All Activity

I'd happoly see the seahorses gone. We don't need any Magpies either tbh - ateast not 2. I'd go with a bigger black and white badge and castle with a Magpie on the middle. Honestly I wouldn't mind a Juventus style rebrand.

Worked fine for Forest with Selz?

Where do you draw the line for necessary cuts though? As I mentioned above, we're £1b in debt. The debt stands at 1.7x our annual revenue. Maybe a poor comparison, but the average UK wage is £37,500. Imagine someone earning that being £60,000+ in debt. You would be licking the back of cling film to try and save money.

Agree and understood. But how much was your revenue when they bought the club and how much is it now ? What is your net transfer spending during that period? I'm not suggesting the glazer are good owners but please don't compare to Ashley as the only metric which your team wins or loses depending on how you look at it is the debt. As for mike Ashley he gutted the club and left behind nothing but an empty shell.

The Glazers and Ashley are both terrible football owners but in different ways. Ashley treated Newcastle as a subsidiary of Sports Direct and through mismanagement, hiring cronies and a lack of investment, he allowed the club to turn into a lower half PL team that regularly fights relegation and one has commercial revenues that are a fraction of previously comparable rivals. The Glazers took ownership of Man united through a leveraged buyout, putting the club into debt that is effectively secured on their future revenues. As an ownership group they have benefitted significantly (into the billions) from a combination of dividend payments, share sales and management contracts. They have overseen chronic financial mismanagement of the club that is only partly mitigated by their impressive commercial revenues, which are a function of man united's legacy rather than anything the Glazers have proactively done. Of course Man U have won trophies under the Glazer's tenure but their starting point was taking over one of the biggest clubs in the world 20 years ago.

Would people be upset with some Saudi green?

Not sure cutting the ex players relatively small support fund was a necessary cut mate in all honesty. That seemed ridiculously punitive and miserly. Didn’t Neville even have him for that in that interview?

The secret with Dan Burn is that he looks like our weakest player but he is far from it. Eddie Howe knew what he wanted doing when he played him at left back. Opposition managers would target him not realising that he is strong, deceptively quick and with long legs. Wingers could not find a way around him and meanwhile we were scoring at the other end. Unfortunately it’s no longer a secret within the game (see England call up) but seems to be unrecognised by some on here.

We're over £1b in debt due to their buyout. We've spent £1b in interest payments due to their buyout. They've still taken £200m out of the club in dividend payments. You're confusing the financial might of our club with the owners pockets. We can spend a lot every season because of global appeal and revenue allows it, but The Glazers have never put a single penny of their own money into the club, and instead have bled it dry. Mike Ashley never did that. Even when he loaned the club money, it was interest free. The Ashley era and The Glazer era can't be compared finance wise, you're right. Ashley was bad, but The Glazers are infinitely worse.

I was thinking something like that, but in the shape of the shield in our current crest.

All three of which will be totally and utterly dismantled in both their back yards and fortress St. James' when they come up against Newcastle United.

Quite crazy to think that two teams as bad as Tottenham and Man Utd are one win away from playing in the CL and a team as bad as Sunderland are a win away from the PL.

Totally get what you're saying but nothing in my lifetime (37) suggests that they will ever be able to consistently been seen as a decent football club. They've had 3x top10 finishes (in the top flight) since the 50s, I think. All of which have been since the turn of the century. They've changed their approach and are essentially (trying to be) a poundland Brighton, but for me their absolute ceiling over the next decade is a yo-yo club. That's not me being biased either - they're a much bigger club than plenty teams in the Premier League now, but the likes of Wolves/Everton/other teams that generally struggle for large parts of the season will eat them alive. I naturally dislike the people of sunderland and that stain of a city, but I've some very good friends and family members who support them. Can't say I'm happy for them but I feel nothing either way. If they go up, financially it will obviously help them but in the grand scheme of things, they're lightyears away from being an established top-flight club. It says more about the state of football than them in fairness, but a long old season awaits either of the teams in the final. There's also no guarantee whatsoever they'd bounce straight back up. I'd seriously be willing to bet my mortgage on them going back down. Any investor would see it as an opportunity to make a quick buck rather than be in it for the long haul. The best bet would be that the hang onto our coat tails when trying to attract players but they never would because of the animosity - we all know they hate the mags more than they love their own team. What's the way to approach it anyway? From what I gather they're pretty conservative, which will definitely help. Sell your youngsters to get a bit of a kitty? Well their youngsters are their better players, so then they're weaker immediately. Ipswich spent well north of £100m and they haven't laid a glove really. The gap is far too big and the playoff winner generally is at a disadvantage immediately. The club & 'city' (joke in itself btw) will always be known as 'the one that's near Newcastle'.

Nope. Just don't want a 24 y/o GK from a midtable Ligue 1 team. It's a Spurs signing. Could obviously be incredibly wrong.

Have watched a fair bit of the Champo this season, for my sins My take on the runners and riders: Leeds – Clearly a cut above in the Champo; might survive in the PL, but it’ll be very tough Burnley – Haven't seen much of them, but solid defensively at this level, which potentially gives them a platform to build on. Highly likely they'll get relegated Sheff Utd – Inconsistent; might have whalloped Bristol in the semis but nailed on to go straight back down if promoted Makems – Looked really good early season but dogshit for last few months; would get annihilated most weeks in the PL Coventry – Woeful, can create chances at this level but finishing was dogshit. Similar standard to the Makems Bristol City – Rancid

Surely if you care enough to hate them you’d want them to go up? They’d get absolutely smashed in the PL with that squad and the limited investment they’d be capable of.

Quite sad how unhealthy their crowd looked when the camera scanned around.

Or, even better, just keep the current one. These are fucking lifting.

Give it a few months

How about a cone sir?

You seen a lot of Angers games?

Forget ten days ago, just over 10 hours ago they were calling for him to be sacked.

Exactly a ridiculous comparison to even suggest Truth is Man U do and will continue to spunk money on players whos characters are all wrong. Then they get a new manager every couple of years as the last one becomes a scapegoat. Now if you want to make a comparison about badly run clubs including the Ashley era and Manure right now I can see a little bit to agree on but NEVER finances

Assumed the Trafford deal was basically ready to go.