Originally posted by rodman
View Post
Unconfigured Ad Widget
Collapse
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Here's a question for ya
Collapse
X
-
Depends how you define success. Di Canio was a success if your yardstick is to be entertained. We played some lovely football under him at times in true QPR tradition, with the No 10 Buzsaky in his prime. He was a popular manager with the fans too exactly because of his attacking playing style. Nice song we had for him to boot.Originally posted by Hove Ranger View PostHe wasn't exactly successful though, think we finished 14/15th under him and had a general even amount of results (wins, draws, losses), or are fans not bothered by success? (This isn't a dig at you Ginge)
Comment
-
That's why I asked the question Stan. Success usually means winning in football. So you would be happy with mid table if we played entertaining football?Originally posted by Stanley View PostDepends how you define success. Di Canio was a success if your yardstick is to be entertained. We played some lovely football under him at times in true QPR tradition, with the No 10 Buzsaky in his prime. He was a popular manager with the fans too exactly because of his attacking playing style. Nice song we had for him to boot.
Comment
-
Yes, on a consistent basis. Getting the fans on their feet and entertaining them for their hard-earned pay. Flair players, free-flowing, fluid and creative football - all in the finest of Queens Park Rangers traditions, in the days when we were everyone's favourite 2nd club.Originally posted by Hove Ranger View PostFair enough. Is that on a consistent basis? I.e. generally promotion or winning isn't a stickler for you
Comment
-
Well shoot me, as I'm biased. It was the style of football I was raised on by my team, going all the way back to Dave Sexton. With others it was Jago and Stock before him.
It's the club I fell in love with as a kid. I literally hero-worshiped those players.
Comment
-
You sound like a manager looking for Jimmy's jobOriginally posted by Stanley View PostYes, on a consistent basis. Getting the fans on their feet and entertaining them for their hard-earned pay. Flair players, free-flowing, fluid and creative football - all in the finest of Queens Park Rangers traditions, in the days when we were everyone's favourite 2nd club.
I am curious if that's the case across the fan base and then if the board are aware of this. Maybe that's the fundamental reason where they are going wrong. Too much focus on promotion rather than playing entertaining football
Comment
-
That's bang on the money mate, in my humble opining. It's only my personal one though. Wouldn't have a clue if I'm in the majority or not.Originally posted by Hove Ranger View PostToo much focus on promotion rather than playing entertaining football
All I can tell you is when I was watching that Newcastle game I was literally seething and screaming, it was that painful to endure. It was such a poor indictment on how far we've turned our back on our roots as a club. But I'm a traditionalist though in how I think the game should be played, and probably quite a purist in that regard. That's my cross to bear. I know and accept others have a different perspective.
Comment
-
You may be onto something mate. Sounds like a lot of fans are in a similar boat. The only criticism is that modern football is too money orientated and with that brings a focus on promotion. Is it sustainable in modern football to focus more on entertaining football rather than promotion? Obviously the 2 aren't antithetical but is it realistic?Originally posted by Stanley View PostThat's bang on the money mate, in my humble opining. It's only my personal one though. Wouldn't have a clue if I'm in the majority or not.
All I can tell you is when I was watching that Newcastle game I was literally seething and screaming, it was that painful to endure. It was such a poor indictment on how far we've turned our back on our roots as a club. But I'm a traditionalist though in how I think the game should be played, and probably quite a purist in that regard. That's my cross to bear. I know and accept others have a different perspective.
Comment
-
Yep, well that's the $64,000 question, isn't it?Originally posted by Hove Ranger View PostYou may be onto something mate. Sounds like a lot of fans are in a similar boat. The only criticism is that modern football is too money orientated and with that brings a focus on promotion. Is it sustainable in modern football to focus more on entertaining football rather than promotion? Obviously the 2 aren't antithetical but is it realistic?
I guess I was a bit spoilt by growing up with the QPR of old. In recent times Warnock renewed my faith in our tradition though, which was heart-warming to see - and proof that it can still be applied to the modern game for a smaller club like ours, at least at Championship level...The Leicester story is a fantastic one too.
Comment
-
Likewise from the days of Alec Stock we were known for attractive football and drew fansOriginally posted by Stanley View PostWell shoot me, as I'm biased. It was the style of football I was raised on by my team, going all the way back to Dave Sexton. With others it was Jago and Stock before him.
It's the club I fell in love with as a kid. I literally hero-worshiped those players.
in accordingly
Comment
-
Give him the season, given the teams in the division are we really up there with the ones in with a shout of promotion? I'd say no. If he can't establish a decent playing style this year then let him go at the end of the seasoni supported qpr in the glory days when chris kiwomya and michael ngonge played up front

Comment
Comment