fredbob

Wanted Anelka and Boa Morte , but Shepherd brought in Luque and Owen.

 

I believe him because he always went on about getting Anelka in as well as Boa Morte from what I remember.

 

What the hell was Shepherds problem??? Why would he bring in Luque out of nowhere like that???

 

Shepherd was definitely bent!

 

Basically, if Souness had had an ounce of pride and integrity he'd have resigned if this had been happening. Remember this is the bloke who said that he was only given money "to tart the team up". Aye, 50m quid.

 

With the £££'s involved these days who resigns apart from Ruud I cant think of anyone else. Even Jose M bit his lip at Chelsea becasue of the numbers involved.

 

Lets put it another way. He's telling us he allowed the chairman to walk all over him then ? I wouldn't admit that to millions on TV. [he could have stood up to him, got the sack and took his comp that way, either way, you know your days are numbered if this happens]

 

So I doubt very much he is telling it as it was here.

 

 

 

Arent you missing the point a little here...fair enough, the big honourable man would of resigned and lost out on £££ but in reality that doesnt happen anymore, from the sounds of it, (and i may be getting sucked in here) that he genuinely liked the club and its fans and didnt want to walk out on such a big job. The main issue here is that he, like the manager before him and i imagine Roeder as well was undermined completely, how in any walk of life is that acceptable?

 

Dont get me wrong, i still think he would of done a s*** job and i dont want him near this club ever again, not even inthe stands, but how does it transfer down to the changing room if the gaffer is having signings made for him. Especially if that gaffer is a well known OTT disciplinarian.

 

I don't think you've made a valid point anywhere tbh, you even denied a blatant u-turn in the other thread

 

Souness had absolutely no time for this club or anything in it, the only thing he wanted was the payday and to massage his ego.

 

 

 

Fair enough, i think the correct opinion will be somewhere between the 2 views.  As for the u turn if you dont understand the subtleties to the the point then ignore it

(blantently taken from The Spence)!!

 

 

There is no subtlety to it whatsoever.

 

Anyway, cheers

 

 

blantently didnt understand it then.

Wanted Anelka and Boa Morte , but Shepherd brought in Luque and Owen.

 

I believe him because he always went on about getting Anelka in as well as Boa Morte from what I remember.

 

What the hell was Shepherds problem??? Why would he bring in Luque out of nowhere like that???

 

Shepherd was definitely bent!

 

Basically, if Souness had had an ounce of pride and integrity he'd have resigned if this had been happening. Remember this is the bloke who said that he was only given money "to tart the team up". Aye, 50m quid.

 

With the £££'s involved these days who resigns apart from Ruud I cant think of anyone else. Even Jose M bit his lip at Chelsea becasue of the numbers involved.

 

Lets put it another way. He's telling us he allowed the chairman to walk all over him then ? I wouldn't admit that to millions on TV. [he could have stood up to him, got the sack and took his comp that way, either way, you know your days are numbered if this happens]

 

So I doubt very much he is telling it as it was here.

 

 

 

Arent you missing the point a little here...fair enough, the big honourable man would of resigned and lost out on £££ but in reality that doesnt happen anymore, from the sounds of it, (and i may be getting sucked in here) that he genuinely liked the club and its fans and didnt want to walk out on such a big job. The main issue here is that he, like the manager before him and i imagine Roeder as well was undermined completely, how in any walk of life is that acceptable?

 

Dont get me wrong, i still think he would of done a s*** job and i dont want him near this club ever again, not even inthe stands, but how does it transfer down to the changing room if the gaffer is having signings made for him. Especially if that gaffer is a well known OTT disciplinarian.

 

I don't think you've made a valid point anywhere tbh, you even denied a blatant u-turn in the other thread

 

Souness had absolutely no time for this club or anything in it, the only thing he wanted was the payday and to massage his ego.

 

 

Fair enough, i think the correct opinion will be somewhere between the 2 views.  As for the u turn if you dont understand the subtleties to the the point then ignore it

(blantently taken from The Spence)!!

Wanted Anelka and Boa Morte , but Shepherd brought in Luque and Owen.

 

I believe him because he always went on about getting Anelka in as well as Boa Morte from what I remember.

 

What the hell was Shepherds problem??? Why would he bring in Luque out of nowhere like that???

 

Shepherd was definitely bent!

 

Basically, if Souness had had an ounce of pride and integrity he'd have resigned if this had been happening. Remember this is the bloke who said that he was only given money "to tart the team up". Aye, 50m quid.

 

With the £££'s involved these days who resigns apart from Ruud I cant think of anyone else. Even Jose M bit his lip at Chelsea becasue of the numbers involved.

 

Lets put it another way. He's telling us he allowed the chairman to walk all over him then ? I wouldn't admit that to millions on TV. [he could have stood up to him, got the sack and took his comp that way, either way, you know your days are numbered if this happens]

 

So I doubt very much he is telling it as it was here.

 

 

Arent you missing the point a little here...fair enough, the big honourable man would of resigned and lost out on £££ but in reality that doesnt happen anymore, from the sounds of it, (and i may be getting sucked in here) that he genuinely liked the club and its fans and didnt want to walk out on such a big job. The main issue here is that he, like the manager before him and i imagine Roeder as well was undermined completely, how in any walk of life is that acceptable?

Dont get me wrong, i still think he would of done a s*** job and i dont want him near this club ever again, not even inthe stands, but how does it transfer down to the changing room if the gaffer is having signings made for him. Especially if that gaffer is a well known OTT disciplinarian.

Allardyce had most fans' support, I'd say. It evaporated pretty bloody quickly, though.

I dont think it was someone who the majority wanted, Allardyce was everyones inevitable choice and was accepted as so. Throughout the years i can only think of 2 or 3 managers who the fans could of got behind, Keegan, Bobby and Dalglish, Dalglish was unformtunate becasue he came after a golden time in our history and his style of football was always gonna be judged agaisnt his predecessor.

There are plenty of people who i think could do a job, but i think that they still wouldnt be accepted because they are either unknwn and unfamiliar. In my opinion its only Shearer and Keegan, or a big big foriegn manager with big achievemnts who would be accepted.

I actually dont think that the managers style of coaching is the main problem for Allardyce's successor. I genuinely think that the most iportant aspect about this appointment is that it is someone who every single fan can get behind.

There isnt a single manager out there who can guaratee succes, (some come close), the improtant thing for the club s that they appoint someone who the fans wont turn on. Shearer sits high on that list becasue the fans could stand by him, a high class appoitment irrespective of coaching style isantoher tye of manager that people could get behind. Anyone less known or between the 2 wont get the support at all. Managers like Quique Flores, Manchini, Co Adriaanse etc, these are all managers who are quite successful but arent on the big stage so wont get the support that is requirted to enable contiuity.

How ridiculous would it be if we got turned down by Redknapp and appointed Hitzfeld.

 

I just wanted to see peoples views on style. Its something that is attribtued as on of the things that the" fans want". Its dismissed as myths by alot of people i just wanted to know if it actually has some merits. Which i genuinely think it does. I think alot of people heads say "substance" but thir hearts say "style".

 

If im perfectly honest, along with NJS id say style as well. I watch football to be entertained and nothing pleases me more than seeing beautiful football.

 

I just wanted to know if there was any compromise for success.

 

Obvioulsy not, we have 52000 win at all costs people out there.

 

I shall stop my questioning.

 

I doubt we've got 52,000 win at all costs people.

Which is the whole point of the question!

This might sound like a stupid question, but what would fans rather see: us performing solidly and efficiently like Chelsea winning a fair amount, or with style and verve, like Arsenal but not winning as much?

 

 

I must be honest, I really don't know how to answer a question like this. Particularly as Arsenal have been more successful than Chelsea in the last decade.

 

 

 

Im glad you didnt slate it, im not sure either. True they have been more successful but havent had the "clinicalness" that Chelsea have. ie consecutive titles. If you ask me, Chelsea at there best were superior to Arsenal at there best.

 

Ok, not superior but better.

 

I could have slated it.

 

The concept that playing attractive football is preferable to winning football is something I don't grasp at all.

 

Winning football is entertaining to your own supporters. End of.

 

 

 

So if one of the contrasting style won you 1 more trophy in x years would you still prefer that style?

 

This hypothetical is getting a bit out of hand now. As was stated, winning football is the main concern for fans. Winning 'ugly' is ok, as long as you're winning. As we saw, losing ugly is a whole different story...

I just wanted to see peoples views on style. Its something that is attribtued as on of the things that the" fans want". Its dismissed as myths by alot of people i just wanted to know if it actually has some merits. Which i genuinely think it does. I think alot of people heads say "substance" but thir hearts say "style".

If im perfectly honest, along with NJS id say style as well. I watch football to be entertained and nothing pleases me more than seeing beautiful football.

I just wanted to know if there was any compromise for success.

Obvioulsy not, we have 52000 win at all costs people out there.

I shall stop my questioning.

Talking of Ashley, he's come out and said that he's now gonna get his suit on and get in the board room. Good news if it's true.

 

Is this him saying "I mean business now"

 

??

 

It's a sign that maybe it's less of a hobby to him and more of a business (yes, I know invested £250m is an expensive hobby).

 

I had no real problem with him wearing the shirt and sitting with the fans, but I'd rather hear that he's in the board room actually attempting to run his business.

 

I completely agree.

 

I think seeing him sitting in the stands wearing a Newcastle shirt has been embarrassing as f**k. And no, I'm not taking the piss

 

 

why?

This might sound like a stupid question, but what would fans rather see: us performing solidly and efficiently like Chelsea winning a fair amount, or with style and verve, like Arsenal but not winning as much?

 

 

I must be honest, I really don't know how to answer a question like this. Particularly as Arsenal have been more successful than Chelsea in the last decade.

 

 

 

Im glad you didnt slate it, im not sure either. True they have been more successful but havent had the "clinicalness" that Chelsea have. ie consecutive titles. If you ask me, Chelsea at there best were superior to Arsenal at there best.

 

Ok, not superior but better.

 

I could have slated it.

 

The concept that playing attractive football is preferable to winning football is something I don't grasp at all.

 

Winning football is entertaining to your own supporters. End of.

 

 

So if one of the contrasting style won you 1 more trophy in x years would you still prefer that style?

Its all hypothetical ladies, thats the whole point of the question becase it link directly with Ashleys interview inthe sense that we are actively looking to be an attacking side rather than the safer "Clinical grind out wins side".

This might sound like a stupid question, but what would fans rather see: us performing solidly and efficiently like Chelsea winning a fair amount, or with style and verve, like Arsenal but not winning as much?

 

 

 

 

 

Either, they both win plenty.

They do, but i think its a fair bet to say that if Mourhino was in charge for a decade, he would of won more than Wenger in the saem decade. Thats my opinion anyway.

But anyway, the question is basically would you sacrifice a little success for a lot of style?

This might sound like a stupid question, but what would fans rather see: us performing solidly and efficiently like Chelsea winning a fair amount, or with style and verve, like Arsenal but not winning as much?

 

 

I must be honest, I really don't know how to answer a question like this. Particularly as Arsenal have been more successful than Chelsea in the last decade.

 

 

Im glad you didnt slate it, im not sure either. True they have been more successful but havent had the "clinicalness" that Chelsea have. ie consecutive titles. If you ask me, Chelsea at there best were superior to Arsenal at there best.

Ok, not superior but better.

This might sound like a stupid question, but what would fans rather see: us performing solidly and efficiently like Chelsea winning a fair amount, or with style and verve, like Arsenal but not winning as much?

Which would surely start at the approximate value that has been invested into the club to acquire it in its debt free state? Maybe?

 

That still needs a willing buyer at that price though. As a private asset if all someone is willing to pay is £1 then thats what its worth.

True, but i think its fair to say that it'll now be worth the figure i quoted. Obviosuly technically your're absolutely correct. In the end he's put £250 of his own money into the club to show his intentions, could quite easily of made the club pay it off its self. Deserves gratitude for putting our financial future at ease, i appreciate him for that reason alone.

Actions do speak louder than words and so far he's paid almost £140 million for the club and wiped out more than £100 million of debt, that's some action as far as I'm concerned.  I doubt we were ever going to go mad in this window but now that the debt has been wiped out we'll have 100% of our profit to spend to the benefit of the team, we'll get close to £40 million in May from Sky alone.

To be fair, i didnt think with Allardyce at the helm we would of spent much, but if a new manager gets appoonte before the end, imagine big funds will be released in order to make the squad his own.

To be fair to S.S.R the club is now worth approx £250m now

 

On what basis?

 

The shares at purchase were £140m and are now I guess not quoted. The club is worth whatever figure he wants to sell it for. If someone wants to pay £250m then fair enough but I can't see it happening which is why he has to expand it by being successful.

 

If we were bought for £140m, and has absolved £100m of debts, wouldnt that be added to the value of the club? A high percentage of that £100m was for stadium debts, which now belongs to us outright, so wouldnt that asset be added to the value?

yes and no.....

 

 

now the only value is what someone else will pay for it

Which would surely start at the approximate value that has been invested into the club to acquire it in its debt free state? Maybe?

To be fair to S.S.R the club is now worth approx £250m now

 

On what basis?

 

The shares at purchase were £140m and are now I guess not quoted. The club is worth whatever figure he wants to sell it for. If someone wants to pay £250m then fair enough but I can't see it happening which is why he has to expand it by being successful.

If we were bought for £140m, and has absolved £100m of debts, wouldnt that be added to the value of the club? A high percentage of that £100m was for stadium debts, which now belongs to us outright, so wouldnt that asset be added to the value?

So he's now apparently paid off all of the debt?! Bloody hell.

 

He's going to get much more hands on?! Bloody hell.

 

All he wants to do is play attacking football and win trophies. Bloody hell.

 

Obviously actions speak louder than words, but the prospect of this combined with Alan Shearer at the helm has me wetting my kecks.

 

Shearer?

 

Here's how I feel about Shearer ... I think he would be a good manager but as far as buying players goes I think he would struggle massively.

 

I think Shearer would be the sort to always go after Brits. Shearer would have bought someone like Smith too.

 

Does he really have the knowledge of world football that will allow us to get the best players we possibly could to the club?

 

That would be my biggest worry.

 

Hasnt exactly got contacts either, would take ages for him to set up a world wide scout system.

 

The head of scouting Paul Montgomery is one of the most respected club scouts in Europe & is putting a team scouts georpahically spread across UK & Europe.

 

Not one of Allardyces men is he?

 

I think he may of been brought back to the club by Sam but he is not what I would class as a Sam man. He is geordie & has worked for us underJim Smith & Bobby Robson, he also worked for former Newcastle captian & manager Glenn Roeder at West Ham.

 

 Good enough for me.

 

Here is old interview with him

http://icnewcastle.icnetwork.co.uk/newcastleunited/news/2003/10/07/face-to-face--paul-montgomery-50081-13489332/

Got me at "rejected Barcelona"  

Maybe he had no other direction to go in, having been rejected by Redknapp, other than to come out all guns blazing, professing himself to be ready to take command of the sinking ship...but even that takes bollocks of steel and having cussed him (and Mort) most of the day, all I can say now is let's see him not just talking the talk and walking the walk but also fighting the good fight. Let's get stuck in and bounce back like heroes.

 

I do remain somewhat circumspect about the way the last few days have gone though, and the dubious timing of the sacking of Allardyce, even if it needed to be done.

 

yep top post, hopefully we can chalk down the allardyce and redknapp episodes to inexperience. what's important is that we move on from it.

re the timing of allardyces sacking.........what was dubious or dodgy about it. could we really be any worse without a manager than we have been the last few months with a manager ?

 

the only problem should be " should he have gone a week or two earlier?"

 

Well, aye - he should have gone well before Xmas IMO...or otherwise they should have seen what giving him the full benefit of a transfer window could do...but what's done is done, and it's all probably for the best.

 

I think he deserved those games against Wigan, Derby, Brum and Fulham to show his mettle. He failed. On the flip side, sack him post window, the new man hasn't got any time to buy and they also run the risk of the mongs on Fleet Street saying "they've sacked him because he got beat off Man Utd and Arsenal (twice)."

 

The more I think about it, if they weren't going to keep him until the summer, this is the only time they could have done it.

Said this earlier, there wasnt really any other more suitable time to sack him, maybe bignning of Jan but that would still of impeded thewindow.

Sorry for having a different opinion.

To be fair to S.S.R the club is now worth approx £250m now. This is when we are at our lowest. It is his asset and if he wanted to could quite easily make a substatial profit on the club. It would of been in his long term interest not to rob the club of resources by owing to external creditors. interst is after all dead money. The club can now be supported enitrely on its income although by adding his own financial input will help progress the club and add further value to the club with big players, bigger assets.

So he's now apparently paid off all of the debt?! Bloody hell.

 

He's going to get much more hands on?! Bloody hell.

 

All he wants to do is play attacking football and win trophies. Bloody hell.

 

Obviously actions speak louder than words, but the prospect of this combined with Alan Shearer at the helm has me wetting my kecks.

 

Shearer?

 

Here's how I feel about Shearer ... I think he would be a good manager but as far as buying players goes I think he would struggle massively.

 

I think Shearer would be the sort to always go after Brits. Shearer would have bought someone like Smith too.

 

Does he really have the knowledge of world football that will allow us to get the best players we possibly could to the club?

 

That would be my biggest worry.

 

Hasnt exactly got contacts either, would take ages for him to set up a world wide scout system.

 

The head of scouting Paul Montgomery is one of the most respected club scouts in Europe & is putting a team scouts georpahically spread across UK & Europe.

 

Not one of Allardyces men is he?

 

I think he may of been brought back to the club by Sam but he is not what I would class as a Sam man. He is geordie & has worked for us underJim Smith & Bobby Robson, he also worked for former Newcastle captian & manager Glenn Roeder at West Ham.

 Good enough for me.

How people can be so anti-Ashley after all he's done for us is beyond me. Quit being so cynical.

 

How can you be quite so spell-bindingly naiive?

I think he has a point to be fair, in the end its the best thing to do for him and the club, but irrespective he deserves credit for it anyway.

Okay, so what managers come to mind when you thing brilliant attacking football though?

 

I can kind of see why he went for redknapp, but lets put that to the side for now.

 

Who could they possibly be considering now? The likes of Mourinho, Lippi and even Houllier don't exactly scream out attacking football.

 

I haven't paid much attention to football around the other big leagues in Europe this season, has any team played particularly exciting attking football? Any team whose manager we might be interested in speaking too?

 

Van Gaal, Ancelotti, Scolari, all reknowned for there attacking style. Also big big targets.  Rijkaard? I dunno there are options, but to go to Redknapp so soon before anyone else seems odd to me.

 

ancelotti?? muyst be one of the most conservative managers around, milan are the wingless wonders. scolari was more famed for his defensive, aggressive, brutal football in brazil, why he earned the sobriquet "big phil", ie brazilian equivalent to "big sam" (which a few reporters did call him a few years ago) plus he played a million defensive midfielders for brazil in 2002. van gaal i'll give you.

 

i wonder if ashley might "park his tanks" on shinawatra's lawn and make a cheeky bid for sven...

Ancelotti plays some nice football, hardly can be called defensive. Scolari hasnt been defensive with Portugal either. I cant see us going for Sven, absolutely no reason whatsoever tocome to be fair.

Van Gaal will be too far off the Radar for Ash me thinks, i genuinely have no idea who we'll go for. I genuinely think that Ashley would be happy to pay whatever dollar for attacking players, it might e the thing that would encourge a manager to adapt his style.

So he's now apparently paid off all of the debt?! Bloody hell.

 

He's going to get much more hands on?! Bloody hell.

 

All he wants to do is play attacking football and win trophies. Bloody hell.

 

Obviously actions speak louder than words, but the prospect of this combined with Alan Shearer at the helm has me wetting my kecks.

 

Shearer?

 

Here's how I feel about Shearer ... I think he would be a good manager but as far as buying players goes I think he would struggle massively.

 

I think Shearer would be the sort to always go after Brits. Shearer would have bought someone like Smith too.

 

Does he really have the knowledge of world football that will allow us to get the best players we possibly could to the club?

 

That would be my biggest worry.

 

Hasnt exactly got contacts either, would take ages for him to set up a world wide scout system.

 

The head of scouting Paul Montgomery is one of the most respected club scouts in Europe & is putting a team scouts georpahically spread across UK & Europe.

Not one of Allardyces men is he?