Teasy

What a finish by Micky Quinn, world class

Which is made even worse by the fact that he was actually one of the fat pricks best signings He signed s*** and played them yet he thought one of his few good signings wasn't good enough mackems.gif

Me too. I don't really know what he's getting at. As Wullie says, most of the players he bought were made to work by Keegan. It's not like people started off saying we were right to sack him then were proved wrong. I think the fat c*** is pointing out that we ended up in a similar position to the one he was sacked in. Of course what he fails to tell people is that he conveniently f***ed off just before all the difficult games started.

But if they could come to a compromise it would be well worth it for us if he ends up going for a fee next season. Unless we seriously think we can win a case against him for compensation of course.

Paying £31,500 a week for a player not playing for us doesn't sound to attractive to me. Especially when we have the option to sack him or possibly get him to drop his wages anyway. I say we compromise, Barton takes a pay cut to £45,000 and Bolton pay the same £31,500 share they're rumoured to be considering at the moment. Leaving us to only pay him £13,500 per week.

Why wouldn't he? He got his 500,000 a year salary plus millions in dividends either way..

Wullie don't forget "He'd never come here because Newcastle are a tiny laughing stock of a club, not capable of competing in the transfer market even with Boro".

I think they shouldn't..

I predict we'll sign him for £15 million.

That's not far from the total we'll end up paying him once his contract is up What kind of idiot gives a 27 year old a 5 year contract on £65,000 a week? Especially for a player who's flopped at his previous club and clearly wasn't quite the player he used to be. What a monumental waste of money. As you can tell I'm worried we may not be able to get rid of Mr Duff.. He never flopped at Chelsea though. Not at first, but he was a flop for the whole season before we bought him AFAIR.

He doesn't have the money to blow himself though, hows he going to spend Chelsea level money but still make the club attractive to investors if it goes tits up?

It's been in a few places iirc. Daily Mirror ran with it and others have jumped on that story. the end If Man City are interested forget it. Oh i wish we had money bags Thaksin instead of the scrooge I swear the transfer window sends certain people stark raving mental Oh and BTW the "DR" doesn't have the cash to spend hundreds of millions so you can bet any money spent is debt heaped on to Man City.

I'm sure they are. If you look at most of the top performing sides over the last few years, they've had a policy of mixing youth with experience. Oh I've got no doubt they'll be looking for experienced players as well. I just question how much they're prepared to spend on those kind of players.

IMO if the scouts think he's good enough we should go for him, if we're not going to trust the judgement of our scouts then we might as well sack them now.

Hopefully those kind of ideas are taken into account and its not just a case of 'if he's over this age limit we won't pay over this amount'.

How can you talk about the Modric transfer and then accuse Ashley of penny pinching and forcing us to sell before we can buy? Did we sell someone for £16 million recently to fund the bid for Modric or are you talking total s***?

No it isn't ancient, I'm not talking about the player being too old to play. I just mean that it seems Newcastle don't want to spend big on players over a certain age. It might not be true but it seems likely that they want to buy players who can do well for the club but also keep there value over the term of there contract incase the club decide to sell. Buy a 24 year old for £11 million and if he does reasonably well at the club you can sell for significantly more if you decide to sell in a few years. With a 27 year old a few years takes hm into his 30's and that usually means a big drop in value.

How old is Woodgate? Genuine question btw. Edit - just checked and he was 28 in January and went for £8m. Only £3m more for a (relatively) injury free Arshavin. Obviously I don't know for definate, I just get the impression that £11 million might be seen as too large an investment in a 27 year old, who knows, the transfer just seems unlikely to me.

That's not far from the total we'll end up paying him once his contract is up What kind of idiot gives a 27 year old a 5 year contract on £65,000 a week? Especially for a player who's flopped at his previous club and clearly wasn't quite the player he used to be. What a monumental waste of money. As you can tell I'm worried we may not be able to get rid of Mr Duff..

Don't even bother replying to him Mick, pretend he's not there and he'll take his trolling elsewhere eventually.

£11 million for a 27 year old.. seems unlikely.

Harsh! Can't really say... I never saw Hitler play. He was a pacy diminutive mass murderer. So... good finisher, then? Yes, he had fantastic execution.

Harsh! Can't really say... I never saw Hitler play. He was a pacey diminutive mass murderer with a great eye for goal.

Ribery looked crap as well though, no end product.