Taylor Swift

Spurs paid something like £10m for Bale, and Zoggy's really not worth that much. We're probably going to have pay them something like £5m + Zoggy for Bale, and even then, I don't think they're going to accept our offer.

The more I think about this, the more Parky's right. We're going to have to spend £100m in a year or two on about 4 quality players if we want to compete.

I personally would go in heavy this summer and give us a strong chance of qualifying for Europe etc, so I agree with your 3rd para. Profit and income has to be increased and that isn't going to happen with treading water. Why the chuff didn't you say that originally then, you gonk! That way would undoubtedly be a lot more exciting, like, as I've said. I thought you knew I was a slash and burn merchant. Should have bolded the bit I meant in particular, I was gagging for someone to state the alternate route. I'd go as far as to say we in all reality have no choice but to compete. For falling further behind or standing still is going to hinder and sacrifice future income and branding goals. It's a tricky one though as we don't really know what all this gradual building lark really means...Is it a 5yr plan or a 10yr plan? When will our breakout year come? Wether it happens now or in 3 years time, speculative investment on the pitch has to happen. We do have to go for it, sooner rather than later as well. In the end, we'll have to acquire top class players and they'll be pricey and command hefty wages. It HAS to happen, if we want to end up back in the Champions League on a regular basis. Tbf, I agree with the initial premise of trimming the squad etc. but our squad is freaking small. We already lack cover in quite a few positions (up front, full backs and CM) so I don't think it's feasible to expect another negative turnover of players this summer. It'd be interesting to see our wages (net) in comparison with the other teams who we'll be competing with. I think we won't be that far ahead of the clubs around us, which would suggest that our financial problems lie with turnover, and not wages. We really do have to increase our turnover, though. Look at Spurs, who have a turnover of over £100m and aren't even in the Champions League, and compared to the £90m-ish turnover that we had when we WERE in the CL. I don't think we, as a club, brand and company, is even near maximising our potential off the field. Of course, to the traditional football fan, this smacks of consumerism/suits etc. and all the negative connotations that come with it. But, we either have to step up or we're going to get left behind. You (Rich) started off comparing us to Spurs, but how is it even possible that they've got a turnover (from last year's irrc, which does not include the tv money yet) higher than what we've ever recorded? If we have a high turnover, we'll be able to pay Owen £100k/week without worrying about it, and we'll be able to pay clubs £20m in one go to make sure they actually sign for us. The only we're going to be able to do that is if we can compete on the field, and the only way to do that is to sign quality players, and quality players cost lots of money.

Well, I think our wage bill is actually what's to be expected of a struggling mid-table Premiership team (i.e. one who's looking to punch above this level) atm. Sure, we do have a few underachieving players who aren't obviously worth what we're paying, but the way to fix this problem is not to decrease the wage bill, but actually to increase our turnover. The only way we can significantly reduce our wage bill is if we get rid of all these high-earners. But, we already have a tiny squad as it is and I don't think we can afford an even smaller one if we hope to be challenging for 5th place next season. Who's going to take Viduka, Emre, Duff and Smith anyway? The way Mort should be thinking is that we spend big this summer, bring in top class players who'll want good money, and we take a loss for the year. Fuck it, we might lose £20m in a year but we're speculating to accumulate. If things work out, we'll have Europe for the season after that and it'll be a massive boost to our coffers (£20m iirc). And then we push on from there. If we trim our squad even further this season, we'll only have unproven youngsters as backups and there's no chance we're going to get into Europe with them.

amazing comment, considering the amount of foreign tosspots we've had that don't give a monkeys for the club. I think that he's getting the stick because he's a Geordie giving 100% and so fans think he should be signing a new contract for nothing. No one thinks that. You're just being daft now. Well, I think its true. I can also assure you that in my case anyway, I'm not bigging him up because he's an honest geordie giving 100%, although such a quality isn't to be sniffed at. You think Geordies and Newcastle fans in general think Taylor should accept a low wage because he's a Geordie 100%-er? Sorry, I don't follow your logic one bit. how many people have slated him for his contract demands So? What if his performances haven't merited a raise so far? How do you know that everyone who has slated him for his contract demands do so because he's a Geordie and not for other, imo, good and valid reasons?

good post, rebel.

Whoa, that's really cool from Bellamy. He should be a role model to every other Premiership footballer.

Decade man, decade. I'm not tired, and I was interested by this, so got my calculator out. It depends on how you calculate it (using figures up to today):- Villa have 516 points over the last 10 years, Newcastle 533. Villa have finished above Newcastle 6 out of 10 years. Villa's total sum of finishing positions = 93. Newcastle's total sum of finishing positions = 93. So, the average league position = 9.3 for both clubs. That's a pretty even spread of underachievement. The main difference is that you got to play in the CL a few times, whereas we didn't. Fuck this, I'm going to bed, Please don't start That calculation is pretty much the one I did when I posted in my first ever 'board' thread. Good times, good times. But, you're looking at it the wrong way. If you do the calculations for every team, we actually come out 5th (tied with you, now). Man Utd average something like 1.9 (iirc), so does that mean they've been the 2nd best team over the past 10 years? Of course not.

I still don't see any reasoned argument against this. If they're good enough (i.e. strong enough, fast enough and good enough on the ball), why not? Of course they won't get special treatment. With that much on the line, they won't expect nor receive special treatment. Read the question again, btw, it says should they be 'allowed'. There's not going to a rule saying that at least one woman must be on the pitch at all times nor are they going to receive special treatment. If they're good enough, why not?

If she's good enough, why not?

What could he have done, though?

Smith was comically bad, true, but Viduka touched the ball about 6 times in the first half and lost it 5 times. It wasn't just Smith's fault that we were dominated in the second half today. They really just came out pushing and pressuring and none of our players could keep hold the ball. They also sent one more defender over to Martins, which is why KK was gesturing for Martins to go play more central (more space there). Our outlet was gone, there wasn't any space for our players and thus, we couldn't keep hold of possession.

Because the expectations for next season are already pretty high imo. At least there's an undercurrent of feeling that we'll easily get top 10 next year and maybe look to challenge for top 6. In reality it is going to be fucking hard since all the teams challenging us have had a year or two headstart.

I don't really recall any cheating. Just thought they were better than us in the second half.

So he's not saying he won't have enough money to spend, but saying that whatever money he will spend, it won't be enough to bridge the gap because he can't spend money on the players that Chelsea have got..? Does anyone else read it the same I did? It is disheartening to hear him say this, but I reckon it's just him trying to lower the expectations for next season. Edit: Nut and Skeletor seems to agree.

Might just be that. Mort's a little inexperienced, and he possibly shouldn't have come out and said those things. Or maybe he's serious? I know it might contradict what Mort's been saying but Mort generally knows what to say to 'appease' the crowd whereas KK has always spoken from his heart.

This thread's going 30 pages.

Please, stop

This season's with Ginola 14 on it.

You had me there

Odds on Bruce playing a weakened team against his beloved 'United'?

Well I will say this to you and I hope you listen......YOU SHOULD HAVE GONE TO SPECSAVERS! What? You need new glasses if you think Taylor was poor today,he was one of our best players today Are you thick or down right stupid? Answers in the next post please. Moron. Ok....I dont want to get in a slagging match here like but how could you say Taylor was poor today is behind me! No not thick,stupid or a moron!This is a forum after all everyones entitled to there opinon but people on here seem to be slagging Taylor off all the time even when he does play well! Can't believe my eyes.

Well I will say this to you and I hope you listen......YOU SHOULD HAVE GONE TO SPECSAVERS! What? You need new glasses if you think Taylor was poor today,he was one of our best players today

Peter Crouch. Good close control like Viduka but less injury prone and with a set of legs on him. I'm with you here. Wouldn't mind Crouch at all. Him and few midfielders with some pace/strength and I think this formation can work really well.