We have fabulously wealthy owners who seem content on owning a second tier (possibly third) club and for what reason.
If you were that wealthy you'd want to show of your dolly bird to your business associates, unless mediocrity and debt are the new in thing. |
It's wierd isn't it. We have mega wealthy owners. The Mittals still have a percentage, I belive.
Built a new training ground, which I thought would never happen, so that's a positive.
Is the club in debt or are the owners just covering the day to day bills? Is it players wages that the biggest expenditure?
Would clearing the decks( which was rumoured last season on LFW) actually help in selling up?
I dunno.
Wierd club. We've try to do our business above board unlike some clubs, Reading for example, and we're still in the shit. |  |
| Occasional providers of half decent House music. |
| |
| Ownership of QPR on 07:52 - Nov 13 with 2589 views | daveB |
| Ownership of QPR on 19:10 - Nov 11 by thehat |
The owners would sell the club tomorrow if they could.
Unfortunately there are absolutely no buyers. |
exactly this, they've been trying to sell for years |  | | |
| Ownership of QPR on 13:44 - Nov 13 with 2335 views | NewBee |
A thought occurs from reading this thread: Might QPR ("Jude") be the footballing equivalent of Schrodinger's Cat?
That is, your owners are killing your club with their bad decision-making, while simultaneously keeping it alive with their money.
Or is this metaphor simultaneously clever and crap? |  | | |
| Ownership of QPR on 14:14 - Nov 13 with 2312 views | TK1 |
| Ownership of QPR on 18:31 - Nov 9 by Wegerles_Stairs |
Need to hound them out. |
Think there's been quite enough 'hounding out', particularly recently.
I'm still mortified by the treatment of Ferdinand, Bhatia, Hoos. The chants, the clown-face memes and stickers up of them, for what, coming 16th while paying off a huge FFP fine?
Not a moment's self-reflection that I've seen from anyone involved in any of that revolting nonsense. Singing 'Fck Off Les Ferdinand!' at games, Hoos being hounded (and filmed) in the street, the memes...embarrassing.
Well, they fcked off. Congratulations. How is that going so far? Everyone involved should put it on their CVs. Enjoying it so much you now want to 'hound out' some others too? Sure that will work just as well.
I am sure that neither Ferdinand, Hoos or Ramsey (or Impey - was there a heartfelt tribute from Nourry to him I missed - nor any of the decent football staff quietly jettisoned and replaced) are vindictive by nature. But they probably do pause while looking at the binfire now in progress.
The owners should communicate with the fans. That's worth pushing for. I think they plan to, but were hoping for genuine news rather than an emergency broadcast. But unless you have a spare £10-15 million quid a year I'd probably hold-off doing any 'hounding out' until you have a better plan. | | | |
| Ownership of QPR on 13:46 - Nov 20 with 1977 views | davman |
| Ownership of QPR on 14:14 - Nov 13 by TK1 |
Think there's been quite enough 'hounding out', particularly recently.
I'm still mortified by the treatment of Ferdinand, Bhatia, Hoos. The chants, the clown-face memes and stickers up of them, for what, coming 16th while paying off a huge FFP fine?
Not a moment's self-reflection that I've seen from anyone involved in any of that revolting nonsense. Singing 'Fck Off Les Ferdinand!' at games, Hoos being hounded (and filmed) in the street, the memes...embarrassing.
Well, they fcked off. Congratulations. How is that going so far? Everyone involved should put it on their CVs. Enjoying it so much you now want to 'hound out' some others too? Sure that will work just as well.
I am sure that neither Ferdinand, Hoos or Ramsey (or Impey - was there a heartfelt tribute from Nourry to him I missed - nor any of the decent football staff quietly jettisoned and replaced) are vindictive by nature. But they probably do pause while looking at the binfire now in progress.
The owners should communicate with the fans. That's worth pushing for. I think they plan to, but were hoping for genuine news rather than an emergency broadcast. But unless you have a spare £10-15 million quid a year I'd probably hold-off doing any 'hounding out' until you have a better plan. |
Controversial opinion, but the same happened with Richard Thompson and we've never, ever been so consistently good as we were under him.
And yet there are still plenty who don't see how stupid that was... |  |
| |
| Ownership of QPR on 14:03 - Nov 20 with 1931 views | wombat |
| Ownership of QPR on 16:59 - Nov 12 by theselector |
Been convinced for a while now that it's all about the stadium and becoming big time property owners. Their plans haven't worked out and now they're in the last chance saloon, desperately hoping this consultation/ agreement with the council is gonna lead to something. Meantime the club just drifts and drifts because it's not what they're focused on. |
doubt that totally , the ground value alone isnt worth anything close to what they have lost running the club and would never had made them much back , concil have alwways said that they would keep it as a sports ground also
they feck up by not taking the plunge years ago when the 4 plots of local land which just happened to be perfect to build a shiny all purpose football ground on , since then its gone totally downhil |  |
| |
| Ownership of QPR on 14:10 - Nov 20 with 1913 views | GaryBannister86 |
| Ownership of QPR on 13:46 - Nov 20 by davman |
Controversial opinion, but the same happened with Richard Thompson and we've never, ever been so consistently good as we were under him.
And yet there are still plenty who don't see how stupid that was... |
It does sound ridiculous now, but there were very valid reasons at the time. We finally had a team capable of winning at least a cup and Thompson was determined to sell every single good player we had, regardless of the time in the season or even if there was much point in selling them (Peacock - should have stayed his entire career).
I will never forgive him for that.
But I suppose these days he would be a great chairman as he cashes in on our players. But - totally different situation I feel. |  | | |
| Ownership of QPR on 14:32 - Nov 20 with 1833 views | daveB |
| Ownership of QPR on 14:10 - Nov 20 by GaryBannister86 |
It does sound ridiculous now, but there were very valid reasons at the time. We finally had a team capable of winning at least a cup and Thompson was determined to sell every single good player we had, regardless of the time in the season or even if there was much point in selling them (Peacock - should have stayed his entire career).
I will never forgive him for that.
But I suppose these days he would be a great chairman as he cashes in on our players. But - totally different situation I feel. |
Yes under Thompson we had an incredible opportunity to build the club and we wasted it | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Ownership of QPR on 14:52 - Nov 20 with 1762 views | TK1 |
| Ownership of QPR on 14:10 - Nov 20 by GaryBannister86 |
It does sound ridiculous now, but there were very valid reasons at the time. We finally had a team capable of winning at least a cup and Thompson was determined to sell every single good player we had, regardless of the time in the season or even if there was much point in selling them (Peacock - should have stayed his entire career).
I will never forgive him for that.
But I suppose these days he would be a great chairman as he cashes in on our players. But - totally different situation I feel. |
It sounds ridiculous because it was. It was the walking, shouting, bedsheet-holding 3-D definition of hubris and ideas above one's station.
A loss-making top tier team with a 14k average attendance which came (checks notes) 12th, 11th, 5th (London's top club: Thompson out! Incredibly, this is the season the protests really kicked in), 9th...
We bought Peacock for £200k and sold him four years later for £2.7 million. This is exactly what QPR should have been doing. It's what Brighton does now, sell their best players every season and restock: we sold Sinton for £2.5 million and bought Sinclair for £600k.
Incidentally, the season after we sold Peacock we finished a place higher in 8th (above Chelsea, Arsenal, West Ham and Palace: imagine what those fans thought of the protests) and got to the FA Cup quarters, so not the disaster you describe.
It's what we should have always done! The protests meant RT totally checked trying to get shot of the club before 95/96 and allowed Wilkins to disastrously attempt to both play for and pick the team, while also wrecking the biggest transfer budget we'd had. There was no oversight, because QPR fans wanted Thompson out! 'OK, if that's what you want...'
None of this opinion. The facts are there, and were apparent at the time. Be careful what you protest for. | | | |
| Ownership of QPR on 14:58 - Nov 20 with 1735 views | GaryBannister86 |
| Ownership of QPR on 14:52 - Nov 20 by TK1 |
It sounds ridiculous because it was. It was the walking, shouting, bedsheet-holding 3-D definition of hubris and ideas above one's station.
A loss-making top tier team with a 14k average attendance which came (checks notes) 12th, 11th, 5th (London's top club: Thompson out! Incredibly, this is the season the protests really kicked in), 9th...
We bought Peacock for £200k and sold him four years later for £2.7 million. This is exactly what QPR should have been doing. It's what Brighton does now, sell their best players every season and restock: we sold Sinton for £2.5 million and bought Sinclair for £600k.
Incidentally, the season after we sold Peacock we finished a place higher in 8th (above Chelsea, Arsenal, West Ham and Palace: imagine what those fans thought of the protests) and got to the FA Cup quarters, so not the disaster you describe.
It's what we should have always done! The protests meant RT totally checked trying to get shot of the club before 95/96 and allowed Wilkins to disastrously attempt to both play for and pick the team, while also wrecking the biggest transfer budget we'd had. There was no oversight, because QPR fans wanted Thompson out! 'OK, if that's what you want...'
None of this opinion. The facts are there, and were apparent at the time. Be careful what you protest for. |
Good points, but lots of retrospective in-the-cold-light-of-day stuff. Of course from what has happened since it seemed absurd, but the key for me was that in those days I was a QPR fan, interested only in what happened on the pitch, not how many £££ we had. There were no TV deals or whatever, no FFP.
What we had was a fantastic team and a fantastic squad and every time we got somewhere Thompson actively sought to rip the team apart, sell, sell, sell. Yes - agree - all very sensible, all very good for little old QPR and our financial solidity.
But not much fun. We will never win a trophy in my lifetime, and that was our best chance. And he squandered it.
So I disagree. | | | |
| Ownership of QPR on 15:13 - Nov 20 with 1650 views | daveB |
| Ownership of QPR on 14:52 - Nov 20 by TK1 |
It sounds ridiculous because it was. It was the walking, shouting, bedsheet-holding 3-D definition of hubris and ideas above one's station.
A loss-making top tier team with a 14k average attendance which came (checks notes) 12th, 11th, 5th (London's top club: Thompson out! Incredibly, this is the season the protests really kicked in), 9th...
We bought Peacock for £200k and sold him four years later for £2.7 million. This is exactly what QPR should have been doing. It's what Brighton does now, sell their best players every season and restock: we sold Sinton for £2.5 million and bought Sinclair for £600k.
Incidentally, the season after we sold Peacock we finished a place higher in 8th (above Chelsea, Arsenal, West Ham and Palace: imagine what those fans thought of the protests) and got to the FA Cup quarters, so not the disaster you describe.
It's what we should have always done! The protests meant RT totally checked trying to get shot of the club before 95/96 and allowed Wilkins to disastrously attempt to both play for and pick the team, while also wrecking the biggest transfer budget we'd had. There was no oversight, because QPR fans wanted Thompson out! 'OK, if that's what you want...'
None of this opinion. The facts are there, and were apparent at the time. Be careful what you protest for. |
Look at what we could have done though with some investment., Chelsea were a club going nowhere, Arsenal and Spurs were pretty rubbish but they all started to invest in players rather than sell and grew from mid table teams to clubs regularly in the top 6 and in Chelsea and Arsenals case winning trophies.
1993/94 season we went into it selling Sinton and bringing in Sinclair.
Other transfers that summer that could have really pushed QPR Andy Townsend to Villa, Marcus Gayle to Wimbledon, Des Walker to Sheff Wed, Gavin Peacock to Chelsea, Peter Beardsley to Newcastle. We could have been in for any of them, none of them mega money and really kicked on after finishing 5th but stood still and then went backwards very quickly
We were so close, finishing 8th and 9th was great but look at the clubs who finished above us in that era, Sheff Wed, Wimbledon, Blackburn, Forest. It could and should have been a lot better
Brighton spend quite heavily to maintain what they are doing but you are right it is comparable and them selling so many players when they have never had so much money coming in might end up being a wasted opportunity to them when they have one bad transfer window and end up relegated | | | |
| Ownership of QPR on 16:06 - Nov 20 with 1541 views | TK1 |
| Ownership of QPR on 15:13 - Nov 20 by daveB |
Look at what we could have done though with some investment., Chelsea were a club going nowhere, Arsenal and Spurs were pretty rubbish but they all started to invest in players rather than sell and grew from mid table teams to clubs regularly in the top 6 and in Chelsea and Arsenals case winning trophies.
1993/94 season we went into it selling Sinton and bringing in Sinclair.
Other transfers that summer that could have really pushed QPR Andy Townsend to Villa, Marcus Gayle to Wimbledon, Des Walker to Sheff Wed, Gavin Peacock to Chelsea, Peter Beardsley to Newcastle. We could have been in for any of them, none of them mega money and really kicked on after finishing 5th but stood still and then went backwards very quickly
We were so close, finishing 8th and 9th was great but look at the clubs who finished above us in that era, Sheff Wed, Wimbledon, Blackburn, Forest. It could and should have been a lot better
Brighton spend quite heavily to maintain what they are doing but you are right it is comparable and them selling so many players when they have never had so much money coming in might end up being a wasted opportunity to them when they have one bad transfer window and end up relegated |
"It could and should have been a lot better": mate, other than one season in 1975/76, it's never been as good before or since, and it will never be as good again. But somehow it still wasn't good enough for you. That's tragic. That was my favourite QPR era.
Who did you want to invest? It wasn't the fans, was it? Because we couldn't fill a 19k ground. We had to sell players to invest.
Other than Marcus Gayle, QPR would not have been in with the remotest shot of signing Walker, Townsend, G Peacock or Beardsley then because they were joining much bigger clubs. It's also why players needed to be sold: generally, players want to play for the biggest clubs. It's why Peacock, Ferdinand, Sinton etc left too. They asked to play for a bigger clubs. I mean, you say we could've convinced Peter Beardsley to chose QPR over Newcastle?!
Anyway, well done everyone. We chased out Richard Thompson, got in Chris Wright who showed "some ambition", invested money neither we nor he had and broke the club, probably for good.
(All this is just to say, history should always teach us to be careful what we wish for). | | | |
| Ownership of QPR on 16:20 - Nov 20 with 1495 views | TK1 |
| Ownership of QPR on 14:58 - Nov 20 by GaryBannister86 |
Good points, but lots of retrospective in-the-cold-light-of-day stuff. Of course from what has happened since it seemed absurd, but the key for me was that in those days I was a QPR fan, interested only in what happened on the pitch, not how many £££ we had. There were no TV deals or whatever, no FFP.
What we had was a fantastic team and a fantastic squad and every time we got somewhere Thompson actively sought to rip the team apart, sell, sell, sell. Yes - agree - all very sensible, all very good for little old QPR and our financial solidity.
But not much fun. We will never win a trophy in my lifetime, and that was our best chance. And he squandered it.
So I disagree. |
Fair play, we live in an era of disagreeing with facts. But those are the facts.
I definitely knew the protests were wnk at the time, too. It's not revisionism. I remember meeting a Leeds fan I worked with and his mates after the Leeds game. There'd been a pitch sit-in and loads of leaflets and protest outside after. I was young and slightly in awe of the work guy. In the pub he asked "what was all the protests about?" I replied, "They're annoyed we sold Darren Peacock..." and they all just laughed in my face and took the mick. It all seemed so tinpot.
Interestingly, the fans group who organised the protests that day was called QPR P.O.R.T = which stood for Piss Off Richard Thompson. The forebears of QPR F.O.L.F = FcK Off Les Ferdinand, no doubt. Another great protest group. We got rid of Thompson for Wright, Ferdinand for Nourry. Who will step in to write Ruben's cheques when he's chased out, I wonder... [Post edited 20 Nov 16:25]
| | | |
| Ownership of QPR on 16:36 - Nov 20 with 1437 views | GaryBannister86 |
| Ownership of QPR on 16:20 - Nov 20 by TK1 |
Fair play, we live in an era of disagreeing with facts. But those are the facts.
I definitely knew the protests were wnk at the time, too. It's not revisionism. I remember meeting a Leeds fan I worked with and his mates after the Leeds game. There'd been a pitch sit-in and loads of leaflets and protest outside after. I was young and slightly in awe of the work guy. In the pub he asked "what was all the protests about?" I replied, "They're annoyed we sold Darren Peacock..." and they all just laughed in my face and took the mick. It all seemed so tinpot.
Interestingly, the fans group who organised the protests that day was called QPR P.O.R.T = which stood for Piss Off Richard Thompson. The forebears of QPR F.O.L.F = FcK Off Les Ferdinand, no doubt. Another great protest group. We got rid of Thompson for Wright, Ferdinand for Nourry. Who will step in to write Ruben's cheques when he's chased out, I wonder... [Post edited 20 Nov 16:25]
|
I'm disagreeing with your opinion of Thompson's treatment and the protests, not with "facts" of what happened. | | | |
| Ownership of QPR on 16:44 - Nov 20 with 1380 views | stainrods_elbow |
| Ownership of QPR on 13:44 - Nov 13 by NewBee |
A thought occurs from reading this thread: Might QPR ("Jude") be the footballing equivalent of Schrodinger's Cat?
That is, your owners are killing your club with their bad decision-making, while simultaneously keeping it alive with their money.
Or is this metaphor simultaneously clever and crap? |
Madsen appears to be the Scandinavian proof of the theory. His imponderable capacity to be both present and absent at the same time on a football pitch surely requires some kind of quantum interpretation. |  |
| |
| Ownership of QPR on 16:47 - Nov 20 with 1383 views | TK1 |
| Ownership of QPR on 16:36 - Nov 20 by GaryBannister86 |
I'm disagreeing with your opinion of Thompson's treatment and the protests, not with "facts" of what happened. |
Fair enough. But if we assume the point of the protests was to chase Thompson out and replace him with someone who could take QPR to the next level, can we agree that those protests were at best spectacularly unsuccessful? | | | |
| Ownership of QPR on 17:24 - Nov 20 with 1261 views | BrianMcCarthy |
| Ownership of QPR on 16:47 - Nov 20 by TK1 |
Fair enough. But if we assume the point of the protests was to chase Thompson out and replace him with someone who could take QPR to the next level, can we agree that those protests were at best spectacularly unsuccessful? |
I was one of the organisers of the anti-Thompson protests, TK. There may have been a group called P.O.R.T. but they certainly weren't in charge. In fact, I don't even remember them. It was the LSA and Dave Thomas who led the way.
The concern with Thompson was not just, as Gary says, that he was failing to invest but that he was actively asset-stripping the club and making way to recover his money and depart himself, leaving us with a weakened team and club. Rightly or wrongly, there were concerns about the long-term future of the club, not just the short-term league position.
I was in favour of the protests at the time because it's what (most of) the fans wanted. Looking back, I've often said on here that I'm no longer so sure, but we have no way of knowing what would have happened had Thompson been allowed to continue unopposed. |  |
| |
| Ownership of QPR on 17:31 - Nov 20 with 1234 views | GaryBannister86 |
| Ownership of QPR on 17:24 - Nov 20 by BrianMcCarthy |
I was one of the organisers of the anti-Thompson protests, TK. There may have been a group called P.O.R.T. but they certainly weren't in charge. In fact, I don't even remember them. It was the LSA and Dave Thomas who led the way.
The concern with Thompson was not just, as Gary says, that he was failing to invest but that he was actively asset-stripping the club and making way to recover his money and depart himself, leaving us with a weakened team and club. Rightly or wrongly, there were concerns about the long-term future of the club, not just the short-term league position.
I was in favour of the protests at the time because it's what (most of) the fans wanted. Looking back, I've often said on here that I'm no longer so sure, but we have no way of knowing what would have happened had Thompson been allowed to continue unopposed. |
Couldn't agree more Brian and I think you were right at the time and I still think you were right now. The cold "facts" TK lists seem damning evidence to the contrary, but it misses out so much of the emotion and feeling and frustration of the time. With odd echoes to now, we had communication that involved Cinzano writing puff pieces in the programme claiming absolute rubbish about Thompson and his commitment - the good ship QPR was heading to the rocks with a nepo baby in charge.
It's all very well saying it was a good offer for Peacock and a sensible sale, but what about the timing? The lack of cover? Who we were playing next? Why it happened? Also, Sinton claimed he didn't want to leave. So who was lying? | | | |
| Ownership of QPR on 17:37 - Nov 20 with 1214 views | TK1 |
| Ownership of QPR on 17:24 - Nov 20 by BrianMcCarthy |
I was one of the organisers of the anti-Thompson protests, TK. There may have been a group called P.O.R.T. but they certainly weren't in charge. In fact, I don't even remember them. It was the LSA and Dave Thomas who led the way.
The concern with Thompson was not just, as Gary says, that he was failing to invest but that he was actively asset-stripping the club and making way to recover his money and depart himself, leaving us with a weakened team and club. Rightly or wrongly, there were concerns about the long-term future of the club, not just the short-term league position.
I was in favour of the protests at the time because it's what (most of) the fans wanted. Looking back, I've often said on here that I'm no longer so sure, but we have no way of knowing what would have happened had Thompson been allowed to continue unopposed. |
Here's a thing about P.O.R.T. Whole thing seems a bit Life of Brian (no relation, obviously!). Splitters!: https://www.indyrs.co.uk/2011/07/when-rangers-fans-vented-their-anger-at-qpr-cha
We live and learn. I think if there'd been no protest and he'd stayed he'd have fired Wilkins that winter of '95. Who know who he'd have got in, but he was much more shrewd with hirings and transfers than Wright.
That interview with him above pretty much mirrors what I thought was going on. It chimes correctly. Fundamentally, it comes down to protesting against this:
"When you look at the player departures under you, you can list them out, Seaman, Parker, Wegerle, Peacock, Sinton, Ferdinand, at the time you were accused of asset stripping, how would you defend that?
RT: The club was always losing about £1m a year, then you had the capital expenditure on the stadium which was probably another couple of million or so. There's no question profits were made on players, although we did replace them all we absolutely had a big surplus come back into the club. If you take the losses and the CapEx that surplus probably covered that sum, it wasn't any more or less if you look at the numbers in real detail.
We did spend money on players too, of course we made some bad mistakes with the likes of Ned Zelic and Mark Hateley. I would always argue there was no asset stripping, it was just funding the losses of the club and of course players were brought in too, so it wasn't all one way.
We spent about £10m on the club in terms of buying it, investing in it and at that time that was quite a lot of money, people now probably think '£10m that’s nothing', but back then it was a lot. " | | | |
| Ownership of QPR on 17:53 - Nov 20 with 1173 views | BrianMcCarthy |
He's entitled to his version of it, of course. | |
| |
| Ownership of QPR on 18:02 - Nov 20 with 1138 views | daveB |
| Ownership of QPR on 16:06 - Nov 20 by TK1 |
"It could and should have been a lot better": mate, other than one season in 1975/76, it's never been as good before or since, and it will never be as good again. But somehow it still wasn't good enough for you. That's tragic. That was my favourite QPR era.
Who did you want to invest? It wasn't the fans, was it? Because we couldn't fill a 19k ground. We had to sell players to invest.
Other than Marcus Gayle, QPR would not have been in with the remotest shot of signing Walker, Townsend, G Peacock or Beardsley then because they were joining much bigger clubs. It's also why players needed to be sold: generally, players want to play for the biggest clubs. It's why Peacock, Ferdinand, Sinton etc left too. They asked to play for a bigger clubs. I mean, you say we could've convinced Peter Beardsley to chose QPR over Newcastle?!
Anyway, well done everyone. We chased out Richard Thompson, got in Chris Wright who showed "some ambition", invested money neither we nor he had and broke the club, probably for good.
(All this is just to say, history should always teach us to be careful what we wish for). |
if Chris Wright had been in charge in 1993 I think history would have been very different, Thompson was more suited to what we needed after we went down
Football was on the brink of booming to ridiculous money and we missed the boat, it didn't need much, we were already a very good side. Blackburn won the league signing players from Southampton, Norwich and Middlesbrough.
I just look back on that era thinking what if | | | |
| Ownership of QPR on 18:38 - Nov 20 with 1044 views | TK1 |
| Ownership of QPR on 18:02 - Nov 20 by daveB |
if Chris Wright had been in charge in 1993 I think history would have been very different, Thompson was more suited to what we needed after we went down
Football was on the brink of booming to ridiculous money and we missed the boat, it didn't need much, we were already a very good side. Blackburn won the league signing players from Southampton, Norwich and Middlesbrough.
I just look back on that era thinking what if |
Chris Wright was an absolute disaster in 1996 and would have been a disaster in 1993, too. What in his CV or work suggests otherwise? The worst chairman/owner we've had. More ruinous than even Fernandes. Every decision he made was a calamity.
I mean, in one respect I guess history might have been different if Wright was in charge in 1993: he may have been able to sell his dream of a joint QPR/Wasps 40k stadium somewhere beyond Heathrow as the next big step that would have allowed us to compete with the big boys. What fun.
Meanwhile, "Blackburn won the league signing players from Southampton, Norwich and Middlesbrough."
Or, Blackburn won the league because they were bought by a man worth £600 million and broke the British record signing Shearer from Southampton, while spending the same again on Sutton, Ripley and Sherwood, never mind Wilcox, Le Saux etc...
It's fantasy to imagine QPR were anywhere near that. Walker spent tens of millions, while we were losing a million quid a year.
We had a bad season, fuelled by Wilkins's rotten buys. Happens, as you suggested may happen to Brighton. The 'what if' moment was the next period: we had the squad to come back up quickly, few adjustments and right coach needed. Just in time for boom time. Chris Wright wrecked that, chasing bad decision after bad decision until the club went bust.
Surely none of this is controversial. It's all historical fact! | | | |
| Ownership of QPR on 18:41 - Nov 20 with 1024 views | paulparker |
| Ownership of QPR on 18:02 - Nov 20 by daveB |
if Chris Wright had been in charge in 1993 I think history would have been very different, Thompson was more suited to what we needed after we went down
Football was on the brink of booming to ridiculous money and we missed the boat, it didn't need much, we were already a very good side. Blackburn won the league signing players from Southampton, Norwich and Middlesbrough.
I just look back on that era thinking what if |
Totally agree
Back in 93 we was was picking up injuries and all we had was Maurice Doyle , a young Karl ready and Devon white
We were screaming out for an Ian bishop , Alex Rae , Kenny Cunningham style of back up |  |
| And Bowles is onside, Swinburne has come rushing out of his goal , what can Bowles do here , onto the left foot no, on to the right foot
That’s there that’s two, and that’s Bowles
Brian Moore
|
| |
| Ownership of QPR on 18:49 - Nov 20 with 999 views | daveB |
| Ownership of QPR on 18:38 - Nov 20 by TK1 |
Chris Wright was an absolute disaster in 1996 and would have been a disaster in 1993, too. What in his CV or work suggests otherwise? The worst chairman/owner we've had. More ruinous than even Fernandes. Every decision he made was a calamity.
I mean, in one respect I guess history might have been different if Wright was in charge in 1993: he may have been able to sell his dream of a joint QPR/Wasps 40k stadium somewhere beyond Heathrow as the next big step that would have allowed us to compete with the big boys. What fun.
Meanwhile, "Blackburn won the league signing players from Southampton, Norwich and Middlesbrough."
Or, Blackburn won the league because they were bought by a man worth £600 million and broke the British record signing Shearer from Southampton, while spending the same again on Sutton, Ripley and Sherwood, never mind Wilcox, Le Saux etc...
It's fantasy to imagine QPR were anywhere near that. Walker spent tens of millions, while we were losing a million quid a year.
We had a bad season, fuelled by Wilkins's rotten buys. Happens, as you suggested may happen to Brighton. The 'what if' moment was the next period: we had the squad to come back up quickly, few adjustments and right coach needed. Just in time for boom time. Chris Wright wrecked that, chasing bad decision after bad decision until the club went bust.
Surely none of this is controversial. It's all historical fact! |
I'm not for a second saying Wright was any good he was a disaster but we neded that investment when we were on the up
All we did every year was weaken the team and it came back to bite us in the end
Thompson was the right owner at the wrong tine, he comes in after Flavio I actually think he'd have done well
Blackburn of course spent a lot but on players we could have got, likes of Sherwood, Ripley and Tim Flowers were all gettable if we wanted to do it. Andy Cole when he was at Bristol City was another we could have taken a chance on
It wasn't the Premier League we see today or even the one of the 2000's, the opportunity was there for us and we didn't go for it. Was never going to take fortunes to do it, we were so close to a very good side just needed some depth to the squad and a bit more quality in midfield alongside Wilkins | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
