Speculation Konchesky to QPR

Log in to stop seeing adverts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Is Konchesky a hate figure? I think people just say he isn't very good because, well, because he isn't very good. He is slow getting back from forward positions (from which he just smacks it at the first man, it seems) and lets too many crosses by him even when he is in position. I think we could do better for less. I certainly don't 'hate' him. Or even dislike him. I just don't rate him.

Given that it looks as though we'll be playing with wing backs I'd be inclined to make Schlupp first choice on the left side. Not his favourite position of course but he doesn't like anywhere near first choice up front (a real shame after he ended the season encouragingly there) and has attributes which would make him a threat in that position. Quick and skillful enough to worry full backs and fast enough to make it back and defend from wide positions. He can tackle, too. Needs to work on his distribution although that's a consistency thing rather than an inability to do it.
 
Last edited:
M17TT C said:
So he should be a hate figure for earning more than he is worth even though he isn't a bad player?

As I said, don't hate him for it as anyone would have accepted the contract but aim that at the people that decided to give it to him.
Click to expand...

Who hates him?!
 
Sell 'em, sell 'em all

That's the recipe for success, right there

Let's get 'em all out the door, yeeeeah gerrintoem
 
I for one think losing Konchesky would leave a hole in our squad. As has been said, why bring in Bakayogo so we have left-back cover only to then be in the position of having no left-back cover? And before anyone says it, Schlupp is not a left-back.
 
londonfox said:
I for one think losing Konchesky would leave a hole in our squad. As has been said, why bring in Bakayogo so we have left-back cover only to then be in the position of having no left-back cover? And before anyone says it, Schlupp is not a left-back.
Click to expand...

He could easily play wing back though. He isn't going to get a go up front.
 
I don't think Konchesky is awful, but he was probably the weakest link in our defence last season and he's on big wages. If we could get rid - especially for a fee - then this would free up funds hopefully to get someone cheaper in of least equal ability... And maybe even get another in.
 
Graz said:
I don't think Konchesky is awful, but he was probably the weakest link in our defence last season and he's on big wages. If we could get rid - especially for a fee - then this would free up funds hopefully to get someone cheaper in of least equal ability... And maybe even get another in.
Click to expand...

Not sure I would say he was the weakest link as I do think he is more than capable at this level. We had one of the best goals against totals last season so he can't have been that bad as he played in most of our games.

Possibly pushing his limits as a wing-back for a full season though and no one can argue with your last sentence imo but we need someone else lined up straight away if he was to go as our other options as pretty much gambles currently.
 
I think he is easily our worst defender and if getting rid of him opens the budget elsewhere I'd be delighted. He's a liability due to his lack of pace and doesn't offer enough as a forward threat to account for it.

Or maybe I hate him because he's rich and that? Yeah that sounds plausible.
 
Konchesky is a very solid and capable left back for a side with promotion aspirations. If QPR recruit him, it will indicate which of our teams are serious about promotion.

That said, I also agree that if we're going to persist with wing backs, this won't suit Konchesky in terms of fitness and energy.

Overall, taking another experienced pro out of the squad and replacing him with (potentially) a couple more Premier League kids, is highly unlikely to result in what we need more than anything right now, greater consistency.
 
Miles Away said:
I think he is easily our worst defender and if getting rid of him opens the budget elsewhere I'd be delighted. He's a liability due to his lack of pace and doesn't offer enough as a forward threat to account for it.
Click to expand...

What this chap said.
 
Be careful what one wishes for; there seems to be an assumption that if PK is transferred this allows for a free transfer player with experience to come in. For a start nobody knows if the board will allow a cheaper replacement to come in bearing in mind FFP. The £28m loss that has to be reduced to £8m has barely been scratched - the shipping out of Beckford and now (possibly) PK would still leave the club with huge prospective losses massively over the FFP allowable threshold.
They may be able to wangle a loan player instead but as others have said - an inexperienced loan player is not what we need. Some point to PK being a weak link but I saw several games both live and on Sky where the guy who scored was marked by a young inexperienced loanee - Michael Keane. Inexperience was costly.
If PK goes I would like to see an experienced player in his mid to late 20's signed - but as stated above not sure if the board & FFP would allow this & we'd have to go for a young loanee instead. By the way, I'll just throw in a point I've made elsewhere that is related if you stick with it... The Thais can help with FFP this year by not charging their reported £4m-£5m 'consultancy' fees and reducing their interest charges to well below the 8% the club pays thm for their loans. If the owners do those two things they alone might help the club get a quality acquisition in much more than getting PK on or off the pay roll.
 
Last edited:
consty said:
The Thais can help with FFP this year by not charging their reported £4m-£5m 'consultancy' fees and reducing their interest charges to well below the 8% the club pays thm for their loans.
Click to expand...

This.

Although what we'd do without their paid-for consultancy expertise I simply don't know.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Log in to stop seeing adverts

P Pld Pts
1Liverpool1128
2Manchester C  1123
3Chelsea1119
4Arsenal1119
5Nottm F1119
6Brighton1119
7Fulham1118
8Newcastle1118
9Aston Villa1118
10Tottenham 1116
11Brentford1116
12Bournemouth1115
13Manchester U1115
14West Ham1112
15Leicester1110
16Everton1110
17Ipswich118
18Palace117
19Wolves116
20Southampton114

Latest posts

Back
Top