| Kelman:Here We Go 19:14 - Jul 26 with 12966 views | Northolt_Rs |
|  |
| Scooters, Tunes, Trainers and QPR. |
| |  |
| Kelman:Here We Go on 11:47 - Jul 27 with 1755 views | gazza1 |
| Kelman:Here We Go on 11:44 - Jul 27 by Rangersw12 |
Shame he didn't want to sign a contract but we've got a great price and sell on clause for someone who's never scored a championship goal
Well done the club |
I would put this one down to Nourry more than anything or anyone else....... |  | | |
| Kelman:Here We Go on 11:58 - Jul 27 with 1652 views | 1JD |
| Kelman:Here We Go on 11:47 - Jul 27 by gazza1 |
I would put this one down to Nourry more than anything or anyone else....... |
Well, he’s at the club due to Ramsay and Ferdinand so that’s the primary credit.
As for why he wanted out, surprised no one is asking that question, as that’s the real issue here - not the fact he only had 1 year left, and thus, just had to be sold.
Under a new regime, why can he not be convinced to stay? It says quite a lot - especially when you further factor in he’s gone to charlton, and preferred that over us. Hardly a step up.
Time will tell if this is a good deal or not. I’m far from convinced. | | | |
| Kelman:Here We Go on 11:59 - Jul 27 with 1634 views | Northernr |
| Kelman:Here We Go on 11:47 - Jul 27 by gazza1 |
I would put this one down to Nourry more than anything or anyone else....... |
Come on now, you don't like it when other people on here make broad brushstroke guesses Gaz. |  | | |
| Kelman:Here We Go on 12:01 - Jul 27 with 1588 views | Wegerles_Stairs |
| Kelman:Here We Go on 11:58 - Jul 27 by 1JD |
Well, he’s at the club due to Ramsay and Ferdinand so that’s the primary credit.
As for why he wanted out, surprised no one is asking that question, as that’s the real issue here - not the fact he only had 1 year left, and thus, just had to be sold.
Under a new regime, why can he not be convinced to stay? It says quite a lot - especially when you further factor in he’s gone to charlton, and preferred that over us. Hardly a step up.
Time will tell if this is a good deal or not. I’m far from convinced. |
Probably told him Celar was starting ahead of him... | | | |
| Kelman:Here We Go on 12:02 - Jul 27 with 1597 views | KensalT |
| Kelman:Here We Go on 11:36 - Jul 27 by stevec |
Yeah but how much did we get for those five?
Not sure it even adds up to a Kelman. |
How much would we have got for Chair and Eze if we had sold them at the end of their loan spells?
A lot less than Chair is worth now. And it wouldn't have made a dent on what we eventually got for Eze. Not forgetting what we might still get if he does move clubs this summer. | | | |
| Kelman:Here We Go on 12:10 - Jul 27 with 1524 views | Wilkinswatercarrier |
| Kelman:Here We Go on 11:58 - Jul 27 by 1JD |
Well, he’s at the club due to Ramsay and Ferdinand so that’s the primary credit.
As for why he wanted out, surprised no one is asking that question, as that’s the real issue here - not the fact he only had 1 year left, and thus, just had to be sold.
Under a new regime, why can he not be convinced to stay? It says quite a lot - especially when you further factor in he’s gone to charlton, and preferred that over us. Hardly a step up.
Time will tell if this is a good deal or not. I’m far from convinced. |
He's been loaned out every season, from Warburton to Cifuentes, under Les Ferdinand and Nourry. Can't all be wrong.
Doesn't exactly scream 'we want you'.
He'd deleted QPR off his social media, but left Leyton Orient stuff on there, so didn't scream 'I want to stay' either.
We've gotten good money, he gets his move. Also, he has gone to Charlton not Leicester or Birmingham. Says a lot. | |
| |
| Kelman:Here We Go on 12:14 - Jul 27 with 1475 views | gazza1 |
| Kelman:Here We Go on 11:59 - Jul 27 by Northernr |
Come on now, you don't like it when other people on here make broad brushstroke guesses Gaz. |
I just thought that this is Nourry main job & not picking football players Norf.......but maybe it isn't, I don't know.
If I was fortunate enough to get a Fans Forum ticket I would of made reference to his job & the DoF to Nourry and not let him waffle.....sadly, after 60 years of supporting the R's watching them 99% of the time at home and many many away matches, they have decided that I am going on the f'ing reserve list!!!! I was going with a mate who applied for a tcket after me and he got one & I did not....like to know how they decided!!!! [Post edited 27 Jul 12:18]
| | | |
| Kelman:Here We Go on 12:16 - Jul 27 with 1455 views | Blue_Castello |
| Kelman:Here We Go on 11:36 - Jul 27 by stevec |
Yeah but how much did we get for those five?
Not sure it even adds up to a Kelman. |
Like a lot of people I would have liked to have seen him extend his contract and stay but that offer was rejected so we were left with no option but to sell and as you rightly say we've got more for him than the other five players so that seems a result.
The trick is to use that money wisely and get good replacements, it looks as if we may have made a good start with Burrell, he seems to have power and pace which has been seriously missing. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Kelman:Here We Go on 12:29 - Jul 27 with 1340 views | TK1 |
Last summer, QPR looked at their strikers, their number 9 options, and decided that the best thing would be:
1/ to start the season with (untested) Celar and (regularly injured) Frey as their two main options up top. Youth graduate Alfie Lloyd, who'd grown up a winger, was their understudy.
2/ Sell Lyndon Dykes early into season.
3/ Loan out Charlie Kelman to L1 once again, his third loan to that level.
Meanwhile, the story of the season reads:
*Celar could not adapt for first three months of season, scored twice, blew out hamstring for rest of season.
*Frey, mostly injured and unfit, though useful when rarely available. Remains the case.
*Lloyd needed/needs a loan. Also unfit for long periods.
*Recent youth grad Rayan Kolli - not a natural lone 9 - is adapted to a lone 9 and plays well sometimes in role...before being injured too.
QPR find themselves playing (and losing) without a striker in squad.
If you were Charlie Kelman and you've just outscored everyone playing as a lone 9 in L1 and have a load of contract interest, why would you sign a new deal for these people who made those decisons seemingly without reflection last summer?
You'd be off as soon as you could. He's a good lad and a good 9. He deserved better. QPR fcked this up *last* summer, when he should've stayed to fight for the 9 and Lloyd/Kolli should've gone out on loan. But the deal is good for all now. [Post edited 27 Jul 12:30]
| | | |
| Kelman:Here We Go on 12:37 - Jul 27 with 1273 views | Gus_iom |
| Kelman:Here We Go on 12:29 - Jul 27 by TK1 |
Last summer, QPR looked at their strikers, their number 9 options, and decided that the best thing would be:
1/ to start the season with (untested) Celar and (regularly injured) Frey as their two main options up top. Youth graduate Alfie Lloyd, who'd grown up a winger, was their understudy.
2/ Sell Lyndon Dykes early into season.
3/ Loan out Charlie Kelman to L1 once again, his third loan to that level.
Meanwhile, the story of the season reads:
*Celar could not adapt for first three months of season, scored twice, blew out hamstring for rest of season.
*Frey, mostly injured and unfit, though useful when rarely available. Remains the case.
*Lloyd needed/needs a loan. Also unfit for long periods.
*Recent youth grad Rayan Kolli - not a natural lone 9 - is adapted to a lone 9 and plays well sometimes in role...before being injured too.
QPR find themselves playing (and losing) without a striker in squad.
If you were Charlie Kelman and you've just outscored everyone playing as a lone 9 in L1 and have a load of contract interest, why would you sign a new deal for these people who made those decisons seemingly without reflection last summer?
You'd be off as soon as you could. He's a good lad and a good 9. He deserved better. QPR fcked this up *last* summer, when he should've stayed to fight for the 9 and Lloyd/Kolli should've gone out on loan. But the deal is good for all now. [Post edited 27 Jul 12:30]
|
If he was in the championship last season, he probably would not be coming off the season he is. I would suggest his extended stay in league one has done him - and us - a lot of good.
He wanted to move on, we need pace. | |
| |
| Kelman:Here We Go on 12:50 - Jul 27 with 1192 views | NorrisGreen |
Despite us sorting out the finances and balancing the books in recent years we have been pisspoor at moving players on at a profit. This will always leave us playing catch-up with our rivals.
Eze was sold ages ago and since then we have not generated anything of note via sales. Getting £3+ Mil for a disaffected player who has done nothing for us since signing him for £200K is an outstanding bit of business AND a necessary bit of business.
It really doesn't matter if Kelman goes onto bigger and better things, right now the club have done very well indeed with this deal. | | | |
| Kelman:Here We Go on 12:59 - Jul 27 with 1148 views | TK1 |
| Kelman:Here We Go on 12:37 - Jul 27 by Gus_iom |
If he was in the championship last season, he probably would not be coming off the season he is. I would suggest his extended stay in league one has done him - and us - a lot of good.
He wanted to move on, we need pace. |
Or...
...he might have played 30 games for us last term (let's face it, he would've given the others avails), scored a dozen goals, signed a new contract in the summer and be going into this season as our main striker, full of confidence, 23, and ready to kick on in his prime with QPR. Then, how much would he be worth in two seasons, when we aren't forced to sell? It's Eze time again.
I guess we'll see from Charlton. (But I do think the squad we have now, with Poku, Dembele and Chair, possibly Kolli, serving a 9 who is an instinctive finisher like Kelman is built for him and representatives a fck-up. He'd do better here than there. | | | |
| Kelman:Here We Go on 13:09 - Jul 27 with 1059 views | 1JD |
| Kelman:Here We Go on 12:10 - Jul 27 by Wilkinswatercarrier |
He's been loaned out every season, from Warburton to Cifuentes, under Les Ferdinand and Nourry. Can't all be wrong.
Doesn't exactly scream 'we want you'.
He'd deleted QPR off his social media, but left Leyton Orient stuff on there, so didn't scream 'I want to stay' either.
We've gotten good money, he gets his move. Also, he has gone to Charlton not Leicester or Birmingham. Says a lot. |
He was loaned out because he joined as an 18 year, and is still only 23 even now. Writing him off in his younger years is a fools errand. He has been loaned out to develop, and develop he did.
You draw attention to previous regimes as to why he doesn’t want to stay; but the point is - this is a fabled NEW regime. So why doesn’t he want to stay? New training ground, great facilities, alleged great vision that all players are buying into, new CEO/DOF.
And the fact it’s Charlton is exactly my point. It’s NOT a step up. Thus, it looks even worse that he doesn’t want to stay under the new regime. So, there are multiple ways to view this transfer.
And the idea that this is great business will be placed under immediate scrutiny. Because he is playing in our division this season, and QPR could quickly have egg on their face. Right now, it looks rosy. But time will tell if this is a good deal or not. | | | |
| Kelman:Here We Go on 13:09 - Jul 27 with 1058 views | nix |
| Kelman:Here We Go on 12:59 - Jul 27 by TK1 |
Or...
...he might have played 30 games for us last term (let's face it, he would've given the others avails), scored a dozen goals, signed a new contract in the summer and be going into this season as our main striker, full of confidence, 23, and ready to kick on in his prime with QPR. Then, how much would he be worth in two seasons, when we aren't forced to sell? It's Eze time again.
I guess we'll see from Charlton. (But I do think the squad we have now, with Poku, Dembele and Chair, possibly Kolli, serving a 9 who is an instinctive finisher like Kelman is built for him and representatives a fck-up. He'd do better here than there. |
Did you really think he was going to score a dozen goals for us last season. Because I didn’t. Maybe you’re Mystic Meg but I thought he looked pretty ineffectual when he came on for us in the past.
I actually couldn’t understand why we extended his contract as I thought he’d been a bit of a failure in our recruitment policy. Obviously if he goes on to be a £20 million player we’ll look a bit stupid but I just don’t think he’s got the physicality to be a Premiership player. If we’ve got a more pacy, bigger replacement for less money how can that be a bad piece of business? |  | | |
| Kelman:Here We Go on 13:10 - Jul 27 with 1053 views | SW_Ranger |
Ifs buts and maybes. All easy to put out there.
We’ll find out soon, as the season starts.
The experts will be vindicated  | | | |
| Kelman:Here We Go on 13:19 - Jul 27 with 980 views | 1JD |
| Kelman:Here We Go on 13:09 - Jul 27 by nix |
Did you really think he was going to score a dozen goals for us last season. Because I didn’t. Maybe you’re Mystic Meg but I thought he looked pretty ineffectual when he came on for us in the past.
I actually couldn’t understand why we extended his contract as I thought he’d been a bit of a failure in our recruitment policy. Obviously if he goes on to be a £20 million player we’ll look a bit stupid but I just don’t think he’s got the physicality to be a Premiership player. If we’ve got a more pacy, bigger replacement for less money how can that be a bad piece of business? |
“If we’ve got a more pacy, bigger replacement for less money how can that be a bad piece of business?”
Well literally no one can answer this question right now. Because it’s all speculation and guesswork. We’ll only know based on the performance of Kelman and Burrell this season. | | | |
| Kelman:Here We Go on 13:20 - Jul 27 with 952 views | eastside_r |
| Kelman:Here We Go on 13:09 - Jul 27 by 1JD |
He was loaned out because he joined as an 18 year, and is still only 23 even now. Writing him off in his younger years is a fools errand. He has been loaned out to develop, and develop he did.
You draw attention to previous regimes as to why he doesn’t want to stay; but the point is - this is a fabled NEW regime. So why doesn’t he want to stay? New training ground, great facilities, alleged great vision that all players are buying into, new CEO/DOF.
And the fact it’s Charlton is exactly my point. It’s NOT a step up. Thus, it looks even worse that he doesn’t want to stay under the new regime. So, there are multiple ways to view this transfer.
And the idea that this is great business will be placed under immediate scrutiny. Because he is playing in our division this season, and QPR could quickly have egg on their face. Right now, it looks rosy. But time will tell if this is a good deal or not. |
Charlton stating it’s a four year contract. Perhaps something that long we weren’t prepared to offer? |  | | |
| Kelman:Here We Go on 13:25 - Jul 27 with 907 views | Wegerles_Stairs |
| Kelman:Here We Go on 12:14 - Jul 27 by gazza1 |
I just thought that this is Nourry main job & not picking football players Norf.......but maybe it isn't, I don't know.
If I was fortunate enough to get a Fans Forum ticket I would of made reference to his job & the DoF to Nourry and not let him waffle.....sadly, after 60 years of supporting the R's watching them 99% of the time at home and many many away matches, they have decided that I am going on the f'ing reserve list!!!! I was going with a mate who applied for a tcket after me and he got one & I did not....like to know how they decided!!!! [Post edited 27 Jul 12:18]
|
Bound to be a load of plants in there. Someone will ask what the 39 Steps are and get wiped out. | | | |
| Kelman:Here We Go on 13:30 - Jul 27 with 888 views | TK1 |
| Kelman:Here We Go on 13:09 - Jul 27 by nix |
Did you really think he was going to score a dozen goals for us last season. Because I didn’t. Maybe you’re Mystic Meg but I thought he looked pretty ineffectual when he came on for us in the past.
I actually couldn’t understand why we extended his contract as I thought he’d been a bit of a failure in our recruitment policy. Obviously if he goes on to be a £20 million player we’ll look a bit stupid but I just don’t think he’s got the physicality to be a Premiership player. If we’ve got a more pacy, bigger replacement for less money how can that be a bad piece of business? |
I'm not Mystic Meg, no. I saw him play for Orient a couple of times during his first loan and thought he looked a bit tubby, needed two chances to score, that that level was his limit - and that Smyth was much better in that team.
Saw him during his second loan, and he was transformed. Stronger, fitter, great finisher.
So no, not Mystic Meg. But also not in footballer development, part of a huge expensively assembled staff employed to judge who should be QPR's strikers and who decide to replace Lyndon Dykes and Sinclair Armstrong with Zan Celar and nobody else, while sending Kelman out to have a breakout season elsewhere.
Let's hope they have judged this better. As JD1 says, we'll know very quickly. | | | |
| Kelman:Here We Go on 13:41 - Jul 27 with 822 views | NewcastleHoop |
| Kelman:Here We Go on 20:29 - Jul 26 by vanrrrr |
That horse bolted for me watching Brighton Bournemouth etc go from being our pre season warm ups to in a different stratosphere.
Charlton our peer group these days |
I'm skeptical of this point; literally every club bar the Premier League top 6 can point to clubs that have accelerated past them and grumble, because those are the eye-catching stories. But for every successful Brighton, Bournemouth, Brentford, Luton or Huddersfield there's a Reading, Wigan, Bolton, Luton or Huddersfield going the other way. | | | |
| Kelman:Here We Go on 13:56 - Jul 27 with 731 views | francisbowles |
| Kelman:Here We Go on 13:30 - Jul 27 by TK1 |
I'm not Mystic Meg, no. I saw him play for Orient a couple of times during his first loan and thought he looked a bit tubby, needed two chances to score, that that level was his limit - and that Smyth was much better in that team.
Saw him during his second loan, and he was transformed. Stronger, fitter, great finisher.
So no, not Mystic Meg. But also not in footballer development, part of a huge expensively assembled staff employed to judge who should be QPR's strikers and who decide to replace Lyndon Dykes and Sinclair Armstrong with Zan Celar and nobody else, while sending Kelman out to have a breakout season elsewhere.
Let's hope they have judged this better. As JD1 says, we'll know very quickly. |
I would argue the club had a bit of foresight to extend his contract last year and send him on loan. As I have posted elsewhere, the loan surpassed EVERYONE'S expectations, which has fairly radically changed his career options. | | | |
| Kelman:Here We Go on 14:35 - Jul 27 with 585 views | Juzzie |
| Kelman:Here We Go on 13:56 - Jul 27 by francisbowles |
I would argue the club had a bit of foresight to extend his contract last year and send him on loan. As I have posted elsewhere, the loan surpassed EVERYONE'S expectations, which has fairly radically changed his career options. |
Not only changed his career options but meant we got more money compared to if he’d only scored 5 goals. I’m sure he wanted away regardless of how
Many goals he got last season but ending up as the League 1 top scorer really benefited both parties. |  | | |
| Kelman:Here We Go on 14:38 - Jul 27 with 568 views | kensalriser |
Now we know he didn't want to stay there shouldn't really be any futher argument that this was the right decision (except of course there will be for people who ignore facts).
And whatever happens in the future won't change that, not even if he scores 20 goals. Because the only value to us was to sell him now. Otherwise he would have been effectively worthless. |  |
| |
| Kelman:Here We Go on 14:40 - Jul 27 with 560 views | mart_Goblin |
Really hard to judge any strikers performances either playing for us or playing for someone else .
Ultimately, strikers like Kelman and Celar thrive in teams who make chances .
We don’t .
We haven’t really for years . Even under the ‘Beale golden era’ we were scoring bangers rather than loads of well made goals . The bangers dried up and then what ?
Yesterday we played with a ‘false’ 9.
But we could have played with Harry Kane up front , it doesn’t matter.
I can’t remember 1 good chance we carved out for ourselves.
So we can ship out Kelman and Celar and bring in whoever……and yes Burrell might create the occasional chance for himself, but the club method at the moment doesn’t create anywhere near enough for the centre forwards . Until the method has been tweaked/changed /thrown in the bin we will continue to struggle .
If the fans forum questions are not pre vetted next week (it will be a miracle ) then I really hope CN or De Souza are pressed hard on this methodology they appear to be totally devoted too. |  | | |
| Kelman:Here We Go on 14:40 - Jul 27 with 560 views | Northernr |
| Kelman:Here We Go on 14:38 - Jul 27 by kensalriser |
Now we know he didn't want to stay there shouldn't really be any futher argument that this was the right decision (except of course there will be for people who ignore facts).
And whatever happens in the future won't change that, not even if he scores 20 goals. Because the only value to us was to sell him now. Otherwise he would have been effectively worthless. |
Well in the event he does score 20 goals, if we're stuck in a relegation battle there would have been some worth in having somebody that could do that. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
