80

No, because the club now has the value of the player in cash form. Hypothetically, if someone bought the club from him tomorrow, they'd also effectively be buying Andy Carroll's value (either in terms of an available balance, or more likely reduced debts). So the value of the club need not be reduced by selling players. (Fyi, there's more to that conversation regarding possible club value outcomes following a player sale) It would of course be stupid to sell all the competent players at once, which is why I don't think I've seen anyone suggest that. But bleed it steadily, say by removing a couple of top class players per year and hoping internal development and good scouting will make up most of the shortfall, that definitely can be achieved. If he really is a git, wanting to get some easy money back year on year, a good place to start might be to draw a salary and maybe charge a few million a year in interest on his loans for a start. But no, your scenario that he's happy to asset strip by putting an unbelievably good academy and scouting network in place to develop a least 2 or more top class players a year, just to sell them at the end of the season and somehow syphon off the cash from the clubs accounts, does seem more achievable. Certainly a better idea, yes. Far more plausible that he'd consider that route, too. Wages and interest rates might yet come, but would be a slow route to recouping his money let alone anything else, and until recently would have only really compromised his ambitions, of course. By the way, 'somehow syphon cash from the club accounts' - are you seriously suggesting he's going to convert his loan into a gift and never take that money out of the club? If so I disagree. It'll come out one way or another. Some assume he's hoping for a quick sale to someone who prepared to pay it off as part of the transaction - maybe, I'll be delighted if so - but otherwise it's only reasonable for him to consider other alternatives.

Seem to remember you praised him more significantly in the past, but aye, fair enough.

I agree with this bit. But as for Woodgate himself and his performances. He was almost flawless. Great player. He absolutely did change the back four, the whole team consequently, in fact. There might well be a post lurking in a far corner of the internet showing I thought this at the time...

Aye, although ask VI... Not a normal fan of another club, but he thinks Woodgate was stunning iirc. Think we saw the best of Woodgate though - he's never been so perfect as he was since his return to England.

I remember him saying around 10 days before he left he was happy to stay here. I specifically don't, to be fair. Not sure which one of us is right, like.

The only critical one of those is Tiote, thankfully. Maybe Barton seeing as we gave away our only other noted right-winger, but there you go. Ha, a midfield of R.Taylor Ireland Guthrie Gutierrez - quite a thought.

I feel like putting my head in a blender when I read your posts. He's pretty much right like. I still owe you a pm don't I mate, sorry about that. Was having a nightmare at the time, read it and forgot it. Sort of prove our point like re: the impact of various personal circumstances. Very good ideas, though.

Think that sums it up nicely. There are a lot of positives, just a shame I expect GPs on Tyneside to be handing out more prescriptions for anxiety medication before long.

Woodgate was God-like on the pitch, the best I've ever seen. but pound for pound Coloccini is a better defender because you just can't underestimate the value of being consistently available and professional in a centre half.

Wow, hell of an interview. Wondering if it's a poor translation, not least because it doesn't all make sense - the 95/96 team lost out because they lacked team spirit and didn't care about winning the league and the pressure got to them? Looked a bit like he'd been pissed off recently, to be honest.

Man your knee must be shattered from the sudden involuntary movement

No, because the club now has the value of the player in cash form. Hypothetically, if someone bought the club from him tomorrow, they'd also effectively be buying Andy Carroll's value (either in terms of an available balance, or more likely reduced debts). So the value of the club need not be reduced by selling players. (Fyi, there's more to that conversation regarding possible club value outcomes following a player sale) It would of course be stupid to sell all the competent players at once, which is why I don't think I've seen anyone suggest that. But bleed it steadily, say by removing a couple of top class players per year and hoping internal development and good scouting will make up most of the shortfall, that definitely can be achieved.

Absolutely. I still don't really rate him, but he's risen to the challenge pretty well and is playing out of his skin at the moment. He's been a great little poacher for us in the last few games. Honestly don't think he is, yet. Take the situation in the second half at 2-0 up, ball gets played into him just inside the area, he looks at the goal, gets half a yard on his man but then hesitates before knocking the ball down the channel and eventually back to Jonas. A fully-firing, top form Leon Best smacks that ball as soon as he gets a sniff at goal, he's definitely proven that he has the technique, think he's the type of player who will only get better with a constant, injury-free run in the team. Whether that is ultimately good enough to be a number 9 for NUFC is up for debate. Yep, as has been said, he definitely has psychological restraints on his play. He's prone to failures of conviction, snatching at things etc. But if, a big if but if nonetheless, he can be trained to overcome those he'll move up a level (or two) as a striker. True as it might be, consistently only being able to reach that kind of confidence after a long run in the side isn't good enough for a Premiership man, but hopefully he can be improved and eliminate that need.

Oh aye. The signing enabled Carroll to become the striker he is, and he's been invaluable since the turn of 2011. Can't believe it's worked out cos the Leon Best i saw for us 12 months ago was f***ing woeful. A Coloccini esq turnaround. Saying that though I do remember possibly myself and definitely Stu saying the Plymouth game showed real potential. Don't mean to bring it up, but seeing as it's been mentioned, yeah I think he's been a decent little cheap as chips investment, providing options for our other players last season (inc. off the pitch) which kept up our momentum, while still not being fully developed himself. I remember him showing a fair bit shy of a goal too, he wasn't abject. A good move by Hughton worth pointing out more than normal, seeing as the £1m spent on him is supposedly one of his biggest crimes according to Ashley and Llambias. Just a shame that injury kept him out of the squad for months at the start of this season and stopped him being able to change that perception. Pleased for him.

Not seen the match yet, or heard much beyond 'dull sans Jonas', but great result. That's a bit of form from him I wasn't much expecting. Still lack confidence over our future performances, but every win's a huge win, so I'd rather be in Wednesday 16th than Monday 14th...

It's true like, I'd say it's you with the attitude to Colocho. Call someone a self-publicising wanker repeatedly when there's not much separating him from other people trying the same thing and they're bound to get a bit chippy. It wasn't him being interviewed on Sky Sports News, it wasn't him announcing his talks with the club in the local paper, but he gets it in the neck while even his colleagues get clappy hands. Why? I've never seen him say anything much questionable, let alone personal, that wasn't in response to you or someone similar saying he's a self-publicist, or that he's trying to speak on behalf of other people, making out he's a better person etc. and trying to pick holes more because you don't like him than that you disagree with his actions. Some solid quotes would help.

The first two paragraphs are are hackneyed and inaccurate. The post reads like it was written in a faux-ivory tower, with those living below characterised as Shepherd-loving ape-men. As such, I would think it's Punk who could be accused of not giving due consideration to what other people have been saying.

And also partly base their beliefs on statements released by the Ashley regime after it first took over. They seemed credible enough people at the time, but in light of subsequent events, these claims should also be revisited... Not saying they weren't bad, they clearly were, but I wouldn't be surprised to find that point was spun to breaking point. As I recall a number of the debts were called in due to the change in ownership, which obviously would make things look worse. I'm not saying the cash injection wasn't very welcome, but talk of the club not existing is laughable. Yep, that's right. Even if some find it laughable, we had favourable loans based upon debtors having faith in our old administration. For whatever reason (not trying to criticise in this instance), they withdrew their credit when Ashley bought us. Sorry but that is a very glib dismissal of the poor financial legacy of our previous owners. I've spouted long and hard on this subject elsewhere on this board. Not going to do so again - especially on a Jose Enrique thread ? It's true. Our structured debts suddenly got toploaded due to a security clause, when that happens by surprise it's liable to make any situation worse than it was before. You don't need to preach to me about problems the old regime did have, though, I'm converted.

Find it hard to imagine ever criticising the guy. If he ever does have to leave, I hope he handles everything in a reasonable enough way, and I expect he will. This non-negotiation is a good sign. And I promise I won't believe any 'what a complete bastard' hijinks the club suddenly accuse him of as he goes out the door... That wasn't suitably grateful-sounding, was it? He's given all we could ask of him and more while he's been here. A great, decent and cheerful character who's played a big role in creating what's been, or should have been, a very special time for the club.

Find it hard to imagine ever criticising the guy. If he ever does have to leave, I hope he handles everything in a reasonable enough way, and I expect he will. This non-negotiation is a good sign. And I promise I won't believe any 'what a complete bastard' hijinks the club suddenly accuse him of as he goes out the door...

And also partly base their beliefs on statements released by the Ashley regime after it first took over. They seemed credible enough people at the time, but in light of subsequent events, these claims should also be revisited... Not saying they weren't bad, they clearly were, but I wouldn't be surprised to find that point was spun to breaking point. As I recall a number of the debts were called in due to the change in ownership, which obviously would make things look worse. I'm not saying the cash injection wasn't very welcome, but talk of the club not existing is laughable. Yep, that's right. Even if some find it laughable, we had favourable loans based upon debtors having faith in our old administration. For whatever reason (not trying to criticise in this instance), they withdrew their credit when Ashley bought us.

And also partly base their beliefs on statements released by the Ashley regime after it first took over. They seemed credible enough people at the time, but in light of subsequent events, these claims should also be revisited... Not saying they weren't bad, they clearly were, but I wouldn't be surprised to find that point was spun to breaking point. It's OK, we've had the club's accounts to pore over since then Yes, and they didn't suggest oblivion was approaching. Restructuring was required, not resuscitation (which Shepherd was trying to implement in his own dense way, to be fair). Unless we went and did something stupid like get relegated, of course...

And also partly base their beliefs on statements released by the Ashley regime after it first took over. They seemed credible enough people at the time, but in light of subsequent events, these claims should also be revisited... Not saying they weren't bad, they clearly were, but I wouldn't be surprised to find that point was spun to breaking point.