Dr Venkman

i'm a bit disapointed having lead twice and not won, but at the end of the day, we have a new manager and so many new signings playing a new system that we cant expect miracles. its very positive that we're unbeaten and that viduka got his first for us, obviously we need some creativity in midfield but i've got high hopes for barton and who knows we may even get a nice surprise transfer next week. calm down lads, under roeder or souness we'd have been lucky to get 1 point from these three games, nevermind 5, early days man, early days.

Agreed. thirded

Does the name have to be theme specific like? And I don't think TU want to focus purely on fans interested in signing anyway as that will alienate those that don't and to be honest, you don't need to be part of a group or club to sing anyway, if we are to have such a fans club or body I think they'll get more shrift by promoting a more inclusive policy about the atmosphere. I.e. instead of focusing on just signing, focus on the general atmosphere, that way they can cover many things to do with it and many fans affected by these things. If they're entirely focused on getting people to sign then they may as well call themselves the "signing end" or "signers". You don't want to box yourself in when creating a club/group. By calling themselves the Ultras, they've kind of already done that and now have to go through a rebranding phase if you like. The Mags is what and who we are, and if any fan body were to adopt The Mags as their moniker, not only would it be traditional but it would also encompass anything associated with being a fan of NUFC really. Furthermore, "Tune Army" is wackytastic and more akin to Soccer AM. I know it's just a name, but I couldn't take anything seriously that goes by the name of "Tune Army", when I heard that Loony Toons theme tune and start/ending came into my head Some good points, but I don't think they are looking to change what they are all about, purely the name. Oh I know they aren't just about signing, hence why I don't think a name so specific to such a theme would be the way to go. Have I been wooshed BTW? Just I can't honestly believe anyone would consider Tune Army seriously, other than for a laugh. BTW you get, I had another good name, but in responding to your post I've forgotten it mate, its siNGing man

Yeah we got nothing better do with our time than making up stories of Icelandic millionaires trying to buy a mediocre football club. Think again you t*** oooooooooooh

hmmm, i'm undecided on this, i mean, i like the idea that st james would always be this cauldron of noise, but tbh i get the feeling that thats got as much to do with bragging rights as it has to how we actually think it'll make the players perform, sometimes i think its great when things are a bit quiet and then the team start to press and THEN the crowd get behind them, i think it keeps a link between the fans and players to some extent, in an age where there basically isnt one, its not like you can congratulate the players in the bar after the match anymore. i'm all for vocal support, but yeah, spontaneous sounds best to me.

not much to add to whats already been said but i'm happy with him so far

coz we're all hoping its utter cack?

interesting point that, i wonder if, with all the comments from john hall regarding ashley as being the perfect person to take us forward etc etc, that there could have been some sort of clause written into the deal so he couldnt sell the club on at a profit within a certain time frame? i dont suppose its likely though, seems as if it would have been more of a gentlemans agreement, or that it wasnt even mentioned and that they were just happy to sell up to someone english and to hell with what they did once the club was theirs

i'm hoping this one's gonna be wide of the mark tbh

Understand where your coming from but to be honest nobody really knows who the f*** Mike Ashley is or his motivations/intentions. thats the problem imo, if he just came out and said he's here for the long run then these stories would go away, mort has said it i suppose, but we need to hear it from the owner. having these takeover stories come out is ridiculous so soon after he bought the club, does anyone know if this sort of thing happened with the other clubs recently taken over? villa, west ham etc, or was it just a case of the new owners making their intentions public and that was that?

hmmmm, not a clue what to make of this like

alves, we need defenders

excellent, best signing since spurs payed 7 million for jenas

Allardyce on the backing he's had. “We’ve invested well, I’ve spent more than I’ve ever spent this summer and I’m grateful for that,” explained a manager who has so far signed seven players. “I’m fortunate to have that, I’ve been able to invest more on transfer fees and more on wages and I’ve got bigger and better players. When you do that you have more quality, you can play better football. When you don’t, it’s about upsetting bigger and better teams, it’s about embarrassing them and it’s something you don’t get credit for. You’re doing it with lesser players and that makes you better than them. But it also means people start saying you’re something you’re not.” http://icnewcastle.icnetwork.co.uk/newcastleunited/journalsport/tm_method=full%26objectid=19618467%26siteid=50081-name_page.html how come chaps like you riducule the Chronicle, then take bits that suit you Never mind. I expect you will ignore this mind : http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/football/premiership/newcastle/article2240973.ece Whether the new owner will let me spend as much as Freddy would have is something we’ll find out come the end of August [when the transfer window closes] but there’s a few players I’ve targeted, either for August or when the window reopens in January, and so far, so good.” and THAT, is all I have said. No more, no less. Quite amazing how you and others are jumping around just because a post isn't either totally anti-Shepherd, or pro-Ashley. But I expected that from the likes of you too. You ridicule the Times, then take the bits that suit you though. Their claims about the Owen clause, which turned out to be correct, is one example that springs to mind. Also, that Chronicle article quoted above has crediblity because it contains direct quotes rather than just supposition. I suspect you realise this though. just so long as its either anti Shepherd/Hall or pro-Ashley eh Alex mackems.gif I don't ridicule the Times BTW, just certain pompous journos when they publish "opinions", especially something about Newcastle because it is anti-Newcastle , most of who are the same people who laughingly said that Keegan "spent a load of money and failed because he won nothing" For the record, I have taken on board both quotes. See my post earlier where I state "Just because I want to believe Ashley will back the board more than the Halls and Shepherd doesn't mean I'm stupid enough to pretend they have just yet". Because, basically, whatever you want to believe, they haven't. Not yet. And you don't know if they will or not any more than I do. Yet. haha, i cant believe this is still going, in about twenty threads at once

thats not a worry, at all

hasnt he said a few times that the whole family is happy here? little girl at school etc, are you telling me she commutes by helicopter too?

better team, better manager, confidence high, home advantage, i think we'll win

oh god,the shepherd europe argument in here aswell is it, get over it man

we were great today, so happy to see us playing like a team, also would like to say i thought viduka looked very assured on the ground, great feet, and of course gave them hell in the air, something shola just can not do well done lads

i'm in

yes

woohoo!

gotta be geremi, pointless having a keeper captain imo

fucking get in

This post rates close to 10/10. I can guarantee no detractor will have the balls to debate or dispute it on it's own merits but may well hark back to the days before Shepherd and Hall as a crutch defence and attempt to divert the issues addressed. You would be wrong then. I can guarantee that no detractor, especially those who weren't around pre - 1992 and think that NUFC have always won trophies galore and the Halls and Shepherd are responsible for bringing an end to decades of glory, would have the balls to dispute that a young quality defender is just as good a buy as an older quality defender, as he can spend his career with you, but whether they are young or old, you have to be prepared to pay a fee if they are under contract. And the competition will be hot if they are good, and the competition will not be so hot if they are not so good. And if they are good, they won't sign for clubs that they think are not going to be successful, or clubs that offer less money than someone else. We did quite well to sign Woodgate. For big money. There was also unknown, or cheap foreigners over the years such as Dumas, Marcelino, Goma, Boumsong, Babayaro, Pistone, Charvet, and younger players such as Bramble, O'Brien, Griffin, as part of a "plan" for those who think everybody but us has a "plan". Lets hope these new defenders are better than most of that little lot, the vast majority of whom were celebrated when arrived because we needed defenders. The bottom line, is that if you want quality, you invariably pay, either with a transfer fee or in wages. Woodgate is the absolute proof. Or rather, if you don't, then your chances of success - depending on your ambition for the club - is seriously diminished. But - at least in terms of the ones who we paid money for, they tried, and backed the manager. I cant fault that. I do think there is evidence though that Allardyce can get good players for small amounts or on a free. We are lucky to have him and we both know who to thank. As I've said earlier, he's said he can't get the players he wants because we have no European football so it makes sense if he's looking to bring in players that can get us into Europe on short term contracts so he can try for the players he wants in January/next summer. Dismissing people because they're free is stupid when nearly everyone would have taken Campbell and Distin under the same circumstances. Spending money on players you don't want to keep numpties on messageboards happy is not the way forward either, both manager and chairman have said the money is there so I really can't see what your problem is, and before you start I couldn't care less about Shepherd or Hall now, they're history and Ashley will get my full support until I think things are going wrong, that's not 2 weeks after taking over either. I think numpties on message boards - or anywhere for that matter - are people who think that success can be obtained without spending money, people who slate the last board for not spending cash despite spending bucketfuls and are now saying not spending any is the way forward, people who think having a DOF cures all your ills, and biggest of all people who think all you need is a "plan" to be successful and we haven't had one having played in the Champions League, europe regularly and reached a couple of Cup Finals in the last decade. There are 2 possibilities here One is that Ashley came in and knew it would cost 200m quid to buy the club and clear the debt. If this is the case, the slate is clean and he has written this money off and is running the club in the way he sees fit. Two is that he didn't, meaning he's not a shrewd as people are making out ? And another 3rd option, which Vic touched on, is that Allardyce is still thinking in Bolton mode, and not high enough for Newcastle. Which is it ? bear in mind his comment about "they would be stupid not to back me now" He's said he's got money but the players he wants want come because we have no European football - You seem to be ignoring this and trying to get it through to you is like banging your head against a brick wall. Do you think Allardyce is lying? If you look at our dealings in the past we managed to sweeten the lack of Euopean/Champions League football through grossly exaggerated wages and minimum release clauses (means to an end). If Mort/Ashley/Sam have put a stop to this and offered a fair wage but no 'compensation wages' as it were then it has to be a good thing and falls in the middle of your two arguments. So I wouldn't say Sam is lying, but under the Freddy regime I reckon one or two of these players would have been persuaded to sign due to our 'ambtion'. Be careful you aren't labelled a Shepherd lover or anything else similarly daft, simply for pointing out something which is a very real possibility. And you think paying over the odds in terms of wages is a good thing? It's one of the contributing factors as to why this club doesn't make a profit. I suppose it was a good idea to pay Luque a bigger wage to make up for our lack of European football? Shame we offered him so much that nobody will take him of our hands, not even on loan. I did insinuate not to use the extreme case. I should have known someone would. By the other extreme I could say if we carry on not paying the going rate and buying cheap players, as you seem to want to do, we would end up like the mackems have been [which is where we were right alongside them before the Halls and Shepherd], Sheff Wed, Wolves etc How do you work out we'll end up like Sheffied Wed and Wolves when we've already signed the likes of Viduka, Barton, Smith and Geremi this summer? All on good wages no doubt. You've stopped reading my comments properly. I have said a few times that Allardyce has done very well with his limited resources - geddit ? How much have we made through sales again ? They've been in charge 2 weekss and you've already made your mind up that they haven't got any money to spend. How are you going to feel if they go out and buy baines and this Drago fella? Will that make you happy to see them spending money? Notwithstanding Ive no idea how good this Drago is, and I'm not sure how good I think Baines is, then if they back the manager, of course. My expectation is for them to at least match the s**** board that they replaced, by qualifying for the Champions League, getting a few top 4 finishes, playing regularly in europe. Wouldn't you agree that a better board should prove it by doing better or not ? I haven't made my mind up at all BTW, I read what Allardyce said and didn't put rose tinted specs on when I read it. Maybe it was a shock tactic that worked, but it shouldn't be like that, if it is indeed a sign of things to come, or he is going to spend his career as Newcastle battling for cash, then he will walk. is it really ALL about league finishes though? surely there has to be SOME element of thought paid to reducing debt, building a squad with free signings and relatively low level signings so that we can progress as a team, looking at defence aswell as attack, its all very well spunking big on attacking players to make up for our lack of quality at the back, and lack of quality in the management team, but isnt it better to make sure all the core elements are in place first? to be honest it sounds to me like you were so traumatised by the pre 1992 era, that after things have gotten better under the halls/shepherds you're just reluctant to let go, things change man, clubs move on, sheperd was a cretin and we're lucky to be rid of him, there are so many things that matter more than 'releasing funds' like a lot of people have said before me, give them a chance man Can't believe the furore just because myself - and a few others - have expressed concern about Allardyce's own words to be honest. Anyone would think that people were pretending he didn't say them for some reason. Can't think why. If anyone knows the true situation as regarding backing of the manager, its him. i take your point, but the same could be said of your over-reaction to allardyces comments, posting 'back to the dark ages' every five minutes, as someone already said, sam is a moaner man, we never know why managers say certain things, lets see what happens, there's nothing wrong with a bit of optimism, everything in moderation