fredbob

Sam wants to sign players all year round. Before the transfer window came in players used to join clubs as late as March & none of the integration bollocks was mentioned. True but times have changed, I cant remeber any manager in the past worrying about intergrating players, trying to find them a place to stay, bank accounts, Mosques etc, but times have changed so much that these little touches have become vitally important. If we were to go into the specifics of the intergrtion im talking about, i mean how about the effect of having 5-6 players being signed in one month on the team, more specifically the players whose position are under threat. How do they react? you'd like them to step up a gear but thats not always the case, and the perfomrnace of the team will suffer. If you are able to sign the same players over a period of 6 months, do you think that the effect will still be the same? I dont.

We had a squad which finished 7th with half a season of Souness which was poor enough to get him the sack, and half a season of Roeder. Last season we had MAJOR injury problems for a large part of it, so our performances or final position last season cannot seriously be taken as a true reflection of the quality of the squad we had. You say Geremi and Viduka and Barton are vast improvements over what we had, but we are currently doing worse than last season if you take into account the teams we have played so far. If the squad is vastly improved and Mort and Allardyce are doing everything right, what's going wrong on the pitch? This is a club that sacked a legend in the game for finishing 5th, if Souness had stayed god knows where we'd of fininshed Roeder had the honeymoon period and it proved to be the case the season after. We had crippling injury problems in all 3 seasons but still had good enough squad to complete, and we also have had no injury issues this season which i attribute to Allardyces excellent fitness techniques. Partial bad lucj, partial bad coaching as Allardyce this season hs proven. How are we doing worse than last season? You dont judge a season on the opposition you've played, you judge it on the points you've aquired and the posiiton you're in. Add to the fact that we're not even halfway through the season. what are we arguing here? The perfomrance of the team, or the process in which we spend money? Becasue i'm arguing about the way we spend our oney, and if you ask me, the quality of the squad has improved lots between this season and last, and im sure it'll be the same the season after that. Why cant you see that? I cant understand why noone else (bar Lazy) understands that we as a club arent in a position to compete in the market with the likes of Man U and chelsea so we have to start slowly and build up, not throw money at the problem at the first available oppurtunity. We did that with Shepard, it dint work, we ended up £80m in debt with nothing to show for it, absolutley nothing. To be fair to mort and Ashley he spent alot of money in the summer on a manager he didnt appoint, does that not suggest that he is willing to put the money in when it matters. It does to me. Again, i wanna reiterate for the 12th time now, all im talking about is the January period. I dont think its a good time or idea to spend vast quantities of money, in a period where it is notoriously difficult to buy quality players. Why is that so hard to understand?

My bad, Owen was a bad example, dint really illustrate my point, my point is that generally speaking, January is a bad time to spend lots of money, you end up paying premium on average players and in the unlkely situation of actually signining a fair few people you have trouble intergrating them in a team which is in 'flow'. Allardyce has said manyy times about the perils of Jan period, and you'll find a lot of clubs dont really utilise the period. There two reasons why we shouldnt use the jan period to it's fullest potential. To be fair, i've already said numerous times that i think that if Allardyce justifies the purchase of aplayer in the jan period then mort will put his hand in his pocket, so the point about the attacking player is unneccassary. i personally think we need a DM more than an AM, but thats my personal opinion. I just personally belive that planning to spend a lot of money in the jan period is a bad idea.

We were up there when we were spending the money though. If we stop spending money then we definitely wont be. Don't forget to add in wages when you talk about expenditure too. Arsenal get away with not spending as much on transfers as the other "big 4" because of Wenger, but they still have a much higher wage bill than us. So will you be happy with the level of success shown by for example Charlton under Curbishley, or Bolton under Allardyce? They both had the stability and solid foundations you are talking about over the period where we didn't but were "spending ridiculous amounts" which didn't work at all; except for getting us into Europe/cup finals of course. Also could you explain how you account for the most successful team in Europe? Hint: since 1990 - 5 league titles, 4 domestic cups, 3 european cups, 20 (twenty) managers. Let me make this perfectly clear to you all, i havent once said i dont think the manager should be given money to spend, i agree that a good manager needs money in order to improve their squad. However, this entire discussion is about Mort's recent quotes about the appproaching transfer window, i was attacking the generalised views that some people were making, implying that Mort had made this statement as though it were his business plans for the club. Which in my opinion is bollocks. And people who are arguing this point are idiots. I argued that Mort, as well as SA think it is a bad idea spending stupid money in January as it bad business and often doesnt really lead to vast improvements. However, Mort has said that he will try to use this window to improve the future of the club by primarily investing in youth. Rather than gettin replacements for the ANC. I also said that i personally think that if the right player was needed and it was justified by allardyce, then Mort wouldnt hesitate to soend the money. So basically i am in partial agreement with peoples views that money needs to be spent. BUT not in this transfer period bad time to spend money. Has no one learnt from the 17m spent on Owen. How much did we overpay, irrespective of his current situation. I'd say we overspent by £6-7m. £6-7m? Thats a huge amount of money, and it was the period that we signed the players that dictated the price. Makes no sense. Granted in that particular period of time, we desperately needed the player, but this period can we honestly say we need a player in the same vain that we needed Owen. I dont think so and i think Mort shares the same view. The fundamental flaw with your views is that you arent taking into accoount the current situation of our club, we had a squad which was low on quality, and because of the lack of european football, or even a decent repuatation we cant attract the type of players we may need, i.e the "trophy signings" in order to make the vast improvements, instead we have to take it slowly, improve the genereal quality of the squad and the depth, make improvements in the league, achieve euro qualifications, then try and go the the higher calibre of player because we have means to do so. To do this you need as much improvemnt on the squad as much as you can afford and your reputations will allow, if you ask me, getting the likes of Geremi and Viduka and Barton, are all vast improvements on the squad we had. Yet they arent the type of players we need to break the top4. Can you see that? So it needs to start slow, becasue we have no other choice. Mort and Allardyce are 100% correct in the way they are doing things. That is all.

Very happy with the appoinment to be honest. Anyone who's not because he's not english needs to take at look at themselves. Best man for the job. Simple. I'm just worried that the nationalsts who would of wanted an Enlglish manager are gonna be the ones in mass who will complain when we dont play "sexy football" even though we win. Silly really but i can already see it happening a la Sven. Bottom line is that there are no world class english managers, and it doesnt matter how good the car looks or how big the engine is, you aint gonna win races with a poor driver.

Welcome back BUT we did get in the CL with them some of them kids, two of them won young player of year & one of them was Bellers. You can't turn your back on younger players any more than you can turn your back on the big name player who will raise expectation are you saying that raising expectation is good? if so why? not spoiling for a fight, just seems like a strange thing to say of course raising expectation is good. Why shouldn't it be ? Thats the whole idea. Would you rather support a club who would be happy to just stay up, for instance ? If so, you should have supported NUFC through the 1960's, 70's and 80's. For instance. NUFC and expectations have raised and changed completely since 1992, and not a single NUFC supporter would say otherwise [or maybe there is, there's always one, or two, or three.............] i think that the raising of expectations should go hand in hand with progress though, and by that i mean higher league finishes, you seem to be getting the cart before the horse there, i think trying to raise expectation in any other way is a very dangerous game to play, dont you? surely expectation and whats ACTUALLY happening should be directly related, that way you acheive a greater harmony around the club. i'm not saying dont be ambitious, just dont be daft. Expectations are totally different to when the old board took over the club in 1992 mate. Thats a fact. It's proven by the fact that 52000 people go to home games, whereas before that it was less than half. And people actually demand to qualify for europe, whereas people used to just be happy to be in the top league [and I'm not just talking about the fans here] why cant i have a discussion with you without feeling like your just out on a crusade to vindicate the old board ? you're ignoring what i'm saying and responding to points i haven't made, i didnt say expectations haven't risen, i'm not saying people didnt used to be happy just being in the top league, i'm saying expectations should correlate with how the TEAM and CLUB is progressing. not with how much money we spend, although at some point these things are going to be related, obviously, i think its a much more delicate balance than just throwing money at it its nothing of the kind mate. I realise you have a point - unlike some - and I'm trying to discuss it with you. I'm not vindicating anybody, the very fact you think that suggests you don't fully understand how expectations were raised under the old board. I shouldn't need to point this out at all, it is obvious. People aren't happy that we are only halfway in the top league just now, and last season, but that is because they expect higher placings because they are used to it. While spending money is no guarantee of absolute success - the reason for that is because there are only 2 major trophies - but ask yourself if the teams that have won the trophies spent more. The answer is yes. Draw your own conclusions. One thing is for sure, if we aren't prepared to bring in players to this club that the current top 4 want themselves, we will NEVER join them. Thats not vindicating anybody. Its a stone cold fact. Would you like to ask yourself how many managers in total have these clubs had in the past 10 years? Also, i wouldnt bet against us being the fifth highest spenders in the league. when will people learn that spending money isnt the answer, you have to build foundations first. All the clubs you're talking aobut have solid foundations, and that solidarity starts with a consistent, good manager. Draw your own conclusion. YOu could say that if Keegan had won the league he may still be here, or would have lasted a lot longer. ? YOu could also say that if bobby Robson had been 10 years younger he would still be here, and that would make us on a level footing than these other clubs ? You could equally say that both of these managers would likely to have won a cup by now if they had stayed, and dare i say it, under the ex board, the worst ever in football responsible for us being the biggest mongs who ever competed for anything. Joking, yes, of course. But this is the impression a lot of people give of what they think of them. Back on track ...... it doesn't change the fact that, yes, you are right, having a good youth policy, facilities, scouting system are important, but they always has been. It doesn't have to start with "good foundations", it can equally start with success at first team level. The success of Keegan is responsible for the growth of NUFC into the club we have now, I agree we all want to go further, but this is also true, is it not ? Liverpools success all started with Shankly, building a good first team that got noticed. Likewise Leeds under Revie, Derby under Clough. Its the first team that counts, its the first team that gets you supporters, money, and exposure. There is no right or wrong way to do this. Either method can work with the right people ie the right team manager. Spending the 5th, 4th most - whatever - is the reason why we have qualified for europe more than most teams, I bet you if we hadn't spent that money we would not have done that. The proof being that, when we didn't, we didn't !!!! Its strange that DV - and you ? - are saying I am looking for ways to vindicate the old board mate, because to me it seems that many people are looking for ways to crucify them too. At the end of the day, they had ambition for the club, and you shouldn't really knock that, because they were doing quite well up until they appointed Souness. You see, I think I am just putting things into perspective Well, this is it, altough i dont particulary want to go down the whole new board old board debate, not in this thread anyway i find that you make a lot of references to darker times, as though we should be judging ourselves agaisnt how it used to be. Which in my opinion is silly. If a business is struggling, then someone comes in and completely turns it around, does that make the person who turned it around completeyl immune from criticisms- i mean if he was to make a mistake which set the business back (kept changing the boss of the company) Is he not still accountable irrespctive of the condition of the business before he took over. Because if you think about it, that is exactly what happened at newcastle. If that personsets the business back he will not be able to say "well you should of seen the state of it before i took over", that's not how things work. In '92 we were in a position to estabilish ourselves as a dominant force in the premiership. We were on a level playing field with a lot of clubs, minus the history. True? Well what went wrong? Why are we in the position we are in today? There was mistakes made somewhere. We spent alot of money in those days, i'd say more than any other club bar Man U. Something went wrong when Keegan left, our expectations were sky high, and because of this, the proceeding managers all failed against those high expecatations. Now ever since those keegan days, there has only been one period of stability, and even then it was undermined alot. As you've helpfully stated in your retort, all those clubs were built by a single manager, thats where the stability has come from. In the past 10 years, we've had 6-7 managers? In the exact same period, off the top of my head, Liverpool, Man U and Arsenal have had 4-5. Chelsea weren't in the same category as those 3 because they werent estabilished as a "big top 4 team" until the russian dollar came in. The fact is that 'lynchpin' to your argument is that the board isnt showing any ambition if it doesnt spend the money, when in actual fact it hasnt really wroked so far for us, the fact is that without the stability that the other clubs have had in having a consistent manager we wont ever catch up. Have a look at Everton, moyes has really slipped under the radar with what he's achieved with (up until recent times) low budget and longevity, look at Allardyce at Bolton. Look at what they achieved, now take a look at Souness, take a look at O'Leary at Leeds, Tigana at fulham, numerous coaches at Real Madrid. The common fact between them all is that they've all had relative amounts of money thrown at them and all have failed. This is why you need to start from the bottom. sorry mate, I think you are wrong. You think I am defending the old board, but I think you are attacking the old board to a degree that you are losing perspective, and simply spouting the cliches of the moment. The people who were jumping for joy when the club bought Boumsong, Luque etc are now saying that the way to certain success is to bring through youngsters and not spend money. Hmmmmm....... The clubs that have had the longest serving managers, have this BECAUSE the first team has been successful, not because they are building foundations, or the foundations that have been there already, they have been there BECAUSE of the success of the first team. Alex Ferguson was one game from the sack after 6 years at manure, while "building foundations". Why ? Because the first team were not performing as the supporters and directors wanted. Nobody in this situation gives a stuff about the foundations of the club. Simple fact of fooball, is that the manager is sacked if the first team doesn't get results. Now, THAT is perspective, and true. Not a cliche, nor a "business plan" in sight. Its football. And how football works. I tell you something, and if you disagree, please say so and why. We will NEVER match the top clubs who win the trophies if we don't have players that they themselves want. And a FACT is that we are not going to do this by finding them as youngsters. If that were possible, then manure, Liverpool and Chelsea would themselves not be spending the money they have been spending. Would you like to tell me why they spend so much money when they have these "solid foundations". ? The managers you mention, didn't get sacked for spending money, they got sacked for exercising bad judgement with it. As a footnote, you can take a club like Everton, who have had stability for 6 years. How many times have they qualified for europe, and how much money have they spent in comparison to their neighbours ? Do you see NUFC as a club run like this, or a club run like Liverpool ? Edit. Re-reading this.......I'm quite shocked you appear to think its acceptable for Everton to be a small club operating with a small budget. So let me get this right...you make a coment about us not spending enough "ask yourself if the teams that have won the trophies spent more. The answer is yes" implying that the successful clubs are the ones that have spent the most. Yes? I retorted by pointing out that we are probably the highest spenders outside the top 4, if not higher than some on the top 4 over a period of 10 years. Which might not be too far from the truth. Therefore by your definition we should be up there? Which we arent. I also pointed out that unlike the other clubs we have had no stability at the club, no solid foundation in the form of a steady manager, i'm not talking about scouting, or youth set up, i'm literally talking about having the right man appionted to do a good job for a sustained period of time. "All the clubs you're talking aobut have solid foundations, and that solidarity starts with a consistent, good manager." Your next argument confuses me a little, who are you to say what could of been achieved had Keegan stayed? Or had Sir Bobby been younger? What point are you trying to make. Yes, Keegan was responsible for the team, it was the right man to do the job, he'd proven himself as he was in a stable job and the foundations were set, the board spent heavily with him, fast forward a few years and we have SBR after 2 unsubstantial years in the job, money is spent as the foundations are set, then we start to achieve something, but increduosly, we still end up sacking him after a 5th place finish. Both achieved good levels of success. To be fair to me and DV, you actually brought up the old board, "Expectations are totally different to when the old board took over the club in 1992 mate. Thats a fact." and thats what instigated DV to respond. Your overall point seems to be that you need to spend on the first team in order to get it right, well i am saying that the manager needs to prove that he is good enough in order to get the money. Like i said, i have no doubts in my mind that ifSA said that he desperately needed a DM for example and it was thouroughly ustified to Mort then the funds would be released. And the responsibiltyof the appointment of a capable manager lies with the board, theres no hard luck about it, if a seemingly good appointment turns out crap then its your fault. Full Stop. The strange thing about having a discussion with you is that we've started with your comment about spending being the key to success, and ended up talking about the shortcomings of the old board. With you, ironically saying that we are forever attacking the old board, when in actual fact you were speculating about the 'worrying fact that Mort's not gonna spend, which would be suicidal' To summarise, your view is that we need to spend more, even though spending ridiculous amounts havent really worked (basically disagreeing with Morts views), and my view is that we need to get a stable foundation to build on so we have something to spend on in the future, (which in my opinion is the view of Mort)which i agree with. The fact that we have spent alot over the years and after all those years we find ourselves a mid table club, with admittedly more qualifications than any other team. However this is such a misleading statement, i cant remember the exact number of qualifications we've had, but the meat of our qualifications were achieved when we were in stable positions with stable managers, and doesnt coincide with the periods of time when we spent the most money. If we were to look at the qualifications in accordance to league position, do you think that we'd be the fifth most qualified team in the premiership of all time. I dont think so, and as that is the case, does that still justify the success of the old board having spent so much. I also dont think so. Draw your own conclusions.

Welcome back BUT we did get in the CL with them some of them kids, two of them won young player of year & one of them was Bellers. You can't turn your back on younger players any more than you can turn your back on the big name player who will raise expectation are you saying that raising expectation is good? if so why? not spoiling for a fight, just seems like a strange thing to say of course raising expectation is good. Why shouldn't it be ? Thats the whole idea. Would you rather support a club who would be happy to just stay up, for instance ? If so, you should have supported NUFC through the 1960's, 70's and 80's. For instance. NUFC and expectations have raised and changed completely since 1992, and not a single NUFC supporter would say otherwise [or maybe there is, there's always one, or two, or three.............] i think that the raising of expectations should go hand in hand with progress though, and by that i mean higher league finishes, you seem to be getting the cart before the horse there, i think trying to raise expectation in any other way is a very dangerous game to play, dont you? surely expectation and whats ACTUALLY happening should be directly related, that way you acheive a greater harmony around the club. i'm not saying dont be ambitious, just dont be daft. Expectations are totally different to when the old board took over the club in 1992 mate. Thats a fact. It's proven by the fact that 52000 people go to home games, whereas before that it was less than half. And people actually demand to qualify for europe, whereas people used to just be happy to be in the top league [and I'm not just talking about the fans here] why cant i have a discussion with you without feeling like your just out on a crusade to vindicate the old board ? you're ignoring what i'm saying and responding to points i haven't made, i didnt say expectations haven't risen, i'm not saying people didnt used to be happy just being in the top league, i'm saying expectations should correlate with how the TEAM and CLUB is progressing. not with how much money we spend, although at some point these things are going to be related, obviously, i think its a much more delicate balance than just throwing money at it its nothing of the kind mate. I realise you have a point - unlike some - and I'm trying to discuss it with you. I'm not vindicating anybody, the very fact you think that suggests you don't fully understand how expectations were raised under the old board. I shouldn't need to point this out at all, it is obvious. People aren't happy that we are only halfway in the top league just now, and last season, but that is because they expect higher placings because they are used to it. While spending money is no guarantee of absolute success - the reason for that is because there are only 2 major trophies - but ask yourself if the teams that have won the trophies spent more. The answer is yes. Draw your own conclusions. One thing is for sure, if we aren't prepared to bring in players to this club that the current top 4 want themselves, we will NEVER join them. Thats not vindicating anybody. Its a stone cold fact. Would you like to ask yourself how many managers in total have these clubs had in the past 10 years? Also, i wouldnt bet against us being the fifth highest spenders in the league. when will people learn that spending money isnt the answer, you have to build foundations first. All the clubs you're talking aobut have solid foundations, and that solidarity starts with a consistent, good manager. Draw your own conclusion. YOu could say that if Keegan had won the league he may still be here, or would have lasted a lot longer. ? YOu could also say that if bobby Robson had been 10 years younger he would still be here, and that would make us on a level footing than these other clubs ? You could equally say that both of these managers would likely to have won a cup by now if they had stayed, and dare i say it, under the ex board, the worst ever in football responsible for us being the biggest mongs who ever competed for anything. Joking, yes, of course. But this is the impression a lot of people give of what they think of them. Back on track ...... it doesn't change the fact that, yes, you are right, having a good youth policy, facilities, scouting system are important, but they always has been. It doesn't have to start with "good foundations", it can equally start with success at first team level. The success of Keegan is responsible for the growth of NUFC into the club we have now, I agree we all want to go further, but this is also true, is it not ? Liverpools success all started with Shankly, building a good first team that got noticed. Likewise Leeds under Revie, Derby under Clough. Its the first team that counts, its the first team that gets you supporters, money, and exposure. There is no right or wrong way to do this. Either method can work with the right people ie the right team manager. Spending the 5th, 4th most - whatever - is the reason why we have qualified for europe more than most teams, I bet you if we hadn't spent that money we would not have done that. The proof being that, when we didn't, we didn't !!!! Its strange that DV - and you ? - are saying I am looking for ways to vindicate the old board mate, because to me it seems that many people are looking for ways to crucify them too. At the end of the day, they had ambition for the club, and you shouldn't really knock that, because they were doing quite well up until they appointed Souness. You see, I think I am just putting things into perspective Well, this is it, altough i dont particulary want to go down the whole new board old board debate, not in this thread anyway i find that you make a lot of references to darker times, as though we should be judging ourselves agaisnt how it used to be. Which in my opinion is silly. If a business is struggling, then someone comes in and completely turns it around, does that make the person who turned it around completeyl immune from criticisms- i mean if he was to make a mistake which set the business back (kept changing the boss of the company) Is he not still accountable irrespctive of the condition of the business before he took over. Because if you think about it, that is exactly what happened at newcastle. If that personsets the business back he will not be able to say "well you should of seen the state of it before i took over", that's not how things work. In '92 we were in a position to estabilish ourselves as a dominant force in the premiership. We were on a level playing field with a lot of clubs, minus the history. True? Well what went wrong? Why are we in the position we are in today? There was mistakes made somewhere. We spent alot of money in those days, i'd say more than any other club bar Man U. Something went wrong when Keegan left, our expectations were sky high, and because of this, the proceeding managers all failed against those high expecatations. Now ever since those keegan days, there has only been one period of stability, and even then it was undermined alot. As you've helpfully stated in your retort, all those clubs were built by a single manager, thats where the stability has come from. In the past 10 years, we've had 6-7 managers? In the exact same period, off the top of my head, Liverpool, Man U and Arsenal have had 4-5. Chelsea weren't in the same category as those 3 because they werent estabilished as a "big top 4 team" until the russian dollar came in. The fact is that 'lynchpin' to your argument is that the board isnt showing any ambition if it doesnt spend the money, when in actual fact it hasnt really wroked so far for us, the fact is that without the stability that the other clubs have had in having a consistent manager we wont ever catch up. Have a look at Everton, moyes has really slipped under the radar with what he's achieved with (up until recent times) low budget and longevity, look at Allardyce at Bolton. Look at what they achieved, now take a look at Souness, take a look at O'Leary at Leeds, Tigana at fulham, numerous coaches at Real Madrid. The common fact between them all is that they've all had relative amounts of money thrown at them and all have failed. This is why you need to start from the bottom.

What a waste of talent, one of those rare type of players who are capable of doing extraordinary things.

End of thread!

Welcome back BUT we did get in the CL with them some of them kids, two of them won young player of year & one of them was Bellers. You can't turn your back on younger players any more than you can turn your back on the big name player who will raise expectation are you saying that raising expectation is good? if so why? not spoiling for a fight, just seems like a strange thing to say of course raising expectation is good. Why shouldn't it be ? Thats the whole idea. Would you rather support a club who would be happy to just stay up, for instance ? If so, you should have supported NUFC through the 1960's, 70's and 80's. For instance. NUFC and expectations have raised and changed completely since 1992, and not a single NUFC supporter would say otherwise [or maybe there is, there's always one, or two, or three.............] i think that the raising of expectations should go hand in hand with progress though, and by that i mean higher league finishes, you seem to be getting the cart before the horse there, i think trying to raise expectation in any other way is a very dangerous game to play, dont you? surely expectation and whats ACTUALLY happening should be directly related, that way you acheive a greater harmony around the club. i'm not saying dont be ambitious, just dont be daft. Expectations are totally different to when the old board took over the club in 1992 mate. Thats a fact. It's proven by the fact that 52000 people go to home games, whereas before that it was less than half. And people actually demand to qualify for europe, whereas people used to just be happy to be in the top league [and I'm not just talking about the fans here] why cant i have a discussion with you without feeling like your just out on a crusade to vindicate the old board ? you're ignoring what i'm saying and responding to points i haven't made, i didnt say expectations haven't risen, i'm not saying people didnt used to be happy just being in the top league, i'm saying expectations should correlate with how the TEAM and CLUB is progressing. not with how much money we spend, although at some point these things are going to be related, obviously, i think its a much more delicate balance than just throwing money at it its nothing of the kind mate. I realise you have a point - unlike some - and I'm trying to discuss it with you. I'm not vindicating anybody, the very fact you think that suggests you don't fully understand how expectations were raised under the old board. I shouldn't need to point this out at all, it is obvious. People aren't happy that we are only halfway in the top league just now, and last season, but that is because they expect higher placings because they are used to it. While spending money is no guarantee of absolute success - the reason for that is because there are only 2 major trophies - but ask yourself if the teams that have won the trophies spent more. The answer is yes. Draw your own conclusions. One thing is for sure, if we aren't prepared to bring in players to this club that the current top 4 want themselves, we will NEVER join them. Thats not vindicating anybody. Its a stone cold fact. Would you like to ask yourself how many managers in total have these clubs had in the past 10 years? Also, i wouldnt bet against us being the fifth highest spenders in the league. when will people learn that spending money isnt the answer, you have to build foundations first. All the clubs you're talking aobut have solid foundations, and that solidarity starts with a consistent, good manager. Draw your own conclusion.

Welcome back BUT we did get in the CL with them some of them kids, two of them won young player of year & one of them was Bellers. You can't turn your back on younger players any more than you can turn your back on the big name player who will raise expectation are you saying that raising expectation is good? if so why? not spoiling for a fight, just seems like a strange thing to say of course raising expectation is good. Why shouldn't it be ? Thats the whole idea. Would you rather support a club who would be happy to just stay up, for instance ? If so, you should have supported NUFC through the 1960's, 70's and 80's. For instance. NUFC and expectations have raised and changed completely since 1992, and not a single NUFC supporter would say otherwise [or maybe there is, there's always one, or two, or three.............] i think you're confusing expectation with ambition - 2 completely different things, no doubt both have risen since 92, but the unreasonably high expectations around this club has had a crippling effect, its that very expectation which led us to sack a lengendery manager in the game for finishing 5th. Which in hindsight was absurd. High ambition is a good thing, high expectation is a bad thing.

Totally agree. Top, top player and is actually under-rated by England & Premiership fans. He's more important to England than any other player. He's the only England player to consistently to a quality and looks as good for his club as he does England unlike every single other England player. Absolutely, he's massively underated, i'd honestly put him in my world 11. The best english defender in 60 years if you ask me, if only his attitude and desire showed on the itch as well as off it he'd be a collosuss in the game. He could easily have been england captain. Terry who?

I like thetournament idea but i think we'd be setting ourselves up for a hiding season after season, personally the acamdemy is by faw and away the best idea, saving a seat for him is a little bit too sad for my liking, i'd rather we had something positve and not too overstated, SBR is a legend in the game, but not quite a legend for newcastel, sad to say but its true. The academy would summarise everything he stood for, bringing in talented youth into the game, it would be related to the club he loved and wont be ridiculed for being too grand a gesture. I'm sure its all been said before but this is the idea that makes most sense to me!!!

Sean Wright Phillips ? For example. Why not? Although i dont think Allardyce would have him, too inflexible, not really adept at playing different positions. On the flip side though, you'd be paying an extortiate price for him, i personally dont think that right wing is the essential position to fill, but is very high up on the list, i'd honestly like to see a DM, then a right winger. Then the "final" piece to the jigsaw, an AM.

Bytheway, where has Mort actually said that we wont be signing any players this jan? I've heard him say he's not looking to sign replacement players for the ANC, and ive also heard that he's looking to sign younger players for the future, i also heard him say that as of yet SA hasnt "pitched" anything to him. I'm struggling to see any definitive negatives from that article. In fact it makes complete sense to me, and people with a bit of intelligence will see the same thing. The january transfer period is such a silly idea, it automatically adds a premium to players prices because it is slap bang in the middle of the season, i think that Mort realises this and has come out and openely said he's not looking to try and sign more defender because (and rightly so) he believes the ones we have at our disposal are more than adequate to do an excellent job. There can be no arguments there, all have shown glimpses of being excellent players. He's also come out and said that he doesnt intend to replace the players he's losing to the ANC, which i agree with as well. If that position is adequately filled then just because you are going to lose the player for a few weeks it doesnt make business sense to try and fill that position at premium prices. I have absolutely no doubt in my mind that if a player is required because the position he plays is a weakness for the side, then Mort will release funds for the transfer.

Rose tinted glassestastic. I remeber numerous times Shearer screaming at him as yet another ball was retrieved from row zz. Hardly surprising, when would shearer ever of been happy if the oppurtunity for him to get some glory was 'wasted'. Its not like you could even say that a Robert effort was a wasted oppurtunity, you always knew that there was a decent chance of something happening. Probably the same odds of something happening if he just plopped a free kick into the box. Knowone argued when Roberto Carlso lined up from 40 yards out, he's been milking that one freekick he's scored in 98 for years, the same cant be said for Robert because he was definitely capable.

No. wouldnt have him here although i would like to see any improvment on our DM situation, i happen to think that DM is actually the key position to fill with the type of football we're aiming to play. People seem to think (and i was one of them) that what we need mainly is an AM who's gonna create things, and therefore make a lot of chances, but having looked at the team play i dont think that this will be effective. The reason fo this is that i dont think our wingers get into very penetrtive positions, rarely do you see Milner or Zog trying to get behind the full back, an attacking midfielder is gonna need these types of options in order to be effective. However, i do believe that one of our weaknesses and it shows in a lot of performancs, is the protection of the defense, which at times is non existent, i find that when Butt has a good game, we play reasonably well and when he has a stinker, so do we. I think that thas more than coincedence. We often sit back as a team, and if the protection isnt good enough, then teams invariably find there way through, which is why finding a player who breaks up there attacks is imperative.

To be honest i completely agree with the policy, and the reason you gave of reserving funds is spot on. I dont think its too wrong to believe that 90%of the managers out there think that the January transfer window is a terrible idea, and quite frankly i think it is as well. It's already a foregone conclusion that you will be buying average plyers at inflated prices, its a complete waste of money. Imagine buying 3 players worth £5m in the summer, how much do you think they'd go for in Januaray? Off the top of my head it wouldnt be unrealistic to say that each of them would get another £2m added to there tag. Cumulatively thats an extra £6m we're paying. I mean obviuosly its all assumption but i dont think its too innaccurate. Too right they're protecting there funds. The only use really would be to try and snap up the cheaper younger players who have potential but wont be able to demand an inflated transfer fee because of there lack of impact on the selling team. Giving them more time to develop at there club in the latter stages of there season may increase the price tag, plus whilst most clubs are universally looking to strengthen there squad, we're snapping up the youngster who are getting snapped up in the summer by bigger clubs.

I like the idea of having a the youth building being named after him, its not too understated as its integral to the club, but is also not too overstated such as having a stand named after him, to be fair, his name is actually more syonmonous with Ipswich than it is with nufc, and respectively speaking he cant be remembered in the same vain as Milburn because his achievements for the club cant be compared with Milburn.

Am i reading right? Signing a loads of top class players is a bad idea? Parky was intimating that if we could sign a top class player in January we should. We arent going to have 8 top class players all wanting to sign for us. We might catch the odd one if the market is in our favour. Ruling out bringing in a player like Arshavin during January isnt good business if someone else signs him. We're struggling to stay in touch with the top 8. The defence needs to settle down, i think we have a good set of players back there and it will take a bit of time. An attacking player of high quality can make a pretty quick impact. Elano for example. Yeh, you're reading it right, if you read my first post i say that i dont think that Mort is ruling out signing players which are needed, but is trying to restrict the idea of signing players to replace the ones we're gonna lose in Jan. I think that its excellent that he's being pro-active rather than reactive. Also im sayin that its not a great idea trying to sign lots of players in January, not only would we be paying premium (do we as nufc fans never learn) on avergae players but also its at the key point of the season when we get to the business end of the season, the last thing we need as a club is to have to try and intergrate foriegn stars into a new league and a new culture, its notoriously difficult to try and intergrate new players into your club, something that a lot of clubs struggle with (including ourselves) and generally effects there performances as a team. Parky said that we should sign as many top quality players as soon as possible, ie the Jan transfer period whic i disagreed with. Does any think that Elano would of had the same impact on City if he dint have the likes of Petrov, Geovanni, etc surrounding him and providing great support. I personally dont think he would of had the same impact at nufc with the likes of milner and Geremi either side of him.

Dont know if ya being ironic or not but thats not what id call a good idea, only the truly world class managers have that knack of being able to intergrate many new top class players in a short time. Signing loads of players would be a terrible idea, for a start it would colectively destroy the morale of the current team who are having potential replacements signed right in front of them. It needs to be done slowly, filling in the weaknesses of the 1st team, then the squad, once the first team and squad is amply filled, then you start trying to improve the overall quality of the squad. Singing 5-6 top quality players sounds like a good idea,but i would bet the last £23.37 of my overdraft that it would fail miserably, Tottenham and Man U a few years back are shining examples of this.

To be honest, i think it was a great article, the guy sounds like he has his feet firmly planted on the ground, its nice having stability right the wa through the club and if its steadying progerss that this club makes then i am more than happy. To be fair to him, he's not ruled out making any first team signings, he's just stated 2 things: (i) he doesnt intend trying the replace the first teamers he's losing in ANC as a sort of stop gap way of an immediate fix, which is a good thing, it doesnt make business sense to go and splash decent money on temporary replacements, i mean, would we be buying these players anyway even if the players werent leaving? The chances are that we wouldnt so whats the need now?? Makes complete sense to me. (ii)Our defence seems to need addressing but the answer isnt trying to find more players who could improve the defense, he seems to acknowlege that the defense has excellent personnel but its a matter of getting them to play better together which is the issue.

Thought about it a bit more and ive changed things around a bit, i want to say Zidane but the fact that he didnt really do anything of note before the age of 25 is working against him, in my opinion he's not THE greatest but extremely close. Romario is a player who been overlooked, has done it in all leagues he's played, and has been consistenlty brilliant to the present day, bit of a footballing genius. Ronaldo is another one who was a talent like no other, the definitive unplayable striker, brilliant at all the teams he's played for and has done well and adapted to every league well that he's played in, also aplayer who's done it at all levels. I think it really goes against a player when they apply there trade in only one league throughout they're careers, thats why i'm steering clear of the likes of Batistuta, and Del Piero and many others, while they are all excellent players there achievements can be matched (roughly) to those of say Andy Cole. if that makes sense. Bergkamp was excellent, as was Kluivert, Clarence Seedorf is an excellent playuer as well, very difficult to choose.

That was horrible to watch, the man is absolutely deserved of the label legend and more. The round of applause at the beginnning of the speech sounding like it could of gone on for years. An absolute hero of mine. Was so sad to see him go, anyone who says he should of gone, was and still is wrong in my opinion. I thought his era as manager of nufc was better than Keegans.

I'd have Robert, his productivity can be rivalled with that of Beckham, and in the end you want your wingers to create and score.