Teasy

Have to say I really don't feel very proud or particularly happy when we win a game in this league, I expect us to win every game we go into anyway. Each game we win is merely one game closer to being back where I think this club should be.

Nowt, Sir Les is all I'll ever need to know about them

Sir Les, that's all anyone needs to know.

Which is what? That we're getting better results against weaker sides? Yeah what a miraculous turn around. Just because its the managers job doesnt mean you ignore the situation and write them off if its not instantly achieved. So one manager gets 5 points from eight games in a harder division, but with a better squad. Performances weren't exactly good, there seemed to be no new manager "bounce", and the squad's general attitude didn't seem to improve that much, but we had been in free-fall most of the season to be fair. Its pretty hard to show an improvement in form when five of your eight fixtures are Chelsea (h), Liverpool (a), Spuds (a), Villa (a) and Stoke (a). It's pretty hard to get a seriously depleted squad of kids and players who were so awful the previous season that they got relegated to play well enough to get 22 points from nine games. Especially when you've had no money to spend, your club is in the middle of a crisis/takeover, you're not a permanent manager and if the takeover happens could be out of a job, etc, etc, etc. Like I said, it's a toss up between them. Neither are proven good managers, we could do better. To state it implicitly, in case anyone is in any doubt: I am not saying Hughton is the man for the job, I am simply saying that his record is at least comparable to Shearer's, yet no-one thinks he is good enough whereas a lot of people think Shearer is good enough for some reason. That reason is nothing to do with his record as a manager, it is based upon something else entirely. Personally I'm inclined to think just about any manager could do as well as he's done, we simply have far better players then most other teams in this league. Not saying we need to replace Hughton right now obviously. But long term I'd have Shearer over Hughton any day.

Which is what? That we're getting better results against weaker sides? Yeah what a miraculous turn around. Just because its the managers job doesnt mean you ignore the situation and write them off if its not instantly achieved. So one manager gets 5 points from eight games in a harder division, but with a better squad. Performances weren't exactly good, there seemed to be no new manager "bounce", and the squad's general attitude didn't seem to improve that much, but we had been in free-fall most of the season to be fair. Its pretty hard to show an improvement in form when five of your eight fixtures are Chelsea (h), Liverpool (a), Spuds (a), Villa (a) and Stoke (a).

With their name being dragged through the mud all over the press that'll be why West Ham did so poorly last season and couldn't get taken over then. Nobody bought West Ham though. Their holding company went bankrupt, so the only asset the company had (West Ham United) was transferred to the companies principle creditor. Being an attractive proposition really didn't come into it..

Its ok, any minute Sillius Soddus will update us with the significant news that's breaking today.

Nah no more bets like, I only put it on because at the time Villa weren't doing too well and it was a great price (most places had him at 20 to 1).

Hope to god he isn't sacked, I've still got a bet of £10 on O'neil at 40 to 1.

Who says we're currently £20m into the overdraft anyway?

Yet they couldn't beat us at their own ground before they lost their best player. We've probably had the hardest start out of any of the top three, especially with a few key players injured, but we're still right up their only a point off WBA, its stupidly early to claim that we can't win the league.

Blackpool? Peterborough? Lincoln! Against Peterborough we basically played a second team. Lincoln?

The club was happy to continue to pay Robson, honouring his contract, until he got a new job elsewhere. That wasn't enough for him though, he wanted to be able to get another job (possibly for a rival) and carry on leeching supporter's money off us as well as getting paid for managing another club. So he dragged the club through an expensive court case. It was futile in end for him anyway, as noone wanted him after the out of control dressing room he left at SJP which even the best manager in the world would have found difficult to turn around, and ultimately led to our relegation last season. Ok first of all he didn't get a new job until after his contract with Newcastle would have ended despite being offered jobs in that time. Secondly if someone with a contract is sacked he has to be paid in full for the remaining time of that contract. Getting another job has absolutely no baring on that what so ever.

Please, no. Why? Watch the highlights of their latest match. Looks unfit and disinterested. I'm not surprised he was disinterested, he was about to leave. Doesn't mean he wouldn't be interested somewhere else.

Yeah they really sneaked him out the back door like I forgot that County have the power to make players disappear without anyone knowing with the click of Erriksons fingers .. They had two options, hang on to him while he pisses and moans in the press before finally leaving anyway. Or let him go straight away with no fuss, considering all we've heard is "Campbell has left the club by mutual consent" then yes he's gone quietly.

I'm not that surprised they let him go. Most of the reason they wanted him was as a big name to elevate the club (same thing as with Errikson). If he'd started talking about how disappointed he was ect it would have damaged the club so its best to quietly get rid.

What? I haven't even mentioned Ashley in any of my post in this thread

Why didn't we just loan him off them then? Wouldn't he have been able to play if that was the case. Yeah but it seems as though there has been a huge falling out, a loan deal would have been good but to late for that to happen now., Also if the wages the papers recon he was getting at Notts County are true it would have been impossible to do a loan deal. No way are we going to pay him £40k a week and no way are County going to pay half or more of his wages while he's not playing for them when instead they could just end his contract and pay nothing.

Robson was sacked and, as far as I remember, simply wanted the money owed to him for the rest of his contract. Keegan walked out and is suing for more then his contract was even worth.

He can sign for us, just wouldn't be able to play in a competitive match.

true about not being able to afford it. but he should get what he's due right or wrong. He should, though it shouldn't be anything near the silly numbers he's suing for. He can't expect the entire contract even if there was a good reason considering he did walk out and there's no way the three years he had left were worth £10m anyway. Hopefully he walks away with £3m and the ability to tell whoever he wants what happened, I'd be happy with that.

Not bothered at all about this, in fact I wish we'd left the kids on against Huddesfield in the last round and went out then.

Not sure Lovenkrands is good enough for anything other then backup on the Premiership and I'd also have big question marks over Simpson. Barton's been shit so far and I'd rather have a more creative player in the middle with Guthrie. Colo is question mark despite his good performances as is Jonas. However if we sell them we can hopefully get enough money from those transfers to replace them so it wouldn't be included in the £30m or so, so I've just left them in.

Five good players added to our current squad (minus Geremi and Butt) would make us a better side then last year unless we buy utter crocks, and I've little doubt we'd have stayed up last year with any half decent manager for the whole season. Harper New, Taylor, Colo, Enrique New, Guthrie, New, Jonas New New We may even end up selling one or two and replacing them with the money we bring in, like Colo or possibly Jonas. Either way we'd have the money necessary IMO. I bet if we look at the average expenditure of promoted teams that have stayed up over the last few years it'll be nowhere near £30m.

. . and what would be the point of him buying it anyway, he couldn't afford to run it. The BEST we could hope for with him, it seems (which would be 'hopeless', but still better than right now actually) would be 'mid-table Premier League nothingness', like we used to think of Villa, Everton, Spurs, Man City & co. Still, no matter who (if anyone) buys the club, it is difficult to imagine us ever competing 'season in season out' for the Premier League Title - which was always the Sir John Hall aim, and is always where a club with such huge support and resources (income) such as us, should always be. If the club generates such huge income (and it does) then why does the owner need to "afford" to run the club? Fantasty Football style investment like Man City isn't the only way to success. This club brings in enough money for a good manager to be successful given time. For the likes of Everton and Villa its necessary to have a rich and generous owner to be successful, they've really got no other option. Obviously it would be nice for us to have one but its not a necessity. Depends how long you want to wait for that "success" and what level of success you're after. If we want anything in the short to medium-term then we're going to need someone who can use their own money for a while until the club's been well and truly sorted out. Years of ineffective and profligate spending have left us in a position where we are making huge losses, have a large amount of debt, and, most importantly, nothing to show for it. To turn that situation around and make progress on the pitch is going to require a lot of investment on the behalf of any new owner. Anyone who comes in without serious financial backing is going to be caught in a Catch-22 situation. We were making big losses, but IF we get back into the Premiership next season we'd no longer be losing money, we'd be making money, mostly due to the massive drop in our wage bill. Once Geremi and Butt have been released in July our wage bill will be down to less then half what it was last season (in the mid to low 30's). Our large debt is a £100m loan from the owner with no interest (was £9m per year) and there's no chance any new owner would accept the full debt anyway (no'one will pay £100m plus £100m debt for the club). I think that "IF" needs to be a bit bigger to be honest, also there's no way that the current squad could survive in the Premiership, so to do that would require us to pay out on transfer fees and increase the wage bill. Also, like I said, "success" is a relative term and I can't imagine that many fans would put up with scrabbling around in the lower reaches of the Premiership or being a yo-yo club given recent events. Can you? Well that's the whole point of this discussion though isn't it? Wether Moat could afford to keep us in the Premiership if we get back up and push us on. What I'm saying is he won't need his own money to get new players and add to the wage bill because our costs would be so much lower then our revenue that we'd make a large profit (around £30m). That money would allow us to bring in new players, and if we need a big extra a small bank loan would be easy to come by given we'd be a Premiership club with such a large revenue. Are you telling me that £30m+ is not enough to keep us in the Premiership the first season we get back up? Obviously the season after we'll generate more cash and can use that to push on. As long as we don't do a Shepherd and take on a top 4 wage bill when we're still mid table and sack a manager every year at a cost of £6m plus we'll always have money to spend ourselves and plenty of cash to pay interest on any loans we may need. If I'd known it's that easy, I'd have put in a bid myself. Seriously though, we will be in a much better financial position if we get promoted this season, you're right. Ashley would have basically taken the hit for Shepherd's mismanagement and we'd probably end up having screwed him over more than the other way around. The club might well be in the position to make a profit, but we all know it's not as simple as that, and no, I'm not sure that £30m is enough to keep us in the Premiership if it's supposed to cover fees and wages and everything else. Obviously running the club isn't easy but thats down to decision making rather then cash. That's why I've always said that what we should be concerned about with Moat is not his money but whether he's got the ability to make the correct decisions at the club. He has no experience outside of being a fan. IMO £30m plus a small loan of £10m would be more then enough to keep us up.