Rich

In your opinion, once again. Until you have some facts to back it up, I won't be agreeing. Ferguson/Jol both think the lad is worth £8m/£6m, at the least, and Burley rates him at over £10m - these are people who deal with the transfer market almost every day of their lives. Not saying they are intrinsically correct, or even right 99% of the time... but they generally know what they're doing more than the likes of us, fans who post on a message board. You have to look at it from the club's perspective, not your own, £6/8/10m is a lot of money to the average Joe, or to the struggling football club, but to the likes of Man Utd/Spurs it's a solid investment that they have made a calculated decision on. You have nothing but your own opinion with which to argue it, so it just doesn't carry much weight. From a NUFC perspective I actually agree with you and Jon in that I think it would be madness to spend our entire budget on a 17-year-old who might never prove to be worth it. But Man Utd can afford to take that gamble because they have Silvestre, Heinze and Evra. We're looking for a first choice defender, while Man Utd already have that and are at the next level to us. A level where they can afford to play high-risk/high-gain with their assets and run the gauntlet a little bit.

In your opinion That's what it's all about, you think he's hyped because he's played for Wales and is adept at set-plays and so isn't worth over £5m. Other people, like Ferguson and Jol, think otherwise

I think you've got it spot-on, Andy. My only issue was you saying Man Utd have spent "hardly fuck all", when they've spent upwards of £40m and have recently bid £20m for Owen Hargreaves and £8m for Gareth Bale. I was merely putting them in the list of clubs who have been taken over and who have far more money than we do because of their status, not necessarily because of the takeover.

Aye Pearson knows Davies really well.He knows what he is capable of and maybe he said that to Roeder You and Jon are correct from what I can see, there's nothing concrete to say they love each other anywhere.

How much did Man Utd pay for Carrick again? £19m or so? How much have they been bidding for Hargreaves? Evra, Vidic and Park have also joined for a decent collective sum (probably near £15m) since Glazer arrived, so they've hardly spent small amounts. Somewhere near £40m already in 18 months, on a squad that was already formidable. If they weren't winning the league I dare say that more would have been splashed as well. Certainly if Bayern would sell, it would be something like £60m in 19 months. Not bad. We've spent a similar amount, like, perhaps a bit more, but we're not running round bidding £20m for people still - or winning the league.

Unless I've been misled I thought it's been written somewhere that they got on extremely well? Or that it was at least known in WBA circles and then consequently on the 'net. Mentor/student thing, wasn't it? I've absolutely no idea. Just seemed daft that everyone says he'd want to sign because of Pearson. You might be right like, as I say i've no idea. I'll have a deeks!

In your opinion, aye. Everyone has their valuation of something, to the likes of Man Utd/Spurs/Southampton, Bale might be worth more than me and you, personally, think he is. There is no set measuring stick for valuation, people are worth what they go for until proven otherwise (Luque, Boumsong, Marcelino...)

TBh, Duff has done very little, it wouldn't bother me, however, i doubt FS would sell a high profile player like him. Would be admitting that he was completely wrong to sign him, so you're probably right. Still think people are writing Duff off far too early.

Unless I've been misled I thought it's been written somewhere that they got on extremely well? Or that it was at least known in WBA circles and then consequently on the 'net. Mentor/student thing, wasn't it?

A good deal of the principles still apply with Bale, though. He's probably the star player down there and he has already played a few times for his national side, and there are some massive clubs that have been credited with a definite interest in him. The lad must be fairly decent if Wenger/Ferguson/Jol/Benitez are sniffing around him. I do agree that his price has been inflated, but surely that's down to the number of interested parties and the financial welly of the interested parties? Think of it like an auction. If you're a normal bloke and are lucky enough to have a valuable item to sell that is coveted by some extremely rich and powerful people, then you're rubbing your hands together because you know you're going to get top-whack. I know that people like to simply compare £10m with £10m (i.e. Martins .vs. Young/Bale), but there really is more to it than that. There are reasons why players go for the money they do, but like most things on here people just debate it at face-value without delving any deeper. "£10m, what a fucking rip! We got Martins for that!" Aye, but Martins was surplus at Inter and there were no big clubs interested in him (amazingly), so it never turned into an auction like it does for these young starlets we have over here. Value isn't merely based on ability alone, it never has been.

No chance, surely? We're bare enough on the left-flank as it is! N'Zogbia's not back until Feb, too, and what if he then gets injured?

As for the original debate at hand here - which is a very good one, too - I've had the same worries for a good while now and I remember the likes of NE5/HTL admitting that they, too, had thought about things the same way. It is a worry that the Premiership currently has Chelsea, Man Utd, Aston Villa, West Ham, Portsmouth and Tottenham with seemingly endless transfer funds because of their respective owners and, in the case of the first two, massive income every year from the Champions League. Liverpool look likely to be the next to follow and Arsenal should be alright money-wise now that their stadium is complete and they're pulling in massive crowds (as well as being in the Champions League.) That's 8 teams who seem to be a good deal better-off than us in the current climate; financially speaking. Thankfully, though, they all haven't overtaken us yet because it is only very recently that we seem to be complaining of money troubles (even though we spent £15m in summer, which isn't bad.) And, we still have a stonger squad than a few of the clubs on that list, although the gap is quickly narrowing. How much longer will players pick us over clubs because we offer the best financial package? If the money is the same, how many players are going to want to live in Newcastle ahead of London? I think Shepherd and Roeder know this already, they're not as daft as people like to think, and so we've seen investment in the Youth Academy and top-class people being brought in to run it. Luckily, we seem to have a strong U18 team for a good few seasons now and so the steady stream of "decent" players from the young 'uns should hopefully continue, which means we should be set squad-wise for a good while yet. I certanly wouldn't mind having the likes of Edgar and Huntington as 4th/5th choice centre-halves for a few seasons, if we made improvements to the starting 11. If we can focus on building a top-class first 11 (preferrably a first 14/16 if funds allow it), then we should be alright - but serious measures need to be taken on the injury front because I refuse to believe it's purely down to "luck". Already we've seen improvement on the "Wenger front", as Tim Krul and Charles N'Zogbia both look to be amazing purchases for the money we paid. If we can unearth a few more gems like these two in the coming years then the club should steadily improve asset-wise as we'll have a large group of players increasing in value, rather than decreasing. The obvious ideal is to buy low, sell high (although that might lead some people to jump on the board for turning us into a "selling club".) But I think that Spurs have got it right... they buy people for decent money and then offload them for a profit, Carrick being the obvious example, but the likes of Davenport have also gone for more than Spurs paid. That's the way to do it these days, and it seems like Roeder knows it.

I don't fully understand people saying that the likes of Young are "insanely expensive", £30M for Shevchenko at his age is what I would consider "insane". Here's why (for Young): a) The lad has proven himself to be a perfectly good Premiership player already in a very poor Watford team. b) Unlike Shevchenko, Young's value should increase if he stays relatively on-form (much like Martins for us, even if he just does fairly well here.) I'd like to see Milner's value now after this season, and N'Zogbia/Taylor are probably worth a pretty penny - even Ramage/Hunty/Edgar will have added some value to themselves by just even playing at the top level. Granted, you get the Viana situation where a player turns out to never get a game, despite having obvious talent, and then his value dwindles. c) Villa could potentially get 10 top-class years out of him, maybe even more. You won't get that when you pay £10M for a 27/28 year old. It's a long-term investment. The only way to make huge gains on young players these days is to make your own. d) Young was Watford's best player... so it's like Man Utd selling Rooney or Ronaldo, or Chelsea selling Terry. By selling Young they are practically waving goodbye to the Premiership, so obviously he commands a big fee. This is much the same for the likes of Barnes and Bale in the Championship... it's not like these lads are barely getting a game, they are extremely valuable to their teams and so the price goes up. We paid £10m for Martins because he was out of the first team picture at the San Siro, imagine his price-tag the summer previous? e) He's English. You'll say it won't make any odds, but having top-class English players in an English team is a massive boon and clubs like to be represented at international level. If a player does well for England then it reflects well on his club and increases the club's reputation as somewhere players will want to play. It's all relative here. Obviously buying a young, English player is expensive when you compare it to other countries, but it's a reflection of the market on a whole in this country. I personally feel that this "insane" price thing is another bandwagon that everyone seems to be jumping on without giving it any proper thought. It's the market these days, folks, it's not completely illogical that Southampton want £10m for their most promising star or that Ashley Young is going for £9.5m. What would people prefer? That we spend massive money on the likes of Luque and Boumsong at a later stage of their careers? I'd rather we went the young, English route that Sir Bobby seemed keen on taking us than do things the Souness way. Obviously there's a balance, and Roeder has demonstrated this so far (he's done well in terms of the ages of players he has bought, I think.) If the club has the money, then I would like to see the likes of Young/Davies/Bale/Barnes brought in here and slowly integrated into the first team (or thrust in, which will probably be the more likely scenario.) I'm not sure that they'll do too much worse than some of our more senior players, anyway.

I don't fully understand people saying that the likes of Young are "insanely expensive", £30M for Shevchenko at his age is what I would consider "insane". Here's why (for Young): a) The lad has proven himself to be a perfectly good Premiership player already in a very poor Watford team. b) Unlike Shevchenko, Young's value should increase if he stays relatively on-form (much like Martins for us, even if he just does fairly well here.) I'd like to see Milner's value now after this season, and N'Zogbia/Taylor are probably worth a pretty penny - even Ramage/Hunty/Edgar will have added some value to themselves by just even playing at the top level. Granted, you get the Viana situation where a player turns out to never get a game, despite having obvious talent, and then his value dwindles. c) Villa could potentially get 10 top-class years out of him, maybe even more. You won't get that when you pay £10M for a 27/28 year old. It's a long-term investment. The only way to make huge gains on young players these days is to make your own. d) Young was Watford's best player... so it's like Man Utd selling Rooney or Ronaldo, or Chelsea selling Terry. By selling Young they are practically waving goodbye to the Premiership, so obviously he commands a big fee. This is much the same for the likes of Barnes and Bale in the Championship... it's not like these lads are barely getting a game, they are extremely valuable to their teams and so the price goes up. We paid £10m for Martins because he was out of the first team picture at the San Siro, imagine his price-tag the summer previous? e) He's English. You'll say it won't make any odds, but having top-class English players in an English team is a massive boon and clubs like to be represented at international level. If a player does well for England then it reflects well on his club and increases the club's reputation as somewhere players will want to play. It's all relative here. Obviously buying a young, English player is expensive when you compare it to other countries, but it's a reflection of the market on a whole in this country. I personally feel that this "insane" price thing is another bandwagon that everyone seems to be jumping on without giving it any proper thought. It's the market these days, folks, it's not completely illogical that Southampton want £10m for their most promising star or that Ashley Young is going for £9.5m. What would people prefer? That we spend massive money on the likes of Luque and Boumsong at a later stage of their careers? I'd rather we went the young, English route that Sir Bobby seemed keen on taking us than do things the Souness way. Obviously there's a balance, and Roeder has demonstrated this so far (he's done well in terms of the ages of players he has bought, I think.) If the club has the money, then I would like to see the likes of Young/Davies/Bale/Barnes brought in here and slowly integrated into the first team (or thrust in, which will probably be the more likely scenario.) I'm not sure that they'll do too much worse than some of our more senior players, anyway.

Will wind-up Spurs, I say bring him on.

What a bloke.

<a href="http://icnewcastle.icnetwork.co.uk/newcastleunited/journalsport/tm_headline=magpies-in-lead-for-defender%2Ds-signature%26method=full%26objectid=18443403%26siteid=50081-name_page.html">Original Story</a>

This was on TribalFootball yesterday, from "Andreolli's Agent", but we all know about TF.

Got quite a growing reputation in the game and Inter have very high hopes for him, amazed that we'd be in for him, but FansFC is hardly a reliable source! Would be quite a coup, even on loan, but a 20-year-old probably isn't exactly what we're in need of.

Of course it does. I'm 100% sure of that, because I always watch Paddy's off-the-ball movement when the midfielders have the ball.... Quite an easy thing to do, in fairness, because the fat bugger is probably just standing still... and you can't miss him. GHoeberX is still the best WUM I've ever seen, this thread is legendary.

This post made me laugh out loud.

It's the only way he'll get another management job. Wor Graeme isn't as daft as he seems sometimes. The fucking slag.

Fuking scummy cunts, you also forgot the waffa as well. But they'll still win nowt. I did remember the WAFFA, but their group really seemed about the same as ours after all the games were played: Club Brugge, Leverkusen, Bucharest and Besiktas aren't a great deal worse than what we faced and they got Feyenoord whereas we got Zulte.

Spurs again get the luck of the draw as they face Southend at home (again)... Look at Tottenham's perilous cup draws so far this season in comparison to ours: Milton Keynes Dons, Port Vale, Southend, Wycombe, Cardiff, Southend (again). Portsmouth, Watford, Chelsea, Birmingham, Reading. Dirty cockney pigdogs.

Saying that, I didn't realise how many lower-league clubs were left. Reading doesn't look that great when you consider there was a definite pool of 18 lower-league teams (either already through or with replays to play against each other) we could have got. Come on Burnley!