mrmojorisin75

Well if we can get defence sorted, then all of our attacking options should have more freedom going forward. Milner just needs to score more, and improve his crossing, cant ever knock his work rate, and his pace and keeping the ball etc oh, he JUST needs to improve scoring and crossing then? piece of piss!! just kidding

So did David Rozenhal! Is this forum on a rerun? Every summer is a rerun with NUFC. First there are no or very few signings and some people start to get nervous. The "sensible" posters then laugh at those people and talk about how much time it is left etc. Time goes and we miss most of our targets and hear lots of stuff about why this happened etc. Roeder being the master of that. We get some players in and in the end you always feel underwhelmed and that we are not ready for the new season. totally and utterly bang on the nose mate different now though, with mike at the helm doncha know!!

long day dave?

interesting summation, i'll not bother making a humorous parody of your username however there are few absolutes; our summer to date is simply not good enough, there's one for you though if i was a spurs fan i'd be equally unimpressed i have to say, as many other people have pointed out they've not addressed the issues with their squad so spend (gross or net) isn't everything i refer you back to our summer transfers to date at this point

so YOU ARE saying they sold keane to balance the books then dave? find that fairly astonishing given the comments from spurs about the transfer that is not my understanding of events, but i'm not ITK as for "people like me" i think there's a fine balance - spurs willingly selling keane/berb this summer to balance the books would be nuts, being forced to by huge bids for players who are not young (remember their policy) is a totally different thing

bingo dave, why would they? in what world wouldn't they demand less than 5m? Why would they want to keep a player that doesn't want to be there? no, why would they accept 2.5m when to general knowledge there are no clauses in place, he's got plenty of time left on his contract & they don't need to sell? oh and he's got england caps right? generally decreases value If a player slaps in a transfer request, the general reaction is to get him out asap. That usually entails accepting an offer pretty sharpish. I'd agree that £2.5m seems a bit low for him but him handing in a request changes things in our favour. If we've got to barter up and settle on about £3.2m then so be it. Only a fucking retard would march straight in and bid £5m. i swear you lot are fucking unbelievable, quoting prices from a skysports story, who we're not allowed to believe as they're "murdoch owned" or some shit and people are saying good price for him one guy (not me) says they wouldn't sell at that price, i back him up and you're all over me like flies on shit embarrassing, seriously Just answering you question tbh. They wouldn't ask for £5m because they know they'd never get it, mainly due to the fact the player doesn't want to fucking be there! Couldn't give a shit about skysports but the prices being bandied about seem about right. You need to calm down a bit. nickey shorey at relegated reading = 4m steven warnock at not relegated, with no real reason to sell blackburn = 2.5m? (you do know a transfer request is just that right, a request? they don't have to accept it and can basically demand any reasonable fee they want) yeah, i'll calm down Reading have just been relegated and I'm pretty sure England International Shorey, whether he handed in a request or not, wanted to play in the Premier League - hence the low fee. Warnock at Blackburn, with rumours of discontent at Ince, slaps in a request to move clubs and we go in at (allegedly) £2.5m. I honestly don't see the problem. Blackburn can indeed reject his request and keep him but how often do you see that, eh? If a player wants out, history tells you he goes pretty swiftly for less than his actual worth. Wasn't having a pop btw. aye, getting excited it seems! stand by myself though - warnocks an international too right? blackburn wouldn't be the first club to turn down a transfer request either...and they've a history of being obstinate over transfer fees as well!!! for what it's worth if we sign him he'll probably do OK, personally i got sucked into all the talk of developing talent/scouting and would have expected (as and example only) a move for taiwo for double the fee and getting a player who could potentially cover 2 positions for a decade (LB, LM) rather than what is essentially a very limited signing

i'll counter both baggio and shak, AGAIN by simply saying duff/zog wages aren't important, nor are fees, the message is everything to me...maybe enrique will have a better attitude to such a move and presumably KK wouldn't simply play warnock (if he signs) should enrique look the better player we'll never agree on this, warnock is at best a sideways step at 2.5m, anything more than that a backwards one

delighted, how about you? thought mike has just went on record saying there's money to spend? no? why would that be necessary dave? I wouldn't be happy at all, considering they're two of our best players. Like Berbatov and Keane. neither would i, missed the ironic smiley if there is one care to answer the 2nd question dave? considering keane and berb have both had their heads turned by bigger clubs rather than spurs selling them to fund other things, oh and berb is still there I don't think it is necessary for us, just making the simple point that the departure of Keane and the probable departure of Berbatov - both for big money - obviously allows them to spend more money. Just like if we bin Smith we can then bring in someone else. Considering Spurs stand to lose two players responsible for nearly half their league goals (not to mention the countless assists), I just don't see why they're this great thing we should be aspiring to. If we lost Owen and Martins to Man Utd and Arsenal, you'd be kicking off that we can't keep hold of our best players. eh? are you telling me keane was sold to fund bentley? and berbatov is being sold to fund who? i was under the impression they sold they tripe off to sunderland, pompey etc... in order to fund moves selling keane/berb to fund makes no sense as they're selling players they want to keep, with good pedigree, that they'd need to directly replace at a risk as we would with owen/martins nonsense way to take something totally out of context and not back down dave

bingo dave, why would they? in what world wouldn't they demand less than 5m? Why would they want to keep a player that doesn't want to be there? no, why would they accept 2.5m when to general knowledge there are no clauses in place, he's got plenty of time left on his contract & they don't need to sell? oh and he's got england caps right? generally decreases value If a player slaps in a transfer request, the general reaction is to get him out asap. That usually entails accepting an offer pretty sharpish. I'd agree that £2.5m seems a bit low for him but him handing in a request changes things in our favour. If we've got to barter up and settle on about £3.2m then so be it. Only a fucking retard would march straight in and bid £5m. i swear you lot are fucking unbelievable, quoting prices from a skysports story, who we're not allowed to believe as they're "murdoch owned" or some shit and people are saying good price for him one guy (not me) says they wouldn't sell at that price, i back him up and you're all over me like flies on shit embarrassing, seriously Just answering you question tbh. They wouldn't ask for £5m because they know they'd never get it, mainly due to the fact the player doesn't want to fucking be there! Couldn't give a shit about skysports but the prices being bandied about seem about right. You need to calm down a bit. nickey shorey at relegated reading = 4m steven warnock at not relegated, with no real reason to sell blackburn = 2.5m? (you do know a transfer request is just that right, a request? they don't have to accept it and can basically demand any reasonable fee they want) yeah, i'll calm down

yourself and shak can read all the subsequent posts to mine to answer your own questions and yes its exactly like zog/duff in that we might be attempting to sign an older player with less appeal to replace...well you know the story, i'm fuckin sick of repeatin it tbh To replace what? A young defender who still hasn't proven anything at all as far as I can see. He has the makings of a solid full-back yeah, but he's hardly pulled up any trees whenever he's played. He's looked a promising young talent who MIGHT turn into a good player for us. N'Zogbia on the other hand had arguably been our best player in that season and we should have been comfortable with him as our first choice left winger going into the following season, as he had proven he was a capable Premiership player. Also Warnock won't come in with the practical gaurantee that he'll be first choice like Duff did. Duff only left Chelsea for regular first team football after it became evident he wasn't getting his game at Chelsea. Warnock on the other hand will be coming here looking to prove himself and I have full confidence that if Enrique proves to be the better player he'll get the nod to start from Keegan, which was never going to be the case with Duff and Zoggy with Roeder in charge. So no, not the same thing at all I'm afraid. our best left back last season, zog was our best left winger that season, both young and improving oranges and oranges mate, spin it however you want we're supposed to be a "developing talent" club now aren't we? what message are we sending to a spanish u21 international by signing somewhere 4 years older than him for the same position? oh and we disagree, i personally see no reason, other than money, why warnock would come unless guaranteed games, and we're not in the business of giving silly wages away any more, are we? Are you suggesting we don't sign another left back then? Or someone shite so Enrique would be guaranteed first choice? either someone up and coming, or someone established and CONSIDERABLY better than enrique again, otherwise what's the point? we've signed bassong presumably on the assumption he can improve right? well why not offer west ham 5m for matthew upson to "challenge" colo, taylor and faye instead or one of a thousand other examples think about it man

Was kinda what I was sayng - net spend is not a good yardstick Modric, Dos Santos, Bentley all good players but there net Spend is near enough nil. Very few clubs can run indefinitely on huge net spends, there has to be a balance somewhere. Even under Keegan mk1 we had to baalnce to a degree - If you have read his autobiography you will be familiar with the fact that we needed to raise £6m in player sales to offset the Shearer signing in 96. In an ideal world you would run each season with a high gross spend but a low net spend, worry when both are low. dude, honestly, it just occurred to me this morning that our spend this summer so far (assuming colo signs) has an eerily similar look to last summer no one wants us to sign 3 more players before the window than me, i just don't see it so i'm getting my retaliation in early to all the "wait and see" merchants...our summer activity to date is not good enough and i defy anyone to say it is Bar Brummie, show me a fan of any club who is happy with their summer so far. Not having a go at you btw, I'm just sick of people going on about Net Spend, apart from that point I think we are on similar wavelengths with regards to wanting more people in ah i see, well fuck net spend, as i said it just jumped into my head this morning figures were a little TOO similar we should not be happy with our summer so far, frankly whether man city, pompey or any other set of arseholes are i don't care, we shouldn't be sep 1st, i hope i wake up with a scolding hot fried egg on my face, really do

bingo dave, why would they? in what world wouldn't they demand less than 5m? Why would they want to keep a player that doesn't want to be there? no, why would they accept 2.5m when to general knowledge there are no clauses in place, he's got plenty of time left on his contract & they don't need to sell? oh and he's got england caps right? generally decreases value If a player slaps in a transfer request, the general reaction is to get him out asap. That usually entails accepting an offer pretty sharpish. I'd agree that £2.5m seems a bit low for him but him handing in a request changes things in our favour. If we've got to barter up and settle on about £3.2m then so be it. Only a fucking retard would march straight in and bid £5m. i swear you lot are fucking unbelievable, quoting prices from a skysports story, who we're not allowed to believe as they're "murdoch owned" or some shit and people are saying good price for him one guy (not me) says they wouldn't sell at that price, i back him up and you're all over me like flies on shit embarrassing, seriously

yourself and shak can read all the subsequent posts to mine to answer your own questions and yes its exactly like zog/duff in that we might be attempting to sign an older player with less appeal to replace...well you know the story, i'm fuckin sick of repeatin it tbh To replace what? A young defender who still hasn't proven anything at all as far as I can see. He has the makings of a solid full-back yeah, but he's hardly pulled up any trees whenever he's played. He's looked a promising young talent who MIGHT turn into a good player for us. N'Zogbia on the other hand had arguably been our best player in that season and we should have been comfortable with him as our first choice left winger going into the following season, as he had proven he was a capable Premiership player. Also Warnock won't come in with the practical gaurantee that he'll be first choice like Duff did. Duff only left Chelsea for regular first team football after it became evident he wasn't getting his game at Chelsea. Warnock on the other hand will be coming here looking to prove himself and I have full confidence that if Enrique proves to be the better player he'll get the nod to start from Keegan, which was never going to be the case with Duff and Zoggy with Roeder in charge. So no, not the same thing at all I'm afraid. our best left back last season, zog was our best left winger that season, both young and improving oranges and oranges mate, spin it however you want we're supposed to be a "developing talent" club now aren't we? what message are we sending to a spanish u21 international by signing somewhere 4 years older than him for the same position? oh and we disagree, i personally see no reason, other than money, why warnock would come unless guaranteed games, and we're not in the business of giving silly wages away any more, are we?

delighted, how about you? thought mike has just went on record saying there's money to spend? no? why would that be necessary dave? I wouldn't be happy at all, considering they're two of our best players. Like Berbatov and Keane. neither would i, missed the ironic smiley if there is one care to answer the 2nd question dave? considering keane and berb have both had their heads turned by bigger clubs rather than spurs selling them to fund other things, oh and berb is still there

Was kinda what I was sayng - net spend is not a good yardstick Modric, Dos Santos, Bentley all good players but there net Spend is near enough nil. Very few clubs can run indefinitely on huge net spends, there has to be a balance somewhere. Even under Keegan mk1 we had to baalnce to a degree - If you have read his autobiography you will be familiar with the fact that we needed to raise £6m in player sales to offset the Shearer signing in 96. In an ideal world you would run each season with a high gross spend but a low net spend, worry when both are low. dude, honestly, it just occurred to me this morning that our spend this summer so far (assuming colo signs) has an eerily similar look to last summer no one wants us to sign 3 more players before the window than me, i just don't see it so i'm getting my retaliation in early to all the "wait and see" merchants...our summer activity to date is not good enough and i defy anyone to say it is

bingo dave, why would they? in what world wouldn't they demand less than 5m? Why would they want to keep a player that doesn't want to be there? no, why would they accept 2.5m when to general knowledge there are no clauses in place, he's got plenty of time left on his contract & they don't need to sell? oh and he's got england caps right? generally decreases value Aye, fancy putting in a low opening bid, what's that all about. hold on, dave said he couldn't see them accepting it ffs not me, i was agreeing

delighted, how about you? thought mike has just went on record saying there's money to spend? no? why would that be necessary dave?

bingo dave, why would they? in what world wouldn't they demand less than 5m? Why would they want to keep a player that doesn't want to be there? no, why would they accept 2.5m when to general knowledge there are no clauses in place, he's got plenty of time left on his contract & they don't need to sell? oh and he's got england caps right? generally decreases value

scott parkers & coxeau - the point, ad infinitum, is that net spend guarantees nothing but good players cost money; we need good players ergo spending less than bolton have done on one player is simply not good enough for a club our size i'm very, very happy with what we've signed so far but point to the entirely coincidental similar net spend to last season (budget?) versus all of the other clubs around us as an example that it's not enough...hard to grasp i understand oh, and scott parkers, spurs? seriously, you're fucking kidding me right? a club that have spent the last 4-5 years signing players who have largely increased in value versus us during the same period? they're selling what they consider shite for money it's not worth somehow yet signing potential quality for similar amounts, hence the net spend.. i said at the start we'll see where we are on sep 1st, as i said back in may when i voiced concerns...i tend to shy away from hyperbole but if this is our summer transfer activity, and you're happy with it, you're a fucken idiot

bingo dave, why would they? in what world wouldn't they demand less than 5m?

yourself and shak can read all the subsequent posts to mine to answer your own questions and yes its exactly like zog/duff in that we might be attempting to sign an older player with less appeal to replace...well you know the story, i'm fuckin sick of repeatin it tbh

Eh? I doubt they're expecting him to be the guy we're going to build the team around or anything, not all your signings are going to be superstars. do people see that much difference between enrique and warnock like? personally given their age(s) i don't so what's the point in warnock then? seriously? 3-4m say for a 26(?) year-old who'll have no sell on value later versus a player already on the books, younger and with more potential, not to mention someone who put in the effort to establish himself last season amidst difficult circumstances - be a right boost for his confidence this signing eh? zog/duff anyone? as i said, not a single thing i understand about it unless (as i suspect) warnock is comfortable in both FB positions, that being the case i can see the method behind the move, if he's only a LB then it's pointless

good team that, against anyone nowhere near the top 6/7 - it'd terrorise weaker teams playing 4-4-2 with our CM's against anyone the likes of villa/spurs upwards is simply nothing short of suicide however

assuming we're interested and this goes ahead there's not really a part of this transfer i understand in the 8 months since KK & Wise + team turned up this is who they identified as a piece of the jigsaw to take us forward is it? mind boggling

Who is here to mod the Admin? Damn you and your reign of terror! Noone. You're our bitches. Now click Dave's link again. NOW!