mrmojorisin75

Yes, Taylor does lack composure and pace. The former he can improve upon but the second he can't. He's no better than Bramble right now but as a younger player does have more potential to improve. I don't think he's going to be the world beater everyone hoped he would be but I hope I'm wrong. john terry is a good example for taylor - physically similar and terry had big question marks over his pace when he was younger....he overcame it through learning how to position himself well & tailoring his training towards increasing his pace amongst other things.... it can be done i think taylor could make it, although probably not as a world beater as you say, but to consider selling him...i just don't know

Well due to having a WBA fan in the family, I have seen enough of Davies to say that I would sell Taylor for less than what I would pay for Davies. I'm sure i'll get backup eventually, but the reality is that most fans are so focused on all things Newcastle that their football knowledge is limited. fair enough, footballs all about opinions eh? my opportunities to see ANY games are limited these days, i live abroad and the only games they show involve korean footballers so when NUFC play spurs, man u, reading or 'boro i'll get to see it...then i also see some when i'm working away so i get PL games but no championship - absolute shame really 'cause it looks like a very exciting league this year i'll defer to your having more knowledge of davies than me of course but at this stage of taylors career i could NEVER see that selling him would make sense unless it was for proposterous money....maybe if in a years time edgar comes in and continues to look good perhaps but certainly not before

ha ha, he's still learning though!! the boy has potential, he just needs the right acting coach....

already said i'd barely seen davies play thanks, you don't need to tell me what i do and don't know what i do know is that one relegation season in the premiership proves nowt pal, that's why it's a relegation season....average quality can look fantastic amidst sh!te in bad teams... when you hear about championship players tearing it up this season i'm hearing about barnes at derby, bendtner at brum, bale at saints and a couple of others...i don't hear that opinion of curtis davies has either shot through the roof or gotten worse; he's a good defender, maybe a very good defender but HAS NOT got the experience to be put alongside taylor yet a similar example is leighton baines and gareth bale if you think about it, both young english left backs one of whom has played in the PL for 2 seasons now and has not been found wanting, the other with bags of potential who hasn't proven himself at the top division (in his case due to being so young) but you can't compare the two just because you think one will do something that the other has.... perhaps a better comparion would be barnes at derby and, say, lennon at spurs.... by the way i see a few people backing me up but not too many in support of you, must be those black and white goggles

Why do you think that? Why can't we bring him on any further? He's 21 for crying out loud and has already shown a lot of potential. Bramble, on the other hand, will always be Bramble. I seriously hope i'm gonna get whooshed here, but i swear you're mixing Taylor up with Ramage. Taylor loses his man rather alot due to ball watching, and doesn't seem to be able to sort it out. That is why we have signed Gooch, and why we are playing him alongside Bramble. taylor would, should and must be number one choice CB once we get full backs worthy of the shirt, anything less and we deserve everything we get name me a better prospect, ENGLISH prospect, for his position at his age...please Curtis Davies, Micah Richards (whose natural position is centre back) right now, and David Edgar will be better by the time he reaches Taylor's age (yes, I know he is Canadian, but I dont get all this English s***). Another centre back that is better is Daniel Agger. Taylor is a good 6th to 16th placed club Premiership defender, but no more, and right now, he is only the third best centre back at the club if you look at both current ability and how the players gel together as a unit. At £7.5m+ we could buy an improvement on him. a) curtis davies has never played consistently and therefore been proven at the highest level b) micah richards is 3 years younger than him and to my knowledge has played primarily at right back and is actually considered a long term prospect for defensive midfield c) edgar has played a handfull of games and looks a good prospect agreed, but you can hardly suggest he's currently to be considered a better prospect than taylor d) agger is obviously not english, but is decent, agreed....albeit even he hasn't convinced for liverpool if you talk to their fans and this is his first full season at the club, a long way to go then.... e) who could we buy for 7.5m, at the same age, who is PROVEN to be better than him then? a) Davies consistently played well in the Premiership last season in a side that got relegated, and still plays consistently for the U21s. He also plays more U21 games than Taylor. b) Richards is versatile enough to play in many positions, but he will be a great player whereever he plays, so that makes him a better centre back. c) During his short stint at centre back, Edgar looked more composed and better in the air than Taylor ever has d) Agger has displaced Hyypia, and fans now like him afterhe had had a dissappointing start to his Liverpool career. Given Liverpool's good defensive record, he must be doing quite well. e) Age is irrelevant. Taylor is unlikely to get much better. Players do not significantly improve while at Newcastle United. I'm sure there are over 20 centre backs with more current ability than Taylor who would cost less than the bid I would accept from Chelsea. Taylor is a good player, but he is replaceable. Curtis Davies is one example of a same age player proven to be better. All just talk though, as there is no way that Chelsea are interested. Taylor is good, but not that good. Davies doesn't play more U21 games than Taylor, he has 3 caps Taylor has 14(and 3 goals). The last time Davies played he looked like Bramlbe at his worst, did you see the Spain game? It was a disaster for him. More caps perhaps, but that is because Taylor emerged a couple of years before Davies. Davies has been around for longer, Taylor has around 50 appearances for us whereas Davies has 62 for West Brom and 56 for Luton. Also he had a full season of football in the premiership, something which Taylor is only getting this season. Taylor has played 70 games, about two games in three since January 2005 which was the time he emerged, and remember that he spent time out injured last season. Thus, Taylor had emerged in top flight football long before Davies did. Again, sentiment seems to come ahead of realism. Also, in answer to Mrmojonson's question regarding how many top level European games has Davies played in, you cant really say that Taylor has played in any top level european games either, or at least he hasn't played any team better than Chelsea, Manyoo, Liverpool or Arsenal. Therefore, both Davies and taylor have played against the same high standard opposition. a) no-one mentioned "top level" european competition, merely european...so how many has davies played in and proven himself to be good enough to play against the likes of PSV, Fenerbache, Sporting Lisbon or whoever Taylor has played against in the last 2 and a bit years? by the way i'm not saying davies is better or worse than taylor, i've barely seen davies play - i'm simply questioning your utter conviction he's better than taylor b) oh and by the way would you sign davies for 8m if we sold taylor for 12m for example? 'cause davies wouldn't get any better at NUFC remember... a) Taylor has played against Lillestrom, Ventspils, Levadia, Palermo, Fenerbache, Frankfurt, Celta Vigo, Waregem and Alkmaar. He may have played in a couple of others, but no real big European games, as this is his first real European campaign. Hardly a great experience to put him above Davies. Bolton, Everton, Spurs are better than all of these teams, and Davies has played against them too and proven himself. b) i'd definitely take it, they players currently of equal standing, and I'd say that Davies has it in him to be a better player. Then, there would be £4m to spend on that full-back problem you keep using as an excuse to defend Taylor. a) ooooooh-kay, i still never implied that taylor had played against the european greats but 5 of the teams you name there i'd consider good european opposition, although not champions league quality...but the fact that he's played against these teams when davies has played against none surely means he's more experienced? no? again don't get me wrong i'm not suggesting that davies would suddenly turn into me or something if he was put in european games but the FACT is he hasn't played at that level, taylor has - end of b) can you elaborate on how bolton, everton and spurs are better than alkmaar, palermo, fenerbache, frankfurt please? by the way.... c) and how does davies have potential to improve himself at NUFC but taylor doesn't? surely the club would drag davies down too right? if not why not? taylor is considered one of the brightest prospects in the english game by tony adams who took him to wycombe and is now coaching pompeys (pretty damn good) defence....between you and tony adams i know which opinion i'd trust a) UEFA cup is not really an experience. He has basically come into European games this season, playing with a team of European experienced players, and played his normal game, and has learnt a few lessons in the process. Davies could have easily done the same in 12 matches given the chance. Therefore, looking at Premiership performances is more of a measure. b) Bolton > Everton > Newcastle > Spurs > Leverkusen = Fenerbache = Alkmaar. c) Davies is faster and more composed from what I've seen. Natural ability which means that by the time each player would reach the maximum level of improvement you can reach currently at Newcastle, I'd expect Davies to be better. i'm siging off from this 'cause whereas i can give davies some credit and see that he might prove himself better than taylor in the long run you can't see that he hasn't done so already and thus we're talking a different language bye bye Admitting defeat are we? Davies has proved himself to have just as much ability as Taylor, who in reality has done little of note yet, and there are people on this forum who know Davies better than I do who can back me up on this. If you think Taylor has proven himself yet, you need to take off your black and white goggles. came back to see what bollox you'd put in next and you did yourself proud davies has proven himself to be a good championship level defender, nothing more nothing less...he has the potential to be an excellent PL defender no doubt but isn't yet taylor has proven himself to be a good, competent PL defender with potential to improve further given his age end of story again

Why do you think that? Why can't we bring him on any further? He's 21 for crying out loud and has already shown a lot of potential. Bramble, on the other hand, will always be Bramble. I seriously hope i'm gonna get whooshed here, but i swear you're mixing Taylor up with Ramage. Taylor loses his man rather alot due to ball watching, and doesn't seem to be able to sort it out. That is why we have signed Gooch, and why we are playing him alongside Bramble. taylor would, should and must be number one choice CB once we get full backs worthy of the shirt, anything less and we deserve everything we get name me a better prospect, ENGLISH prospect, for his position at his age...please Curtis Davies, Micah Richards (whose natural position is centre back) right now, and David Edgar will be better by the time he reaches Taylor's age (yes, I know he is Canadian, but I dont get all this English s***). Another centre back that is better is Daniel Agger. Taylor is a good 6th to 16th placed club Premiership defender, but no more, and right now, he is only the third best centre back at the club if you look at both current ability and how the players gel together as a unit. At £7.5m+ we could buy an improvement on him. a) curtis davies has never played consistently and therefore been proven at the highest level b) micah richards is 3 years younger than him and to my knowledge has played primarily at right back and is actually considered a long term prospect for defensive midfield c) edgar has played a handfull of games and looks a good prospect agreed, but you can hardly suggest he's currently to be considered a better prospect than taylor d) agger is obviously not english, but is decent, agreed....albeit even he hasn't convinced for liverpool if you talk to their fans and this is his first full season at the club, a long way to go then.... e) who could we buy for 7.5m, at the same age, who is PROVEN to be better than him then? a) Davies consistently played well in the Premiership last season in a side that got relegated, and still plays consistently for the U21s. He also plays more U21 games than Taylor. b) Richards is versatile enough to play in many positions, but he will be a great player whereever he plays, so that makes him a better centre back. c) During his short stint at centre back, Edgar looked more composed and better in the air than Taylor ever has d) Agger has displaced Hyypia, and fans now like him afterhe had had a dissappointing start to his Liverpool career. Given Liverpool's good defensive record, he must be doing quite well. e) Age is irrelevant. Taylor is unlikely to get much better. Players do not significantly improve while at Newcastle United. I'm sure there are over 20 centre backs with more current ability than Taylor who would cost less than the bid I would accept from Chelsea. Taylor is a good player, but he is replaceable. Curtis Davies is one example of a same age player proven to be better. All just talk though, as there is no way that Chelsea are interested. Taylor is good, but not that good. Davies doesn't play more U21 games than Taylor, he has 3 caps Taylor has 14(and 3 goals). The last time Davies played he looked like Bramlbe at his worst, did you see the Spain game? It was a disaster for him. More caps perhaps, but that is because Taylor emerged a couple of years before Davies. Davies has been around for longer, Taylor has around 50 appearances for us whereas Davies has 62 for West Brom and 56 for Luton. Also he had a full season of football in the premiership, something which Taylor is only getting this season. Taylor has played 70 games, about two games in three since January 2005 which was the time he emerged, and remember that he spent time out injured last season. Thus, Taylor had emerged in top flight football long before Davies did. Again, sentiment seems to come ahead of realism. Also, in answer to Mrmojonson's question regarding how many top level European games has Davies played in, you cant really say that Taylor has played in any top level european games either, or at least he hasn't played any team better than Chelsea, Manyoo, Liverpool or Arsenal. Therefore, both Davies and taylor have played against the same high standard opposition. a) no-one mentioned "top level" european competition, merely european...so how many has davies played in and proven himself to be good enough to play against the likes of PSV, Fenerbache, Sporting Lisbon or whoever Taylor has played against in the last 2 and a bit years? by the way i'm not saying davies is better or worse than taylor, i've barely seen davies play - i'm simply questioning your utter conviction he's better than taylor b) oh and by the way would you sign davies for 8m if we sold taylor for 12m for example? 'cause davies wouldn't get any better at NUFC remember... a) Taylor has played against Lillestrom, Ventspils, Levadia, Palermo, Fenerbache, Frankfurt, Celta Vigo, Waregem and Alkmaar. He may have played in a couple of others, but no real big European games, as this is his first real European campaign. Hardly a great experience to put him above Davies. Bolton, Everton, Spurs are better than all of these teams, and Davies has played against them too and proven himself. b) i'd definitely take it, they players currently of equal standing, and I'd say that Davies has it in him to be a better player. Then, there would be £4m to spend on that full-back problem you keep using as an excuse to defend Taylor. a) ooooooh-kay, i still never implied that taylor had played against the european greats but 5 of the teams you name there i'd consider good european opposition, although not champions league quality...but the fact that he's played against these teams when davies has played against none surely means he's more experienced? no? again don't get me wrong i'm not suggesting that davies would suddenly turn into me or something if he was put in european games but the FACT is he hasn't played at that level, taylor has - end of b) can you elaborate on how bolton, everton and spurs are better than alkmaar, palermo, fenerbache, frankfurt please? by the way.... c) and how does davies have potential to improve himself at NUFC but taylor doesn't? surely the club would drag davies down too right? if not why not? taylor is considered one of the brightest prospects in the english game by tony adams who took him to wycombe and is now coaching pompeys (pretty damn good) defence....between you and tony adams i know which opinion i'd trust a) UEFA cup is not really an experience. He has basically come into European games this season, playing with a team of European experienced players, and played his normal game, and has learnt a few lessons in the process. Davies could have easily done the same in 12 matches given the chance. Therefore, looking at Premiership performances is more of a measure. b) Bolton > Everton > Newcastle > Spurs > Leverkusen = Fenerbache = Alkmaar. c) Davies is faster and more composed from what I've seen. Natural ability which means that by the time each player would reach the maximum level of improvement you can reach currently at Newcastle, I'd expect Davies to be better. i'm siging off from this 'cause whereas i can give davies some credit and see that he might prove himself better than taylor in the long run you can't see that he hasn't done so already and thus we're talking a different language bye bye

Why do you think that? Why can't we bring him on any further? He's 21 for crying out loud and has already shown a lot of potential. Bramble, on the other hand, will always be Bramble. I seriously hope i'm gonna get whooshed here, but i swear you're mixing Taylor up with Ramage. Taylor loses his man rather alot due to ball watching, and doesn't seem to be able to sort it out. That is why we have signed Gooch, and why we are playing him alongside Bramble. taylor would, should and must be number one choice CB once we get full backs worthy of the shirt, anything less and we deserve everything we get name me a better prospect, ENGLISH prospect, for his position at his age...please Curtis Davies, Micah Richards (whose natural position is centre back) right now, and David Edgar will be better by the time he reaches Taylor's age (yes, I know he is Canadian, but I dont get all this English s***). Another centre back that is better is Daniel Agger. Taylor is a good 6th to 16th placed club Premiership defender, but no more, and right now, he is only the third best centre back at the club if you look at both current ability and how the players gel together as a unit. At £7.5m+ we could buy an improvement on him. a) curtis davies has never played consistently and therefore been proven at the highest level b) micah richards is 3 years younger than him and to my knowledge has played primarily at right back and is actually considered a long term prospect for defensive midfield c) edgar has played a handfull of games and looks a good prospect agreed, but you can hardly suggest he's currently to be considered a better prospect than taylor d) agger is obviously not english, but is decent, agreed....albeit even he hasn't convinced for liverpool if you talk to their fans and this is his first full season at the club, a long way to go then.... e) who could we buy for 7.5m, at the same age, who is PROVEN to be better than him then? a) Davies consistently played well in the Premiership last season in a side that got relegated, and still plays consistently for the U21s. He also plays more U21 games than Taylor. b) Richards is versatile enough to play in many positions, but he will be a great player whereever he plays, so that makes him a better centre back. c) During his short stint at centre back, Edgar looked more composed and better in the air than Taylor ever has d) Agger has displaced Hyypia, and fans now like him afterhe had had a dissappointing start to his Liverpool career. Given Liverpool's good defensive record, he must be doing quite well. e) Age is irrelevant. Taylor is unlikely to get much better. Players do not significantly improve while at Newcastle United. I'm sure there are over 20 centre backs with more current ability than Taylor who would cost less than the bid I would accept from Chelsea. Taylor is a good player, but he is replaceable. Curtis Davies is one example of a same age player proven to be better. All just talk though, as there is no way that Chelsea are interested. Taylor is good, but not that good. Davies doesn't play more U21 games than Taylor, he has 3 caps Taylor has 14(and 3 goals). The last time Davies played he looked like Bramlbe at his worst, did you see the Spain game? It was a disaster for him. More caps perhaps, but that is because Taylor emerged a couple of years before Davies. Davies has been around for longer, Taylor has around 50 appearances for us whereas Davies has 62 for West Brom and 56 for Luton. Also he had a full season of football in the premiership, something which Taylor is only getting this season. Taylor has played 70 games, about two games in three since January 2005 which was the time he emerged, and remember that he spent time out injured last season. Thus, Taylor had emerged in top flight football long before Davies did. Again, sentiment seems to come ahead of realism. Also, in answer to Mrmojonson's question regarding how many top level European games has Davies played in, you cant really say that Taylor has played in any top level european games either, or at least he hasn't played any team better than Chelsea, Manyoo, Liverpool or Arsenal. Therefore, both Davies and taylor have played against the same high standard opposition. a) no-one mentioned "top level" european competition, merely european...so how many has davies played in and proven himself to be good enough to play against the likes of PSV, Fenerbache, Sporting Lisbon or whoever Taylor has played against in the last 2 and a bit years? by the way i'm not saying davies is better or worse than taylor, i've barely seen davies play - i'm simply questioning your utter conviction he's better than taylor b) oh and by the way would you sign davies for 8m if we sold taylor for 12m for example? 'cause davies wouldn't get any better at NUFC remember... a) Taylor has played against Lillestrom, Ventspils, Levadia, Palermo, Fenerbache, Frankfurt, Celta Vigo, Waregem and Alkmaar. He may have played in a couple of others, but no real big European games, as this is his first real European campaign. Hardly a great experience to put him above Davies. Bolton, Everton, Spurs are better than all of these teams, and Davies has played against them too and proven himself. b) i'd definitely take it, they players currently of equal standing, and I'd say that Davies has it in him to be a better player. Then, there would be £4m to spend on that full-back problem you keep using as an excuse to defend Taylor. ooooooh-kay, i still never implied that taylor had played against the european greats but 5 of the teams you name there i'd consider good european opposition, although not champions league quality...but the fact that he's played against these teams when davies has played against none surely means he's more experienced? no? again don't get me wrong i'm not suggesting that davies would suddenly turn into me or something if he was put in european games but the FACT is he hasn't played at that level, taylor has - end of can you elaborate on how bolton, everton and spurs are better than alkmaar, palermo, fenerbache, frankfurt please? by the way.... and how does davies have potential to improve himself at NUFC but taylor doesn't? surely the club would drag davies down too right? if not why not? taylor is considered one of the brightest prospects in the english game by tony adams who took him to wycombe and is now coaching pompeys (pretty damn good) defence....between you and tony adams i know which opinion i'd trust

Yes, but at the same age, they have played at the same high level ie Manyoo etc. Taylor has played more Premiership games, but that is because he plays forNewcastle, and not West brom or Luton. taylor has proven himself to be a young competent premier league defender, whereas davies hasn't. i'm not saying he won't, given time, just that he hasn't. there's no comparison between the experience and level the two of them have played at agreed, that's exactly what i'm saying too - no-one is suggesting davies won't prove himself but to argue he has already done so and is a better player than taylor is borderline idiocy

Yes, but at the same age, they have played at the same high level ie Manyoo etc. Taylor has played more Premiership games, but that is because he plays forNewcastle, and not West brom or Luton. so surely taylor, by that admission, has proven himself more consistently at a higher level....? no?

Why do you think that? Why can't we bring him on any further? He's 21 for crying out loud and has already shown a lot of potential. Bramble, on the other hand, will always be Bramble. I seriously hope i'm gonna get whooshed here, but i swear you're mixing Taylor up with Ramage. Taylor loses his man rather alot due to ball watching, and doesn't seem to be able to sort it out. That is why we have signed Gooch, and why we are playing him alongside Bramble. taylor would, should and must be number one choice CB once we get full backs worthy of the shirt, anything less and we deserve everything we get name me a better prospect, ENGLISH prospect, for his position at his age...please Curtis Davies, Micah Richards (whose natural position is centre back) right now, and David Edgar will be better by the time he reaches Taylor's age (yes, I know he is Canadian, but I dont get all this English s***). Another centre back that is better is Daniel Agger. Taylor is a good 6th to 16th placed club Premiership defender, but no more, and right now, he is only the third best centre back at the club if you look at both current ability and how the players gel together as a unit. At £7.5m+ we could buy an improvement on him. a) curtis davies has never played consistently and therefore been proven at the highest level b) micah richards is 3 years younger than him and to my knowledge has played primarily at right back and is actually considered a long term prospect for defensive midfield c) edgar has played a handfull of games and looks a good prospect agreed, but you can hardly suggest he's currently to be considered a better prospect than taylor d) agger is obviously not english, but is decent, agreed....albeit even he hasn't convinced for liverpool if you talk to their fans and this is his first full season at the club, a long way to go then.... e) who could we buy for 7.5m, at the same age, who is PROVEN to be better than him then? a) Davies consistently played well in the Premiership last season in a side that got relegated, and still plays consistently for the U21s. He also plays more U21 games than Taylor. b) Richards is versatile enough to play in many positions, but he will be a great player whereever he plays, so that makes him a better centre back. c) During his short stint at centre back, Edgar looked more composed and better in the air than Taylor ever has d) Agger has displaced Hyypia, and fans now like him afterhe had had a dissappointing start to his Liverpool career. Given Liverpool's good defensive record, he must be doing quite well. e) Age is irrelevant. Taylor is unlikely to get much better. Players do not significantly improve while at Newcastle United. I'm sure there are over 20 centre backs with more current ability than Taylor who would cost less than the bid I would accept from Chelsea. Taylor is a good player, but he is replaceable. Curtis Davies is one example of a same age player proven to be better. All just talk though, as there is no way that Chelsea are interested. Taylor is good, but not that good. Davies doesn't play more U21 games than Taylor, he has 3 caps Taylor has 14(and 3 goals). The last time Davies played he looked like Bramlbe at his worst, did you see the Spain game? It was a disaster for him. More caps perhaps, but that is because Taylor emerged a couple of years before Davies. Davies has been around for longer, Taylor has around 50 appearances for us whereas Davies has 62 for West Brom and 56 for Luton. Also he had a full season of football in the premiership, something which Taylor is only getting this season. Taylor has played 70 games, about two games in three since January 2005 which was the time he emerged, and remember that he spent time out injured last season. Thus, Taylor had emerged in top flight football long before Davies did. Again, sentiment seems to come ahead of realism. Also, in answer to Mrmojonson's question regarding how many top level European games has Davies played in, you cant really say that Taylor has played in any top level european games either, or at least he hasn't played any team better than Chelsea, Manyoo, Liverpool or Arsenal. Therefore, both Davies and taylor have played against the same high standard opposition. no-one mentioned "top level" european competition, merely european...so how many has davies played in and proven himself to be good enough to play against the likes of PSV, Fenerbache, Sporting Lisbon or whoever Taylor has played against in the last 2 and a bit years? by the way i'm not saying davies is better or worse than taylor, i've barely seen davies play - i'm simply questioning your utter conviction he's better than taylor oh and by the way would you sign davies for 8m if we sold taylor for 12m for example? 'cause davies wouldn't get any better at NUFC remember...

WHY?? If you read the next sentence, I have thoroughly explained that statement. Have you bollocks. It's an excuse for a reason. 'Players don't improve at Newcastle'. Load of s***, mate. You don't need a reason you just want to write him off and write the club off. Have I written the player or the club off? no I haven't. In fact, it is the job of a supporter to be vocal about how the club is run. Taylor is a good player, and has my support, but to reject a bid above a certain level is bad business, and I have to be realistic about the ability of our own playing staff, and when a chance arises to improve the club through good business, it is my duty to put all sentiment aside, and support what would in the long run improve our football club. If you cant do that, you are quite a bad fan for the club to have. Again, by pointing out that no player improves significantly at Newcastle, I am doing my club a favour, and I am doing Steven Taylor a favour, as if enough fans were to read this and agree with the points I'm making, there would perhaps be more pressure on the club to improve the management and coaching. Criticism is an important part of supporting a club. If people wont criticise bad management/bad business, then the club will never win anything. Incidentally, can anyone name a player who has improved (not regained form, actually improved) since Dalglish became manager? depends what you mean or will accept - bernard improved first time around from when we sent him out on loan to being a very good left back that most people liked (ignoring his subsequent collapse) charles n'zogbia improved throughout last season from when he made his debut but injuries and a few other factors have held him back this season james milner, ALL people seem to agree, has been one of our best players this term and therefore has improved that's off the top of my head, but you're right they're few and far between, doesn't mean it can't happen

Why do you think that? Why can't we bring him on any further? He's 21 for crying out loud and has already shown a lot of potential. Bramble, on the other hand, will always be Bramble. I seriously hope i'm gonna get whooshed here, but i swear you're mixing Taylor up with Ramage. Taylor loses his man rather alot due to ball watching, and doesn't seem to be able to sort it out. That is why we have signed Gooch, and why we are playing him alongside Bramble. taylor would, should and must be number one choice CB once we get full backs worthy of the shirt, anything less and we deserve everything we get name me a better prospect, ENGLISH prospect, for his position at his age...please Curtis Davies, Micah Richards (whose natural position is centre back) right now, and David Edgar will be better by the time he reaches Taylor's age (yes, I know he is Canadian, but I dont get all this English s***). Another centre back that is better is Daniel Agger. Taylor is a good 6th to 16th placed club Premiership defender, but no more, and right now, he is only the third best centre back at the club if you look at both current ability and how the players gel together as a unit. At £7.5m+ we could buy an improvement on him. a) curtis davies has never played consistently and therefore been proven at the highest level b) micah richards is 3 years younger than him and to my knowledge has played primarily at right back and is actually considered a long term prospect for defensive midfield c) edgar has played a handfull of games and looks a good prospect agreed, but you can hardly suggest he's currently to be considered a better prospect than taylor d) agger is obviously not english, but is decent, agreed....albeit even he hasn't convinced for liverpool if you talk to their fans and this is his first full season at the club, a long way to go then.... e) who could we buy for 7.5m, at the same age, who is PROVEN to be better than him then? a) Davies consistently played well in the Premiership last season in a side that got relegated, and still plays consistently for the U21s. He also plays more U21 games than Taylor. b) Richards is versatile enough to play in many positions, but he will be a great player whereever he plays, so that makes him a better centre back. c) During his short stint at centre back, Edgar looked more composed and better in the air than Taylor ever has d) Agger has displaced Hyypia, and fans now like him afterhe had had a dissappointing start to his Liverpool career. Given Liverpool's good defensive record, he must be doing quite well. e) Age is irrelevant. Taylor is unlikely to get much better. Players do not significantly improve while at Newcastle United. I'm sure there are over 20 centre backs with more current ability than Taylor who would cost less than the bid I would accept from Chelsea. Taylor is a good player, but he is replaceable. Curtis Davies is one example of a same age player proven to be better. All just talk though, as there is no way that Chelsea are interested. Taylor is good, but not that good. can you explain how you reach the assumption that richards will be good wherever he plays yet taylor will never improve? unless you've watched both of these players consistently for their clubs then i don't feel you're in a position to be able to make this judgement... remember glenn johnson who is now on loan at pompey? was considered in the same way as richards at the same age and it went badly, badly wrong for him....taylor has been in the first team/squad for 3 years and shows signs of increasing maturity and being a leader, signs of improvement if you will oh and how has curtis davies been proven better than taylor? how many european matches has he played in to test his talent? he's playing week in week out in the championsh!t but because his name is linked with us and countless other clubs that makes him better than taylor does it? you could also start naming me the 20 better CB's who would cost less the 7-8m bid you talk about then please....

Why do you think that? Why can't we bring him on any further? He's 21 for crying out loud and has already shown a lot of potential. Bramble, on the other hand, will always be Bramble. I seriously hope i'm gonna get whooshed here, but i swear you're mixing Taylor up with Ramage. Taylor loses his man rather alot due to ball watching, and doesn't seem to be able to sort it out. That is why we have signed Gooch, and why we are playing him alongside Bramble. taylor would, should and must be number one choice CB once we get full backs worthy of the shirt, anything less and we deserve everything we get name me a better prospect, ENGLISH prospect, for his position at his age...please Curtis Davies, Micah Richards (whose natural position is centre back) right now, and David Edgar will be better by the time he reaches Taylor's age (yes, I know he is Canadian, but I dont get all this English s***). Another centre back that is better is Daniel Agger. Taylor is a good 6th to 16th placed club Premiership defender, but no more, and right now, he is only the third best centre back at the club if you look at both current ability and how the players gel together as a unit. At £7.5m+ we could buy an improvement on him. Taylor keeps Davies out of the U21 team, same with Ridgewell and Cahill, why? Micah Richards never plays in the center so that's a big assumption, and Edgar is 19, Taylor was better when he was 18. I think we're seriously underrating him on here. And i'm shocked to see alot of people think Bramble is better, but i suppose it's like this every time Bramble turns a corner isn't it. cheers, you're not wrong about an of that...

I will stick to English. Similar or better 1. Seb Hines (Middlesbrough) 2. Gary Cahill (Aston Villa) 3. Liam Ridgewell (Aston Villa) 4. Micah Richards (Man City) That said, I don't want Taylor to go, no matter how much they offer. how many games have #1 & #2 played to be considered as good as taylor (i'm not saying they're not) ridgewell, from everything i've seen of the lad he looks more ramage than taylor...and richards lets say we accept CB is his best position even though he plays RB most of the time then fine, lets take richards the other 3 questionable at best

i've no idea...win every game single handed by the looks of it these people have also not considered the fact that when taylor started (much in the same way edgar and huntington have done) he was doing the right things as he'd been coached to do in reserves and youth....since then he's been paired with the likes of boumsong and bramble who have taught him some elements of how NOT to defend if he was played with a class act like woodgate, or god forbid terry, then he'd be fantastic there's a reason a club like chel$ki are interested (if they are) and it's NOT because he's a 16th to 6th place defender is it?

Why do you think that? Why can't we bring him on any further? He's 21 for crying out loud and has already shown a lot of potential. Bramble, on the other hand, will always be Bramble. I seriously hope i'm gonna get whooshed here, but i swear you're mixing Taylor up with Ramage. Taylor loses his man rather alot due to ball watching, and doesn't seem to be able to sort it out. That is why we have signed Gooch, and why we are playing him alongside Bramble. taylor would, should and must be number one choice CB once we get full backs worthy of the shirt, anything less and we deserve everything we get name me a better prospect, ENGLISH prospect, for his position at his age...please Curtis Davies, Micah Richards (whose natural position is centre back) right now, and David Edgar will be better by the time he reaches Taylor's age (yes, I know he is Canadian, but I dont get all this English s***). Another centre back that is better is Daniel Agger. Taylor is a good 6th to 16th placed club Premiership defender, but no more, and right now, he is only the third best centre back at the club if you look at both current ability and how the players gel together as a unit. At £7.5m+ we could buy an improvement on him. curtis davies has never played consistently and therefore been proven at the highest level micah richards is 3 years younger than him and to my knowledge has played primarily at right back and is actually considered a long term prospect for defensive midfield edgar has played a handfull of games and looks a good prospect agreed, but you can hardly suggest he's currently to be considered a better prospect than taylor agger is obviously not english, but is decent, agreed....albeit even he hasn't convinced for liverpool if you talk to their fans and this is his first full season at the club, a long way to go then.... who could we buy for 7.5m, at the same age, who is PROVEN to be better than him then?

In the last couple of games perhaps, certainly not overall. Personally, i would try and do everything to keep him unless they offered ridiculous money. We're currently struggling to find one top-6-standard central defender to play alongside him, are we really going to find two for just £6-7m? Exactly. I am not saying sell, but it is a fact that of late, Titus has been miles better and if Taylor shows Brambles kind of improvement then we are going to have two very good CB's.. So people are STILL living on the lie that Titus is turning the corner, and is actually a top class defender underneath it all. Five years on and people are still relying on a useless non-fact. No. He has periods of a season where he'll play really well. Like now Then be abnormally s*** for the rest of it. Taylor has his flawas but he has been playing consistently almost season. I say almost - you cannot criticise his improvement. On returning from a long injury, he was rubbish at the start of the season. It took him a month or two to regain his form. He improved dramatically as the season progressed. phew, so i'm not alone then....i'm outraged by the very suggestion from so-called fans that they'd somehow even be able to dream of selling him that lad NE5 is right about one thing from the past, selling our best players IS NOT to be considered a sensible way to progress

In the last couple of games perhaps, certainly not overall. Personally, i would try and do everything to keep him unless they offered ridiculous money. We're currently struggling to find one top-6-standard central defender to play alongside him, are we really going to find two for just £6-7m? Exactly. I am not saying sell, but it is a fact that of late, Titus has been miles better and if Taylor shows Brambles kind of improvement then we are going to have two very good CB's.. i take it you all mean that bramble has been better playing CB than taylor has at RB or LB? unsurprising that eh? i asked earlier if anyone can tell me a better english prospect at his his age and position right now - i'm still waiting....

Why do you think that? Why can't we bring him on any further? He's 21 for crying out loud and has already shown a lot of potential. Bramble, on the other hand, will always be Bramble. I seriously hope i'm gonna get whooshed here, but i swear you're mixing Taylor up with Ramage. Taylor loses his man rather alot due to ball watching, and doesn't seem to be able to sort it out. That is why we have signed Gooch, and why we are playing him alongside Bramble. taylor would, should and must be number one choice CB once we get full backs worthy of the shirt, anything less and we deserve everything we get name me a better prospect, ENGLISH prospect, for his position at his age...please

get a grip - we've a 21 year old that came through the yourh system who has the potential to play for england, and you want to sell him now!!!! how about we keep the lad, get some full backs to the club so he can play in his proper position and make him the cornerstone of our team for 10 years? how old was john terry before he become as good as he is? at least 2-3 years older than taylor is now and the one thing taylor has in his favour is that he's faster than terry was at the same age suicide selling the lad, suicide

nightmare for me - i feckin live in korea, that would have been MINT!!!

what tables are they mate ? The tables posted by macbeth (based on official club financial statements) that he commented on, duly dismissed by HTL. Eh? The facts posted by NE5 tell the story that previous boards were inferior to the current one, these facts ignored by many. Based on these facts an opinion has consequently been formed that it is possible for us to once again have a board like previous boards should the present one go. However, this is deemed to be impossible by the some, who dismiss events of the past as of no consequence. The facts posted by macbeth do not tell the story he portrays, what they tell is the story of his envy of Fred agend and they tell the story of one poor managerial appointment made not by Fred, but by the entire board. He continually ignores this, which I why I dismmissed his charts as nonsense. They do not say what he has in the past claimed they say. Understand? a good argument HTL, particularly the first part about what NE5's statistics prove and i'd tend to agree (in fact you can't disagree) that statistics show positionally club has improved during the current/recent boards in comparison to previous ones however none of what NE5 posted, nor indeed much of the macbeth stuff, takes into account context - comparing the last 10 years to periods from the '60's/'70's and '80's ignores the dramatic shift in the game and it's finances in the whole country, this is fact... it's not enough to simply say our league finishes are higher therefore the board is better, nor is it enough to say the club is losing money here and there whilst ignoring that in the context of our history we are doing pretty well, you'd have to say Please explain how we did not fill the ground and capitalise on being one of the biggest financial players in the country prior to 1992 ? Or do you think that during the 1960's, 1970;s and 1980's, clubs such as Luton, Derby, Oxford, Crystal Palace, smoggies, Stoke, Ipswich, Norwich, Watford, Swindon, Brighton, Notts County, Preston, QPR, Bristol City, Grimsby, Swansea, Rotherham, Southampton, Portsmouth, Wimbledon, Burnley.....and more, all finished above us in the league for prolonged periods in some instances, and sometimes bought our better players, and some of who have won a domestic trophy since we did, because they had bigger crowd potential before the "dramatic shift in the game and its finances" BTW, this post in the context of the clubs I have mentioned, is all factual information. I am pleased you appear to think the dismal 30+ years we experienced is down to the fact that you think we did not have the same potential as we have nowadays, thanks to Sky and the "dramatic shift in the game and its finances". Which, of course, proves one thing and one thing only. You know and understand absolutely nowt about Newcastle United. OK, 1, i never mentioned mentioned SJP and 50,000+ plus crowds as being the driver behind the "dramatic shift", you did as it happens, in the above post...that you ASSUME it was what i was referring to shows you're not alwats dealing in fact 2, i never made any link to your dismal 30 years and lack of potential at the club pre-1992 (which i also didn't mention as it happens) so please don't link me and my supposed lack of knowledge to stuff you're inventing 3, i've never disagreed with you about the clubs you refer to in the 1960's, 1970's and 1980's and how we did in comparison to them, i agree with you, i have no idea why you're trying to create an argument about it... 4, i'm actually pleased you think i know nothing about NUFC baecause in all the games i've been to over the last 16-17 years (yes, my crime was not being born in 1945 and for that i offer my apologies), all of the away games and friendlies i've been to and european games i've travelled to see i've never ONCE met another fan with such a twisted, bitter & immovable opinion as you... in fact i'll tell you who you remind me of - there were a couple of people used to be behind me in the east stand, a couple of old farts never been south of the tyne but had the same spot in the ground forever and they were the only ones who knew anything, if anyone else around offered an opinion they were shot down 'cause these old knakcers knew more....start talking to them about having been to see the anderlecht friendly in belgium 3 days after the charity shield fiasco and they'll tell you about a home game in 1952 that was better 'cause of this and that...you're the chat room equivalent of them so if you're the font of knowledge, the bastion of truth about NUFC then i'll stay in my state of ignorance with all my mates, they say it's bliss don't you know? Please tell us, then, what you mean by "dynamic shift in finance". Do you mean we needed the money from sky tv to exert our superior potential over all those clubs I mentioned previously ? The previous 30 years is relevant because it illustrates how far forward the club has moved, and I am not trying to create an argument, I think you are because otherwise you would accept this point without question or argue about how "s***" the club is. My opinion isn't immovable, if you can prove the facts I have posted are incorrect. But having witnessed the years and the events which led to those facts, I doubt that you can do it. There is nothing like basing opinions on facts, is there ? Unless you can suggest something else to base opinions on ? Shame really, but I think you obviously care about the club, and unlike many others, have a fairly open mind about the clubs fortunes, apart from that like many others who have only really witnessed NUFC as a top club - which is neither your fault nor am I saying it is of course - but too many of the newer NUFC fans are completely removed from the reality of the fact that it is entirely and easily possible for us to do a lot "worse" than we have done in the last 15 years. As those who booed Bobby Robson when we finished 5th should have realised "be careful what you wish for", those wishing the current board out are of exactly the same mindset. as it happens, as you'll see from various posts here to yourself and HTL, some of what you (both) said has rubbed off on me a bit...i was backing your factual argument earlier regarding league positions but i do think they're taken out of context without any sort of financial background to them, the same as the financial argument can't stand alone without looking at league placings/european qualifications as for the "dramatic shift", i'm no accountant but i do know that financially our club has received a sh!tload of money over the last 10-15 years and it all hasn't been because the board were astute enough to generate it themselves....here's that word again but context can't be ignored - riding on the back of a wave that keegan created, the club (through Fletcher largely i seem to remember) managed to increase turnover, improve the stadium, sell more shirts and blah blah blah but it was part of wider trend of football becoming more trendy itself, the outward reduction of the hooligan element and football becoming more family oriented, and of course the birth of the sky generation.... if keegan had simply gotten us promoted amidst the game still being mired with a terrible reputation for hooliganism, there being no moves to improve the quality of the stadium and the game not awash with rupert murdochs money and, more importantly, the new profile sky created for the game then i have no doubt of two things: #1, we would not have had the league positions and european football we've seen for 10 years and #2, we'd probably be broke and have been relegated by now as for the people who booed robson well i'm in total agreement with you, 100%...i hope they can sleep at night these days...but i suppose that's what i can't get over and you can - it wasn't the people that booed robson who sacked him, nay humiliated him, it was freddy shepherd and i find it hard to forget or forgive that mistake....

fair comment obviously but teams do know how to PLAY against us at home don't they? sit deep, invite pressure, wait for us to get frustrated and make an ar*e of something simple at the back gifting them a chance.... didn't see AZ but given the scorline i'd guess they came to SJP and tried to play and we had better individuals than them? when the likes of man u come to SJP they come to play and have better individuals than us and thus don't need the sitting deep tactics

not wanting to be a negative vibe merchant but i suppose some might say that we're doing well 'cause european teams haven't worked us out - the vast majority of the PL have, particularly at home