AyeDubbleYoo

I'm tempted to agree, from what I've seen Long would work the channels and run onto through balls better, but Bendtner would provide an alternative/competition to Ba.

I obviously didn't mean that. I'm not positive about the results, but I'm positive that we're trying for some decent players. We can't make NUFC any more successful and appealing than it is, and we won't pay over the odds in wages. Therefore if we go for top players they are quite likely to reject us. It's all part of the process.

The fact is our first 2 choice strikers have turned us down, we can't do anything if our first choices did not want to sign. I know and I agree, that's why I'm positive about our work so far.

I agree we need players, I hope we get them and think we are trying. We've already done some good deals IMO.

Because we seemingly are using the money of his sale to pay off other players wages. Simple. Not really what I was going at though. This on the other hand: "And yet here we are, with people happy to 'hope it allows us the ability to react to opportunities, if there are any'. But didn't the Carroll money just go onto our bottom line, and some money comes off our bottom line when we spend anything? I just don't see this logical link that because the Carroll sale happen it was needed to sanction the signing we've made. Every incoming and outgoing is just part of one balance sheet.

I don't know, we'll see if it happens. You seem to be reacting like this happens all the time, when Carroll is the only real example. my reaction is a continuation of the one i had when hughton was sacked for nothing and pardew brought in so ashley could sell/bring in whoever he wanted with no argument , IMO, it's all part of the same thing Hughton was widely criticised as a yes man when he was given the job originally, this thing about Pardew being a walkover is a non-starter IMO. Any manager sometimes has to acquiesce to the board, they would be resigning all the time if they didn't. Ian, you're a good lad and I enjoy our debates, but this just seems so naive to me. I'm aware I brought up Hughton but i reckon it's probs best for everyone if we dont go down this route again Same, I loved Hughton even though I was unsure when he was appointed. I do like Pardew as well though, seems he's working away quite well to improve our squad and style of play. For me it's more naive to think that a manager won't have to do what the board says quite often. For example, I don't believe for a second that Pardew "wanted" to sell Carroll, but I also don't believe it was his job, or within his power, to stop it. Anyway, I was encouraged with what he said on Total Sport (to get back on topic!) and I'll wait and see what we come up with before the end of the window.

I don't know, we'll see if it happens. You seem to be reacting like this happens all the time, when Carroll is the only real example. my reaction is a continuation of the one i had when hughton was sacked for nothing and pardew brought in so ashley could sell/bring in whoever he wanted with no argument , IMO, it's all part of the same thing Hughton was widely criticised as a yes man when he was given the job originally, this thing about Pardew being a walkover is a non-starter IMO. Any manager sometimes has to acquiesce to the board, they would be resigning all the time if they didn't.

taxfree, why do agree so much that we "needed" to sell Carroll to buy the players we've bought? That doesn't seem to be a conclusion you can draw from anything we've done.

I don't know, we'll see if it happens. You seem to be reacting like this happens all the time, when Carroll is the only real example.

Scouting is a much of a muchness really. Most clubs are aware of most players. Our history of buying players doesn't really reflect that.

Ultimately we've had six months to decide what to do with at least £30m of allegedly unexpected income, with the benefit of what some seem to say is the world's best scout and a manager who apparently has the full backing of his manager and the club owner. And yet here we are, with people happy to 'hope it allows us the ability to react to opportunities, if there are any'. If we're so hard up that we needed to sell our best striker and most promising talent for big money just to pay wages and to afford to bring in couple of free transfers, it makes you wonder if they'd fully intended on flogging Carroll all along. And if that is the case, who's next out of the door? All valid questions, but none of the answers get the club out of the financial reality it's in. It's clear that Ashley wants to bring an unusual approach to running a football club, he's not going to sanction ever-increasing debt or subsidise any spending from his own pocket. Fair enough the Carroll money was unexpected (if we believe it was), but that still doesn't mean it all has to go on transfer spending. I know I'm always defending the regime, but I really think we may as well accept the Ashley spending/contracts/wages strategy and judge decisions based on that. I'm not suggesting we "needed" to sell Carroll to buy the players we've bought, the logic doesn't work in reverse like that. What I'm saying is that just because we had some extra income it doesn't mean it all goes straight on transfer fees. For Pardew to say it would was probably inadvisable, but he was reacting to a pretty shocking situation.

This obsession with the £35m from Carroll is bordering on the mental for me. The Carroll sale was a massive blow to the team and is still hard to accept, we did it because the deal was too good to turn down and the player fancied a shot at a bigger club. It's pointless to latch onto that one quote where Pardew said it would all be invested into the team. He was just responding to a question the best way he could in difficult circumstances, and he probably had no idea how much he would end up spending. To judge our transfers solely on whether we spend the magic figure of £35m is pointless IMO. As far as I can see we've made some good moves in the market so far, and are looking to make more. There might be a big departure (Enrqiue) but circumstances make that inevitable anyway. The club is running a regular loss, and there isn't a ring-fenced pot for transfer money. The club will spend what it thinks it can afford and when it can get the right deals. Let's judge that on it's own and stop bleating on about this magical £35m.

Not saying I disagree, but what attitude should our top striker have?

Agree Dave, I also can't see Arsenal selling Bendtner if he's back to fitness and Nasri/Cesc are leaving. They already only have one striker. Chamakh and Van Persie? Well I meant one striker apart from Bendtner (meaning Van Persie), forgot about Chamakh. Still think they are light up front, especially when RvP gets injured again.

Agree Dave, I also can't see Arsenal selling Bendtner if he's back to fitness and Nasri/Cesc are leaving. They already only have one striker.

I really don't like when people use the Giggs, but...

I don't really know how bad Bentner's finishing even is. He missed the winner against Barcelona and that was high profile, but I've seen him strike the ball beautifully at times.

Never heard of him, but now I do he looks pretty good. He's big and his goal record with PSG is more than decent. Still think we're more likely to buy a nippy striker than another target man.

I'm not bothered specifically about Erdinc, but I'm interested to see who our other targets will be if he's off the table.

I wouldn't worry too much about classifying him as a LB or LW at this point, he will develop and grow into whatever role suits him best. Hopefully he'll still get plenty of chances from the bench and in cup games next season.

The quote is bad, what he said was that if fans were trying to estimate how much money had been spent, they would be way off.

Agree with you, don't know where the negative feeling has come from. Maybe the order of things, I'm guessing if Nolan had left before Cabaye, Ba and Marveaux arrived the feeling would be a lot more positive. For me we've done well so far this summer, but then I was never going to base it on whether we make a net loss of £35m on transfers.

Me too. Give him center stage and he will deliver Fk that he is an utter dick and thinks he is way better than he is. True, but he thinks he's the best player in the world, so a bit below that isn't too bad.

Agree with you, he offers another dimension if Barton is going to play RM. I wouldn't be desperate to move him on at all.

Chill out, there's plenty of time to go in the transfer window. If we want the club to go for a quality striker, that increases the chances we'll be knocked back. It's all part of the process.