macphisto

I don't want to derail this thread but I don't agree about Targett being a no brainer. Maybe for the majority of fans but I don't think Howe has ever been keen on him. There was a delay and a little uncertainty between his loan ending and us buying him. For me, it felt more like a move to bolster the squad at the time as none of How's preferred targets were available/too expensive.

Even more bizarre when you add Targett to the list. Was he £15 million? That's £50 million on left backs and not one of them plays.

Interesting article in the Athletic about Barcelona making their own shirts. I wouldn't advocate going down that route but this caught my eye: " As per the terms of their current agreement, Nike pays a yearly fee for the right to produce various items of Barcelona sporting equipment and apparel, and the American company keeps all profits made from sales. However, through the BLM (Barca Licensing & Merchandising) arm — mentioned by Laporta in his radio interview — Barcelona also exclusively market and sell some clothing and apparel themselves. BLM was the fourth-biggest source of revenues in Barcelona’s most recent budget, accounting for over €100million across 2022-23." Whilst I don't think we'd make anywhere near 100 million Euros, it does show we have numerous revenue streams waiting to be exploited.

Am I the only one who thinks this debate about the city centre is laughable? Newcastle is one of the most compact major cities in the UK, we're talking about a 10 minutes walk further away and even that depends on where you're coming from. You'd think we were talking about moving from one end of Tokyo to the other.

Is that model not broken now since Real and Barcelona don't splash the cash like they used to? I can think of Berbatov, Modric, Bale, Suarez and Coutinho for Spurs and Liverpool but no one in recent times. I'd say the model is now to buy young to mid-career players, get 5-6 years at their peak and then sell to Saudi when they're 31-34. Obliviously the Saudi's have enough money to start buying younger players if they wanted to.

You've lost me there, your reply doesn't make sense. I did say that I 100% back staying in the city centre. My point was that I don't care about the thoughts of away fans when considering future stadium plans, if PIF milked away fans then again not something I'd be concerned about.

Don't think it would have much impact with regards to away fans as they'd still book a hotel in the city centre and go out there either the previous night before the match or after the match (maybe both). I obviously understand the impact on the city centre economy with regards to home fans but as I say I couldn't really care about away fans.

100% agree with the need for a city centre location but I do not understand one of the reasons being away fans as has been mentioned a few times in this debate. I can't think of any group or factor that is less important in this debate than away fans. Who cares what they think?

That's why I said I doubt it that the others would have been included. I'm sure I read somewhere that Ferguson was more than happy to include Gillespie in the deal. Disagree about Neville, that would have been right back sorted for the next 10 years.

Is Gillespie another sliding door moment? I wonder if we could have got one of Beckham, Scholes, Gary Neville rather than Gillespie as part of the Cole deal? I doubt it but he was ahead of them in terms of 1st minutes when we signed him.

I disagree, I think he has a great eye for a player. He bought a good few players who gave great service to the club, after Keegan I can't think of a manager with a better transfer record. Yes he took some punts on players that didn't turn out well but overall he did well given the financial circumstances. Look at Liverpool his second time around, Carroll, Henderson and Suarez. Tactically there's a lot to criticise him on but his transfer record is good if you look at it closely, which other manager have we had with a better record apart from Keegan? In defence of other managers it might be difficult to judge them on transfers as Shepherd became more and more involved with certain agents (I think Stretford).

Souness is by far, for me, the worst manager we've had but selling to Ashley is solely on the shoulders of the Halls.

David Kelly's goal v Portsmouth is probably the biggest moment, not worth thinking what would have happened without that goal.

Jon Dahl Tomasson's career could have been a lot different too.

Would getting approval and building the new stadium on Castle Leazes have made a difference and dramatically altered history?

Agree on Ashworth himself but that's why I said the role too as you have to consider the next DoF. Take the individuals out of it, the club's offer shouldn't be that different to what was previously offered. Otherwise people will know the DoF doesn't have any real authority.

If the NUFC offer drastically changes then it completely undermines Ashworth and the DoF role as players and agents will just start to drag out talks until they talk directly to Staveley.

What are they classifying as a department? We have a new Psychology department but it's only one guy.

It can only be based on his relationship with the media during his time with England. He hasn't been at any club long enough to justify his reputation.

It would matter to me if I was a parent and should to a young player too when the club was as dysfunctional as Newcastle were pre-takeover. I can't comment on Harrison, my main point was Newcastle under Ashley.

Clark went pre-takeover, any decent parent would not have their son anywhere near an Ashley-ran Newcastle.

I read in the Athletic that they are asset managers with a contract to manage the club on behalf of PIF. Not sure if it was this article I read but it does say, "The Saudi fund, just like those in Abu Dhabi, Qatar and Norway, employs professional asset managers to make shrewd investments and manage assets. MBS will not be scouting which centre-back Newcastle should target in the January transfer window. "Rather, Staveley and Ghodoussi have the contract to manage Newcastle. But they are “asset managers”, acting on behalf of the consortium that is 80 per cent comprised of the PIF and, by extension, the Saudi state." It does feel like they are much more hands-on than a normal Chair representing the ownership but to repeat I'm not criticising them at all even though I could see how it might muddy the waters.

Is it not the role of Staveley that complicates our structure as she's managing the club on behalf of PIF? It's an extra tier of management that most clubs don't have. Not criticising Staveley in anyway just that our model is different to many other clubs.

I agree about it being a mess due to the Ashley years but at the same time Howe and heads of scouting and academy were in place before Ashworth arrived; I can't think of any other roles half as important as those three that fall under Ashworth's remit.

It has to be over exaggerated as he's never been anywhere long enough to be judged. To make any sort of meaningful organisational impact takes a long, long time, more than the 2-3 years he was at Brighton.