TRon

Have to agree. I would consider Geremi but we need to keep the fossil count down otherwise the midfield will be at walking pace again.

He's obsessed with the past. The title of this thread was intended to be provocative and make us think about the post Ashley era now he has been hounded out. Even NE5 has to realise that whether FFS and Co gave us courageous and successful leadership or whether they gave reckless leadership leading towards oblivion, it doesn't really matter any more. They are not coming back. It would be good if he could tell us what he wants post Ashley in specific real world terms rather than continuously using abstract expressions such as its gaining success on the field that matters, and thats his main requirement which he must do to the best of his ability. We ALL know that and we ALL want that, it's just that a lot of us thought that's what Ashley was doing until Keegan walked and he may just still be our best chance. If you want him out then specify what will improve our situation, but with specifics please not just "Ashley's s****, Keegan's a messiah, the old board were great" type remarks which frankly any retard can spout. no, I'm not obsessed with the past. But you should learn from the past. I only used ex directors of the club to try and point out that showing ambition for the club was a matter of choice and not automatic, which appeared to be what many people thought. Sadly, they have found out the hard way re recent events and witnessing new people running the club who have not chosen to take this route. Looking forward, we need owners of the club who have the desire to succeed and the understanding of how to do it in terms of running one of the biggest clubs in the country. Until that happens, we won't match the european qualifications and the champions League run etc, and that is not looking in the past at all, its pointing out the blatantly obvious that many people chose to ignore and sadly STILL choose to ignore. The conclusion being - in keeping with your thread title - that any suggestion that Ashley is anywhere near being better than even the Halls and Shepherd, never mind the best ever, is ridiculous and utter nonsense. It was fairly easy for me [and one or two others] to see the signs of the direction the club was going by the way, having seen it before. All it takes is to open your eyes. Seeing as you have known the correct path all along, can you find us a mega-billionaire owner please? One who will back his manager to the tune of around £50m-£100m each year to prove their ambition to compete with the top 4 because according to your admirably high standards nothing less will do.

Didn't we try that? David Edgar? So you're advocating bringing in someone younger, less developed and with less first-team experience than Edgar? And, considering Edgar was played ahead of said kid, most likely less talented... At this point in time? Re-signing Carr would almost certainly enhance our playing squad. Yes, it signifies exactly where we are as a club - it's appalling, diabolical, an indictment on every person who has had any authority since... Carr left. But, yes, signing an international right back on a free transfer on "most likely" smallish wages - if his name wasn't Carr, if he was an (largely) unknown Asian or African player never seen before we'd be stoked to sign him. After all, I'm sure that, crap as he is, someone could make a ripping YouTube vid of Carr The point is to have cover for Beye right? I saw enough of Carr's injury blighted career here to know you couldn't rely on him to be fit in any case. I'd rather see Taylor there. As an aside, I find it disgraceful that we don't have any young lads in the reserves who play specialist right back or in Butt's midfield role.

Alan Oliver

He'd break down after 2 games. Put a kid in there.

Or us for that matter. If he's really a toon supporter as he's alleged to be why go for Everton unless it's just a lever to get Ashley to drop his price?

That's my thinking on all this as well.

Should be said mind, whether he was a good bloke meaning to do well, or a business shark looking to bleed the club dry (neither true IMO), it was a bit daft calling this thread "Mike Ashley - Newcastle's best ever chairman/owner.", considering the events of the last few weeks.

Well at least they've had their week's free publicity.

He'll be back for the spring fixtures, the lad always takes an extended holiday this time of year.

Apparently their latest offer is £200m which Ashley won't accept. They say they won't go higher because that will leave them with no funds for transfers, development etc. Waste of time if that's true.

Good article in general, but the bit in bold is exactly how I feel. Fucking furious at the lack of fight in our players and using the situation as an excuse to not bother turning up. I didn't see Liverpool's players capitulate during their turmoil last season.

Hope this isn't true:

tbh if Wise and Llambias were sacked tomorrow and Mort brought back I'd probably shit myself with glee. Mort is a hard nosed businessman as well at the end of the day. He told Deby to fuck off when they asked for more than £2m for Giles Barnes last year didn't he?

I would say the second option. If he wanted to sell quick, there were obviously buyers all along, supposedly Man City's big spending Sheikhs wanted in but got knocked back at the time. Ambani flew to England but got no encouragement. Since the fans protested suddenly there are all sorts coming out of the woodwork to buy in. Obviously something has changed.

NE5 prefers to spout statistics when it suits him rather than reflect honestly with perspective, so don't hold your breath on that one.

You have to keep pointing it out because from a financial perspective it doesnt back up the position you are taking. Debt is fine but no debt is better because debt has a cost, r. I wont go into the models for you. I'm sick of reading the opinions of people on finance and business who are not qualified to open their mouths on the subject. However, we all have a cross to bear Johnny. aye, the same old people still defending it, as we hurtle down towards where the Halls and Shepherd found us. You have to acknowledge at some point that Shepherd had stopped spending on the team, that's how Roeder had one of the weakest squads since the days of McKeag who you keep coming back to. At the point Ashley took over the well had run dry, the big money signings had put the club into significant debt with no return following Souness reign of terror, and Roeder's bumbling ineptness. There was no Europe, we were doing shit at that point. This isn't a defence of Ashley, btw, just bringing some perspective. comes back to a point also mentioned before though. You may think that Roeder was "inept" or whatever, but if you want to compare the 2 regimes ie McKeag etc and Shepherd/Hall etc, then where we were under Roeder was deemed success [not shit] under the McKeags and his cronies. Thats also a perspective. Understand ? Its called "higher expectation", which I've mentioned in the Shepherds Legacy thread, as well as other threads in the past. If you just want to pick selective periods to support your POV, then I would say that the most successful period we had was when SJH was the Chairman. As soon as Shepherd took the reigns, the rot set in. Under Hall we went from being 2nd in the league to struggling against relegation due to Shepherd's tenure. This is also an undeniable fact. the most successful period was when Keegan was manager mate. Nowt to do with the chairman. Its the players and managers who are responsible for winning games. You would come across a lot better if like other people you dropped this infatuation with personality driven agendas. Sir John did nothing without the backing and support of his fellow board members, because on his own he was a minority shareholder and couldn't have done it on his own. This situation is exactly the same as the one that Shepherd presided over too. I would like someone - like yourself - to tell me how much more ambition they think the club could show than to succeed Keegan with a manager who had won league titles with 2 different clubs, and won 3 manager of the year awards and 2 FA Cups. And I'm certainly not talking about Joe Kinnear. If you read any of my previous posts going back some while now, I have said like you, that I would love an owner who would back Keegan with the funds he requires. Unlike Shepherd I wouldn't even demand a trophy or a CL spot at the end of it. Hopefully we aren't too far from that day right now. It won't be Shepherd though, he's trying to buy some club in Spain for £40m.

The club's getting sold isn't it? That means he's making way for whichever next best leader who is willing to put his money where his mouth is. That's how it is, that's how it's always been. Not sure what your point is there? It means he's a leader who can't provide what you want. The next best thing is to sell to someone who will hopefully do it better.

As it was his mistake to overlook them, I don't agree that they are a valid reason for curtailing his spending plans. That's all I'm saying. Well it's his money at the end of the day mate. He's not going to spend it because you want him to. Let's hope whoever comes in once the club is sold will have so much money they can blast everyone out of the water. Even those who are already blasting everyone else out of the water.

Well, that's a point that was also discussed. What stance should NUSC take on the new owners (whoever they may be)? That the new owners may be no better than Ashley, or (heaven help us) even worse was recognised. Basically, the stance taken is a 'guarded welcome' in that if they are here to genuinely build the club up then NUSC welcomes them, but if they're just aboput exploiting the club/supporters, obviously NUSC is going to be critical. Well I'm sure Greggs and the Irish Bar so far have appreciated their coffers being boosted at the expense of the football club, it seems strange though that you only offer "guarded welcome" to those who will invest big money in Newcastle United rather than feed off it. Greggs is a big business with local roots, why can't they organise a local consortium to buy the club? The guarded welcome is because we don't know what we're going to get. I mean look how pleased we were when Ashley took over and for a long time we thought he was going to be good for us and NUFC and he went and made us look like mugs. So yeah, I think we will be guarded. Once bitten, twice shy as they say. So you offer guarded welcomes to investors who could save the club, but unqualified support to independent businesses who are profiting from Newcastle United without giving anything back?

The club's getting sold isn't it? That means he's making way for whichever next best leader who is willing to put his money where his mouth is. That's how it is, that's how it's always been.

Well, that's a point that was also discussed. What stance should NUSC take on the new owners (whoever they may be)? That the new owners may be no better than Ashley, or (heaven help us) even worse was recognised. Basically, the stance taken is a 'guarded welcome' in that if they are here to genuinely build the club up then NUSC welcomes them, but if they're just aboput exploiting the club/supporters, obviously NUSC is going to be critical. Well I'm sure Greggs and the Irish Bar so far have appreciated their coffers being boosted at the expense of the football club, it seems strange though that you only offer "guarded welcome" to those who will invest big money in Newcastle United rather than feed off it. Greggs is a big business with local roots, why can't they organise a local consortium to buy the club?

He spent fuck all of Coloccini taking into account £12m recouped on Milner. What if we'd got offered £30m for Milner?

Because it is being used to pay wages and installments for players like Owen and Luque. If you're honest with yourself though, you'll realise that if he doesn't have enough money to put into the club (i.e. at least 15-20m purely for transfers a year) then it's pointless him being here as we would just be standing still. Which is why the club is for sale probably.

He spent £10m on Coloccini. Where was the fool-proof residual value in that?