nufcjmc

so is it they "are" dragging and its not over or that "have" been dragging and the end is near.....

followed up with this one though: Paul Smith @Smudge1962 The @premierleague are dragging their heels and prolonging the process so as not to be accused of not investigating the consortium thoroughly enough following certain allegations made against them. My understanding is they have found nothing significant to block it #nufctakover

It is.......and it isn't. Its with the PL but there's a month worth of checks been done . Only thing is would they tell the Sellers/Buyers straight away if they couldn't allow it to go ahead or do they complete everything then tell them. IF its a two way dialog where issues are identified and passed back to buyer for comment/clarity they would surely know if they have hit an insurmountable obstacle as they wouldnt be able to move past that point. Unless they are at the final question/nothing else left on the buyers to do list and they await the outcome assuming no issues.

If I didn't despise our current owner so much, I wouldn't want this to happen tbh. I'm quite uncomfortable with it. I'm very confortable with it as it happens. If someone wants to carry on with mike then that's their own decision but opinions shouldn't be forced on to others. After all this is a football forum and not a human rights forum or mumsnet. We’ve never been stuck with Mike, ever. People don’t have to turn up, they chose to. That’s on them. We are stuck with Mike we the normal supporter don't have the money to buy the club and we were here long before Mike Ashley so while he may have the keys its the supporters club.

I think whats annoying me at the minute is how the leak makes it open to public debate. If this wasn't leaked I assume its all 100% behind closed doors with no influence from any parties. The fact that press can say pressure is mounting from external forces means if it does fail I hope its all rewritten and allowed open to public consultation first before allowed to be voted it.

Truly awful From what I recall I remember feeling his was a "plodder" did a job he was asked and you get what you pay for and signing cheap "usually" means you are buying limited players. I didnt dislike him as he did do a job but nor did I miss him leaving the club.

I dont think your going mad, well you are going mad in the sense of willing for it to be completed with no concrete information other than statements every so often from the press saying "our understanding is that". It allows massively for you to fill the missing gaps yourself with hope or doom and gloom. If I was a business willing to invest potentially 500/600 million into something it isnt a short term investment, while the virus may affect the next couple of seasons this isn't a own it for a couple of year and look to move on. That's not to say that some of the parties may not say enough is enough we will revisit this when it all calms down but again why would they do so at a massive financial loss to themselves? If we were in the looking at the account phase and seeing about a bid I can totally see why you would walk away due to all of the new variables to consider particularly in terms of the clubs now value, however we passed that tipping point before lock down. It almost sounds like I am trying to convince myself and in a way I am because no one knows for sure.

Not wanting to give excuses but there are three sets of directors surely as there are 3 investors, time differences between countries, some staff not at work or working at reduced capacity due to where/how they are working. Other priorities for the league in terms of the virus response and keeping all clubs informed/happy etc."project restart" I can see why this process is not a quick glance rubber stamp kind of job, added to the fact its leaked "early" means we dont know if this sort of timescale is normal as we normally are just told they have been taken over. I am worried and not worried at the minute its a bit conflicting due to lack of information and the only new thing to bounce on in the press is now negative.

Similar line of thought, I was thinking what if the issue was what delayed things last week in terms of unforeseen and clarity needed murmurs and final reason is leaked now. Hopefully these stakeholders making up the bid are so determined they will overcome any obstacles.

That would surely be the responsibility of individual clubs how they handle it. There's no fitness requirement to play games. I guess those who want to win desperately will find a way. Otherwise worst case scenario would be two teams playing at slightly less high intensity than usual. so we may end up seeing a few mini beer guts on the pitch rather than in the stands.....

its been a more light hearted tangent than debating cliques or politics

Think that's a fair point actually. We have sort of got used to the idea of wanting great long term value out of every signing, but with the deep pockets of the Saudis, they would probably not blink at spending plenty on big name players who are approaching over the hill status. £100m down the drain would probably be worth it for the exposure worldwide, and short term results that it would bring. its essential if you have a strategy of buying older players as not to sound like current lot but they have zero resale value. You buy them for what they offer in the here and now (or the hope they reproduce it at your club). Some will fail as they cannot transition to us, transition to this league, transition to the manager or other players around them etc. Having owners that cut losses and are happy not making a monetary return on every one is a good thing. At the end of the day you can spend big on players and they not be as successful as the cheaper gems, it mainly allows you to spread your wings in terms of a talent pool and not dismiss players because of transfer fee or age which has heavily limited us on certain sales going through. It actually reminds me of the Keegan days a bit. If you can recall, he wanted to bring Henry here in his second stint as manager, and of course it was laughed out of the boardroom by Ashley's mates. It did seem a bit extravagent, but he was probably looking at results and stature as a club worldwide rather than resale value of one individual player. I remember even from his first stint as manager, even if he bought players like Beardsely and Venison who were in their 30's, adding them to the squad actually inflated the value of the whole squad because of the success they brought with them. I think there needs to be a balance as with everything too many old players even high calibre ones restricts the type of play you can play due to their declining speed etc you dont want a squad of 30 somethings as it just means you need to do major squad overhall on a regular basis which is no good as the more players you need to replace the more likely you will bring flops due to higher turn over. Just because a player is 30/31 does not mean they cannot add value or bring on your younger players which as you say in itself adds value to those individual players. Taking losses on players will happen and while we have managed to make profits on Ashleys way we have also had some losses/lucky to get our money back players. I think having alot of money means as a supporter you dont (or at least I wont anymore) shite we have blown 20 million on him we now cant spend this window or we are shopping for free's as the money is all gone.

Think that's a fair point actually. We have sort of got used to the idea of wanting great long term value out of every signing, but with the deep pockets of the Saudis, they would probably not blink at spending plenty on big name players who are approaching over the hill status. £100m down the drain would probably be worth it for the exposure worldwide, and short term results that it would bring. its essential if you have a strategy of buying older players as not to sound like current lot but they have zero resale value. You buy them for what they offer in the here and now (or the hope they reproduce it at your club). Some will fail as they cannot transition to us, transition to this league, transition to the manager or other players around them etc. Having owners that cut losses and are happy not making a monetary return on every one is a good thing. At the end of the day you can spend big on players and they not be as successful as the cheaper gems, it mainly allows you to spread your wings in terms of a talent pool and not dismiss players because of transfer fee or age which has heavily limited us on certain sales going through.

Its a clique i tell ya , a clique ! I don't think there is a 'clique' on here, what we do have is a group of very regular posters who tend to 'listen to' eachother and 'quote' eachother, and that seems fine, as they are the ones who have 'put the work in on here' and kept this forum going for years. I have been on here for many years, but I don't post too often, so consequently I don't get "quoted or re-quoted" all that often either . . but I think that is ok. We have some very good regular posters on here, who I enjoy reading !! I tend to agree with this I have certainly taken more out of this forum in terms of the content than contributing. Part of that is my dyslexia and lack of confidence to air my views, while micky taking and people reading things out of context and having rants (which I believe is normal in most forums on set topics) I certainly feel welcome. The regular posters are big personalities and I have been here long enough to see many come and go and yet here we are still around as a site which I am really proud to be apart of. Discussing things at nausea does become a bit tedious and that is partly down to the fact in these 5 weeks or so there has been little in the way of concrete new information. A newer poster who hasnt read the last 100/150 pages may take exception to their point being missed or not given the same weight as others but that may in part be down to the fact its been discussed already.... more than once...... then discussed again.

Potentially 4 players? Possibly 1 striker,2 centre midfielders and 1 centre half. I dont know and have no clue on names but I am hoping 60-70m on one striker young (under 26))and one you can build around 20-30m on an older striker or depending on formations a new number 10 (switch the 60/70m spend on this player depending on formation) age not as much as an issue as long as your not stuck with a 37 year old on 300k a week 25m right back 25m left back 50m new central midfield player so hoping for 5 minimum, obviously great point by neesy clubs will find it hard to hold onto players when there is a bigger need to balance books coupled that with modest player sales say 10/20 million we may be able to get another high quality player or get rid of the dead wood and have some higher calibre squad players.

Not paying in full for players will stretch that budget further if need be but we need quality not quantity.

Everyone is upgradeable with the right funds, the issue is keeping to ffp we don't have unlimited funds if we have 150/200m to spend we need 2 strikers, midfielder, left back and right back first and thats the money already well spent I recon.

I am not sure some grounds are capable of being the 12th man for the team, it certainly may not be played with the same tempo and bad decisions may well not be as contested. Also bad tackles etc not sure how much boo'ing does affect players. I think due to how bad some players potty mouths are its unlikely it will be played in silence anyway with fake crowd noise played through speakers for some atmosphere and to hide those go fuck yourself comments.

Documents were actually submitted on the 8th so probably started then 4 weeks up just in time of the bank holiday Friday!

To be fair the tea towel thing will happen will all come down to context: https://www.nufc.co.uk/news/archive/dress-up-for-french-day/

Aids isn't bad now, this thread is more like parkinsons. No offence to anyone who has parkinsons. Surely more like dementia forever repeating around and around.

Lacazette would be a good striker for us. Still have a few good years left and has experience in the PL. Would only get better if he knew he was the main striker. The one that plays regularly for Arsenal? I think that's who he means maybe willing let him go as he has turned out to be a 1-3 striker (they should try having a 1 in 29) https://metro.co.uk/2020/04/15/mikel-arteta-makes-decision-alexandre-lacazettes-arsenal-future-amid-atletico-interest-12560500/

I think we will spend more initially but say after this hinted 3 year cycle of spending we are higher up the league with a genuinely better squad after that if we then go into a period of replacing old players and adding a quality addition here or there 50m plus player sales may well be fine. I agree with you though bigger spends are required early on due to neglect/poor investment etc

Its simple to stop arguing though. Just stop. It would be a very strange world if we all held the same opinions. The problem is people relentlessly repeating their position as if the other person didn't get it. People don't change opinions that easy. As Thomas suggested - breathe in, breathe out. As long as it stays here and doesn't leak into every other thread its a good place as any to go around in circles.

As long as we have at least 100m to spend per window that should be enough to put the wheels in motion regarding improving squad quality. Once we then create additional income we should be able to gradually increase it. Especially if we have a model of buying any older players meaning potentially we need to cycle through upgrading the squad (on going concern) as well as replace older players.