mrmojorisin75

very much agree with the point but disagree about the player oldtype sholagoals is borderline useless if he's not playing regularly, and even if he is he has a brief spurt of form then it's back to normal...he can maintain form neither as a bit part player nor a starter problem we've had for years i might add and well highlighted, for the PL you need better than ameobi as a squad member

The wage bill is 70.4% of our operating expenses so that's got to be the most obvious area to go looking to make savings. Targeting anything else as a starting point wouldn't make sense as the savings would me minimal in comparison. In business you always go for savings in whatever area offers the greatest gains, 10% of a 100 is better than 50% of 5. what a load of s**** mackems.gif How is that a load of s****? Mick is spot on there, both in his analagy at the bottom with regards to the %'s and he's also right about the wage bill. If it is indeed 70.4% of expenditure (and I have no reason to doubt it) then that has to be the first place he looks at trimming. Obviously if someone was on £100,000 a week but got 35 goals a season or whatever then that would justify the wages, but when you look at the likes of Geremi, Owen, Smith, Viduka, Duff, Cacapa etc, these players offer nothing to the squad because they are either s****, made of glass, or both. In some cases (Smith, Cacapa, Viduka) we're basically paying them for nothing, as well as covering the cost of their rehab and physio. I'd like to see you explain how that post is s****. My guess is just because it was Mick who posted it, maybe you should actually read it? It makes sense. Yet the point is most of those were signed under Ashley, yet they don't seem to want to take responsibility for this. They are far too quick to lay the blame under the previous regime (who were far from perfect btw) without acknowledging their own mistakes for the extraordinary high wage bill that we have. Apart from Cacapa the rest were signed when Shepherd was chairman and his boy was still negotiating deals. I've read somewhere that our wage bill is 55% higher than Everton's, that's shocking. your DOF is doing a great job. You make no sense sometimes, having a DOF may not be the best idea but he's actually done well with the players he has signed. I am not arguing the about having a DOF or anything but to say Wise has done a bad job when you compare it to the previous regime is absolutely ludicrous. Look at the players wise has signed. Jonas - 4m or whatever, bargain Bassong - 1.5M Bargain Colo 10M - a little pricey but has started every game and looks to be worth his money Guthrie - 2M Bargain Ranger - Sod all -will be World's greatest player in 1 years time Vuckic - 70k - Beat off competition from all over Europe for this lad and he looks good Xisco - hasn't been given a chance but ok Doesn't look great Nacho -You cannot really rate this is a signing as he's been i jured which in your eyes probably is Wise' fault for not having a crystal ball you'll get milner, given & owen thrown at you in a slight of hand routine on a par with hitting someone over the back of the head with a baseball bat been knawing at me this one, through the NUSC rally/jamboree thread....FUCK these wise out clowns, i mean it....someone come to me with a constructed, backed up reason why wise is hated & should be out of the club, otherwise shut the fuck up all the "evidence" we have is that working to a budget, which isn't his fault might i point out to some people, wise or wise as part of the team are doing a decent job, more than decent it's NE5 himself who says in defence of the cash-splashing that went on under FS you can't get it right 100% of the time so i'll take nacho and xisco there myself...imo they're well ahead since being installed in the club and i defy anyone to show me otherwise

and he did this because 2 vital strikers were passed fit to start for him for the first time, meaning we had 3 very good strikers to attack with. his methods didnt just "click" suddenly. did we attack teams in the same manner with smith, ameobi and owen upfront? no, we didnt. dude, you're starting to annoy me with the repetitiveness of this now...i agree with you in the sense that when we had those three things clicked and he changed the system to accommodate, and it worked very well what was the alternative before they came back? what would a better manager have done with the tools at his disposal? only thing i can see is throw in untested bairns in the hope they'd do better than duff/smith etc... what else could have have done with such shite? which, again, is my entire point. the thread (i think) is bashing somebody because the football we're playing isnt great but with all the players missing what are people expecting? we looked shit last year before martins and viduka came back so, like you say, how else can we attack teams with any potency without our best 3 strikers? if we get owen, martins and viduka (and possibly barton) all fit and playing we'll look infinitely better, like we did last year. righto then, now i see how it ties up...you're suggesting there's a chance that under and/or hughton as stand in these players will repeat the form of last season when they're fit again don't agree with you but i respect your right to think it

and he did this because 2 vital strikers were passed fit to start for him for the first time, meaning we had 3 very good strikers to attack with. his methods didnt just "click" suddenly. did we attack teams in the same manner with smith, ameobi and owen upfront? no, we didnt. dude, you're starting to annoy me with the repetitiveness of this now...i agree with you in the sense that when we had those three things clicked and he changed the system to accommodate, and it worked very well what was the alternative before they came back? what would a better manager have done with the tools at his disposal? only thing i can see is throw in untested bairns in the hope they'd do better than duff/smith etc... what else could have have done with such shite?

It took time to bring the change about FFS. He had to get the players minds switched from nagative football to open football. Birmingham was the turning point, where got a draw but could have won it. Libertine always sniping at KK, any little chance. Its ok tho, you just bend history to suit your argument. it took time to get 3 very good players back (and staying fit) to take the team forward in matches and score goals. the front 3 took the pressure off the s*** midfield the same as a good midfield will take the pressure off a defence. simple as that. Obviously the manager doesn't deserve any credit at all for changing the whole shape of the team though. to some extent. "playing your best players" is what its called at other clubs. dropping smith and ameobi to play martins and viduka isnt rocket science. You're absolutely pathetic. martins or viduka didnt start a game for keegan before the birmingham match and then they come back in and we start doing well. did keegan "change their mentality" or did we just get 2 very decent/vital players back in place of 2 s*** ones? the keegan thing. obviously. The players coming back was obviously instrumental but it was Keegans tactics that got us the results we did. Not many managers would have had the balls to play Owen, Martins & Viduka together. Allardyce certainly didn't. keegans tactics did nothing for the few months before 2 vital players were fit again. worth noting in the context of the thread. He was trying to turn the mentality of the team around. Did you expect instant results? no but he might have expected better than we saw prior to the return of these players, i.e. anything other than playing duff & smith

It took time to bring the change about FFS. He had to get the players minds switched from nagative football to open football. Birmingham was the turning point, where got a draw but could have won it. Libertine always sniping at KK, any little chance. Its ok tho, you just bend history to suit your argument. it took time to get 3 very good players back (and staying fit) to take the team forward in matches and score goals. the front 3 took the pressure off the s*** midfield the same as a good midfield will take the pressure off a defence. simple as that. Obviously the manager doesn't deserve any credit at all for changing the whole shape of the team though. to some extent. "playing your best players" is what its called at other clubs. dropping smith and ameobi to play martins and viduka isnt rocket science. You're absolutely pathetic. martins or viduka didnt start a game for keegan before the birmingham match and then they come back in and we start doing well. did keegan "change their mentality" or did we just get 2 very decent/vital players back in place of 2 s*** ones? the keegan thing. obviously. The players coming back was obviously instrumental but it was Keegans tactics that got us the results we did. Not many managers would have had the balls to play Owen, Martins & Viduka together. Allardyce certainly didn't. and prior to those players coming back? where were the tactics and the balls?

It took time to bring the change about FFS. He had to get the players minds switched from nagative football to open football. Birmingham was the turning point, where got a draw but could have won it. Libertine always sniping at KK, any little chance. Its ok tho, you just bend history to suit your argument. it took time to get 3 very good players back (and staying fit) to take the team forward in matches and score goals. the front 3 took the pressure off the shit midfield the same as a good midfield will take the pressure off a defence. simple as that. Obviously the manager doesn't deserve any credit at all for changing the whole shape of the team though. to some extent. "playing your best players" is what its called at other clubs. dropping smith and ameobi to play martins and viduka isnt rocket science. You're absolutely pathetic. martins or viduka didnt start a game for keegan before the birmingham match and then they come back in and we start doing well. did keegan "change their mentality" or did we just get 2 very decent/vital players back in place of 2 shit ones? the keegan thing. obviously. can see both sides of this; until Birmingham keegan didn't have that much of a noticeable effect on either results or performances as i recall it, once the players come back in he has to be credited with playing owen deeper than martins/viduka if martins/viduka didn't come back when they did we might have been having a very different discussion but they did, the two things can't be divorced from each other shit argument by the way lads, really shit

its a picture. this is the URL for it though.... http://i269.photobucket.com/albums/jj70/xborox/img075.jpg nah, blocked here...fuckin draconian twats

can someone PM what's in the OP please? can't see it on my works browser

people arguing about this

he's shit alright

From what I've seen of him, I'd say he's been at least as good as Woodgate was for us, especially taking fitness into account. i was half cut yesterday but there was a long punted ball up and he out muscled jo (i think) and was surrounded by a couple of players and he elected to take it on his chest and try and play it away reminded me of woodgate completely...fair enough the ball was nicked away from him but that he has the presence of mind and confidence to even try it says it all for me be devastated if he leaves

not happy with the gap at the moment, we're nailed on to lose 3 of the next 5 and certainly not nailed on to win the other two, although it's possible where we're at in 5 games time will probably tell us what's gonna happen...if we get 6 points out of the 2 "winnable" () games then it'll look significantly brighter, 0 points then it's looking like doom

they are all absolutely correct, but you can bet that a few particular people on here would tell you whatever Mike Ashley does is wonderful, even if we get relegated and end up like Sheff Wed they will still think he's doing all the right things for the club and so long as he doesn't "embarrass them" [whatever that means, poor dears] he will be just, er, great. i tell you that non newcastle supporting friends of mine laughed at NUFC for appointing souness and roeder and it is dismissed. someone else tells you that some non nufc fans think along your lines and it is taken on board and is supposed to mean something. i can see a pattern forming. so can I. Its quite amazing that you can't see mandiarse is the one harping on saying Ashley isn't embarrassing him and causing us to be laughed and the Halls and Shepherd did. mackems.gif The difference is, I know that nobody laughed at us/me when we were qualifying for europe more than everybone but 4 teams. I also don't take the presumption that they are, to heart. I'm so pleased you think all the 87 clubs that haven't qualified for europe as often as us, found something to laugh at. I think you and some others should get out more and stop taking these WUM's on phone ins to heart. Whats your take on Chelsea sacking Phil Scolari ? How can that be, a world cup winner, and I thought it was only us who appointed managers who failed and didn't give them time Have you read the reports that Zola may take over in the summer ? Amazing, someone who has only been a manager for a few months, surely its only us who do things like that too ? erm i'm not actually bothered about what he thought. i'd have disagreed with him about dalglish and also with those who were carrying on about fred the way many are now about ashley ("just want them out and anyone will be better, despite no-one looking like they are willing to step into the breech or carrying the financial clout needed). you shouldn't try to lump everyone who disagrees with you in the same boat and lets face it ,it would need to be a cruise liner. my whole disagreement with you has been about the position the club was in when ashley took over. i'm sure i've answered the scolari one before, but hey ho. it's a one that didn't pay off and was always more of a risk than it seemed due to him never having managed in european league football. even the fact he won a world cup can be lessoned when you think of the players at his disposal. i take it you weren't that miffed when we appointed kinnear in "the lottery" ? I think if we stay up, it will be almost entirely down to Kinnear for getting their heads up and restoring some spirit among the players. Next season will be just the same as this though, until the inevitable happens. And the club will be nearer to where it was when the Halls and Shepherd found it. But I'm sure Ashley continuing his prudency on crowds of 20,000 will be the right policy to get us back into europe again. Why don't you tell us what you would describe the appointments of football managers to be, when such a sure fire certainty as a World Cup Winner is sacked after a few months, and the long term replacement is being touted as someone who has been a manager for only a few months ? Or do you still think we are the only club who ever do this, and all the 87 clubs who didn't qualify for europe as often as we did were getting it right while we were getting it all wrong ?? if we stop up we'll disagree as to why then. i think the squad has enough quality but not enough depth and kinnear hasn't done anything for me to think he's changed things. they don't seem to be playing with extra spirit or extra tactical nouse. you speak of next season but i think had fred and sam stayed this season would have seen championship football and real panic on the financial front (.thats why after backing fred, as things turned, so did I). as for your question about appointments i'll give you an honest and straight forward answer......you'll see that i said scolari,due to his lack of euro league experience wasn't a sure fire bet. personally i'd have went for a manger with euro league experience (preferably english,spanish or german leagues) for the other 87 clubs it should have been easier for us to attract a better quality of manager (instead of souness) as we were a team who had finished 5th and managers tend to want to go to the better performing clubs as we were than. haven't you yet realised the irony that you are defending apointing poor managers on the grounds that they aren't certain to be a success yet are complaining that we aren't trying to buy the best players who are just as uncertain . i'll save you answering to this bit as you'll say that i am saying that we should get a top manager but not top players,my answer is that we should get the best of both that we can afford,even using debt as necessary but not the level of debt fred built up and not with the totally unsustainble wages. At the end of the day. 1. Mike Ashley doesn't have ambition for the club like his predecessors did. 2. 87 other clubs have appointed managers and run clubs inferior to us, yet you say we have "failed" 3. I think relegation is inevitable under the current Mike Ashley "plan" at the start of the day 1. fred was in a position to do that (ie assets to gaurantee lending against,less debt to finance etc) then his gamble failed. 2. lesser clubs will have more problem attracting a better manager. you'd expect a club who finished 5th should attract better than souness, or any prem club should attract better than roeder, it works exactly the same with players, which you don't see as a lottery. 3. i think releagtaion and bankruptcy was a certainty under freds direction. by the way...do you think nufc should have kept borrowing despite making yearly losses till success or bankruptcy ? well, as I have said. The Halls and Shepherd have paid the price you wanted them to pay for their "failure". I hope you are pleased the club is in better hands, but a few years of real mediocrity the likes of which you have never imagined will change your mind I suspect. As has been pointed out by UV, what a shame we didn't take the Ashley direction 9 years ago and we would have avoided all that champions league stuff, getting in the way of the business etc etc. i've already told you about where i saw the club going under fred, and i'd take a few years mediocrity (which i do remember from the 70's and 80's) over that. also i've already stated about when it is wise,if not best practise, to take on debt,however there are also times when it is unwise to take on more debt, ie when your performance on and off the pitch is going backwards,when you are making regular losses and when wages count for over 70% iof your turnover. in this instance do you think it a good thing to build up more debt ? what happens if you take this gamble a two or three times and it fails to pay off, do you keep on doing it ? why are you so s*** scared of answering this question honestly and straightforwardly ? ffs....I've said that I agreed with the appointment of Allardyce as a measure of steadying the ship and appointing a manager who had shown he could put together a decent team without spending money. Ditto the first year or two of Bobby Robson. The difference being that they pushed forward again, and the best players at the club knew this and so didn't want to leave. Unlike Mike Ashley, who is not going to do this. I really think if you are going to continue to harp on and make comments like being "s*** scared" [when its you who is unable to read and understand] then you ought to direct such comments at Ozzie Mandiarse and MICK although I'm sure you know the reason you don't do that is because you agree with them. Which means you are as incorrect, blind and naive as they are too. I hope to see you encouraging them to answer questions, in the same manner you show me. Respect for you disappearing fast mate. i wish ozzie would answer the question if only to make mine the only unanswered question on here. as i've alrerady said ,i think allardyce could well have taken us down,as for pushing foward again afterwards,wecould only do it after stabalising. my view is that the stabalisation we are currently undergoing has had to be harsher because of the mess fred left. time and again you've went on about "competing" with those higher up without once explaining how we are meant to do it whilst still paying for the recently past attempts that have failed and seemingly thinking we can keep on doing it year on year. i really think you underestimate the position we were in or are in denial. I don't underestimate anything. I'm just totally bored with people like you harping on about the accounts, because the club keep harping on about it, and you are feeding into it which is exactly what they want you to do instead of focussing on their lack of ambition which stands out a mile. Naive. Like the bloke said today at the NUSC meeting, why don't they talk about the Champions League qualifications, the stadium expansion, the high quality signings, the Cup Finals, the capacity crowds. This is what football is all about. because like it or not, they're all firmly in the past unfortunately for us the money spent on fees/wages and debt accrued to "achieve" this remains firmly in the present

fucks the point of this thread? we all know it all already, but KK has gone and that's that

good point

didn't see the whole game yesterday but most of the 2nd half...had to come on say how good bassong was again, if he keeps this up he'll be as good as woodgate was for us imo (taking into account fitness) great player

The answer: take Ashley Cole out, he gets nee assists, and get Maynor Figueroa in. Been excellent all season, Wigan get buckets of clean sheets and he gets lots of assists. hth i put the wigan trio in ages ago, palacios/valencia/figeroa...been the lords ever since, wonder how many points figeroa got for villa away where he basically tackled and blocked everything on the pitch on his own!?

this

what's the big deal with this guy? cost nothing and probably isn't getting paid the world...much worse things to be getting hot under the collar about imo oh yeah, but like xisco he was part of nasty dennis's masterplan to get rid of KK obviously, now i remember

what? Kinnear did some scouting and other work for Arsenal and Wenger while he was out of management. buh?

have you decided if you agree with protests or not ? Surely that would depend on what the protest is about? its about unhappiness with how the club is run. As ozzie was fully behind a protest about the last board, as I have linked, why does he ridicule the idea when someone else is the target ? Basically toonlass, he just likes his one liners, which aren't funny in the slightest, and doesn't like the same back. Unless he is happy with how Ashley is running the club, but he hasn't told us this either as he's not one for opinions Ozzie, just hindsight later. Bit behind the times NE5. Anyway, are you going to the "rally" on sunday? That would negatively impact his pre-match drinking experience, though he might have a "shake the drops off for Freddie" moment. tsch, no reply as usual. Careful you don't whinge on when someone gives you the one liners back. What exactly do you think of the merits of appointing a manager who won 4 titles with 2 different clubs and 3 manager of the year awards ? Would that make it 4 out of 6 appointments that you agreed with ? Never mind, IF you go to the game, you can always have a pint for Graeme for selling the "cancer". seriously, when i accidentally read this now i fall into a momentary trance...like the hypo-toad out of futurama

ha! that's it, the living room horrible place

no no, not the lounge...definately on grey st...name like the lounge

fine by me to be honest, if he could stabilise us so we are in a better position and then fuck off to man united that would do me absolutely fine. oh yeah, not really saying it would be bad for us, just pointing out my opinion of his motivations