koven

Glenn Roeder didn't do that bad? 1992-93 Gillingham, 2nd bottom of the football league. 1993-94 Watford, finished 6th bottom of the second division or whatever it was called. 1994-95 Watford, finished 7th in the old second. 1995-96 Watford, finished 2nd bottom of the old 2nd and relegated, he was sacked. 2001-02 West Ham, took over from Redknap and finished 7th. 2002-03 West Ham, finished 3rd bottom and relegated, quite funny that he thought that Don Hutchison was worth £5 million. 2003-04 West Ham, sacked. Good job we didn't appoint somebody with a poor record. a) Gillingham fans didn't want him sacked. That must tell you something? Maybe that they expected to get relegated and he did well to save them? Or they thought he was taking the club itself in the best direction he could? b) In 2 seasons he took a rubbish Watford to just outside the playoffs (in the equivalent to the championship) from a recent history of not getting near them. c) he didn't relegate Watford. He was sacked in the February when they were near the bottom. Graham Taylor had 3 months or so to help and he couldn't stop them being relegated. But yeah, it was all Roeders fault. d) he took West Ham from 15th to 7th (in the Premiership!). He made some good signings (David James for 2 mil, Englands goalkeeper) at times, got hit by bad injuries and had a brain tumor, he didn't do that great though to be fair. Although in his defence, they're now pretty much relegated from the Premier league by 2 different managers, with players like Tevez in the team, etc. e) he took NUFC from 15th place with a devestated team and morale, plus injuries to a respectable 7th and into Europe. I'm not saying he's a great manager but a failure? Not really. What you seem to forget is that facts like you've posted are meaningless unless you have an accurate view on the ability of those clubs, their recent history and what the fans expected.

Bingo.

So rather than a couple of defenders you sign Damien Duff...rightio Glenn. You actually think he decided against a defender and went with Duff? And who would you have played in left midfield for the months and months that Zoggy has been injured?

Exactly! and where are they now, bandwagon jumpers. I'm still here, and I'm still of the opinion that he can do a good job for us. But then again, I've never been one who thinks that because we're newcastle united, we should be in the top 4 every year... I'd be very happy with Top 10 finish this year, Top 7 next year, Top 6 the year after.... and I think Roeder, providing he's given the backing, can do that job. It's got nothing to do with me being "happy with mediocrity" as plenty of people call it... i just think we need the stability that all of the top clubs have. Fair enough, he's been a bit tactically naive at times, and there have been a few odd team selections, but I think he talks a lot of sense, and would much prefer us to persevere with a capable if not spectacular manager (which he is) than rush out for another "proven" manager and start this whole process again. I think he's spending the little money he does have wisely (Duff has been dissappointing but will surely get better), and should be given the chance to take us to the next level. I don't think spending the majority of the season with between 10 and 15 first team regulars missing is "a fair crack at the whip". I think there are an awful lot of people on this and other message boards who can't tell the difference between "poor decisions" and "decisions that I don't agree with, but aren't neccesarily wrong". For instance, when the team was announced for the AZ home game, the majority of posters were saying Roeder was clueless because he brought Carr back into the team... we then went on to play our best football of the last year, and people spent the rest of the night trying to get their heads out of their arses. As people say, Football's about opinions. You have one, I have one, Roeder has one, and none of us are wrong. I'd largely agree with that. We hired Keegan with no previous experience as a manager. Glenn showed he had the ability to be a manager at the end of last season (honeymoon periods don't last that long and no player expected him to be full manager). Imagine if we hadn't employed Roeder for this season and we ended up with a poor manager (was anyone available?). How would people feel looking back at how Roeder rescued the club from Souness. He deserved that chance to continue imo. And before anyone says Glenn was a failure in management beforehand... he didn't do that bad.

Saw Steven Taylor walking up Northumberland Street today. Looked like he'd been on the tanning beds.

So? No one on this message board is a professional footballer but I don't see how that stops us from having opinions Newcastle players. We don't run multi-million pound businesses so we can't comment. Ridiculous? You said it. You're a day late mate, someone already said that.

Are you a professional footballer? No? In that case please refrain from commenting on whether anyone was ever 'rubbish' etc. He is wrong, I run a business of 70 million sterling. a) i don't believe you b) can you point to where in the thread you posted when I made that comment? If not, then you weren't in the thread were you?

Well obviously, but we aren't spending at a rate that would induce insolvency in any way, shape or form. It's already been established that the Sky revenue will cover our losses and any cut backs to the transfer fund will save money. I don't think we're getting worse than under Souness tbh but nevertheless do you think spending less money would make us better? How would this magical method work?

Quite ridiculous justification/basis for keeping Roeder on. So a manager doing poor in the first few seasons, culminating in the fans wanting him sacked doesn't compare at all to our situation? Ok, then. If you look at our situation, Roeder has actually done better than AF did in his first few seasons. I'm not sure if you understand but people can't predict the future. Hence why Man U fans at the time wanted him sacked. You're reading my post and thinking how great AF has been over the last 10 years. Have a think about that and have another go at replying. Do you think we should of kept Souness on? If no, why not? No I didn't however, the fact i'm sitting on the fence with Roeder means I don't have absolute faith in him either. Don't assume I love Roeder when I don't. Reasons why Souness should have been sacked: Fell out with way too many players. They obviously had no respect for him. No mention of this with Roeder and in fact, we hear the exact opposite. There have been no problems with players since Roeder has been here I don't think. Other than the performances on the pitch of course. Rubbish league positions with less injuries than Roeder. This does apply to Roeder but to a lesser extent. Rubbish training methods and rubbish signings. He spent £50 million and didn't get much to show for it. Universally hated by fans which affects the players. Plus loads more. You know how bad it was. I think most people will agree that the present situation isn't AS bad as under Souness. The question is whether it's bad enough to risk another rubbish manager getting appointed.

Yeah, cos speculate to accumulate doesn't apply to any other industry apart from online bookstores... What an incredibly naive outlook on business. Mate, there are fundamentals in business that apply to almost all sectors. Hence why there is books about business in general and not "a book on how to run an online bookstore". Why don't you tell me about those fundamentals from your books, I'm all ears. I don't understand. What do you think they teach in business school? On on business degrees? There are general business practices that apply to nearly all businesses. One being you can't not spend money and expect to be successful. Is it a coincidence that the most financially successful football clubs are also the most successful? People are reading way too much into the Amazon thing. The point was that Amazon spent millions of pounds even when they were making a loss because they were confident in their business model that that investment would pay off. Arguably, the football industry is a lot safer. Amazon were on unknown territory with similar dot.com businesses failing every day. It's no secret in the football business than if you spend money, wisely, on good players you will be more successful in the league. Chelsea is an extreme example of this. And with that success comes a lot more money. Quoting Amazon's turnover and profit is neither here nor there because that isn't the comparison I was making. NUFC is stuck in Newcastle and has a limit on it's success. Amazon has the whole world as a market. We don't. Yes that's what I meant by 'blue sky business'. See you learn summat everyday. Well thanks lol, I have learned something new then.

To be fair we didn't offer 16 million for a laugh. That was RM's valuation. Not Liverpool or any other club would have got him for anything other than 16 million. That's how I read it anyway.

Yeah, cos speculate to accumulate doesn't apply to any other industry apart from online bookstores... What an incredibly naive outlook on business. Mate, there are fundamentals in business that apply to almost all sectors. Hence why there is books about business in general and not "a book on how to run an online bookstore". Why don't you tell me about those fundamentals from your books, I'm all ears. I don't understand. What do you think they teach in business school? On on business degrees? There are general business practices that apply to nearly all businesses. One being you can't not spend money and expect to be successful. Is it a coincidence that the most financially successful football clubs are also the most successful? People are reading way too much into the Amazon thing. The point was that Amazon spent millions of pounds even when they were making a loss because they were confident in their business model that that investment would pay off. Arguably, the football industry is a lot safer. Amazon were on unknown territory with similar dot.com businesses failing every day. It's no secret in the football business than if you spend money, wisely, on good players you will be more successful in the league. Chelsea is an extreme example of this. And with that success comes a lot more money. Quoting Amazon's turnover and profit is neither here nor there because that isn't the comparison I was making. NUFC is stuck in Newcastle and has a limit on it's success. Amazon has the whole world as a market. We don't.

Yeah, cos speculate to accumulate doesn't apply to any other industry apart from online bookstores... What an incredibly naive outlook on business. Mate, there are fundamentals in business that apply to almost all sectors. Hence why there is books about business in general and not "a book on how to run an online bookstore".

Quite ridiculous justification/basis for keeping Roeder on. So a manager doing poor in the first few seasons, culminating in the fans wanting him sacked doesn't compare at all to our situation? Ok, then. If you look at our situation, Roeder has actually done better than AF did in his first few seasons. I'm not sure if you understand but people can't predict the future. Hence why Man U fans at the time wanted him sacked. You're reading my post and thinking how great AF has been over the last 10 years. Have a think about that and have another go at replying. You back a managment team on their track record - Roeder has no track record, AF did. It has nothing to do with predicting the future. In business, owners and other funders back management teams with track records - not ones who don't. You don't seem to be able to grasp the concept that you are comparing two very different situations. Just because our situation is comparable in terms of wanting the manager sacked, doesn't mean that its the same as Ferguson's situation. Two very different people, different managers, different ability/quality at two very different clubs at two very different times. But if that's the case why did the fans want him sacked? Just admit that if we were in that situation most of our fans would want AF sacked. Kevin Keegan didn't have a track record either remember. I would be happy with that level of success now. Of course I know there will never be an identical comparison. Arguably though, Roeder was successful enough last season to show he had some promise. Nevertheless, I have already said that I haven't made my own mind up yet, but what is the point in sacking him when we have nobody (decent) to replace him. We will end up going around in circles like we've been doing. I don't know the answer, i'm just trying to get some alternate views going so we don't get 4 pages of "Sack the rat faced c***".

In the 9 years as a PLC to June 2006 the club made a combined loss of £59.7m. I love your belief that there is a plan in there somewhere. I'd have hoped to see the club looking mroe healthy on the playing front than it is today. If we about to compete in Europe with a team of young players, led by a bright innovative coach, all ready to blossom into the next great team then the idea that there was a plan of some sort may be right. [Potential agenda alert} Of that 9-year loss nearly 60% comes from giving money away to needy causes, and is nothing at all do with the way the business has performed. If for the next 9 years we did exactly the same, but didn't give away ll that money we'd be doign very well. The sad thing is that the only reason we got away with giving so much money away was because of the money put in at the launch of the PLC. That money has now gone, and the current financial results show we're a bit stuck. [/Potential agenda alert] I would like to see better success on the playing front as well but we've been up against a lot. And you don't get success on the playing field without spending money. You have to speculate to accumulate as they say. Do you think we would have had the success with Keegan without spending a world record fee on Shearer? No way. The club has tried to do the same with Martins and Owen which of course will have a negative effect on the financial situation but the club is trying to get us into the UEFA cup/Champions League and they only way they can do this is by spending money. Is the NUFC finances site yours btw? I doubt you would have set it up/or continued if we had qualified for the champions league last year because we would have a much greater revenue. Take Amazon again for example. I'm not saying NUFC are as busines savvy as those guys but.. Anyway, they have still not made a profit, overall, the losses in the earlier days are larger than the current profits. Yet they invested millions into the company, and it paid off. They're steadily picking up profit. In my opinion that's what NUFC are trying to do. They aren't perfect but they're spending money in the hope that it'll pay off in the future. If Newcastle was in such dire straights, with no optimism, there would not have been investors interested in a take over, of course I know they decided otherwise but if you could tell so much from the public accounts then why would they even bother investigating? Don't some of the board also run Shepherd Offshore successufully? The 'success' with Keegan came pre Shearer surely? Partly, the argument still stands though. Quote from wiki: The 1995-96 season would see major team-strengthening, David Ginola, Les Ferdinand and others joining the squad. The team came close to winning the Premier League Then we finished 2nd again with Shearer. All i'm saying is you have to spend money to get success.

Yeah, cos speculate to accumulate doesn't apply to any other industry apart from online bookstores...

Quite ridiculous justification/basis for keeping Roeder on. So a manager doing poor in the first few seasons, culminating in the fans wanting him sacked doesn't compare at all to our situation? Ok, then. If you look at our situation, Roeder has actually done better than AF did in his first few seasons. I'm not sure if you understand but people can't predict the future. Hence why Man U fans at the time wanted him sacked. You're reading my post and thinking how great AF has been over the last 10 years. Have a think about that and have another go at replying.

In the 9 years as a PLC to June 2006 the club made a combined loss of £59.7m. I love your belief that there is a plan in there somewhere. I'd have hoped to see the club looking mroe healthy on the playing front than it is today. If we about to compete in Europe with a team of young players, led by a bright innovative coach, all ready to blossom into the next great team then the idea that there was a plan of some sort may be right. [Potential agenda alert} Of that 9-year loss nearly 60% comes from giving money away to needy causes, and is nothing at all do with the way the business has performed. If for the next 9 years we did exactly the same, but didn't give away ll that money we'd be doign very well. The sad thing is that the only reason we got away with giving so much money away was because of the money put in at the launch of the PLC. That money has now gone, and the current financial results show we're a bit stuck. [/Potential agenda alert] I would like to see better success on the playing front as well but we've been up against a lot. And you don't get success on the playing field without spending money. You have to speculate to accumulate as they say. Do you think we would have had the success with Keegan without spending a world record fee on Shearer? No way. The club has tried to do the same with Martins and Owen which of course will have a negative effect on the financial situation but the club is trying to get us into the UEFA cup/Champions League and they only way they can do this is by spending money. Is the NUFC finances site yours btw? I doubt you would have set it up/or continued if we had qualified for the champions league last year because we would have a much greater revenue. Take Amazon again for example. I'm not saying NUFC are as busines savvy as those guys but.. Anyway, they have still not made a profit, overall, the losses in the earlier days are larger than the current profits. Yet they invested millions into the company, and it paid off. They're steadily picking up profit. In my opinion that's what NUFC are trying to do. They aren't perfect but they're spending money in the hope that it'll pay off in the future. If Newcastle was in such dire straights, with no optimism, there would not have been investors interested in a take over, of course I know they decided otherwise but if you could tell so much from the public accounts then why would they even bother investigating? Don't some of the board also run Shepherd Offshore successufully?

The difference is that Amazon is a high growth company. Newcastle's revenues have actually been going down (though, as other posters have mentioned, the new TV revenue will rectify that and save the board). Most people attribute Amazon's success to it's slow growth, they went through a dot.com bubble bursting. A lot harder than NUFC's situation. It wasn't obvious they would do well to the outside world. And I like how you mention the TV revenue like it will save them. Do you not think they know this is coming and include a relevant figure in future plans?

He had shown some ability previously though, in winning the SPL and Uefa Cup Winners Cup with Aberdeen. Koven, I swear your working in some capacity for the club .....Why not tell people why ManU persevered with Fergy: 1980:First managerial honour when Aberdeen win Scottish championship. 1982:Aberdeen win the Scottish Cup beating Rangers 4-1. 1983:Aberdeen retain Scottish Cup this time beating Rangers 1-0 and defeating Real Madrid 2-1 in Gothenburg to lift European Cup Winners'Cup. 1984:Aberdeen win League and Cup double beating Celtic 2-1 in theCup final. Ferguson awarded OBE. With Aberdeen ffs!! Now compare that to GR's record will you? Will you!!?? That's fair enough, I don't deny he had done well before. I wasn't gonna post his entire career now was I. In any case that didn't stop most of the fans wanting him sacked. Are you telling me that if we were in that situation there wouldn't be loads of posts wanting AF sacked? Or would everyone be pointing to his record? Do me a favour, they would want him gone. And when you say Aberdeen!!! they were better back then, they got to cup finals before AF joined and many attribute AF's success to the previous 2 managers, partly. Although there is no denying he did fantastic there.

Alex Ferguson had been a manager for 8 years when he joined Man U, and he didn't do particularly well then either. He took the team to 2nd place and then they finished in 11th. Then they finished 13th and everyone wanted him sacked. It took a good few seasons to get them close to the club they are now. And iirc they didn't have half the squad injured, including their best player. I'm not posting this to prove we should keep Roeder on, I still haven't made my own mind up yet and don't envy Freddy's position. But it's something to think about when we give managers barely a season and a half to get things right.

There's nothing inherently wrong with making a loss each year, provided you plan ahead and i'm sure the club have. It may mean we have to hold back a little on the player spending though. Amazon.com didn't make a profit in the first 7 years but they knew that and they had a plan. I trust NUFC that they knew they might post a loss and have a plan for the future.

But not so good with words? From the 2005 accounts - The club have roughly 300 full time employees, and roughly 1000 part-time staff. The wages and salaries for all of those comes to £44.5m. On top of that the club paid £5.2m in Social security costs, and then a further £0.4k in other pension costs. This came to the total for that year of £50.2m. The total for 2006 was £56.6m but I don't have the breakdown at hand. (Anyone any idea wher I've put it :-[ ) Lets play numbers ... The 1000 part-time wiill be match-day people. So for 25 home games, at £50 (?) a game woudl be £1.2m. If we say that the footbalnlers and the management total 35 bodies, then that leaves about 270 other full-time staff to run the business. Lets say they have the average UK wage of £20k per year. That would cost ~ £5.4m to finance. This leaves the 35 "football" employees to share the rest. This means 44.5 - 1.2 - 5.4 = £37.8m Looks like just over £1m per year for each of them. Of course there will be extremes, at both ends, but on average the figure looks like £1m to me. ++++++++++ So about £20k per week? About what I said then. Plus like it or not Owen and Dyer do skew the figures for the average player at the club. So almost every club doesn't meet the criteria? I haven't seen any premiership clubs go bust recently either? I understand what your saying but in football especially it's harder to stick to the ideal model. When you consider the cost of players, etc. Wages for all clubs rose in those 4 years I would guess. Nevertheless those wage costs were meant to create success for the club, which unfortunately hasn't happened. I trust the board of NUFC to keep the club in good financial help whilst providing as much resources as they can to the team.

I'm mystified for sure.

Well said. i think exactly the same Agreed. If I'm honest he's my favourite player. I can't believe people slated a 20 odd year old for urinating in the street, i've done it quite a few times lol. aye, peeing in the street, that's why I hate the c*** Well I think that's a little unfair. As i've said we've all done it. we can all be sarcastic