Unbelievable

Which is what those people are suggesting should happen, not what they believe will happen. No different to the people saying we should have a traditional manager who has the final say on transfers, when obviously we know that won't happen either. I doubt anyone here believes we can produce a great system that will bring in a very balanced quality squad. But that also doesn't mean the director of Football/head coach system is a bad thing, because that's not what stops us from getting that kind of squad, Mike Ashley and the constraints he puts on the kind of signings we can make stops us from getting that kind of squad and that won't change with or without the current setup in place. There's absolutely nothing in the Charnley statement to suggest that there will be a healthy relationship between the head coach, chief scout/DoF and MD/dealmaker, so I'm just astounded reading so many people's optimism regarding us openly stating that the new manager will have very little say in transfers. That is all. It's just a system devised for maximum profit in the transfer market, not one supporting what should be the main focus of a football club, i.e. the (first team) manager and his squad of players.

I think people who praise Graham Carr (rightly) for his great finds and are optimistic about having a head coach with little say in the transfer department, but who can get the best out of any Carr approved transfer target Charnley manages to ‘get over the line’ are hopelessly naïve. Yes, there is no denying that we have managed to bring in some very good players at reasonable fees in recent years (we have also brought in some duds but that’s beside the main point I’m trying to make). Such a setup could work in theory if Carr’s (proven) scouting ability added to Chanrley’s (as yet largely unproven) dealmaking ability is used for the benefit of the manager, i.e. to compose a good squad of players that compliments each other well. Over the Ashley years we have always had some good, “top six” players at any stage, but we have also had glaring weaknesses, and I mean Championship level players at best in the first team, let alone the squad. On the pitch, this will always hold us back from reaching the potential level of our best players, hence why they want away as soon as they have proven they can cut it in the Premier League, and we start all over again, only the next “great deal” we do may be in a completely different position, or with complete disregard to our “philosophy” of play (ha, I know we have none, which is part of the problem. Graham Carr is a brilliant spotter of talent, and he apparently has a wide array of contacts throughout football who enable him to sniff out the best deals for individual players. We are however forever hindered by the fact that our transfer dealings focus on getting the best possible deal each and every time. We would rather buy another left back when we already have three if we believe there is money to be made, than bring in a centre back we are desperate for. Centre forwards cost serious money, so we will take punts on cheap ones until we hit the jackpot and move them on for huge profit as soon as someone offers a healthy return on our investment. This is no way for a head coach to come in and be successful. Yes, a head coach should primarily be involved with coaching the first team and getting the best out of the players at his disposal. But he should also give direction to the transfer team (i.e. Carr and Charnley) of what he needs. So for example “if we are potentially selling Sissoko this transfer window, I want to change the setup slightly from counter attack (his major strength) towards possession football, so go and get me an attacking midfield player who can create and score goals”. Or “Steven Taylor has broken down for the rest of the season (again) and we plan to not extend his expiring contract, go and get me a commanding centre back who would make good foil for Coloccini”. Or even: “I think we are light in the striker department, and my style of play requires somebody to hold the ball up as well as somebody with good finishing. I know this guy from my previous job. His name is XYZ. I think he could do a job for us. Can you have a look at him and get him in, or someone of his ilk?”. What I am trying to say is that the manager (head coach) may not get final say on who the club ultimately bring in, but he SHOULD be the person who sets the requirements for the transfer team to work towards, which is obviously not the case at our club, nor is it what is planned reading through the lines of Charnley’s statement. It’s all good and well saying we need a head coach who can make players better and who doesn’t require heavy involvement in player incomings and outgoings, but this is such a simplistic approach. Players generally improve because they can play with confidence in a team that does well. This requires a manager with tactical awareness who is provided with the correct tools to execute these tactics. I can’t see any high profile, promising head coach, should they even be interested in the first place lasting long here if his reputation is damaged by the evident lack of ambition from the people at the top.

I suggest you direct your attention to this section: Outright lies. Enormous stretching of the imagination. Charnley says he doesn't want a yes man, but that the right person will be one who says "yes" to the Ashley doctrine, who says "yes" to his proscribed media role and who says "yes" to Carr's signings. You could argue that it's all true in manager-speak, but history says that the upper echelons will say whatever it takes to appease the fans and that they have admitted openly that public statements are no more than PR exercises. Being a Newastle United fan these days requires critical literacy and a sound understanding of the language of persuasion. I'm not sure. he says he wants someone to buy into their philosophy and show a united front not question the club policy in public.there is nothing wrong with that. We don't know how Pardew was behind the scenes we presume he was a yes man but we don't truly know if he questioned club policy or process in private. One of the reasons they gave for sacking Hughton was that he was too much of a push over and just accepted things. I think the picture he paints could entirely true it could also be a complete lie, but we don't know for sure, nor will we likely ever know. He is absolutely right though that surounding yourselves with yes men will get you nowhere in business, Ashley is a multi billionaire he could never have gotten that successful in business by recruiting yes men all the time, maybe NUFC is his exemption who knows. I'm quite baffled by your failure to see through the bullshit here afar, taking everything at face value without looking at the facts. Quite clearly from that statement Lee Charnley is as much a yes man as you could imagine. I know LLambias suggested that Hughton was sacked because he was too soft ("you don't know how horrible we can be"), but in reality he DID challenge their view that some of the more important players in the dressing room, the ones that made that relegation/promotion team what it was (such as Kevin Nolan and to a lesser extent Joey Barton and Andy Carroll) were expendable and held too much power. Hughton challenged them much more than Pardew ever did, they didn't like it, and he got the boot.

Pretty sure Armstrong and possibly others don't have tl be registered yet

Would De Boer stay at Ajax if Barcelona came calling? Of course he wouldn't. He will not even be remotely interested in us. I can't wait until the summer where we will court all these top managers, offering them peanuts and a straitjacket manager role at a club deprived of ambition and investment, only to end up with Carver for the remaining duration of his contract.

Completely unwilling to pay a single penny in compensating another team to hire their manager. Except he suggests that they are. There are some that can [come now], whether they are tied to other clubs but have a compensation element involved or are out-of-work. I interpret that as "some of the applicants would require us to pay compensation for". It's a nothing statement. The proof of the pudding will be in the eating. Just because they've mentioned the word compensation doesn't mean they're intending to pay any...

He talks about not wanting a yes man for the head coach job, and how they continuously challenge each other within the club. As if this slimy arse licker would have the balls to challenge Ashley to pay up in order to release their preferred choice for next manager or to strengthen the glaring holes in our squad in this transfer window. He's just a slightly more eloquent, less brazen Llambias. A yes man if ever I saw one.

Decent summary when you take away all the layers of verbal makeup

About the only part I didn't agree with. But I'm sure both side will be arse kissing a while longer as to not leak any goss on each other. As soon as pardew left this window was done. No way we'd buy any player without a manager, so no loss there. I agree in principle of waiting for the right candidate, however, we need to arrange that move ASAP, have it signed and ready to go for the summer, which means carver knows his place, and the fans know the future. If it's all genuine then there's not much in that which upsets or annoys me. Whether it's the truth time will tell. I won't hold my breath but I wont abuse him either for simply doing his job to a better standard than anything we've seen from Ashley's cronies so far. No better or worse than Llambias tbh. Short memory. You must have. This may as well have been a copy paste from a Llambias statement.

The most idiotic statement has to be we have a full roster so bringing in players this January window was never on the cards. Does this fucker even know we have three centre backs, one of whom is out for the season?

Yep

Same as Pardew for me. Ask any of those pundits if they'd have him managing the side they support. Bet not.

Eurosport Cheers. Got a little money on Algeria should see off SA fairly easily

I've only just tuned in, but SA should have scored. Twice.

http://img.thesun.co.uk/aidemitlum/archive/01063/Vuvuzelas_12_682x4_1063980a.jpg

I can't get my head around so many journalists dismissing Tuchel as a viable option for a short term appointment. Yes, he is apparently tied in a contract with Mainz until the end of the season, but surely, if he was interested of course, Mainz would be more than willing to negotiate on that score. I'm confident they would rather receives some money for him and see him leave the country than move to a rival Bundesliga team for free in a few months. Providing the "lists of candidates" are somewhat correct, that makes two excellent candidates available immediately. We just got 3.5m for Pardew for crying out loud, I'm sure we could afford to get a good manager in now and arrange whatever they need in terms of backroom staff a few months down the line if they are currently in a job they don't want to leave mid season. I have no doubt that if we fail to appoint anyone short term they will tell us that it is beneficial to wait until the summer when our first choice candidates are available, only to see all of them turn us down, and we'll happily give John Carver the job permanently. It's now or never for a creditable appointment - there are at least two excellent candidates available.

He's beyond shit

These last few pages Where even was that 15k + contract termination clause thing from anyway?

No chance Howe will come here sadly, I'd love him as well. If ever a statement summed up how far we have fallen under Ashley then that's surely it. Ridiculous knowing we have no chance of getting a manager from Bournemouth. It's also completely inaccurate. http://talksport.com/football/eddie-howe-rules-himself-out-running-newcastle-job-150107131363

Rémi garde insulte Thiago Motta - YouTube

I believe P$G fans hate his guts after he insulted Thiago Motta in the PSG-Lyon league cup final just before he resigned, so I seriously doubt they would consider him regardless of ability.

He seemed to be hinting that he actually would turn it down. That may just be him applying pressure to Charnley, but overall it doesn't help the situation. I know the bloke passionately wants the job, but he really hasn't handled the situation well. Agreed. He should have known his place and served the club selfishly rather than put himself forward so publicly and make it into this high pressure trial period. I mean, has the bloke ever looked at his managerial record? If he wants to manage so badly why doesn't he apply for a Gateshead type of job and go from there?

Couldn't they have just come out and said: "look, here's our new manager. We believe the current squad is good enough to stay up and we will keep our powder dry until the summer (haha) in order to let the new manager assess what he's got and what he requires" if they are such cheapskates that they won't even fix the two glaring holes in our squad with the tens and tens of millions they must be sitting on by now?