I wonder if we would be feeling as gloomy

If we had lost to middlesboro and wolves and beaten Brighton or would the general consensus be that we didnt expect to beat those 2 teams anyway.

 

I don't feel particularly gloomy

With the squad we've got I'd resigned myself to a relegation battle. Not necessarily relegation, but a fight to stay up. When you realise that's what you're in for, you know that you're going to take some hammerings along the way. Brighton won't be the last. But on the flip side of the coin I didn't expect us to beat Middlesbrough, so we're up on my expectations. We're averaging a point per game which will give us a fighting chance come the conclusion of the season.

Low expectations admittedly, but I don't see how you could have anything else with the group of players we've got.

 

Re: I don't feel particularly gloomy

I expect consolidation14-18th with a fully fit squad, any manager with 11 unavailable players would find it hard.

 

It's not losing that has really bothered me, it's the way we lost particularly at Brighton.

 

I think that highlights how much backing Keith Hill has had

He's been here just over a year, he has 11 players out injured, yet he is still able to put out a team where 10 of the 11 starters are his signings.

Injuries are always a problem to any manager. And we've got plenty of them at the moment. But you can only really use that as an excuse when you have to field a team made up of youngsters, players you don't fancy left over from the last regime and players played out of position. That just wasn't the case on Saturday.

The entire midfield and forward line were all Keith Hill signings played in their proper positions. Golbourne was signed by Keith as a left back and was playing left back. Foster was re-signed in the summer and playing his natural position. Only Scott Wiseman could be said to be out of position, but when you consider that Cranie and Collins were on the bench, both central defenders signed by Keith, then you have to conclude that Wiseman at centre half was a tactical decision not something forced upon us. Stones was the only youngster in the side, but we had experienced options on the bench and the amount of times he was used in pre-season suggests he was always part of our plans. It was only the inclusion of Gonzalez that can really be said to be outside of Keith's plans and even he was signed by Keith.

Injuries were not the problem on Saturday. It could be argued that we would have fielded a very similar starting 11 should all our player have been fit. After all, they were nearly all Keith's signings. The problem was the quality of player we've brought to the club under Keith's leadership. That's why I think we're in for a relegation battle.

Now it sounds like I am being gloomy, but I'm not really, I've accepted our lot.

 

I find it hard to disagree with anything you've written jay and to be honest this was probably the 1st season since we came back in to the championship that I wasn't feeling optimistic, I wasn't sure if that was down to the fact that I just expect us to be in a relegation battle now or just the quality of player we've signed.

 

Re: I think that highlights how much backing Keith Hill has had

3 points is probably more than i expected from the first 3 games but while i always try to be optimistic it was always on the cards that this season would likely be a struggle. However the fact that the lay down and have our bellys tickled attitude appears to have rolled over from last season is worrying. I accept that we will get a tonking from time to time but do we really need the manager to tell us that we should accept it,that attitude is hardly going to inspire fans and players alike

 

As usual spot on Jay. I said the same last night that with the exceptions of Steele, JOB and maybe Perkins who else would improve this side that isn't playing?

 

Basically, the only players out injured that would improve the team are al the ones that Keith didn't sign.

 

Thats about the top and bottom of it.

I'm at a loss to understand what Hassell has done to continually get overlooked. I'm not his biggest fan but surely he would offer a better option at CH than Wiseman.

Granted Wiseman diid well against Middlesborough but to believe that he has now turned into Paulo Maldini is questionable even if he is your love child.

If you look through the signings that Keef has made in 12 months and it must be well in the 20s I'm struggling to find many that have been a massive success. Its a worrying trend and to think he hasnt had money is also misguided...

 

Has the club

Been prepared to pay the same salaries to players as it did under Simon Davey & Mark Robins, be that individually or as a group budget? Has the manager been given the same budget as previously when it comes to incoming transfers? Keith Hill has certainly been given money, but for anyone to claim that he's had the same budget the previous managers received is somewhat disingenuous. The available budget will obviously dictate where the manager can shop for any new recruits. I doubt whether the manager and his assistant appreciated just what a difficult job they'd taken on when accepting the position, and the financial parameters placed upon them, last year. I'm certain they do now.

 

Re: Has the club

Didn't the latest accounts filed at companies house show that under Mark Robins' tenure we were very close to breaking even and all the talk of over spend on here was completely wide of the mark. Indeed, Mr Rowing has stated that Keith Hill's budget is very similar to that which Mark Robins enjoyed.

 

Re: Has the club

I don't think he's had the same budget by any stratch nope ....... but he's effectively had since the end of January last season to plan for this season and do something about our defence. At the beggining of the summer he made a move for Gordon Greeer and everyone was delighted that he was targeting our main problem ..... the soft centre of our team, the defence.

Since then he's signed 142 midfield players and 2 overweight/unfit strikers.

The defence we have is 'damaged' beyond repair ..... the same players are making shocking errors and are being 'found out' one way or the other week in week out ..... and it's been happening since January.

At the back we are 'shot' !

Signing Crainie is a step (hopefully) in the right direction. I'd suggest we flog Done to Palace for the reported £500k they are said to be offering & add that money to the alleged £400k we had for Norwood and go out and sign a good quality Championship standard Centre Half/ Captain to help shore things up ....... if not we will be ars*holed pretty much everytime we take to the pitch this season........A bit like the last 4 months of last season !

Keith says we will 'always compete' ..... well I'm not sure that's been true for the last 25 league games.

 

If all that is true and accurate

Then it's news to me, mate.

 

I've seen the accounts

Both BFC_Dave and Extremely_Northern were good enough to send them to me. They looked very healthy to me, even more so when BFC_Dave explained them to me, and showed nothing of this massive debt being racked up that was being claimed on here. I seem to have misplaced them otherwise I would send them to you, but they are still available at companies house or maybe one of the above two gentlemen could pass them on.

 

Re: I've seen the accounts

So there was no truth to the rumour that Cryne had to put in an extra £2m after over spending during the 2010-11 season? I was sceptical at the time as I couldn't really see where we had signed players or big wages or paid fees but that was the rumour doing the rounds at the time.

 

Re: I've seen the accounts

I believe we made a small operating loss of £400,000, but that didn't include the Shackell sale which was made not long after the period for the accounts. BFC_Dave knows the ins and outs better than I do and if you do a search he gave a summary of them on this BBS when they were released.

 

I'm not trying to hide

From the fact that we need to strengthen in various areas. All I'm saying is that the budget dictates the salary the club is willing to pay and, therefore, will restrict the manager in the transfer market. Perhaps he's targeted a number of central defenders, but the club can't or won't meet their wage demands. Football is a result driven business and there's no doubt there has to be an improvement from the final three months of last season. Middlesbrough at home showed what this group of players are capable of. Unfortunately, so did Brighton away. I believe in the manager and think we'll see more of the Middlesbrough type performances as the season progresses. If I'm wrong and the display witnessed at Brighton is to be the norm, then Hill will probably be on his way.
However, if we were to sack the manager, as some fans want, would the new man have to work within the same financial restraints? If so, how long would it take before the same fans are demanding the new man be sacked if there's no improvement on results?

 

Re: If all that is true and accurate

In fairness to Hill the players that he has signed have reflected the budget he has had. Whenever he has tried to compete (wages wise) with another club who have wanted the same player he has lost out. This has happened on numerous occasions (Norwood, Greer, Pearce, Carayoll). Two of those are centre half who would have significantly improved the team. He has also tried to bring in a centre half from Man Utd on loan which broke down due to wages.

The reality has been that Hill has been able to recruit two types of players, those from the lower leagues that have potential (Perkins, Done, Davies, Goldbourne, Collins) and players that no-one else wanted in our league (Vaz Te, Cywca, Harewood, Cranie). I would add that Cranie said on Barnsley Player that he hasn't played any pre-season games as he was a free agent and couldn't risk getting injured, and presume therefore that he isn't match fit yet. A fit Cranie and fit McNulty would be a decent pairing for me.

My issue is, and why I always seem to be defending Hill, is when people use the players he has signed to constantly criticise him without any acceptance of the context of finance. I think, on the smallest budget in the Championship, he managed to create a very good starting XI last year but a poor squad, and this year a good starting XI (when all fit) and a decent squad. Over a full season I think that will serve us better.

There are plenty of thing to critcise Hill, and the players, about within the context of his resources. My main gripes are our inability to overlap with full-backs, not splitting the centre-halves at goal kicks with a midfielder dropping in to collect the ball, the lack of pressing when not in possession, and playing 4-4-2 when we don't have the midfielders capable of doing so.

 

Re: I've seen the accounts

What worries me is the difference in performance level/attitude in the 'Boro game and the Brighton game.

I think that's why you have quite a few REDS fans feeling negative (Wolves result was expected and apparently we played "OK").

Bristol City at Oakwell on Saturday............we need a solid performance and 3 points and let's get back on track.

When you look down fixture list, this is a game we should be looking to win?