Matej Vydra: Still sorry we missed out?

[Hampster Gull]

He would do well in this team

 

[ferring seagull]

You're right, I don't know where I got my figure from, but it actually proves my point even more. He only cost £500k and we were giving him stick whereas Vydra, 4x that for only a loan but whose goal ratio is not much better.
Edit: The £2m fee for O'Grady is quoted on quite a few sites including a local one. Is it a case of Chinese whispers or did that include add ons?

No way was it near £2m ( no more than £500K if indeed that) but, add ons, are you serious ?

 

[marlowe]

No way was it near £2m ( no more than £500K if indeed that) but, add ons, are you serious ?

No, I believe it was £500k as that is the figure I now remember, but the figure of £2m crops up on a lot of different sites so I was wondering if there was a reason for that, notwithstanding the fact that misinformation is easily and widely disseminated on the internet. Of course any add ons would not have been activated given how things panned out, but there is the possibility that some were set in place in the expectation or hope that his career with us might have been more mutually productive in which case he would have been worth that.

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

£2m loan fee shouldn't be ridiculous at all. Its not normally the way things are done in the UK, but if Reading had bought him on a 3-year contract for £6m, would there have been much batting of eyelids? Jordan Rhodes was just bought for £9m on a four and a half year deal, so exactly the same pro-rata, £2m a year is the going rate for a top championship striker

 

[Dirk Lehmann's Python]

Funny how everyone is laughing at the loan fee but will turn a blind eye to the amount we pay for Glenn to replace Zamora in a fortnight

 

[stss30]

£2m loan fee shouldn't be ridiculous at all. Its not normally the way things are done in the UK, but if Reading had bought him on a 3-year contract for £6m, would there have been much batting of eyelids? Jordan Rhodes was just bought for £9m on a four and a half year deal, so exactly the same pro-rata, £2m a year is the going rate for a top championship striker

The difference being if Rhodes does well he has sell on value, if Vydra does well, great, but if you don't get promoted spending £2m you've basically chucked it down the drain

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

The difference being if Rhodes does well he has sell on value, if Vydra does well, great, but if you don't get promoted spending £2m you've basically chucked it down the drain

I guess that rather depends on whether you seeing buying players as an investment for the future or for what they can do for you now. All transfer expenditure is a risk, not to mention wages, CMS is a clear case of someone who cost a lot and didn't have sell-on value. We'd have saved money if we had just taken CMS on a one-season loan for one million. Rhodes in one year, with less time on his contract and one more year in his legs, may well not be worth more than 7m, in which case Boro would also have spent 2m on one season of a top striker.


Regardless, all spending has to be taken in context. Sometimes the best option is to put all your eggs in one basket. I'm sure that Reading assessed their current players, their age, contract situations, the clubs income and next-years income, their competitors positions, and so on and so forth, and decided that this season was their best chance of promotion . They must have decided that spending £2m on the best player available right now, for one season, was better than investing it in someone who might have their best years ahead of him. Or that spending 2m on a player for one season and having another 3m available to strengthen elesewhere was a better bet than spending all 5m on that one player for several seasons.

 

[stss30]

I guess that rather depends on whether you seeing buying players as an investment for the future or for what they can do for you now. All transfer expenditure is a risk, not to mention wages, CMS is a clear case of someone who cost a lot and didn't have sell-on value. We'd have saved money if we had just taken CMS on a one-season loan for one million. Rhodes in one year, with less time on his contract and one more year in his legs, may well not be worth more than 7m, in which case Boro would also have spent 2m on one season of a top striker.


Regardless, all spending has to be taken in context. Sometimes the best option is to put all your eggs in one basket. I'm sure that Reading assessed their current players, their age, contract situations, the clubs income and next-years income, their competitors positions, and so on and so forth, and decided that this season was their best chance of promotion . They must have decided that spending £2m on the best player available right now, for one season, was better than investing it in someone who might have their best years ahead of him. Or that spending 2m on a player for one season and having another 3m available to strengthen elesewhere was a better bet than spending all 5m on that one player for several seasons.

Of course it is, and I have no doubt Reading explored other options and decided that they thought Vydra was the best option, I just personally think spending £2million for a loan player near the start of the season when there is no guarantee you will be challenging for promotion is a poor way to run a football club. As for the point about players being an investment for the future or what they can do now, I don't think the two are mutually exclusive.

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

Hopefully he'll score the winner vs Burnley today !

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

Of course it is, and I have no doubt Reading explored other options and decided that they thought Vydra was the best option, I just personally think spending £2million for a loan player near the start of the season when there is no guarantee you will be challenging for promotion is a poor way to run a football club. As for the point about players being an investment for the future or what they can do now, I don't think the two are mutually exclusive.

Real devil's advocate now, but signing Bobby Zamora and paying whatever he is costing us when there is no guarantee we would be challenging for promotion... etc etc

We all expected Reading to be challenging for promotion of course, and they were for a while. They must be pretty livid with the way their season is going

Anyway my point is (1) that every single signing of a player in their prime costs money, whether its depreciation as contract runs out, depreciation as the player ages, cost of salary, and so on. In that context 2m for one season for a player should be seen as perfectly reasonable if you are a club expected to challenge for promotion. It certainly isn't if you expect to be mid-table; (2) all clubs are in the same market, and if a player of that quality is only available on such a deal, then you get a playing advantage over your competitors by being the team to sign him; (3) some sources of income are temporary, i.e. parachute payments, and should be taken advantage of, and (4) there are long-term benefits to the one-year signing that should not be underestimated, i.e. loss of risk in the case of career-ending injury; not being saddled with high-salary contracts if promotion fails; and so on

 

[fat old seagull]

If my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle

You really should post more

My Uncle Sylvia hasn't

 

[stss30]

Real devil's advocate now, but signing Bobby Zamora and paying whatever he is costing us when there is no guarantee we would be challenging for promotion... etc etc

We all expected Reading to be challenging for promotion of course, and they were for a while. They must be pretty livid with the way their season is going

Anyway my point is (1) that every single signing of a player in their prime costs money, whether its depreciation as contract runs out, depreciation as the player ages, cost of salary, and so on. In that context 2m for one season for a player should be seen as perfectly reasonable if you are a club expected to challenge for promotion. It certainly isn't if you expect to be mid-table; (2) all clubs are in the same market, and if a player of that quality is only available on such a deal, then you get a playing advantage over your competitors by being the team to sign him; (3) some sources of income are temporary, i.e. parachute payments, and should be taken advantage of, and (4) there are long-term benefits to the one-year signing that should not be underestimated, i.e. loss of risk in the case of career-ending injury; not being saddled with high-salary contracts if promotion fails; and so on

Even if Vydra bagged 20 goals for Reading, if they failed to get promotion he would still leave at the end of the season. I think one of the keys to this division is keeping your 'star players' and building a squad around them. With deals like this there is no continuity season on season so I would argue it can harm clubs, you could argue the same about Zamora however we knew full well what we were getting, a much more proven striker than Vydra but someone who can't play every game. Plus there is always the element of 'do loan players really care' as Vydra will probably be on a healthy salary at Watford after they got promoted.

 

[El Turi]

Hemed has missed a hatful of great chances this season, Vydra would be in doubles figures easily by now with that level of service.

Vydra has missed loads of chances as well. He's been receiving a lot of stick from Reading fans.

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

Even if Vydra bagged 20 goals for Reading, if they failed to get promotion he would still leave at the end of the season. I think one of the keys to this division is keeping your 'star players' and building a squad around them. With deals like this there is no continuity season on season so I would argue it can harm clubs, you could argue the same about Zamora however we knew full well what we were getting, a much more proven striker than Vydra but someone who can't play every game. Plus there is always the element of 'do loan players really care' as Vydra will probably be on a healthy salary at Watford after they got promoted.

yeah of course, thats the other side of the coin, and we can go back and forth forever. IF Vydra turns into the best player in the world, then Reading will wish they had bought him for longer than one year - but that would have cost more money, and if he was never available in the first place thats an irrelevant consideration. If Reading's choice was to buy Vydra for one year or a lesser striker for longer, it may not have been a bad decision they made in that context.

 

[ferring seagull]

A question please.

What would happen if having taken said player on loan for £2m, would that fee be paid in instalments - just wondering what would happen in the event of a season long injury ?

 

[Perkino]

If Watford were prepared to sell for £2m then I would've been happy to see the club spend that money, but for a loan it was pure robery. Glad we didn't sign him and happier with Wilson

 

[Triggaaar]

£2m loan fee shouldn't be ridiculous at all. Its not normally the way things are done in the UK, but if Reading had bought him on a 3-year contract for £6m, would there have been much batting of eyelids? Jordan Rhodes was just bought for £9m on a four and a half year deal, so exactly the same pro-rata, £2m a year is the going rate for a top championship striker

It's completely different if you have the option to sell the player. BLackburn bought Rhodes for about £8m - has that cost them £2m a year? No, they've made a profit (obviously wages would apply on top of either loan or transfer fee).

I guess that rather depends on whether you seeing buying players as an investment for the future or for what they can do for you now.

Usually both, depending on their age.

All transfer expenditure is a risk, not to mention wages, CMS is a clear case of someone who cost a lot and didn't have sell-on value. We'd have saved money if we had just taken CMS on a one-season loan for one million.

And if we'd done the same with Ulloa we'd have lost money. At least when you buy a player you have the chance to make money, or get your investment back.

Rhodes in one year, with less time on his contract and one more year in his legs, may well not be worth more than 7m

He had 3 years left on his contract when he was sold, so in 1 year, he'll have the same amount left.

in which case Boro would also have spent 2m on one season of a top striker.

Rhodes is better than Vydra and boro are most likely to go up and not care about a couple of million.

Real devil's advocate now, but signing Bobby Zamora and paying whatever he is costing us when there is no guarantee we would be challenging for promotion... etc etc

It's nothing like the same thing. We didn't bid over the odds for Bobby to pry him away from a well paid job, he was unemployed and asked to come hear. It seems that Chris said no, but Bobby still said he wanted to come here, so you'd think we got a pretty good deal in terms of wages. It would have had nothing to do with challenging for promotion.

yeah of course, thats the other side of the coin, and we can go back and forth forever.

You could go on forever and you'd still be wrong.

IF Vydra turns into the best player in the world, then Reading will wish they had bought him for longer than one year - but that would have cost more money... If Reading's choice was to buy Vydra for one year or a lesser striker for longer, it may not have been a bad decision they made in that context.

If signing someone for 4 years, £2m a year is £8m, so I don't see why they'd have been a lesser striker.

 

[Paul Reids Sock]

Hemed has missed a hatful of great chances this season, Vydra would be in doubles figures easily by now with that level of service.

As someone who has watched a few Reading games this year I can tel you that Vydra has missed several hat loads of chances! Many of which have been sitters

Not fussed at all that we missed out

 

[One Love]

As someone who has watched a few Reading games this year I can tel you that Vydra has missed several hat loads of chances! Many of which have been sitters

Not fussed at all that we missed out

This infers to me that he is a player who is very good at getting in positions to score. Unlike Hemed, how many sitters has he missed this season? I can't think of many but he's been struggling to score for ages.

This sort of player, IF he clicks in front of goal, is capable of taking a team up. He just needs to rediscover his goal scoring.

Reminds me of Barnes, I was constantly frustrated by the amount of chances he missed but you had to hand it to him, he was often in the right place to be prolific.

 

[Pavilionaire]

I accept that Vydra has had a poor season but that can happen - Glenn Murray scored 6 one season, 30 the next. Vydra already has two big Championship seasons in his locker, indeed if Watford look to offload and we don't go up then we should make a bid.