Teasy

Howay, get some perspective for fuck sake, West Broms situation is bleak, ours is just worrying. Actually the results today were quite good for us. Another crushing loss for Blackburn and West Brom, Man City lose and the Spuds are playing Manure at 17:30. The only result that wasn't good for us was Sunderland, but I could never see West Brom beating them anyway. Nobody's going to pull away from us and plenty of teams around us are in freefall (West Ham, Man City ect). Like I said, worrying but nowhere near bleak.

Remove the word instead and I'd agree.

Bassong, I like him but Upson's a better player and Bassong has plenty of time on his side to become a top player for us in the future (that's not to say he shouldn't have the chance to play ahead of Colo or Upson if he deserves it of course). At the end of the day I don't think we should be going for backup to Colo or Bassong, its much better to buy someone as good or better and have three very good central defenders and Taylor at the club.

Very good defender, I'd be impressed if we bought him in given our current situation. He's 29 like and £7.5 million isn't peanuts but I think he'd be worth it.

That guy's pretty much a pauper compared to Ashley, so if people weren't happy with what he was putting in, then they're in for a big disappointment as he couldn't even afford to match that even if he wanted to. Means nothing, firstly he's obviously not trying to buy the club on his own. Secondly Ashley had/has billions yet how much was spent on players?, nowt.. If there's anything we all should have learned from his time here its that the amount of money the owner has isn't what's really important if he's unwilling to spend it. A millionaire who's willing to invest his money is far better then a billionaire who isn't. Obviously exceptions are to be made when the entirety of his personal fortune would barely fund two years worth of transfers. Obviously, but like I said he's not trying to buy the club himself. Though to be honest even if he spend half his money on players he'd still have spent £20 million more then Ashley If he gets to be termed the "head" of the consortium with 40m in his pocket, I doubt the people he's running with are swimming in money either. I know it's a bit more complicated than that, but this really doesn't seem like a good proposition. Wasn't Quinn termed the head of the Sunderland consortium?, how much money does he have? I'm not exactly excited by the prospect either though to be honest.

That guy's pretty much a pauper compared to Ashley, so if people weren't happy with what he was putting in, then they're in for a big disappointment as he couldn't even afford to match that even if he wanted to. Means nothing, firstly he's obviously not trying to buy the club on his own. Secondly Ashley had/has billions yet how much was spent on players?, nowt.. If there's anything we all should have learned from his time here its that the amount of money the owner has isn't what's really important if he's unwilling to spend it. A millionaire who's willing to invest his money is far better then a billionaire who isn't. Obviously exceptions are to be made when the entirety of his personal fortune would barely fund two years worth of transfers. Obviously, but like I said he's not trying to buy the club himself. Though to be honest even if he spend half his money on players he'd still have spent £20 million more then Ashley Didn't Ashley put £9 million of his own money in under Allardyce? I count £6.5 million, but only £3.5 million total since he arrived. I'll be generous to him and actually say that was his £3.5 million which makes it £16.5 million more the pauper would have spent in my little hypothetical.

That guy's pretty much a pauper compared to Ashley, so if people weren't happy with what he was putting in, then they're in for a big disappointment as he couldn't even afford to match that even if he wanted to. Means nothing, firstly he's obviously not trying to buy the club on his own. Secondly Ashley had/has billions yet how much was spent on players?, nowt.. If there's anything we all should have learned from his time here its that the amount of money the owner has isn't what's really important if he's unwilling to spend it. A millionaire who's willing to invest his money is far better then a billionaire who isn't. Obviously exceptions are to be made when the entirety of his personal fortune would barely fund two years worth of transfers. Obviously, but like I said he's not trying to buy the club himself. Though to be honest even if he spend half his money on players he'd still have spent £20 million more then Ashley

That guy's pretty much a pauper compared to Ashley, so if people weren't happy with what he was putting in, then they're in for a big disappointment as he couldn't even afford to match that even if he wanted to. Means nothing, firstly he's obviously not trying to buy the club on his own. Secondly Ashley had/has billions yet how much was spent on players?, nowt.. If there's anything we all should have learned from his time here its that the amount of money the owner has isn't what's really important if he's unwilling to spend it. A millionaire who's willing to invest his money is far better then a billionaire who isn't.

I wasn't saying we can't get relegated or we aren't in some trouble. I was just confused by the random nature of the post.

What? Wait and see... Wait and see what?

What?

Not really if you take into account the goals he scored got us higher league placings meaning more cash, helped us get into Europe, saved us millions from us not going down, got us in the next round of cups, I am sure I could think of more things but I am heading out now. Laters.... He's still costing that though, he's not alone in helping the team, many players can do that and they won't usually cost £363,000 per game.

He is a total gimp like

The Sun are reporting that Bruce wants to try to sign Butt in the summer and apparently it would be "a hammer blow" to us How fucking out of touch are todays press?

since when? What? When has Viduka been great with the ball at his feet? Since I first saw him play for Celtic until now. He wont be a starter for the team anymore, as I think his latest knock career threating if reports are believed will have taken the edge off him & he is not young enough to change his game now. Like Craig Moore he will go from PL with Newcastle to the Oz league. To be honest, I don't think he's had any physical edge for years, its all upstairs so I don't see him needed to change his game. I think he may be getting judged too quickly and he could be important for us for the rest of the season. Obviously I agree we still can't renew his contract though, because he simply doesn't play enough. Unless its basically pay per play as I've said before. He wasnt Teddy Sheringham man, he used to have a nice burst of power. Of course he will have role to play we have so few players I am guessing we have not seen the last of Cacapa either. Maybe he had a good burst of power 3 years ago..

since when? What? When has Viduka been great with the ball at his feet? Since I first saw him play for Celtic until now. He wont be a starter for the team anymore, as I think his latest knock career threating if reports are believed will have taken the edge off him & he is not young enough to change his game now. Like Craig Moore he will go from PL with Newcastle to the Oz league. To be honest, I don't think he's had any physical edge for years, its all upstairs so I don't see him needed to change his game. I think he may be getting judged too quickly and he could be important for us for the rest of the season. Obviously I agree we still can't renew his contract though, because he simply doesn't play enough. Unless its basically pay per play as I've said before.

IMO one striker of the right quality would replace both Viduka and Ameobi. Edgar wouldn't need replacing because he's anonymous while Cacapa needs to be replaced anyway, whether we release him or not, he's just not good enough. So I'd say that if we release nobody we need 3 to 4 players, and if we release all but Owen and Harper we meed 5 to 6 players.

A nine is just sooo over the top!

That's crazy. When he's coming back from injury he can be hit and miss, but once he's got his sharpness he's a fantastic finisher.

Eh? Why not if he only gets paid when he plays? He can't hide/pretend not to be fit because he won't be paid. Also if he's s*** in games he doesn't get picked and so also won't get paid. Where's the downside here? The downside is he is too old, too fat and too crap. It would be much more worthwhile getting in someone who is actually interested in football. We don't need his stinking unprofessional behaviour around the place any longer. Again none of that is a downside if he's only paid when/if he plays as he won't play often if he's shit. By the way I disagree with you on Viduka, he's old and slow but he's quality on the ball when fit.

So do I, but that's the only way I'd take him, either that or an extremely low wage with a large pay per play bonus.

Eh? Why not if he only gets paid when he plays? He can't hide/pretend not to be fit because he won't be paid. Also if he's shit in games he doesn't get picked and so also won't get paid. Where's the downside here?

Parachute payments are £11 million, that's in comparison to the £39.2 million we took from Premiership Television/Prize money last season. As for gates, not only will they drop but ticket prices will have to drop too, further reducing revenue. In 2006-2007 our total revenue was in the region of £87 million, now it should he closer to £100 million. That revenue would half at best if we were relegated IMO, and I'm taking parachute payments into account there. Even if we could half our wage bill we'd then be coming out with around £18 million after paying the wage bill. As opposed to £35 million at the moment, so we wouldn't be better off, and that's if we magically managed to half our wage bill, which we couldn't, certainly not for the first season or two. After two seasons we'd lose the £11 million from parachute payments and unless we'd managed to more then half our wage bill we'd then be spending at nearly 90% of revenue on wages. Where is the £200 million or so coming from to give Ashley his money back? Relegation would be an absolute disaster, for us and for Ashley. His asset would be worth half what he paid for it at best and if we didn't get back up quick we'd be a lot worse of then we are at the moment, even with our wages cut to 1/3 of what they are now. For a Championship club our revenue would be brilliant, but our outgoings would also be massive, and that's not something you can change in a year or two, or even a few years. If Ashley wants to make a profit every year then its much better to make sure we stay in the Premiership this year and then let the likes of Viduka and Owen go in the summer, replacing them with players on much lower wages. In the Premiership the revenues are so massive in comparison to the Championship that margins can be much higher. All he has to do is drop our insane wage bill down to the level of a mid table Premiership side and he'd be in the money every year. It would still take him 10 years to make his money back but its better then the 20 years or more it'd take in the Championship EDIT: changed the revenue number for this seasons increase TV money and changed the other numbers accordingly.

Maybe offer him a massively reduced weekly wage with a large playing bonus and decent goal bonus. One things for sure there's no way we can offer him another year long deal on what he's on now even if he's fit for the rest of the season. He'll simply wait until he's got his deal and then disappear again.

Cacapa - Release Owen - Keep at same wage, otherwise release Harper - Keep Butt - Keep on 1 year reduced deal Ameobi - Release Edgar - Release Viduka - Keep on pay per play