TRon

I'd far rather we hold out for the player we really want so no problem with that - as long as we aren't chasing a lost cause and there is a realistic prospect of him coming here. From Pardew's comments today it seems clear the club think they're being fucked around by his agent and we're at a stalemate rather than the deal being dead. Can only assume they've had some encouragement from the player himself. Again I can't remember who said it but one of the journos said we'd been led to believe he really did want to come previously. Sounds plausible. I see no other reason why we would still be holding out on this one. Another one that will drag on I suspect. There will come a point where we'll have to get the player to tell his agent to get the deal done otherwise it's off though.

If we get Erdinc and Zog we'll have had a fantastic window. However I think we'll have to settle for just a striker and while that wouldn't be a bad window it will be an opportunity missed for me.

Completely agree. We shall see, if he does stay I fully expect this thread to implode due to half hearted lacklustre performances . I'm confident he'll have another great season if we don't manage to flog him.

I'd far rather we hold out for the player we really want so no problem with that - as long as we aren't chasing a lost cause and there is a realistic prospect of him coming here.

The fact that we are still holding out for the move makes me think this might still happen. PSG obviously would want to move him on now they've bought other strikers and the dispute just seems to be about payment to the agent. Might drag on for a bit but unless another club comes in there'll probably be a compromise I reckon.

Kna fk him, he is taking the piss, do you really think the way he is behaving means he will be giving 100% on the pitch? I don't, even towards the end of last season he was playing like a man who wanted away. He is still saying he wants out then why should we expect him to give his all for us this season. because he's getting paid to fucking play. Why would he under-perform for no reason? It's him who is going to stay here we aren't forcing him.

Apparently there's "a trio of continental strikers" under the age of 28 who we are looking at as well if this one doesn't come off. We must really want Erdinc badly to be putting up with all this crap.

He's totally entitled to run down his contract as is Joey Barton. It's unfortunate for us as we'll lose the fee but that's what contracts are all about. The best we can do is make the most of having him for another season. At least he's earning his money unlike liabilities like Smith.

Best has the footwork of a lower division player so I can understand why people don't rate him. He looks positively clumsy at times. He does know where the goal is though and puts them away if the cameo from last season was anything to go by. I'd rather have him as a back up striker than Shola.

UV or Pip? I'd be more inclined to take Pips but neither are entirely dependent on the activity of NUFC so it's f***ing nonsense - last year was widely recognised as an anomalous year for a lot of teams and based on that, if we stick as we are in the market, i reckon we'll end up doing worse despite having some better players on the books I was referring to UV's proposal FWIW. Quite comical watching people try and squirm it into something else. On the contrary I think most of those other people have explained their reasoning very well. UV's shallow point-scoring exercise of counting goals rather than results is petty at best. It says more about those who want to support such a narrow argument than it does about those who are disputing it. To be fair, his bet was targeted at the supposed improved quality of our ATTACK. I would say goals scored is a pretty good measure for this, certainly better than the possession stat nonsense others have been coming up to counter his argument, wouldn't you agree? No I wouldn't. While Carroll is a formidable centre forward, I have never rated Nolan so highly and neither it seems have the rest of the premiership clubs. Carroll and Nolan did provide an effective Stoke-style partnership but it severely limited our passing game due to Nolan's lack of movement. As Baggio pointed out earlier, we scored more goals than Spurs, does that mean our attacking play was more effective than theirs? Yes, it means exactly that. Not sure how you could argue this... May not have been as pleasing on the eye as Barcelona style attacking, but effective it was. Would you rather we still had last years' team than the current one then (plus the two signings we are supposedly still to bring in)? As I've argued before and based on how it currently stands: a resounding yes. In attack, we have lost Carroll, by far our best and most promising striker, and got in Ba, somebody with a decent enough record but not at the same level. Conclusion: degression In midfield we have lost Nolan, our captain and scorer of many important goals for us in the last 2 seasons, and got in Cabaye and Marveaux, who look like good additions but have it all to prove in the Premiership. Conclusion: slight progress In defense we have lost cover in Campbell and not got anybody in. Conclusion: slight degression. Overall: we have lost almost half of our goals from the past 2 seasons and brought in some promising players with a lot to prove at this level. So yes, I would take last year's squad over the current one. Speculating about the 2 players yet supposedly to come in and how they will affect the squad strength is pointless; they may or may not come (if you don't believe me, look up Pardew's statements in January about bringing in reinforcements), and we may just as well lose key players such as Tiote, Enrique and Barton before the end of the transfer window without replacing them, like we have done before multiple times. Like everybody else I will have to wait until the transfer window is shut to judge whether we have gone forward or backward, but right now I think people are kidding themselves if they think our squad is stronger than it was last season. Since I'm of the firm belief that we could have no hope of progressing while Nolan was our key midfielder, I am planting myself firmly on the side of the club on this one, and in fact I wanted him gone even when we offered him a new contract. You can shout about his virtues all you like, it won't change the fact he ended up in the Championship to play under a long ball merchant. Speaks volumes for me.

UV or Pip? I'd be more inclined to take Pips but neither are entirely dependent on the activity of NUFC so it's f***ing nonsense - last year was widely recognised as an anomalous year for a lot of teams and based on that, if we stick as we are in the market, i reckon we'll end up doing worse despite having some better players on the books I was referring to UV's proposal FWIW. Quite comical watching people try and squirm it into something else. On the contrary I think most of those other people have explained their reasoning very well. UV's shallow point-scoring exercise of counting goals rather than results is petty at best. It says more about those who want to support such a narrow argument than it does about those who are disputing it. To be fair, his bet was targeted at the supposed improved quality of our ATTACK. I would say goals scored is a pretty good measure for this, certainly better than the possession stat nonsense others have been coming up to counter his argument, wouldn't you agree? No I wouldn't. While Carroll is a formidable centre forward, I have never rated Nolan so highly and neither it seems have the rest of the premiership clubs. Carroll and Nolan did provide an effective Stoke-style partnership but it severely limited our passing game due to Nolan's lack of movement. As Baggio pointed out earlier, we scored more goals than Spurs, does that mean our attacking play was more effective than theirs? Yes, it means exactly that. Not sure how you could argue this... May not have been as pleasing on the eye as Barcelona style attacking, but effective it was. Would you rather we still had last years' team than the current one then (plus the two signings we are supposedly still to bring in)?

UV or Pip? I'd be more inclined to take Pips but neither are entirely dependent on the activity of NUFC so it's f***ing nonsense - last year was widely recognised as an anomalous year for a lot of teams and based on that, if we stick as we are in the market, i reckon we'll end up doing worse despite having some better players on the books I was referring to UV's proposal FWIW. Quite comical watching people try and squirm it into something else. On the contrary I think most of those other people have explained their reasoning very well. UV's shallow point-scoring exercise of counting goals rather than results is petty at best. It says more about those who want to support such a narrow argument than it does about those who are disputing it. To be fair, his bet was targeted at the supposed improved quality of our ATTACK. I would say goals scored is a pretty good measure for this, certainly better than the possession stat nonsense others have been coming up to counter his argument, wouldn't you agree? No I wouldn't. While Carroll is a formidable centre forward, I have never rated Nolan so highly and neither it seems have the rest of the premiership clubs. Carroll and Nolan did provide an effective Stoke-style partnership but it severely limited our passing game due to Nolan's lack of movement. As Baggio pointed out earlier, we scored more goals than Spurs, does that mean our attacking play was more effective than theirs?

UV or Pip? I'd be more inclined to take Pips but neither are entirely dependent on the activity of NUFC so it's fucking nonsense - last year was widely recognised as an anomalous year for a lot of teams and based on that, if we stick as we are in the market, i reckon we'll end up doing worse despite having some better players on the books I was referring to UV's proposal FWIW. Quite comical watching people try and squirm it into something else. On the contrary I think most of those other people have explained their reasoning very well. UV's shallow point-scoring exercise of counting goals rather than results is petty at best. It says more about those who want to support such a narrow argument than it does about those who are disputing it.

I'm with you, but for some reason people are freaking out because there's been a lull in our activity. I really think if we'd signed the players we had more recently, spaced them out more or spent more on them, people would be loving our transfer dealings so far. It's not that in my case, I am pretty happy with how we have acted quickly so far, the reason I'm now moving into a more cynical frame of mind is that for whatever reason our search for a striker doesn't seem as urgent since the Gameiro knock back. The Erdinc deal has stalled supposedly due to a dispute with his agent despite the fact we've been publicly shouting how much of the Carroll fee has gone to paying agents of other players we've signed this summer. We've cooled our interest in Long according to the journos and according to the same sources we are not interested in anyone else. It seems a fair conclusion to draw that we may well not get another striker if that's close to the truth. So many ifs, buts and assumptions in that though, it's almost farcical. If they don't sign another striker then they'll deserve a bit of criticism, but they don't deserve any yet IMO. I'm just giving my take on it, there might well be a lot more happening behind the scenes. As things stand though I'm not convinced.

I'm with you, but for some reason people are freaking out because there's been a lull in our activity. I really think if we'd signed the players we had more recently, spaced them out more or spent more on them, people would be loving our transfer dealings so far. It's not that in my case, I am pretty happy with how we have acted quickly so far, the reason I'm now moving into a more cynical frame of mind is that for whatever reason our search for a striker doesn't seem as urgent since the Gameiro knock back. The Erdinc deal has stalled supposedly due to a dispute with his agent despite the fact we've been publicly shouting how much of the Carroll fee has gone to paying agents of other players we've signed this summer. We've cooled our interest in Long according to the journos and according to the same sources we are not interested in anyone else. It seems a fair conclusion to draw that we may well not get another striker if that's close to the truth.

I'm implying that we won't get N'Zogbia because we won't pay the required fee/wages and someone else, probably Villa will. In a similar vein I'm now doubtful whether we'll sign another striker for the reasons already explained in the previous post. Of course the club could always blow both theories out of the water by signing either/or in which case I'll gladly accept I jumped the gun.

As I suspected, the club's pursuit of another striker is fairly half hearted so it might well be they decide that Ba, Best and Shola are perfectly adequate front men. I would be surprised now if we do actually make a decisive move for a striker, the pursuit seems to be similar to the N'Zogbia "chase". If the player falls into our lap at a stupidly low price and on low wages we'll take it, otherwise qe sara srara.

Especially since they've already reportedly signalled their intention to do so when the situation is ripe.

It doesn't really take much staff tbh. The Neil Taylor twist will probably be a rehash of the ideas mooted on this site of a possible swap deal between Taylor and Routledge. How many staff members does it take to read a forum?

I hadn't thought of it before, but Ireland would be a handy forward to bring in at the last minute if/when our various half hearted efforts at signing a real striker fall through.

My main concern is the striker. I never really considered our bid for Zog to be serious once we signed Marveaux, but the worry now is that our hunt for a forward seems to be floundering. Hopefully that's not the case and the club have everything in hand and won't end up pissing about in the last few days of the window only to come up short as in previous years.

"Manchester United is a club you can't say no to, but if Newcastle United call then I'd stay in Glasgow, no doubt." He can f*** right off. Thanks Pardew. He was spot on with his comments, SPL is a fucking wank league. and any player who would rather play in that league than in the premier is a loser by definition. Fuck off Jocknavic, don't call us we'll call you.

Not surprised that of all the fringe players we have put on sale Ranger was the first to fetch a fee. This thread vindicated. End of.

Arsenal wanting £12m and what they'll sell him for are not necessarily the same thing.

I know it isn't a direct quote which is why I referred to this stuff being "leaked" via (ex) Journal sources. I just don't see what Edwards has to gain from putting a negative spin on Zog coming here. If he's not putting the club point of view across why would he say that? As far as I can see he's just saying that Zoggy's character is like that. I don't see any reason to assume he's been fed that by the club. How much influence do think NUFC have on the content of Luke Edward's tweets? Luke Edwards was one of the more impartial journalists during his stint up here and I imagine he's got contacts close to the club still. His tweets fit with our stance on Zog whether by coincidence or design. Of course the club could still make us all look like mugs by swooping in and signing Zog but I think I'll go with Luke's version at this point. Do they? What is the club's stance on Zog like? We can only speculate.