fredbob

Surprised by the Milner stat. thats a lot of people who think that Milner could be a good enough player to get into the top6

To be honest i dont think Taylor will make it as a big premiership defender, he has all the attributes to be an excellent defender but i think he's a bit slow up top. Not as slow as Bramble but slow. The other problem i thnk he has is that he's not sure what type of defender he should be, with Faye he needs to be the one who reads the game and gets good positioning but if he plays with anyone else he needs to be the commited defender, i dont think theres another defender in the permiership whi has that problem. Finding his feet. Give him time. I do agree with you that he has a few problems which is why I hesitate to make him a regular starter but Rich is right in that he's got loads of potential and we don't have anyone better at the club atm so he's gotta start. I'm also pretty sure that with his contract up in the air, he'll perform better now that more responsibility is placed on his shoulders. I hope so, i see big potential in him as well, but its strange that as of yet i havent a clue what type of defender he is.

To be honest i dont think Taylor will make it as a big premiership defender, he has all the attributes to be an excellent defender but i think he's a bit slow up top. Not as slow as Bramble but slow. The other problem i thnk he has is that he's not sure what type of defender he should be, with Faye he needs to be the one who reads the game and gets good positioning but if he plays with anyone else he needs to be the commited defender, i dont think theres another defender in the permiership whi has that problem.

I'm still confident he can play a part here, he has shown far too much class at times to be written off already. There is a danger of the "Boumsong" about him, who also looked solid to begin with before he/we destroyed his confidence, but hopefully if he's used more sparingly then we should start seeing him thrive again. I don't think he'll be a regular starter, but I don't doubt he's a good influence to have at the club and that he can only help the likes of Taylor to improve. He probably doesn't have the physical presence, like Rozehnal, to ever be really top-drawer for us, but he should be good enough when necessary. If you consider Taylor/Faye as our first-choice pair, which I would assume plenty do, then Rozehnal/Cacapa look like very strong back-up when you consider the players we've had to play there in the recent past. They should only get better as they adjust to the country/game, as well. Fair assessment, i happen to think that theres no way that he'll be Boumsong, he's shown a lot of bottle already after the Portsmouth game, he came back like a man who knows what he's capable of. He hasnt really had too many bad games, its just a case that he may have one glaring weakness (being dominated by big strikers) to his game which will always hinder him. Still a very good player.

How does everyone feel about Cacapa? He's seemed to fallen down the rankings of late.

Ok Ok, i cant help myself, he says some ridiculous stuff sometime. I try my hardest not to bite but i cant help proving him wrong, its my nature to be argumentitive, im a training lawyer. Even you bite sometimes....

Considering three of those were brought in by Allardyce (and they weren't exactly cheap), do you think trusting him with more money will see him change targets to something more exotic? General question, not really owt to do with the thread as such. I know you've advocated giving him time. Would of been my secondpoint to Chez! Dave, i'm not sure, thats the biggest question facing the club (as i said after City ). Fruitbat, my point was that the midfielders we have dont have the attributes to match the attributes of our strikers. Both departments are lacking and neither can make up for the inadequacies of the other. So, yes, i think the players are just about playing to their potential which is why we arent any higher up the league. Blame last summer if you want. I tend not to over analyse things so forgive me for not understanding this, but why exactly do we have the wrong kind of strikers for our midfield? We've got tall ones, short one's, fat one's, skinny one's, strong one's and weak one's. Is it the midfield that's wrong? What attributes do the midfield lack when playing at potential. Duff in Blackburn form is an excellent provider and occasssional scorer. As are Milner, Smith and Zoggy on Villa, Leeds and previous form. Butt, Geremi, and Faye are solid as a rock on Man U, Chelsea and current form, while Barton always looked a classy* box to box player at Man City. Sounds like British Rail excuse like the wrong kind of snow on the track. *EDIT: Of course by classy I mean in a working class scumbag, thugish charver, blood and guts way. Not sure if you actually seriously asking me or not.... Viduka and Owen are immobile and slow, Martins is unpredictable. The midfield has no pace or creativity. You can have one or the other but both at the same time means neither makes up for the inadequacies of the other. If the midfield had class and pace, they would pull defenders out of position, allowing the strikers to find space. If the attack had more class and a lot of pace, a hardworking midfield would be able to support them. The lack of mobility up front (and the spatial spackaness of Martins) places greater emphasis on creativity behind them. So you dont think there would be a single manager in the world who could put us in a better position with the squad we have at present? 9 players currently on the books have been brought to the club by Allardyce, with the deals sanctioned by Mort/Ashley. If the vast majority of them aren't good enough, who are you going to blame. Before you reply, consider the transfer fees involved and the competition we had to sign most of them ........ Still. I'm sure that you appear to be happy with the season so far. The books are balanced, and we have a long term "plan". Shame every other club also has a long term "plan", part of which will be to have a better "plan" than our "plan". mate you shouldnt keep putting plan in inverted commas like that, it makes you look mental, planning in business is always beneficial, doesn't matter who's in charge Well, I think people who infer that "plans" bring automatic success in football, are pretty stupid. It makes you look like you are saying the only teams who have "plans" are those who win the league, FA Cup and League Cup. Clearly bollocks, as you clearly had a flawed "plan" for not winning one of these trophies. Thats one hell of a lot of teams without a "plan" by the way. ok, and what about what i actually said? it's quite clear to me that if you qualify for europe more than every team bar 4 over the course of a decade, you must have some sort of "plan" which is a better "plan" than most of your rivals "plans". I realise you won't agree this because you have some sort of silly agenda with the fat b******, but hey, thats your prerogative. Ignore the facts as long as you like, its your problem. i'm gonna try not get dragged into this again,but, i was just pointing something out, doing that sort of stuff very definitely makes you look mental and very definitely makes YOU look like the one with the agenda i'm not disagreeing with you on the first part, credit where credit's due and regarding it being my problem, ironic, considering you've taken it on yourself to be the one true voice in defense of one man, it would seem that you continually make people 'ignoring the facts', your problem to sum up pretty much my last year of posting, it seems you have a policy towards people that suggests if they've done something right they cant do much wrong, and its so out of sync with reality that you end up fighting with everyone on here, anyway i still think you're good craic, keep up the good work not "defending" anyone, only pointing out misrepresentations and a correct perspective. Anyway, time for some shut eye Night night sleeping beauty, good to see you go when the going gets tough. Good business sense, get out while you can etc...

Considering three of those were brought in by Allardyce (and they weren't exactly cheap), do you think trusting him with more money will see him change targets to something more exotic? General question, not really owt to do with the thread as such. I know you've advocated giving him time. Would of been my secondpoint to Chez! Dave, i'm not sure, thats the biggest question facing the club (as i said after City ). Fruitbat, my point was that the midfielders we have dont have the attributes to match the attributes of our strikers. Both departments are lacking and neither can make up for the inadequacies of the other. So, yes, i think the players are just about playing to their potential which is why we arent any higher up the league. Blame last summer if you want. I tend not to over analyse things so forgive me for not understanding this, but why exactly do we have the wrong kind of strikers for our midfield? We've got tall ones, short one's, fat one's, skinny one's, strong one's and weak one's. Is it the midfield that's wrong? What attributes do the midfield lack when playing at potential. Duff in Blackburn form is an excellent provider and occasssional scorer. As are Milner, Smith and Zoggy on Villa, Leeds and previous form. Butt, Geremi, and Faye are solid as a rock on Man U, Chelsea and current form, while Barton always looked a classy* box to box player at Man City. Sounds like British Rail excuse like the wrong kind of snow on the track. *EDIT: Of course by classy I mean in a working class scumbag, thugish charver, blood and guts way. Not sure if you actually seriously asking me or not.... Viduka and Owen are immobile and slow, Martins is unpredictable. The midfield has no pace or creativity. You can have one or the other but both at the same time means neither makes up for the inadequacies of the other. If the midfield had class and pace, they would pull defenders out of position, allowing the strikers to find space. If the attack had more class and a lot of pace, a hardworking midfield would be able to support them. The lack of mobility up front (and the spatial spackaness of Martins) places greater emphasis on creativity behind them. So you dont think there would be a single manager in the world who could put us in a better position with the squad we have at present? 9 players currently on the books have been brought to the club by Allardyce, with the deals sanctioned by Mort/Ashley. If the vast majority of them aren't good enough, who are you going to blame. Before you reply, consider the transfer fees involved and the competition we had to sign most of them ........ Still. I'm sure that you appear to be happy with the season so far. The books are balanced, and we have a long term "plan". Shame every other club also has a long term "plan", part of which will be to have a better "plan" than our "plan". mate you shouldnt keep putting plan in inverted commas like that, it makes you look mental, planning in business is always beneficial, doesn't matter who's in charge Well, I think people who infer that "plans" bring automatic success in football, are pretty stupid. It makes you look like you are saying the only teams who have "plans" are those who win the league, FA Cup and League Cup. Clearly bollocks, as you clearly had a flawed "plan" for not winning one of these trophies. Thats one hell of a lot of teams without a "plan" by the way. ok, and what about what i actually said? it's quite clear to me that if you qualify for europe more than every team bar 4 over the course of a decade, you must have some sort of "plan" which is a better "plan" than most of your rivals "plans". I realise you won't agree this because you have some sort of silly agenda with the fat b******, but hey, thats your prerogative. Ignore the facts as long as you like, its your problem. Theres that top 4 stat again!! Ha ha, i noticed you stopped posting after i pointed out the fallacies of this stat in the other post. In fact, you proved the fallacies of the stat for me. Classic. Well. You said you would prove it wasn't true, then admitted you couldn't. Now you're attempting it again ? Are you pissed ? Haha, classic, you're really falling on your arse here. Again find me where i said i would prove it wasnt true. This was last night man. How could you "forget"?? I actually said i would put some perspective on it. Ok then, here you go http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php?topic=48368.msg1136817#msg1136817 "If you want me to blow your "top 4 stat" out the water i can do if you'd like. Upto you?" "blow your top 4 stat out the water" doesnt mean "disprove your stat" It means that i would be able to put enough perspective on the stat in order to render it pretty useless. Glad you went to all that effort beuase it just shows how badly you read things.

Ok mate, heres a bone for you. In future attack opinions of mine when i have actually said it.

Considering three of those were brought in by Allardyce (and they weren't exactly cheap), do you think trusting him with more money will see him change targets to something more exotic? General question, not really owt to do with the thread as such. I know you've advocated giving him time. Would of been my secondpoint to Chez! Dave, i'm not sure, thats the biggest question facing the club (as i said after City ). Fruitbat, my point was that the midfielders we have dont have the attributes to match the attributes of our strikers. Both departments are lacking and neither can make up for the inadequacies of the other. So, yes, i think the players are just about playing to their potential which is why we arent any higher up the league. Blame last summer if you want. I tend not to over analyse things so forgive me for not understanding this, but why exactly do we have the wrong kind of strikers for our midfield? We've got tall ones, short one's, fat one's, skinny one's, strong one's and weak one's. Is it the midfield that's wrong? What attributes do the midfield lack when playing at potential. Duff in Blackburn form is an excellent provider and occasssional scorer. As are Milner, Smith and Zoggy on Villa, Leeds and previous form. Butt, Geremi, and Faye are solid as a rock on Man U, Chelsea and current form, while Barton always looked a classy* box to box player at Man City. Sounds like British Rail excuse like the wrong kind of snow on the track. *EDIT: Of course by classy I mean in a working class scumbag, thugish charver, blood and guts way. Not sure if you actually seriously asking me or not.... Viduka and Owen are immobile and slow, Martins is unpredictable. The midfield has no pace or creativity. You can have one or the other but both at the same time means neither makes up for the inadequacies of the other. If the midfield had class and pace, they would pull defenders out of position, allowing the strikers to find space. If the attack had more class and a lot of pace, a hardworking midfield would be able to support them. The lack of mobility up front (and the spatial spackaness of Martins) places greater emphasis on creativity behind them. So you dont think there would be a single manager in the world who could put us in a better position with the squad we have at present? 9 players currently on the books have been brought to the club by Allardyce, with the deals sanctioned by Mort/Ashley. If the vast majority of them aren't good enough, who are you going to blame. Before you reply, consider the transfer fees involved and the competition we had to sign most of them ........ Still. I'm sure that you appear to be happy with the season so far. The books are balanced, and we have a long term "plan". Shame every other club also has a long term "plan", part of which will be to have a better "plan" than our "plan". mate you shouldnt keep putting plan in inverted commas like that, it makes you look mental, planning in business is always beneficial, doesn't matter who's in charge Well, I think people who infer that "plans" bring automatic success in football, are pretty stupid. It makes you look like you are saying the only teams who have "plans" are those who win the league, FA Cup and League Cup. Clearly bollocks, as you clearly had a flawed "plan" for not winning one of these trophies. Thats one hell of a lot of teams without a "plan" by the way. ok, and what about what i actually said? it's quite clear to me that if you qualify for europe more than every team bar 4 over the course of a decade, you must have some sort of "plan" which is a better "plan" than most of your rivals "plans". I realise you won't agree this because you have some sort of silly agenda with the fat b******, but hey, thats your prerogative. Ignore the facts as long as you like, its your problem. Theres that top 4 stat again!! Ha ha, i noticed you stopped posting after i pointed out the fallacies of this stat in the other post. In fact, you proved the fallacies of the stat for me. Classic. Well. You said you would prove it wasn't true, then admitted you couldn't. Now you're attempting it again ? Are you pissed ? Haha, classic, you're really falling on your arse here. Again find me where i said i would prove it wasnt true. This was last night man. How could you "forget"?? I actually said i would put some perspective on it.

Considering three of those were brought in by Allardyce (and they weren't exactly cheap), do you think trusting him with more money will see him change targets to something more exotic? General question, not really owt to do with the thread as such. I know you've advocated giving him time. Would of been my secondpoint to Chez! Dave, i'm not sure, thats the biggest question facing the club (as i said after City ). Fruitbat, my point was that the midfielders we have dont have the attributes to match the attributes of our strikers. Both departments are lacking and neither can make up for the inadequacies of the other. So, yes, i think the players are just about playing to their potential which is why we arent any higher up the league. Blame last summer if you want. I tend not to over analyse things so forgive me for not understanding this, but why exactly do we have the wrong kind of strikers for our midfield? We've got tall ones, short one's, fat one's, skinny one's, strong one's and weak one's. Is it the midfield that's wrong? What attributes do the midfield lack when playing at potential. Duff in Blackburn form is an excellent provider and occasssional scorer. As are Milner, Smith and Zoggy on Villa, Leeds and previous form. Butt, Geremi, and Faye are solid as a rock on Man U, Chelsea and current form, while Barton always looked a classy* box to box player at Man City. Sounds like British Rail excuse like the wrong kind of snow on the track. *EDIT: Of course by classy I mean in a working class scumbag, thugish charver, blood and guts way. Not sure if you actually seriously asking me or not.... Viduka and Owen are immobile and slow, Martins is unpredictable. The midfield has no pace or creativity. You can have one or the other but both at the same time means neither makes up for the inadequacies of the other. If the midfield had class and pace, they would pull defenders out of position, allowing the strikers to find space. If the attack had more class and a lot of pace, a hardworking midfield would be able to support them. The lack of mobility up front (and the spatial spackaness of Martins) places greater emphasis on creativity behind them. So you dont think there would be a single manager in the world who could put us in a better position with the squad we have at present? 9 players currently on the books have been brought to the club by Allardyce, with the deals sanctioned by Mort/Ashley. If the vast majority of them aren't good enough, who are you going to blame. Before you reply, consider the transfer fees involved and the competition we had to sign most of them ........ Still. I'm sure that you appear to be happy with the season so far. The books are balanced, and we have a long term "plan". Shame every other club also has a long term "plan", part of which will be to have a better "plan" than our "plan". mate you shouldnt keep putting plan in inverted commas like that, it makes you look mental, planning in business is always beneficial, doesn't matter who's in charge Well, I think people who infer that "plans" bring automatic success in football, are pretty stupid. It makes you look like you are saying the only teams who have "plans" are those who win the league, FA Cup and League Cup. Clearly bollocks, as you clearly had a flawed "plan" for not winning one of these trophies. Thats one hell of a lot of teams without a "plan" by the way. Straw man argument.... Haha it gets better and better. Is it difficult having a 2 way conversation with yourself. you don't understand very much do you I tell you what, if you find me one person who has said that "plans bring automatic success" ill admit that what you're saying is 100% correct. If you cant, then how far and for how long can you actually stretch these "facts" before you finally see you are actually having an argument with your own imagination. Well, in that case, stop harping on about "plans" then and accept that it is a matter of us finding the new Alex Ferguson [and backing him with serious money] before anyone else then. Which I'm sure will be easy, and grossly incompetent on our part if someone else finds him first. Haha, "harping on". Rich, very rich. Again, i mentioned it once as part of a bigger argument. Again, see what you wanna see.

Considering three of those were brought in by Allardyce (and they weren't exactly cheap), do you think trusting him with more money will see him change targets to something more exotic? General question, not really owt to do with the thread as such. I know you've advocated giving him time. Would of been my secondpoint to Chez! Dave, i'm not sure, thats the biggest question facing the club (as i said after City ). Fruitbat, my point was that the midfielders we have dont have the attributes to match the attributes of our strikers. Both departments are lacking and neither can make up for the inadequacies of the other. So, yes, i think the players are just about playing to their potential which is why we arent any higher up the league. Blame last summer if you want. I tend not to over analyse things so forgive me for not understanding this, but why exactly do we have the wrong kind of strikers for our midfield? We've got tall ones, short one's, fat one's, skinny one's, strong one's and weak one's. Is it the midfield that's wrong? What attributes do the midfield lack when playing at potential. Duff in Blackburn form is an excellent provider and occasssional scorer. As are Milner, Smith and Zoggy on Villa, Leeds and previous form. Butt, Geremi, and Faye are solid as a rock on Man U, Chelsea and current form, while Barton always looked a classy* box to box player at Man City. Sounds like British Rail excuse like the wrong kind of snow on the track. *EDIT: Of course by classy I mean in a working class scumbag, thugish charver, blood and guts way. Not sure if you actually seriously asking me or not.... Viduka and Owen are immobile and slow, Martins is unpredictable. The midfield has no pace or creativity. You can have one or the other but both at the same time means neither makes up for the inadequacies of the other. If the midfield had class and pace, they would pull defenders out of position, allowing the strikers to find space. If the attack had more class and a lot of pace, a hardworking midfield would be able to support them. The lack of mobility up front (and the spatial spackaness of Martins) places greater emphasis on creativity behind them. So you dont think there would be a single manager in the world who could put us in a better position with the squad we have at present? 9 players currently on the books have been brought to the club by Allardyce, with the deals sanctioned by Mort/Ashley. If the vast majority of them aren't good enough, who are you going to blame. Before you reply, consider the transfer fees involved and the competition we had to sign most of them ........ Still. I'm sure that you appear to be happy with the season so far. The books are balanced, and we have a long term "plan". Shame every other club also has a long term "plan", part of which will be to have a better "plan" than our "plan". mate you shouldnt keep putting plan in inverted commas like that, it makes you look mental, planning in business is always beneficial, doesn't matter who's in charge Well, I think people who infer that "plans" bring automatic success in football, are pretty stupid. It makes you look like you are saying the only teams who have "plans" are those who win the league, FA Cup and League Cup. Clearly bollocks, as you clearly had a flawed "plan" for not winning one of these trophies. Thats one hell of a lot of teams without a "plan" by the way. ok, and what about what i actually said? it's quite clear to me that if you qualify for europe more than every team bar 4 over the course of a decade, you must have some sort of "plan" which is a better "plan" than most of your rivals "plans". I realise you won't agree this because you have some sort of silly agenda with the fat b******, but hey, thats your prerogative. Ignore the facts as long as you like, its your problem. Theres that top 4 stat again!! Ha ha, i noticed you stopped posting after i pointed out the fallacies of this stat in the other post. In fact, you proved the fallacies of the stat for me. Classic.

Considering three of those were brought in by Allardyce (and they weren't exactly cheap), do you think trusting him with more money will see him change targets to something more exotic? General question, not really owt to do with the thread as such. I know you've advocated giving him time. Would of been my secondpoint to Chez! Dave, i'm not sure, thats the biggest question facing the club (as i said after City ). Fruitbat, my point was that the midfielders we have dont have the attributes to match the attributes of our strikers. Both departments are lacking and neither can make up for the inadequacies of the other. So, yes, i think the players are just about playing to their potential which is why we arent any higher up the league. Blame last summer if you want. I tend not to over analyse things so forgive me for not understanding this, but why exactly do we have the wrong kind of strikers for our midfield? We've got tall ones, short one's, fat one's, skinny one's, strong one's and weak one's. Is it the midfield that's wrong? What attributes do the midfield lack when playing at potential. Duff in Blackburn form is an excellent provider and occasssional scorer. As are Milner, Smith and Zoggy on Villa, Leeds and previous form. Butt, Geremi, and Faye are solid as a rock on Man U, Chelsea and current form, while Barton always looked a classy* box to box player at Man City. Sounds like British Rail excuse like the wrong kind of snow on the track. *EDIT: Of course by classy I mean in a working class scumbag, thugish charver, blood and guts way. Not sure if you actually seriously asking me or not.... Viduka and Owen are immobile and slow, Martins is unpredictable. The midfield has no pace or creativity. You can have one or the other but both at the same time means neither makes up for the inadequacies of the other. If the midfield had class and pace, they would pull defenders out of position, allowing the strikers to find space. If the attack had more class and a lot of pace, a hardworking midfield would be able to support them. The lack of mobility up front (and the spatial spackaness of Martins) places greater emphasis on creativity behind them. So you dont think there would be a single manager in the world who could put us in a better position with the squad we have at present? 9 players currently on the books have been brought to the club by Allardyce, with the deals sanctioned by Mort/Ashley. If the vast majority of them aren't good enough, who are you going to blame. Before you reply, consider the transfer fees involved and the competition we had to sign most of them ........ Still. I'm sure that you appear to be happy with the season so far. The books are balanced, and we have a long term "plan". Shame every other club also has a long term "plan", part of which will be to have a better "plan" than our "plan". mate you shouldnt keep putting plan in inverted commas like that, it makes you look mental, planning in business is always beneficial, doesn't matter who's in charge Well, I think people who infer that "plans" bring automatic success in football, are pretty stupid. It makes you look like you are saying the only teams who have "plans" are those who win the league, FA Cup and League Cup. Clearly bollocks, as you clearly had a flawed "plan" for not winning one of these trophies. Thats one hell of a lot of teams without a "plan" by the way. Straw man argument.... Haha it gets better and better. Is it difficult having a 2 way conversation with yourself. you don't understand very much do you I tell you what, if you find me one person who has said that "plans bring automatic success" ill admit that what you're saying is 100% correct. If you cant, then how far and for how long can you actually stretch these "facts" before you finally see you are actually having an argument with your own imagination.

With signings like that it could take fat Sam £100 million to get us into the top 10. I thought that was Parky's original point. Not taking what Parky says completely literally, i wholeheartedly agree with the principle. I knew you would. But I was hoping for a deeper insight from you. There are still a few deluded souls who think we could get more out of our players but most recognise that, on the whole, the squad is where it ought to be in the prem. We need 2 defenders, 3 midfielders and 2 strikers of higher quality than anyone already at the club to be where Ashley said he wanted the club to be in the next few years. I think over the next 18 months, £100m (spent not net spend) isnt far off. Are you categorically saying that the current pefomrances of our individuals are the best we'll ever see of them? Scratch that, not even "best" but a true reflection of what they genreally capable of? No. He's saying that we need 2 defenders, 3 midfielders and 2 strikers of high quality if we are to seriously challenge the top clubs. And, despite what you think, we aren't going to do this by looking around for cheap young players and cheap foreigners and bargains. Mick will confirm this is how the club was run for decades prior to 1992. f*** it, we have £2000m pounds behind us, lets get the 11 best player we can get. That'll show real ambition. Dammit, i bit EDIT: my comment was in reference to his "deluded fans" bit, man, how long are you gonna be sniping my posts? I cant really be doing with your crap to be honest, you had a debate with me, you lost it, get over yourself man. I don't lose to anybody who hasn't got a clue Is that one of your "opinions" or "FACTS"? Fact. I decided it was futile to continue Shame, i could of helped you understand what a "Fact" was.

Considering three of those were brought in by Allardyce (and they weren't exactly cheap), do you think trusting him with more money will see him change targets to something more exotic? General question, not really owt to do with the thread as such. I know you've advocated giving him time. Would of been my secondpoint to Chez! Dave, i'm not sure, thats the biggest question facing the club (as i said after City ). Fruitbat, my point was that the midfielders we have dont have the attributes to match the attributes of our strikers. Both departments are lacking and neither can make up for the inadequacies of the other. So, yes, i think the players are just about playing to their potential which is why we arent any higher up the league. Blame last summer if you want. I tend not to over analyse things so forgive me for not understanding this, but why exactly do we have the wrong kind of strikers for our midfield? We've got tall ones, short one's, fat one's, skinny one's, strong one's and weak one's. Is it the midfield that's wrong? What attributes do the midfield lack when playing at potential. Duff in Blackburn form is an excellent provider and occasssional scorer. As are Milner, Smith and Zoggy on Villa, Leeds and previous form. Butt, Geremi, and Faye are solid as a rock on Man U, Chelsea and current form, while Barton always looked a classy* box to box player at Man City. Sounds like British Rail excuse like the wrong kind of snow on the track. *EDIT: Of course by classy I mean in a working class scumbag, thugish charver, blood and guts way. Not sure if you actually seriously asking me or not.... Viduka and Owen are immobile and slow, Martins is unpredictable. The midfield has no pace or creativity. You can have one or the other but both at the same time means neither makes up for the inadequacies of the other. If the midfield had class and pace, they would pull defenders out of position, allowing the strikers to find space. If the attack had more class and a lot of pace, a hardworking midfield would be able to support them. The lack of mobility up front (and the spatial spackaness of Martins) places greater emphasis on creativity behind them. So you dont think there would be a single manager in the world who could put us in a better position with the squad we have at present? 9 players currently on the books have been brought to the club by Allardyce, with the deals sanctioned by Mort/Ashley. If the vast majority of them aren't good enough, who are you going to blame. Before you reply, consider the transfer fees involved and the competition we had to sign most of them ........ Still. I'm sure that you appear to be happy with the season so far. The books are balanced, and we have a long term "plan". Shame every other club also has a long term "plan", part of which will be to have a better "plan" than our "plan". mate you shouldnt keep putting plan in inverted commas like that, it makes you look mental, planning in business is always beneficial, doesn't matter who's in charge Well, I think people who infer that "plans" bring automatic success in football, are pretty stupid. It makes you look like you are saying the only teams who have "plans" are those who win the league, FA Cup and League Cup. Clearly bollocks, as you clearly had a flawed "plan" for not winning one of these trophies. Thats one hell of a lot of teams without a "plan" by the way. Straw man argument.... Haha it gets better and better. Is it difficult having a 2 way conversation with yourself.

With signings like that it could take fat Sam £100 million to get us into the top 10. I thought that was Parky's original point. Not taking what Parky says completely literally, i wholeheartedly agree with the principle. I knew you would. But I was hoping for a deeper insight from you. There are still a few deluded souls who think we could get more out of our players but most recognise that, on the whole, the squad is where it ought to be in the prem. We need 2 defenders, 3 midfielders and 2 strikers of higher quality than anyone already at the club to be where Ashley said he wanted the club to be in the next few years. I think over the next 18 months, £100m (spent not net spend) isnt far off. Are you categorically saying that the current pefomrances of our individuals are the best we'll ever see of them? Scratch that, not even "best" but a true reflection of what they genreally capable of? No. He's saying that we need 2 defenders, 3 midfielders and 2 strikers of high quality if we are to seriously challenge the top clubs. And, despite what you think, we aren't going to do this by looking around for cheap young players and cheap foreigners and bargains. Mick will confirm this is how the club was run for decades prior to 1992. f*** it, we have £2000m pounds behind us, lets get the 11 best player we can get. That'll show real ambition. Dammit, i bit EDIT: my comment was in reference to his "deluded fans" bit, man, how long are you gonna be sniping my posts? I cant really be doing with your crap to be honest, you had a debate with me, you lost it, get over yourself man. I don't lose to anybody who hasn't got a clue Is that one of your "opinions" or "FACTS"?

With signings like that it could take fat Sam £100 million to get us into the top 10. I thought that was Parky's original point. Not taking what Parky says completely literally, i wholeheartedly agree with the principle. I knew you would. But I was hoping for a deeper insight from you. There are still a few deluded souls who think we could get more out of our players but most recognise that, on the whole, the squad is where it ought to be in the prem. We need 2 defenders, 3 midfielders and 2 strikers of higher quality than anyone already at the club to be where Ashley said he wanted the club to be in the next few years. I think over the next 18 months, £100m (spent not net spend) isnt far off. Are you categorically saying that the current pefomrances of our individuals are the best we'll ever see of them? Scratch that, not even "best" but a true reflection of what they genreally capable of? No. He's saying that we need 2 defenders, 3 midfielders and 2 strikers of high quality if we are to seriously challenge the top clubs. And, despite what you think, we aren't going to do this by looking around for cheap young players and cheap foreigners and bargains. Mick will confirm this is how the club was run for decades prior to 1992. f*** it, we have £2000m pounds behind us, lets get the 11 best player we can get. That'll show real ambition. Dammit, i bit EDIT: my comment was in reference to his "deluded fans" bit, man, how long are you gonna be sniping my posts? I cant really be doing with your crap to be honest, you had a debate with me, you lost it, get over yourself man.

...following that logic (painful) even if we spent 50m on 2/3 players they still wouldn't come....eh? You think we can't attract top players? The PL is now the No.1 destination of most top players in the world read the opening article. Thought so. I don't think we can't, I know we can't. f****** Steve Sidwell didn't even want to come. Not good enough. You know jack s*** from what Iv'e read so far. Sorry. I just don't buy all this we can't attract quality lark. Football is a speculative business model. remnants of the old "fat b****** to blame for everything" era. And clearly bollocks too. Nobody bite

You would only believe they were achieving their maximum if you believed Sam was the best coach in the world. Other, better managers, of course could do better and the best one could get the maximum out of them. Some on here think that Souness is one of those better managers, their opinion of Sam is so low. So are you saying that what Allardyce is getting from the players is possibly the best he can do according to his ability? Just a genral question, i think we're diverging here a little Not looking to scrutinize your answer!!

We can get 3 players for the best part of £50m as Souey proved. That was years ago, we were a champions league chasing side, in the UEFA cup. We could then, we can't now. What? We'd finished 14th in the Premiership the season before we signed those players and we weren't in Europe in any form. We're a premiership side, that's enough to attract big players if you're willing to spend the cash. Of course it also doesn't hurt that we've at least been in Europe plenty of times unlike most of the rest of the Premiership.. Teasy - Dont say nowt but Man City who finished 14th last season went out & spent about £40 million on incoming players in the summer & are now sitting in a Champions League spot. You think £15m is the difference between 12th and 4th? No that would be 8 postions in the league table. Well said.

Considering three of those were brought in by Allardyce (and they weren't exactly cheap), do you think trusting him with more money will see him change targets to something more exotic? General question, not really owt to do with the thread as such. I know you've advocated giving him time. Would of been my secondpoint to Chez! Dave, i'm not sure, thats the biggest question facing the club (as i said after City ). Fruitbat, my point was that the midfielders we have dont have the attributes to match the attributes of our strikers. Both departments are lacking and neither can make up for the inadequacies of the other. So, yes, i think the players are just about playing to their potential which is why we arent any higher up the league. Blame last summer if you want. I tend not to over analyse things so forgive me for not understanding this, but why exactly do we have the wrong kind of strikers for our midfield? We've got tall ones, short one's, fat one's, skinny one's, strong one's and weak one's. Is it the midfield that's wrong? What attributes do the midfield lack when playing at potential. Duff in Blackburn form is an excellent provider and occasssional scorer. As are Milner, Smith and Zoggy on Villa, Leeds and previous form. Butt, Geremi, and Faye are solid as a rock on Man U, Chelsea and current form, while Barton always looked a classy* box to box player at Man City. Sounds like British Rail excuse like the wrong kind of snow on the track. *EDIT: Of course by classy I mean in a working class scumbag, thugish charver, blood and guts way. Not sure if you actually seriously asking me or not.... Viduka and Owen are immobile and slow, Martins is unpredictable. The midfield has no pace or creativity. You can have one or the other but both at the same time means neither makes up for the inadequacies of the other. If the midfield had class and pace, they would pull defenders out of position, allowing the strikers to find space. If the attack had more class and a lot of pace, a hardworking midfield would be able to support them. The lack of mobility up front (and the spatial spackaness of Martins) places greater emphasis on creativity behind them. So you dont think there would be a single manager in the world who could put us in a better position with the squad we have at present? I hope this is leading somewhere about the quality of the squad, otherwise you've taken my trick of asking a subtle question but without the 'relevant' bit. Of course i think there are better managers than Sam out there, who of course could do better. If you think Mourinho or Capello would win the league with our lot then my nickname for you is spot on I'll save the Sam debate for that thread though I never said anyhting about winning the league, however i am one of those "deluded souls who think we could get more out of our players" and apperently so are you, only in denial. My point GayGiven, is that until Allardyce gets any improvments out of the players he has at the moment, i wouldnt be entirley confident that signing big players would make any difference to the current situation. Maybe a little, but i dont think enough to justify the huge prices. Cock up bum, dont tell mum, as my brother says. [/jjc] I can see that argument, i also see high quality players as more of an attraction to a prospective manager. Who wants to inherit s****? I think a decent midfield would make a massive difference to the current situation and that means offering big money for some big players. Yes you can scout them and yes you can unearth gems, we should be doing that too of course. Those other routes are not likely to yield all the solutions though, otherwise spending wouldnt be as high overall. Fair point, i just dont think that the big problem with this team is the weak positions, but more the way we are playing and the effect of Allardyces method. Dont get me wrong, i will support Allardyce but i just believe that saying this squad is achiveing its maximum because is s*** (not saying that is your view) is short sighted and pretty naive. No, quite right, i never said that and i dont think anyone on this forum has ever said that either. However, quite why we should perservere with the belief that some of our players are up to the job when the evidence suggests they are not is beyond me (not saying that is your view ) Potential=maximum ? Fair point, but it lead onto the point as to why they arent upto the job when quite clearly they all collectively have the ability to be doing much much better!

We can get 3 players for the best part of £50m as Souey proved. That was years ago, we were a champions league chasing side, in the UEFA cup. We could then, we can't now. What? We'd finished 14th in the Premiership the season before we signed those players and we weren't in Europe in any form. We're a premiership side, that's enough to attract big players if you're willing to spend the cash. Of course it also doesn't hurt that we've at least been in Europe plenty of times unlike most of the rest of the Premiership.. Teasy - Dont say nowt but Man City who finished 14th last season went out & spent about £40 million on incoming players in the summer & are now sitting in a Champions League spot. You think £15m is the difference between 12th and 4th?

Considering three of those were brought in by Allardyce (and they weren't exactly cheap), do you think trusting him with more money will see him change targets to something more exotic? General question, not really owt to do with the thread as such. I know you've advocated giving him time. Would of been my secondpoint to Chez! Dave, i'm not sure, thats the biggest question facing the club (as i said after City ). Fruitbat, my point was that the midfielders we have dont have the attributes to match the attributes of our strikers. Both departments are lacking and neither can make up for the inadequacies of the other. So, yes, i think the players are just about playing to their potential which is why we arent any higher up the league. Blame last summer if you want. I tend not to over analyse things so forgive me for not understanding this, but why exactly do we have the wrong kind of strikers for our midfield? We've got tall ones, short one's, fat one's, skinny one's, strong one's and weak one's. Is it the midfield that's wrong? What attributes do the midfield lack when playing at potential. Duff in Blackburn form is an excellent provider and occasssional scorer. As are Milner, Smith and Zoggy on Villa, Leeds and previous form. Butt, Geremi, and Faye are solid as a rock on Man U, Chelsea and current form, while Barton always looked a classy* box to box player at Man City. Sounds like British Rail excuse like the wrong kind of snow on the track. *EDIT: Of course by classy I mean in a working class scumbag, thugish charver, blood and guts way. Not sure if you actually seriously asking me or not.... Viduka and Owen are immobile and slow, Martins is unpredictable. The midfield has no pace or creativity. You can have one or the other but both at the same time means neither makes up for the inadequacies of the other. If the midfield had class and pace, they would pull defenders out of position, allowing the strikers to find space. If the attack had more class and a lot of pace, a hardworking midfield would be able to support them. The lack of mobility up front (and the spatial spackaness of Martins) places greater emphasis on creativity behind them. So you dont think there would be a single manager in the world who could put us in a better position with the squad we have at present? I hope this is leading somewhere about the quality of the squad, otherwise you've taken my trick of asking a subtle question but without the 'relevant' bit. Of course i think there are better managers than Sam out there, who of course could do better. If you think Mourinho or Capello would win the league with our lot then my nickname for you is spot on I'll save the Sam debate for that thread though I never said anyhting about winning the league, however i am one of those "deluded souls who think we could get more out of our players" and apperently so are you, only in denial. My point GayGiven, is that until Allardyce gets any improvments out of the players he has at the moment, i wouldnt be entirley confident that signing big players would make any difference to the current situation. Maybe a little, but i dont think enough to justify the huge prices. Cock up bum, dont tell mum, as my brother says. [/jjc] I can see that argument, i also see high quality players as more of an attraction to a prospective manager. Who wants to inherit s****? I think a decent midfield would make a massive difference to the current situation and that means offering big money for some big players. Yes you can scout them and yes you can unearth gems, we should be doing that too of course. Those other routes are not likely to yield all the solutions though, otherwise spending wouldnt be as high overall. Fair point, i just dont think that the big problem with this team is the weak positions, but more the way we are playing and the effect of Allardyces method. Dont get me wrong, i will support Allardyce but i just believe that saying this squad is achiveing its maximum because is shit (not saying that is your view) is short sighted and pretty naive.

Considering three of those were brought in by Allardyce (and they weren't exactly cheap), do you think trusting him with more money will see him change targets to something more exotic? General question, not really owt to do with the thread as such. I know you've advocated giving him time. Would of been my secondpoint to Chez! Dave, i'm not sure, thats the biggest question facing the club (as i said after City ). Fruitbat, my point was that the midfielders we have dont have the attributes to match the attributes of our strikers. Both departments are lacking and neither can make up for the inadequacies of the other. So, yes, i think the players are just about playing to their potential which is why we arent any higher up the league. Blame last summer if you want. I tend not to over analyse things so forgive me for not understanding this, but why exactly do we have the wrong kind of strikers for our midfield? We've got tall ones, short one's, fat one's, skinny one's, strong one's and weak one's. Is it the midfield that's wrong? What attributes do the midfield lack when playing at potential. Duff in Blackburn form is an excellent provider and occasssional scorer. As are Milner, Smith and Zoggy on Villa, Leeds and previous form. Butt, Geremi, and Faye are solid as a rock on Man U, Chelsea and current form, while Barton always looked a classy* box to box player at Man City. Sounds like British Rail excuse like the wrong kind of snow on the track. *EDIT: Of course by classy I mean in a working class scumbag, thugish charver, blood and guts way. Not sure if you actually seriously asking me or not.... Viduka and Owen are immobile and slow, Martins is unpredictable. The midfield has no pace or creativity. You can have one or the other but both at the same time means neither makes up for the inadequacies of the other. If the midfield had class and pace, they would pull defenders out of position, allowing the strikers to find space. If the attack had more class and a lot of pace, a hardworking midfield would be able to support them. The lack of mobility up front (and the spatial spackaness of Martins) places greater emphasis on creativity behind them. So you dont think there would be a single manager in the world who could put us in a better position with the squad we have at present? I hope this is leading somewhere about the quality of the squad, otherwise you've taken my trick of asking a subtle question but without the 'relevant' bit. Of course i think there are better managers than Sam out there, who of course could do better. If you think Mourinho or Capello would win the league with our lot then my nickname for you is spot on I'll save the Sam debate for that thread though I never said anyhting about winning the league, however i am one of those "deluded souls who think we could get more out of our players" and apperently so are you, only in denial. My point GayGiven, is that until Allardyce gets any improvments out of the players he has at the moment, i wouldnt be entirley confident that signing big players would make any difference to the current situation. Maybe a little, but i dont think enough to justify the huge prices.

A little off topic but who was it who hadnt even sgined for Birmingham but criticised the training methods during a trial...cant remeber.