Harriman leaves

Michael Harriman joins wycombe for undisclosed fee, shame i'd like to see what he could offer the 1st team & can't be any worst than what we got, rave reviews about him from gareth but bang goes our give youth a chance.

 

Was he ever really given a chance? They must not have rated him at all and, if so, why did they keep him on the books for so long?

 

I have to say from what I saw of him against Gillingham last season he was not 1st team material. League Two is probably his level, good luck to him and I hope he does well for them...

 

The same will be said when Doughty, Sutherland, Lumley and Furlong all go. Might as well release them now. I never see the point in keeping players who are over 20 and have no chance of making it in the first team regularly.

 

He's better than Perch. I'll leave it at that.

Looked perfectly fine when he had a chance. Didn't get many chances. Not a name so he's let go. Typical QPR.

 

The facts are that the youth team players are just not good enough. It's widely reported by those that see these players play and recognise the gap.

When I take my 'magic hat' rose-tinted specs off, I recognise that Steve Gallen for all his gallant and commendable efforts over the past 18 years evidently has not influenced this situation sufficiently to make a change to the conclusion of many a youth team player.

As such, either the raw material coming in, or the coaching going on is the root cause. In either case, this should have been addressed by Mr Gallen. And now becomes the responsibility of Chris Ramsey as new Technical Director.

 

Wycombe fans can't believe their luck. All the youth players who have had brief appearances the last couple of years have looked like capable squad players who could develop if the club had the patience and will to develop them properly. Harriman wasn't even a youth player any more- just a better, cheaper, younger alternative to Perch and Onuoha. We currently have an injured and **** RB, a CB out of position, a perfectly good, young RB out on loan and a better one sold for peanuts. It's a shambles.

 

I disagree that it's a shambles.

On face value, when you present the facts as you do, I do accept that it questions the judgement of those who deem it acceptable to sanction the transfer out of Michael Harriman.

We have to however trust that this decision has been taken on the basis of there being very little opportunity for Michael Harriman to develop into the player that is required in the future; and that his present skill is just not up to the required standard at present.

Rather than be outraged, I welcome the decisiveness as a refreshing change to the procrastination of the past where players have been lurking in the background neither breaking through, nor moving on.

It's win-win. This conclusion allows both the player and the club to progress.

 

I'm trying not to post on QPR threads, but Harriman may be exactly the sort of player we need at the level we will be playing at in the future. In the present if Perch is still injured I think we have precisely zero natural right backs fit to play, and having seen him play Perch isn't a natural right back either. So we are signing an Italian journeyman aged 29. For the future.

Watford is spot on, it's a shambles.

 

sb_73 - I think to describe it as 'a shambles' is a slight over-reaction.

If this fellow was any good, he'd have been banging on the door of the first team dressing room months ago.

The club is going through transition; and as such, whilst it's a frustration, this is entirely normal.

All clubs go through this from EPL to Sunday League.

 

I half agree, and I half disagree. All we can do is judge on what we saw in, essentially, a nothing PL match against a debuting Jordan Ibe, and pre season fixtures. Harriman is 23 now, and for the sake of his own career I imagine a lot of this is his choice too. He's playing regularly in L2, and could make the step up to L1. All I will say is, what former youth team player that we let go after he's played a first team game has come back and bit us in the arse? I can't help but feel this is the best solution for all parties.

 

I've not been very clear, and Sku I admire your relentless positivity, I have no idea whether Harriman is good enough for a team which is in the PL or Championship or not, though I'm inclined to believe he isn't. The shambles is the decision making process, or lack of it.

 

At just about any other club I'd agree he'd have been picked if his ability warranted it but I don't trust the decision-makers at QPR at all. I reallly don't buy the argument he wasn't good enough to at the very least be playing now Perch is injured given the ability he's suggested he has on his rare appearances for QPR and the views of Wycombe fans, who think he's excellent at their level. Some of the goals he's scored are those of a player with genuinely very good technique at the very least. What do Perch/Onuoha do at RB that he can't?

 

Watford_R - I'm inclined to query this too, however this approach of playing a more experienced player out of position is rife in football.

A prime example:

Many times over the years Manchester United have played Michael Carrick at centre half rather than blood an inexperienced youth player.

 

Each case is different. United have played quite a few young players at CB recently (McNair and the black guy whose name I've forgotten, for example). Leaving out Harriman to accommodate Perch and/or Onuoha is akin to playing Steve Bruce at full-back while a young Neville sits on the bench.

I really wish Harriman the best of luck. I think he'll go on to have a very good career.

 

It's been years I think since I saw Harriman play so I have no real idea how good he is or isn't. But he has been around years and as successive Managers have had so little use for him, my guess is that he's not good enough. Surely they know better than us? If they were all correct I agree with Sku, a decision has been made that looks best for both parties. Good to make these calls, as we did last summer, which coupled with Hall's extension makes it a good day.

 

How much money and time has been wasted on trying to progress youth players for QPR over the years
And why do we bother

 

Why do we spend vast sums of money on players that have been developed elsewhere?

 

Because they are better than what we've got, what we've scouted and what we've developed.

We're not alone either. Just look at Manchester City and Chelsea. The only difference is the height of the bar.

Part of the problem might be with those teams I have just mentioned and others. Vacuuming up the cream of talented youngsters - many of whom have a very slim chance of actually breaking through.

No doubt that leaves a residual pool of players from which all other teams are scouting. Statistically there is a lower chance of a team like QPR developing from within when there's a scarcity of remaining skilled young players. The two exceptions to this theory being Raheem Stirling and Dean Parrott.

 

Are they better? Sometimes yes, sometimes, when we're replacing Harriman with a Watford reject six years older, probably not.