mrmojorisin75

wonder if chelski just outright buy positive publicity in the media? i can fathom no other explanation for it 'cause no-one really liked them before abramovich so why would they now? kenyon is on his mission to create a global brand, ain't gonna happen if the papers and media are skitting their figureheads is it? slush fund for the papers and TV would not surprise me one bit bit of a tangent there i'm aware...

there was a thread where someone brought up spurs spending in recent seasons but i could never find it again, i was going to ask the spurs resident ITK's how the club can continue spending at such a sustained rate? they balance out to some degree i'm aware but very recently the balancing out part seems to have been forgotten? genuine question like, not a piss take

I can't see any way that would be workable. What counts as "local"? How would it work in, say, Birmingham or Stoke? For which team could Owen Hargreaves play? how should i know, i don't work for fifa, i just said i liked an idea - why the snipe? for arguments sake though either anyone signed up at 16 in a clubs academy or anyone signed from abroad before a certain age (say 16 again?) can qualify as "local" or "home grown" players...anyone outwith that is either senior & english or senior & foreign you need to have 5 "local" or "home grown" players in your match day squad - a senior player bought from another english club couldn't be counted don't see the downside...bigger clubs couldn't sign anyone between say 16 & 21 from another english club, if they tried to to sign someone from south america for instance they'd not get a work permit, if they sign them and send them to belgium or something they'd be classed as foreign when they arrive not home grown work the rest out yourself, it's not my manifesto or anything, idea just appealed It wasn't a snipe. It was a question. If you can't handle people taking issue with your posts, perhaps a discussion board is not the ideal medium for ya. so can you still not see any way that would be workable? Depends how you define "local", hence my question. In simple terms it would advantage some teams more than others. i see, so did you read any of my last post or not? if you're gonna "take issue" with a post it'd help if you read and counter argued the points made, that's why i took it as sniping originally...you appear to have dismissed something as not workable for no reason other than you deem it non workable, from what i can see and before i have to explain myself for your next post i'll point out someone else used the word local that you originally picked up on, i then changed it to "home grown" or whatever you want to call it, before you start in with the semantics

I can't see any way that would be workable. What counts as "local"? How would it work in, say, Birmingham or Stoke? For which team could Owen Hargreaves play? how should i know, i don't work for fifa, i just said i liked an idea - why the snipe? for arguments sake though either anyone signed up at 16 in a clubs academy or anyone signed from abroad before a certain age (say 16 again?) can qualify as "local" or "home grown" players...anyone outwith that is either senior & english or senior & foreign you need to have 5 "local" or "home grown" players in your match day squad - a senior player bought from another english club couldn't be counted don't see the downside...bigger clubs couldn't sign anyone between say 16 & 21 from another english club, if they tried to to sign someone from south america for instance they'd not get a work permit, if they sign them and send them to belgium or something they'd be classed as foreign when they arrive not home grown work the rest out yourself, it's not my manifesto or anything, idea just appealed It wasn't a snipe. It was a question. If you can't handle people taking issue with your posts, perhaps a discussion board is not the ideal medium for ya. so can you still not see any way that would be workable?

neither do i, but then i'm not a solicitor anyways making clubs field home grown players might be a sensible answer to levelling the playing field - yank style draft systems, wage caps etc.. i just don't see working

might as well pick a team of uncapped/non-regulars otherwise what's the point?

I can't see any way that would be workable. What counts as "local"? How would it work in, say, Birmingham or Stoke? For which team could Owen Hargreaves play? how should i know, i don't work for fifa, i just said i liked an idea - why the snipe? for arguments sake though either anyone signed up at 16 in a clubs academy or anyone signed from abroad before a certain age (say 16 again?) can qualify as "local" or "home grown" players...anyone outwith that is either senior & english or senior & foreign you need to have 5 "local" or "home grown" players in your match day squad - a senior player bought from another english club couldn't be counted don't see the downside...bigger clubs couldn't sign anyone between say 16 & 21 from another english club, if they tried to to sign someone from south america for instance they'd not get a work permit, if they sign them and send them to belgium or something they'd be classed as foreign when they arrive not home grown work the rest out yourself, it's not my manifesto or anything, idea just appealed

that reverse prize money would be mental, smaller teams would be begging to get relegated so they could go down swimming in cash, spend a bit of that to get back up and then repeat for smaller clubs there would be far less incentive to stay up!!! the idea of "local" kids/players being part of the quota appeals to me though...might be a very good way of levelling the playing field as long as you stop kids moving about between certain ages from 16-21 (arbitrary but off the top of my head) a kid has to stick with the club he signed for, can't be bought, AND you impose a number of home grown players on clubs in the matchday squad that would have an effect, say 5? that way you're not breaking the law by limiting foreigners, you're imposing something that must be present in a squad rather than denying someone the opportunity to be there...the other 13 players in a match day squad could be foreign in this instance

saw most of his games in the ACN and liked him then actually; energetic, neat on the ball, range of passing hard to determine on those ACN pitches though so i'm not sure about that...he made a lot of stuff happen for cameroon i thought in that tournament also liked alexandre song in that midfield during the ACN...perhaps we could shine a laser pen in wengers eyes and nip in for that lad while he's temporarily blinded!! yeah Song looked excellent but a lot of Arsenal fans say he is awful, so perhaps the ACN is not the best platform on which to judge talent. remember song against man u at old trafford this season? they played him at CB...phew hew, not the best of games...

saw most of his games in the ACN and liked him then actually; energetic, neat on the ball, range of passing hard to determine on those ACN pitches though so i'm not sure about that...he made a lot of stuff happen for cameroon i thought in that tournament also liked alexandre song in that midfield during the ACN...perhaps we could shine a laser pen in wengers eyes and nip in for that lad while he's temporarily blinded!!

Believe me, I'm as concerned as you about the transfers this summer. The squad needs a fair bit of investment, and I'm not sure that lots of young promising kids is the correct way to flesh out the squad - we need some proven quality and experience in there too. Promise, and/or credentials alone don't mean a player will be a success at St James Hugo had promise. Didn't do a huge amount over here for whatever reason. Cacapa had lots of the credentials in the french league. Didnt appear to be entirely suited to the premier league. Are we really paying three more people, or is it just three different people? I wonder who was making the most - Wise or Doug Shepherd. We've made a positive start by getting rid of some of the liabilities (I'm not sure Troisi's release was a good or bad thing), hopefully they can start to rebuild, buy some good players and play some good, winning football next season. As for SWP and Eagles? I doubt it very much. We're constantly linked to Wright-Phillips, and Eagles? Nah... Just a name off the top of my head - use Saha in my example if it makes you more happy. was trying to write in between work and got bogged down by semantics to summarise; some people are happy/content (call it what you will) that a team of specialists brought in to basically do one job have produced no tangible results in almost 6 months i'm not, that's all i'm saying if we start the season with a wonderful deep, packed vibrant young squad then there's a standing apology from me Not asking for too much are you? christ on a bike "if we start the season with one new player" - does that do you? Well pretty much saying that you already don't like the job done by people who have only had six months in the job, and will only change your mind if we have "a wonderful deep, packed vibrant young squad" is both unfair and unrealistic. I hope that by September, the squad will be improved, but I do not expect it to be perfect. dude, reading words isn't enough in the real world - you're supposed to be able to understand them, put them into context, glean when someone is being facaetious/sarcastic/flippant Perhaps if half your posts didn't also contain the same idealistic nonsense, I'd notice. fair enough, i'll try and fill them with little smileys and cute signs to indicate what i mean in future see if you can understand then and what's idealistic by the way? having a contrary opinion about how we conduct our transfer business? riddle me this batman, 'cause this is what it all boils down to in the end: how is not trying to sign players before the transfer window opens going to save NUFC any money, get us better players or have the squad any more settled before the season starts? if you can provide me a satisfactory answer to that "idealism" i'll pack up my bags and go home [i'd just like to point out the pack up my bags and go home part isn't to be taken literally James; unfortunately i don't think anyone has made a little smiley or symbol for that]

Believe me, I'm as concerned as you about the transfers this summer. The squad needs a fair bit of investment, and I'm not sure that lots of young promising kids is the correct way to flesh out the squad - we need some proven quality and experience in there too. Promise, and/or credentials alone don't mean a player will be a success at St James Hugo had promise. Didn't do a huge amount over here for whatever reason. Cacapa had lots of the credentials in the french league. Didnt appear to be entirely suited to the premier league. Are we really paying three more people, or is it just three different people? I wonder who was making the most - Wise or Doug Shepherd. We've made a positive start by getting rid of some of the liabilities (I'm not sure Troisi's release was a good or bad thing), hopefully they can start to rebuild, buy some good players and play some good, winning football next season. As for SWP and Eagles? I doubt it very much. We're constantly linked to Wright-Phillips, and Eagles? Nah... Just a name off the top of my head - use Saha in my example if it makes you more happy. was trying to write in between work and got bogged down by semantics to summarise; some people are happy/content (call it what you will) that a team of specialists brought in to basically do one job have produced no tangible results in almost 6 months i'm not, that's all i'm saying if we start the season with a wonderful deep, packed vibrant young squad then there's a standing apology from me Not asking for too much are you? christ on a bike "if we start the season with one new player" - does that do you? Well pretty much saying that you already don't like the job done by people who have only had six months in the job, and will only change your mind if we have "a wonderful deep, packed vibrant young squad" is both unfair and unrealistic. I hope that by September, the squad will be improved, but I do not expect it to be perfect. dude, reading words isn't enough in the real world - you're supposed to be able to understand them, put them into context, glean when someone is being facaetious/sarcastic/flippant

Believe me, I'm as concerned as you about the transfers this summer. The squad needs a fair bit of investment, and I'm not sure that lots of young promising kids is the correct way to flesh out the squad - we need some proven quality and experience in there too. Promise, and/or credentials alone don't mean a player will be a success at St James Hugo had promise. Didn't do a huge amount over here for whatever reason. Cacapa had lots of the credentials in the french league. Didnt appear to be entirely suited to the premier league. Are we really paying three more people, or is it just three different people? I wonder who was making the most - Wise or Doug Shepherd. We've made a positive start by getting rid of some of the liabilities (I'm not sure Troisi's release was a good or bad thing), hopefully they can start to rebuild, buy some good players and play some good, winning football next season. As for SWP and Eagles? I doubt it very much. We're constantly linked to Wright-Phillips, and Eagles? Nah... Just a name off the top of my head - use Saha in my example if it makes you more happy. was trying to write in between work and got bogged down by semantics to summarise; some people are happy/content (call it what you will) that a team of specialists brought in to basically do one job have produced no tangible results in almost 6 months i'm not, that's all i'm saying if we start the season with a wonderful deep, packed vibrant young squad then there's a standing apology from me Not asking for too much are you? christ on a bike "if we start the season with one new player" - does that do you?

Believe me, I'm as concerned as you about the transfers this summer. The squad needs a fair bit of investment, and I'm not sure that lots of young promising kids is the correct way to flesh out the squad - we need some proven quality and experience in there too. Promise, and/or credentials alone don't mean a player will be a success at St James Hugo had promise. Didn't do a huge amount over here for whatever reason. Cacapa had lots of the credentials in the french league. Didnt appear to be entirely suited to the premier league. Are we really paying three more people, or is it just three different people? I wonder who was making the most - Wise or Doug Shepherd. We've made a positive start by getting rid of some of the liabilities (I'm not sure Troisi's release was a good or bad thing), hopefully they can start to rebuild, buy some good players and play some good, winning football next season. As for SWP and Eagles? I doubt it very much. We're constantly linked to Wright-Phillips, and Eagles? Nah... Just a name off the top of my head - use Saha in my example if it makes you more happy. was trying to write in between work and got bogged down by semantics to summarise; some people are happy/content (call it what you will) that a team of specialists brought in to basically do one job have produced no tangible results in almost 6 months i'm not, that's all i'm saying if we start the season with a wonderful deep, packed vibrant young squad then there's a standing apology from me

i'm not gonna argue this down to the bones with you mate, i'm just not...but lets say for argument someone could have been at the turkey game the night before or the ivory coast game the night after, such venues might have prevented his attendance in moscow due to travel time etc...? but it's not the point, i don't really care because other clubs haven't signed anyone means we shouldn't does it? you're right though, maybe we've got deals all lined up and the players ready to dance june first personally i'm expecting another half-arsed transfer fiasco...just more annoying 'cause we're now paying 3 new people to fuck it up

fux sake, i refer youback to "(when i refer to wise i refer to all of the scouting staff by the way)" what i'm saying is ostensibly it seems to me they've done sweet fuck all since being employed on very generous wages...go back to the post that wasn't out of context - it was about them being on holiday, fuck them being on any type of holiday til they've done some type of job for the club NOW is the time fo these people to be earning their wages, not being on holiday - it's not that hard a concept to grasp is it? but then i suppose since employing so-called experts in their field we can make the same mistake of sitting back doing nothing til the window opens by which time EVERYONE is looking at the same players...far be it from me to think these people might actually think making early moves might have some benefit to their employers [i always get tripped up by this on here, you have to spoonfeed people every facet of your opinion otherwise they can't understand it, no-one seems able to make a leap] p.s. that's an excellent point about the CL final, i agree, who knows who wise met and spoke to? so lets see that as a positive then, i agree

Gee. Maybe he's on, you know, like his six weeks summer holidays, and decided to go and watch a team he used to play for in one of the most prestigious matches of the season. Did we see lots of Republic of Ireland supporters complain when Bobby Robson was at St James regularly? I can assure you it wasn't to track the progress of Stephen Carr for the national team. I'm assuming you were watching the match to know he was there? Presumably on time off from work? Should you not have been preparing for the next fiscal year at wherever you are employed? Bah. nice bit of taking something out of context there pal, the point was we employed these people in january and it's not like we've been making them solder circuit boards for 18 hours a day is it? his job is to scout players for the club, am i wrong? who the fuck would he be scouting in that game we don't know anything about? no-one were there any other games in the world he could have been at watching players for us? i've not researched it but i'm guessing yes when he's done something positive for the club, well anything actually would be a start, i'll be able to accept holidays to watch his beloved chelski...we pay his fucken wages now, his loyalty should be with us (when i refer to wise i refer to all of the scouting staff by the way)

yeah, yeah...keegans always brought through the odd youngster (not sure how young bobby lee was mind?) but it's a different thing when you're not (perhaps) being given 100% choice about matters what i'm saying is if keegans list has a load of people like SWP/Dunne and so forth on it and the 3 people charged with transfers reply not with "we'll go out and get him Kev" but "don't you want to look at this kid, same deal but he's younger and cheaper?" THEN you're gonna have a problem keegans old school man - you see ferguson having that system imposed on him? (or martin o'neill for that matter?) neither do i, he wants tevez and he doesn't give a fuck what it costs to get him

this is mint, whole thing reminds me of when keegan was appointed and broadly speaking there was a camp saying "hold on a minute, what about the fact he's been out of football for 3 years etc..." and the other camp saying "king kev won't let us doon man, shut up and you'll see, nowt to worry aboot" when we went into the 9 game run without a win a few people must have been wavering, and i'll bet we get the same again this summer unless some transfers are concluded quickly i personally questioned when keegan was appointed for a number of reasons and i'm doing the same now - it's all hearsay and hyperbole but i honestly think there must be something going at the club, NOT because we've not signed 6 players in may but because it seems to me the clubs new very public policy of aiming for up and comers only doesn't seem to sit well with keegans established PL players chelp people here seem to think it'll work itself out, i'm not so sure - there's no win for either side (if you see it that way) if they cede to the other...keegans a manager and he'll sit back until he gets the players he WANTS, wise etc... will want to show what they're about, if they just let keegan sign campbell/henry or whoever he's targetted then where does it leave them? in an egoless world this wouldn't be an issue, but that's not where we live is it?

Sidwell. Modric. Woodgate. You have 2 managers who have expressed dissatisfaction with the support given to them by officials at the club. Allardyce complained of them not moving quick enough etc etc Keegan made the comments he made 2 weeks ago Still, you know best NE5 didn't sidwell sign for chelski very early last summer, before the club had even changed hands? anyways a wider point here i think you seem to sidestep is, in my opinion, mort was never brought in to be the type of chairman you expect him to be - and that's not a dig, what i mean is the historic english chairman who does all the transfer deals you know? personally i reckon ashley has identified that in the past people brokering the deals in football were lacking expertise in both football and legal/negotiating/financial matters and he's brought in a team he believes will benefit the club to take care of all that i think they've been intentionally cautious in the market as part of this overall strategy - i mean i'm actually glad they didn't come in gung-ho 'cause if they'd let fat sam blow 50m i think we'd all be a lot unhappier now? anyway all that said i can forgive a period of cooling off as they surveyed what was around them, i can forgive it no more; it's time to stop the headlines about boardroom appointments and joey bartons gaol time and start the headlines about players SHOW ME THE MONEY MIKE!!!!! both statements taken from wikipedia whatever the impact or otherwise of these dates [which shows the Ashley - and Mort - had control of the club when Sidwell went to Chelsea] its the comments from Mort which are more alarming to me. Allardyce complained about them not understanding how things work in football, so has Keegan the other week. I've always said that the first thing you want from a chairman is the desire to punch the clubs weight. It doesn't matter how nice a bloke he may be, if they don't do that they are a waste of time. Hope Mort does OK as he seems like a nice bloke but I'm not bothered he's left the club. If his successor is the same, then its Ashley's desire to run the club like a tight ship, and believe me, unless you compete with the big boys you won't get in amongst them. This is obvious, and is so obvious I just don't understand how people keep making excuses. We will find out soon enough. You can make good decisions and bad decisons, but if you have to atttempt it. If you don't buy a ticket you don't win the raffle. other people have pulled the sidwell facts, and isn't it accepted knowledge that we offered more in fees and wages for modric than spurs? woodgate was a last minute job wasn't it and he'd already agreed to go to spurs? i stand to be corrected on the second two mind anyway back to point, i think you've made my point for me "I've always said that the first thing you want from a chairman is the desire to punch the clubs weight." - because you say it doesn't make it true, you've made the role of chairman at NUFC that of punching the clubs weight in the transfer market, it might not be part of his remit under ashley in reality it's perfectly clear to me why mort was brought in and it wasn't to go out and broker deals to bring the best players in the world to SJP so i can't understand your criticism of him i guess...i'll guarantee if you got an audience with ashley he'd tell you the guy did exactly what he was brought in to do your criticism of him is almost like me criticing beye for not scoring double figures - it's not strictly speaking in his job description but i've decided he should be doing it so why isn't he? (petty i know dude) I see your point. Fair comment. Its a slight play on the word "chairman" again, which in this case, I've done myself too. We all know that Ashley is the owner and so the chairman will do his bidding for him, so it is maybe wrong to say "Mort". This means that if Mort has done what Ashley wanted, then his replacement will also do the same ? Agreed ? It therefore follows that if this theory is correct, nothing will change under the new chairman, whoever it is ? So whoever the new chairman is, Ashley will have to raise his game, if this theory is correct. He will have to learn that some of the comments made by Mort [on behalf of Ashley] are not ones which a progressive football club should be making, nor is it a path they should be following. I don't agree that the chairman should be saying in November that we won't be making signings in January unless they are young players for the future, when the team aren't doing too well. We were incredibly fortunate Keegan found a way to keep Owen fit, and a system to play him, Martins and Viduka or we would have been in serious relegation trouble. And it also follows that if the new chairman is given a different role to one that Mort had, what was Ashley doing by not giving Mort the same power he may give the new man ? This has not been fair to Mort if this is the case ? We will see. progress appears slow to achieve, as for your first question i agree; under the new owner ashley the chairman is not running the club 100% and is bound by what his paymaster is telling him, therefore i think you're correct to say a new chairman will not change anything however i also think you ignore one very crucial point: the transfer trio of people the club have brought in - the chairman should now be essentially a non-entity in this area, everything must be run by them and i think you'll find it will be 2 transfer windows so far; first one they backed fat sam to a degree and evidently didn't like what they saw on the pitch and with his transfers and in between that window and the next went about assembling these transfer monkeys; second window a nightmare as a manager had just been sacked and the new team barely had their feet under the table, aborted bid for woodgate who was a known quantity to manager and owner now we'll see what's what, forget the chairman man he's an irrelevance now - the club have instituted a policy of signing young(er) players and have employed a team of people to ensure we get good players...whether we now go and sign no-one at all, sign people who are good or sign people who are shit the likelihood is it will have virtually nothing to do with the chairman whoever he is i agree with the 2nd part of what you say but it's somewhat harsh in my opinion not to cut these guys a little slack first season; if we'd gone down i'd have been there with you but as you say keegan did VERY well in the end (and THEY appointed him after all) and we've not panic bought a load of shite in january...we're in a better position now and yes it's time for ASHLEY to perform, 100% agree...as i said i see mitigations with the last year in most areas, there are no more get out of jail cards for them or we'll have a repeat of last season on our hands

fucker will probably pitch up 2 stone lighter to sign the contact and play every game for the next 3 seasons

i can hear NE5's gears grinding from here!! agree though, as i said in the other thread by HTT i personally reckon we need a season or two doing what everton did...getting players NOT at the top end of the market (i'd start with barnes from derby) either in england or abroad and improving their game then we can start looking at signing the best and point to how we make players better as a pulling point either that or fat mike doles out 100m and we just go mental!!!

fact is for all we talk as a club like spurs, and many of us want to compete in that way, i honestly think we'll have to be more of an everton than a spurs or arsenal simply 'cause when it comes to signing a nasri/modric/ben arfa/benzema or whoever now there's too much pull elsewhere - it's like vultures circling a dead body these days man unless we offer big wages these players will go elsewhere we need a period of signing then developing the lescotts/cahills of this world before we'll be able to get the higher end kids from the continent, UNLESS we pay daft wages doesn't mean i've not got pride in the club, just being realistic about it...the tozers of this world know who we are and would walk to SJP in my opinion, a 20 year old johnny foreigner would likely not...

i think this simplifies the issue - never before in my lifetime has the professional game been so hungry for young players, you're almost considered finished by many if you're not in the first team by 20 wenger in particular has led the game to the point of wanting to hoover up the best young talent from around the world in order to build & develop a team rather than buy it for massive fees; teams like us and spurs are trying to emulate that but you're also forced to compete with teams from other countries too we've never, never had a reputation for being that good with bairns (perhaps the opposite) but when we signed the likes of pistone/tomasson/jenas the climate was very different than now a young player will not only look at money, location etc... but also his opportunities in the first team - this might be where our holy trinity & keegan might well trip us up, the manager has spoken of wanting established premier league players yet the club are trying to secure young up and comers from wherever they may be if i was a bairn and looked at spurs vs newcastle the fact they're buying, training and playing more young players than us might well swing my opinion regardless of anything else like location and so on just a thought

i'd like to see us fling in a bid for darren bent personally - can't see there being that many challengers for his sig, if we nicked him for 7-10m he'd be a decent addition in our present system could do what martins is doing on the left but on the right, double the treat especially away from home