nufcjmc

seems to me that some think his comments mean he wants 16/17yr olds that arent very good but may come good with coaching and time to slowly blood in, he may mean more along the lines of those in the 20/22 age bracket those who already have experience but still have alot of time to mature and grow and potentially these sorts of signings can cost alot of money and can be worth while we have had the bad i.e hugo but you can still grab young talent just like man u have done with ronaldo in the past and nani and anderson from this summer.

its just such a relief to be able to say that these days without being sarcastic not so long ago we were all complaining that all we had was baba and carr and that was it. I really dont know how we 1. payed 1.8 million for him and 2. that he ever got a game for chelsea

would be a good addition at the right price (8 mill seems to have been thrown about in the papers) but would obviously seem to indicate the end for shola and probably either owen or extending vidukas contract I would be quite happy going for someone older and trying to get gudjonsson in for about the same money purely due to him being able to play in midfield and as a striker I never exactly ever got excited by an owen crouch partnership

possibly get a left back in for january let baba rot in the basement levels of the ground till his contract is up and then that gives enrique time without pressure to play every game and zoggy can go back to challenging duff (when back) for left wing

10 year head start tbf I can Taylor either becomming really good or just another one of our average plodders I guess its how he is played and how many injuries he gets on the way.

this whole thing is just giving me flash backs to when keegan walked out of the england job pissing down and a poor england showing

very poor Boro team this year even their bright star downing is struggling for any sort of form.

Admin delete this if it isnt allowed but found a good small interview with Barton http://www.shieldsgazette.com/nufc/We39ve-ridden-our-luck-.3494235.jp basically as Given has been in the past very critical about the team but maybe rightly good read at least.

I see it as them trying to say is he a 10 mill keeper.

Very, very true Sorry! he was never going to be our answer to ashley cole but saying that I would assume he cost us peanuts and would play across the back anywhere you wanted him to without a problem and was never a pre madonna by kicking up a fuss if he spent time on the bench either.

how about a mention for arron hughes was no world beater but he was a cheap signing that did the job you told him to without any fuss and when he was called up certainly did a descent job.

Mint, what's the P + P? course That whole post could also be talking about Bellamy. the problem with some of our most "controversial" players was how many games we had to keep the faith and keep playing them before we got that has to start type performance. Where as I think mostly with smith and milner they are the type of players you at least know what you are going to get from them. Still my point stands that we need to have a big enough squad to have players of both types or we need to spend big again and bring players in that show both qualities are alot more rounder than the two extremes I think the bit in bold is particularly unfair on Bellamy I really did like bellamy as a player when he was here and his goal for us against Feyenoord was just excellent however many times I remember watching Bellamy and again this wasn't his whole game but he had electtric pace but alot of his chances he never put them away for us and seen as he was brought in as a striker its a pritty fundamental part of the job. Bellamy was a far better finisher after the first season than you're giving him credit for. he never broke into double figures from 2001-2004 and finally managed it when he was loaned out to celtic with 7 for us and 7 for them which doesn't exactly enspire confidence from one of your main scoring outlets. As Yorkie said for what we paid for him and how he kept us in the champs league he was value for money to a point. A ratio nearing 1 in 3 is pretty good for a second striker, he offered lots more than his goals, and helped Shearer's career no end. granted he did play second fiddle to alan alot of the time and it did work well as a partnership most of the time shearer was loosing yards by the bucket loads and bellamy offered that pace back to the team to allow shearer to be a predator. Like i said I did like Bellamy at least on the field but certainly didn't feel that sad to see him leave either although its a shame he didnt manage to muscel souey out instead.

That whole post could also be talking about Bellamy. the problem with some of our most "controversial" players was how many games we had to keep the faith and keep playing them before we got that has to start type performance. Where as I think mostly with smith and milner they are the type of players you at least know what you are going to get from them. Still my point stands that we need to have a big enough squad to have players of both types or we need to spend big again and bring players in that show both qualities are alot more rounder than the two extremes I think the bit in bold is particularly unfair on Bellamy I really did like bellamy as a player when he was here and his goal for us against Feyenoord was just excellent however many times I remember watching Bellamy and again this wasn't his whole game but he had electtric pace but alot of his chances he never put them away for us and seen as he was brought in as a striker its a pritty fundamental part of the job. Bellamy was a far better finisher after the first season than you're giving him credit for. he never broke into double figures from 2001-2004 and finally managed it when he was loaned out to celtic with 7 for us and 7 for them which doesn't exactly enspire confidence from one of your main scoring outlets. As Yorkie said for what we paid for him and how he kept us in the champs league he was value for money to a point.

yorkie I will give you bernard I guess it all feels a little strange though when he refused to sign a new deal and then when he got brought back into the fold by roeder we all saw ( I use that work loosely) the reason why he had been in limbo for 3-4 seasons.

I was just about to post that. There's no way Roeder could be described as horrible or a cunt really. Out of his depth in the end, some of the shit he gets on here is diabolical. and we used to all be disgusted by some of the chants made towards him by the west ham fans I guess like you say nice guy out of his depth was more like it more than he was this horrible human being.

That whole post could also be talking about Bellamy. the problem with some of our most "controversial" players was how many games we had to keep the faith and keep playing them before we got that has to start type performance. Where as I think mostly with smith and milner they are the type of players you at least know what you are going to get from them. Still my point stands that we need to have a big enough squad to have players of both types or we need to spend big again and bring players in that show both qualities are alot more rounder than the two extremes I think the bit in bold is particularly unfair on Bellamy I really did like bellamy as a player when he was here and his goal for us against Feyenoord was just excellent however many times I remember watching Bellamy and again this wasn't his whole game but he had electtric pace but alot of his chances he never put them away for us and seen as he was brought in as a striker its a pritty fundamental part of the job.

That whole post could also be talking about Bellamy. the problem with some of our most "controversial" players was how many games we had to keep the faith and keep playing them before we got that has to start type performance. Where as I think mostly with smith and milner they are the type of players you at least know what you are going to get from them. Still my point stands that we need to have a big enough squad to have players of both types or we need to spend big again and bring players in that show both qualities are alot more rounder than the two extremes

which is where I was leading to really as I worry that our midfield has lost any edge or creativity there needs to be options to throw on players to graft away for you no worries and there will be times you need to start or put on wild cards which is what robert was famous for basically little to nothing all game then an act of brilliance on the whole though for 10.5 million robert cost us you would have expected really to have a much rounder player in the sense has a creative flair but still has the basic skills to play as a unit and track back , mark and defend where nessacary which sadly was not in his game at all.

you mean you weren't really proud of our intertoto plaque?

all players even the very excellent have flaws, I am not saying this is not the case. Putting a nail in this I just feel that dyer was really supposed to be our attacking midfielder or creative outlet and in that you expect him to create and score a fair few, an maybe this is me only remembering the bad but I can't remember dyer ever scoreing alot of goals, his england carear his never kicked off either now at the age of 28/29 if you look at his toon life as a whole to assess his true value for money he just was not worth it in my very small humble opinion. Thats one perspective. Mine is that he did more than enough in his first 5 years to be worth the fee we paid. The point remains that we still havent replaced him btw. If we settle for the 'hard working' types like Milner and Smith as adequate replacements for what Bellmay, Dyer, Solano and Robert could do then we are asking for trouble. Talent is the key. Worry about the other stuff after watching a few goals, attacking play with real end product (yes, it did happen!) then compare with the current lots abilities. No comparison, I'm afraid. Question: did Laurent Robert offer more in 2 years than the likes of the hard working Smith and Milner ever will? Which would you have irrepective of position? some good points and to be honest its a real tough one to say as I think it depends on formation/style of play/ home or away and oposition. Litterally because I believe you need the creative or pacy players which no doubt is robert,bellamy and to an extent dyer. Thing is you cannot play souly on flair alone as proved a few seasons ago when we played arsenal at home we basically bullied them and knocked them about which is where the milner's and smiths of this world come in. You need the worker the grafter player to just keep it simple and to grind out a result. As you remember robert used to let play pass him by unless he had the ball to his feet, never used to mark and hardly tracked back which in todays game you would just be punished for. I really can't choose as if I am honest we need both them right now and see to only have one type available in the squad.

Dyer did a lot more for the club than N'Zogbia has tbf. People write off the good parts but he was a far better young player than any of the kids we have now. Dyer cost a decent fee, plus millions in wages to mostly be injured and score a few goals. I would already see N'Zogbia as a better value buy, seen as he has not cost us anywhere near as much as Dyer, and don't see how he ever will. didnt we only end up paying a 200-300k for zoggy as compensation to la harve?

blueyes.gif And all of the people who hated Luque are the one's supporting Smith. mackems.gif mackems.gif mackems.gif I guess smith has been brought in for a lower fee and maybe we all have just less expectations than we put on luque. I mean when he was signed I remember mates saying "wow you got him he is the 3 most popular striker in spain" obviously had a stinker from day one where as when smith was signed alot were saying he was no direct replacement for anyone as he wasn't an out an out striker any more and certainly manu failed in their attempt to make him the new roy keane (although the mullet stype mow hawk was a good attempt to look very hard) Luque put a hell of a ball in on day 1 tbf Still not suited to this league. I am having a viana after you said that

all players even the very excellent have flaws, I am not saying this is not the case. Putting a nail in this I just feel that dyer was really supposed to be our attacking midfielder or creative outlet and in that you expect him to create and score a fair few, an maybe this is me only remembering the bad but I can't remember dyer ever scoreing alot of goals, his england carear his never kicked off either now at the age of 28/29 if you look at his toon life as a whole to assess his true value for money he just was not worth it in my very small humble opinion.

blueyes.gif And all of the people who hated Luque are the one's supporting Smith. mackems.gif mackems.gif mackems.gif I guess smith has been brought in for a lower fee and maybe we all have just less expectations than we put on luque. I mean when he was signed I remember mates saying "wow you got him he is the 3 most popular striker in spain" obviously had a stinker from day one where as when smith was signed alot were saying he was no direct replacement for anyone as he wasn't an out an out striker any more and certainly manu failed in their attempt to make him the new roy keane (although the mullet stype mow hawk was a good attempt to look very hard)

was it ex dreadlocks Ruud Gullit then?