Teasy

Why do some people come out with such random nonsense?

Surely you can be more specific then that..

Its not that simple though. Stoke had a Championship team on paper and finished 12th. It comes down to good management and team spirit. Two things we didn't have last year and Stoke did. Now we have and we also have the quality, which is why we look like running away with the league. Say there are 150 players in this classification. Then not all of them can play for the 3 teams that get relegated. I take your point about management but that wasnt what i was talking about. I was talking about the gulf in class in the leagues and how some players can therefore fall between the two. But we aren't one of those sides who are full of players too good for the championship but not good enough for the prem. Nolan, Smith, Jonas, Barton, Harper, Guthrie, Taylor and Enrique are proven Premiership players, who we are spoilt and blessed to have in this league. Butt and Geremi are proven but have arguably seen better days. The only players i'd maybe put in that category are Ameobi and Ryan Taylor. Ameobi clearly a class apart in this division but won't get 20 goals in the Premiership. Having said that Taylor still did well for Wigan and Ameobi would probably do well for someone like Burnley or Bolton. So no i don't think we've actually got any players who aren't good enough for the Premiership. Fair enough but if you think we have the nucleus of a side already that will be able to keep in us in the premiership if we get promoted then we disagree. I think Guthrie can improve, Barton is good enough, Jonas should be but is lacking in ccutting edge, Nolan is ok but would not provide the strongest link in a prem team and Smith the same. Enrique is a great defender but gives the ball away even at this level too many times. You're also essentially denying that the gulf in class between the leagues exists. This gulf logically creates this class of player, since individual ability isnt determined by TV revenue but club quality unfortunately is in the long-run. The gap is mostly between the top half and the bottom half of the Premiership and then between the big 4 and the rest. The Championship is a poor division in terms of quality which is why teams coming up need to strengthen. The likes of Bolton, Blackburn, Portsmouth, Hull and last seasons promoted sides etc are in my opinion inferior to what we have. Allardyce kept blackburn up through good management and grinding out results, while we had to put up with the farce with Keegan, JFK and then try and rely on a guy with no coaching experience to get us out of trouble. If we go up with this squad then we clearly would need to add to it and will do. The main thing is a realiable Premiership goalscorer. Had Michael owen done what he was paid for, then we wouldn't have been in any trouble. I disagree that Allardyce kept Blackburn up with good management, he stumbled upon a set of players which fit his long ball blueprint. if he'd been a good manager he'd have made better use of the players he had at Newcastle rather than trying to play the same brand of football with players who weren't suited to it. He still wouldn't have relegated us though. Yeah he would.

Toon Amy, go and have a look at the last set of accounts if you're wondering where the money has gone.

How many players have Portsmouth sold now?

Its his mission to unsettle as many players as possible and bankrupt as many clubs as possible. He destroyed Portsmouth and now its the Spuds turn. I for one fully support him in this mission

Could mean that players will be leaving. Would love it to be Butt, Geremi Would not like it to be it to be Nolan, Smith Would hate it to be Guthrie, Barton If we could land Gibson I actually wouldn't mind Nolan leaving along with Butt. Smith and Gibson would be a really good partnership in midfield and Barton could then play in the more advanced position Nolan has been played in this season, as he would do a much better job there than Nolan has. So bring in a loan player and get rid of 2 players we own from the thread bare squad You mention the fact we own them two as if its a plus point, they're terrible and on massive wages, we should do our best not to own them. Bringing in one good player on very small wages and getting rid of two useless ones on a combined £100,000+ per week would be a very good deal. The squad as a whole is very thin but centre midfield isn't and I'd be very happy to never see Butt or Geremi play for this club again. Nolan, Smith, Guthrie, Barton, Gibson, Vuckic is more then enough for central midfield.

No way will anyone buy him injured, him pulling his hamstring was a blessing in disguise IMO.

What makes you think they're paying all his wages? This way, they get a player and we still pay him to do f*** all, but this time he's not there if we need to throw him on. Obviously they're paying at least a significant portion of his wages, otherwise there's no f***ing point of loaning him out. This is Newcastle United remember. We're probably paying his wages in full and giving them £6m for the burden of taking him for the year.

What use would be a replacement for someone rubbish who doesn't play? We need a striker whether Xisco fucks off or not. you're disagreeing with me there and then agreeing again. what the fuck you're on?? Eh? You're saying this is a shit decision if someone else doesn't come in. And what makes you think that Xisco wasn't going to play a part in this season, before today? we're not exactly blessed with quantity or quality upfront, are we? The fact that he's only played 45mins so far? I know we're not blessed with quantity or quality up front, but Xisco leaving doesn't change that. Maybe that's because shola and caroll are our first choice front 2, no?? Injuries, suspensions or bad form... and we're fucked! Ranger and Nolan also play ahead of him.

What makes you think they're paying all his wages? This way, they get a player and we still pay him to do fuck all, but this time he's not there if we need to throw him on. Obviously they're paying at least a significant portion of his wages, otherwise there's no fucking point of loaning him out.

What use would be a replacement for someone rubbish who doesn't play? We need a striker whether Xisco fucks off or not. you're disagreeing with me there and then agreeing again. what the fuck you're on?? Eh? You're saying this is a shit decision if someone else doesn't come in. And what makes you think that Xisco wasn't going to play a part in this season, before today? we're not exactly blessed with quantity or quality upfront, are we? Because he only gets on if two out of Shola, Carroll, Ranger and Nolan aren't available/need to come off.

That would be because its a paper thin squad that's costing us more then the majority of Premiership squads (£45m or so).

The pecking order seems to go Shola, Carroll, Nolan, Ranger, Xisco. Use some of his rediculously high wages to help bring in a useful player such as Lovenkrands and/or Sturridge and I'll be miuch happier with our forward line.

He's looked useless so far this season, if he's really on £45k a week as is claimed he has to go IMO. Send him out and up any offer to Lovenkrands, he's a far better player then Xisco.

They still did their best to make it sound as negative as possible like, just look at the title, fucking idiotic

Sounds like speculative bullshit to me.

None of those have been particularly good in our shirt. Apart from one of them being absolutely key for us so far this season

What did he say that was right this time?

isn't that saying if it was a level playing field ? edit...also the ammount of money the club has to pay to generate that fan base etc has seen us pay out more and more as a percentage of turnover as wages. No I wouldn't say being run well automatically puts a club on a level playing field with any other. You're second point assumes we actually needed to have such a ludicrous wage will in order for fans to turn up, I don't believe that. To keep some of the fans interested the club certainly had to show ambition, but that doesn't mean we had to put bad players on long exorbitant contracts. Anyway I'm going to stop talking about this now, its way off topic

All he seems to have been trying to say is that the club generates loads of money in comparison to almost any other club in the same kind of situation (whether that's Championship, Premiership or Champions League). His comment may have been put a little bit oddly but his point isn't too far from the truth IMO. You've misunderstood me there, when I said 'by default' I just meant without anything extra being added such as Europe or a rich benefactor. Also while Shepherd achieved his goals by squandering money and running the club disastrously I'm sure the same goals are achievable by spending well and running the club well.

Gerami, Smith, Butt Easy Do you honestly not think that if we could have sold those player we would have by now Who's to say they aren't on the list? Get rid of your decent players first then try shift the s**** on the last few days of the window when people panic buy! I bet the likes of Hull would jump at the chance to sign any 1 of those 3. These players are on high wages and no other sane club would offer anywhere near what they are on, hence no sale! The likes of Geremi and Butt are likely to accept pay cuts if it means getting a 2 or 3 year deal. They only have one year left here and may fear that a year from now nobody will want them. £35,000 a week over two years is more then £50,000 a week over one year after all.

how can it be clearly the case when the game is built on the fact that there isn't a level playing field ? hey if i was given the some training and diet etc from the age of 6 i could be a world class sprinter.......but i'm not and thats the position i have to deal with. He didn't say it was a level playing field, he was just making a point on the amount of money this club brings in by default (without Champions League or outside help) in comparison to other clubs. If the clubs run well we could compete with anyone without outside benefactors.

Its not about covering all those costs but sustaining them. The club couldn't sustain those kind of operating costs, not when the future prospects of the club in terms of revenue was one of less income and that was before relegation... Not denying that the club was running on excessive wages, just know that Ashley will not walk away from this club having been taken for as much as people think he has been, how many players have we sold in the last 2 years compared to those we brought in? Wages now down to 48 Million apparently with last years Sky money, merchandise and gate receipts to be included, add on top of that money from player sales and do you think the deficit will be up or down? The 2009 accounts were forecast to have a reduced loss in comparison to the previous year. But a reduced loss isn't going to make anyone money. The Sky money, merchandise and gate receipts you mention will be included in the 2009 accounts, as will the £72m wage bill which wasn't reduced until recently. Also remember that wages are not the clubs only costs. The wages are now £48m (perhaps even slightly lower) but the TV money will now be £14m (parachute payment) instead of £35m. Foreign TV money will now be £0 instead of £8m (?), merchandise will be lower as well. Costs have dropped but earnings will have dropped even more. Anyway I'm breaking my promise of not getting into the financial stuff tonight so I'm going to stop now.

Fees won't have been paid upfront and most of cash received will have been spent paying wages. The club pays player wages (among other things) using the overdraft. Origanally there was no overdraft, he has creamed his original buy money out of the overdraft, he put 134 Million to buy the club and apparently another 100 in to clear debt, we where in Prem for a year, netting him about 40-50 Mill, Parachute payment this year (about 15-20 Mill?) about 60-70 Million in transfer money and about 20 mill in outgoing transfers. Club turnover and merchandies sales cover the players wages so he is laughing all the way to the bank. Only this year will the high earner eat into his club profits, that why we have seen £0 investment on any front (manager and players) I don't mean to take the piss at all mate, but you're about as wrong as you can be there. I'm not going to get into this financial stuff again if I can help it, do a search on the forum for NUFC finances. Just to give you an idea, if you think Ashley has made any money from the club simply because NUFC have brought lots of money in you're completely forgetting to consider the outgoings of the club, not least the £72m per year wage bill we had in the Premiership. We did have a high wage bill but you seriously think that merchandise, tv rights and gate reciepts didn't cover that? Don't make me laugh. If the club was that much in the shit Ashley would be willing to sell for £1 and there wouldnt be any takers, get real, football clubs make a fortune, where we not 7th in the richest clubs list last year? Are you being serious? Man you need to research these things before talking like that, you're going to end up looking like a tool otherwise. The club accounts are freely available, most of the info you need from the last set are available on this forum and a quick guide is listed here: http://www.nufc-finances.org.uk/ In total the club brought in £99m (that's total revenue, so it includes merchandise, TV money, sponsorship and everything else the club made money from) and sent out £120m (£129m if you look at actual cash flow). The year before that was similar, the club has lost about £50m-£60m in the last two seasons.