fredbob

I think this is the only thread on the entire board where people can say how they feel aboutf Shepherd safe in the knowledge that it wont descend into the usually 70 page stunner.

I don't get that at all - Wise was spending money on Xisco on Gonzales when all Keegan wanted was a left back. We made a £3m net profit that window. Its a moot point trying to guess who Keegan wanted but if i was to guesd id say Dunne represented a good guess, compare him to Bassong and you see the importance of Wise and the system. Dunne would of been on high wages, would have cost a fee and was 28 with no sell on value. Bassong , is on lower wages, cost a smaller fee and is a lot younger with a potnetially larger sell on value. Its blantently obvious that Bassong makes more sense to the club. With the account sheet on hand, you can cleary see the importance of choosing Bassong over Dunne and credit has to go for Wise and co for finding him becasue im pretty confiddent that if Keegan had free reign we;d have Dunne here. Im not trying to smear Keegans name (although it does seem that way) all i doing is highlighting the importance of the policy. EDIT: just noticed you meant the team over keegan, its just that Wise is the one thats been villified by many on these boards so i assumed thats what you meant. What you say makes sense but my view is has an element of hindsight in Bassong's obvious promise versus Dunne's proven experience - I think its an argument you can have over individual players but I don't like the suggestion that it's an all one way or the other situation. Guthrie is normally described as a "Keegan signing" but shares attributes with which you describe Bassong. Yeh, very true. In fact i agree with everything you say but id also point out that maybe the reason Guthrie was signed was becasue he did fit in witht he policy tht the club were trying to implement, if Keegan was to make the majority of singing like Guthrie, in my opinion i think the club wouldof backed him. Its also telling that Keegan said many times that first and foremost he wanted players with premiership experince - maybe this would give a clue on Keegans buying policy becasue i see few examples which would fit in with the clubs policy as well. Guthrie being one example....

That's amazing. I didn't think Fulham would accept £5m and I certainly didn't think he'd actually go there. As you say, perhaps we've dodged a bullet. Bullard is a good player and would of improved us but at 30, costing £5m and on wages of £60k p/w Im not sure he'd represent value for money.

Major U turn and backtrack form the NUSC.

I don't get that at all - Wise was spending money on Xisco on Gonzales when all Keegan wanted was a left back. We made a £3m net profit that window. Its a moot point trying to guess who Keegan wanted but if i was to guesd id say Dunne represented a good guess, compare him to Bassong and you see the importance of Wise and the system. Dunne would of been on high wages, would have cost a fee and was 28 with no sell on value. Bassong , is on lower wages, cost a smaller fee and is a lot younger with a potnetially larger sell on value. Its blantently obvious that Bassong makes more sense to the club. With the account sheet on hand, you can cleary see the importance of choosing Bassong over Dunne and credit has to go for Wise and co for finding him becasue im pretty confiddent that if Keegan had free reign we;d have Dunne here. Im not trying to smear Keegans name (although it does seem that way) all i doing is highlighting the importance of the policy. EDIT: just noticed you meant the team over keegan, its just that Wise is the one thats been villified by many on these boards so i assumed thats what you meant.

I've made a few posts where I've said that his lack of ambition/speculation is much more of an issue for me than the Keegan thing - though I do think he got that badly wrong. I agree that improvement is a better measure than "money out" but then if so fundamental to the business why appoint a very inexperienced team? Whats so inexperienced about it? We had a top class negotiator who had many footballing contancts, and we had a scout whos scouted for the biggest club in the world we also had someone with footballing experince at the hishglest level sitting on the board. Just becasue Wise doesnt have the official DOF experiences, it doesnt make him unqualified, especially if his primary target is to look for good youth talent and the occasional first teamer. It makes more sense to work with peopleyou're familiar with than those who you;re not.

Link? Come on Dave, we all remember it. I remember him appointing Kevin Keegan and saying money was there 'if Kevin wanted' a player. Seems a bit at odds with the pretty straightforward explanation that we're skint as fuck. Theres still no suggestion that he wouldnt puthis and in his pocket when keegan was signed - hence the bid for AModric amongst others. We knew that finances were tight at the point that mort said "we were close to collapsing like a house of cards". I dont understand, though at which point did you think we were ever flushed after the owner having to put £100m into the club to keep us afloat? ~EDIT: For me personally, these accounts dont excuse Ashley from spending any money but they do go on to explain the absolute nessecitiy of the system and its importance to the club. I never thought we were 'flushed', but then I saw the owner come out several times and say he'd be looking to back his manager with significant funds to improve the first team. That didn't happen IMO. I seem to remember when Mort came out with that quote, most people were still fully behind Ashley. It's what's gone on since then which has turned many, hence my request for a link from Ozzie. I can't recollect 'no fucker' believing him, apart from NE5. Fair enough thats your opinion, my opinion is that the moeny WAS there to spend, i dont believe the Modric bid was a PR stunt and i dont think these accounts show that we are on a Bolton style budget, i think Ashley was happy to invest his own money, people were right to back Ashley at the time. In my opinion, these account emphatically show the importance of the system and the clubs transfer policy. There are 2 main issues which have surrounded the club : a) Ashley backing Wise over Keegan b) Not spending enough and therefore not having a complete squad. Well for me, the accounts emphatically vindicate the decision to back Wise over Keegan, they also go to show the reasons for b) but dont excuse the fact. Its the reaosn why im giving Ashley till Sept 1.

Link? Come on Dave, we all remember it. I remember him appointing Kevin Keegan and saying money was there 'if Kevin wanted' a player. Seems a bit at odds with the pretty straightforward explanation that we're skint as fuck. Theres still no suggestion that he wouldnt puthis and in his pocket when keegan was signed - hence the bid for AModric amongst others. We knew that finances were tight at the point that mort said "we were close to collapsing like a house of cards". I dont understand, though at which point did you think we were ever flushed after the owner having to put £100m into the club to keep us afloat? I didn't expect £100m budgets but I did expect a realisation that the only way to any success was through moderate speculation - a view I still take even in light of these figures. So the issue for the uproar is changning now - its now more about how much he's spent rather than backing Wise over Keegan? Like i say, i wouldnt care if we made a profit window by window providing we improved the squad.

Link? Come on Dave, we all remember it. I remember him appointing Kevin Keegan and saying money was there 'if Kevin wanted' a player. Seems a bit at odds with the pretty straightforward explanation that we're skint as fuck. Theres still no suggestion that he wouldnt puthis and in his pocket when keegan was signed - hence the bid for AModric amongst others. We knew that finances were tight at the point that mort said "we were close to collapsing like a house of cards". I dont understand, though at which point did you think we were ever flushed after the owner having to put £100m into the club to keep us afloat? ~EDIT: For me personally, these accounts dont excuse Ashley from spending any money but they do go on to explain the absolute nessecitiy of the system and its importance to the club.

If we're looking at any comparison made between SBR team and the current team, shouldnt it be this squad and SBR's squad in his second season? Wouldnt that be an infinitely fairer comparison? The only questionable variable between the comparisons would the the strength of the squad at the point of rebuiliding.

Says the man who's comparing this squad with one that got us into the CL and trying to draw out logical conclusions from the comparison, which as far as i can see is 2004 > 2009 team. Well done, have a banana. While we're at it Guthrie isnt as good as Rob Lee, we must therefore have no quality in the squad.

The big name thing was cringe worthy to be honest, I believe that the big name signing was Colocinni, i think the way Ashley "announced" it was a clue as to how he viewed the transfer. I also disagre with the "They would have arrived by now" bit. The way i see it is that we'll be scouting similar calibre of player to Spurs and with those in the frame not many clubs would be willing to sell so early, leave it a bit longer and they put themselves in a win win situaiton, either they keep the player and progress with the season or the buying clubs get desperate and pay over the odds. People go on about how its the clubs fault for not planning ahead when the exact same thing happens over and over again, but in actual fact its the fans "fault" for not relaising that in actual fact its the nature of the window, this is just how it goes.

I do agree with AS9's Robert comment tho, though probably a better comparison would be with Dyer in terms of what Jonas brings to the side. in that sense we're still to replace Robert's end product rather than his position. That is a good comparison actually, Jonas is like a slower version of Dyer who isn't a cunt and doesn't get injured, also works harder defensively. Whilst Jonas looks destructive when running, he flatters to deceive imo. Take his late run in the box vs WH; can you see Robert not converting in that position? He would have cracked it like a bullet. Jonas has the work ethic which people seem to desire so much, but you cannot replace technical ability. He will never score a goal like the many Robert smashed in. What I'm trying to say is technically, who do we have in the squad who competes with the likes of Robert/Solano? Nobody. well said. So overall you're saying this team isnt as good as the team that got us into the CL? Do you not think that how we play as a team directly affectshow many oppurtunities we create. With a more expansive gane (one we wont expect to see from Kinnear) I think Zog and Jonas could get a hell of a lot more assits than they are now. Id also suggest, again, that Shearer is the key to all this as well. Like ive said before, its not the quality of the ingredients that is the most important thing, its the skill of the chef. You're deluded if you think Jonas/Zog would contribute as many goals/assists as Solano/Robert in any team. Ive never understood why people find it hard to read and actually understand what people are saying. You;re comparing this side with one that got us into the CL? Its akin to comparing Martins with Shearer and saying Martins isnt therefore good enough becasue he doesnt stand up to those stats. How does you theory go when looking at our defence? For what its worth, if Jonas and Zog played for Man U, they might not get the same amount of assists as Robert and Solano but i can guartunee you that they;d get more assists than they would here over the same period. After re reading your opening post, Im not exactly sure what your point is?

I agree with most of the stuff you are saying I think people it is time to be United once again we have to back Ashley and his long term strategy. He bought back Keegan in a ways by thinking he would be great for us. HE WAS GREAT to some time but for what ever reason it didn't work out why are we so harsh on a person who spends 230 mil on us? It is really insane we think we are against Ashley but indirectly we are against Newcastle United. We have to stop this tit for tat know and move on. Time to be positive for Ashley Whatever anyone may think about Ashley there is no doubt that work has gone in securing young players for the future. But none of us will know if this strategy has worked for a while yet. And in the mean time you look at the state of our first team squad and the fact that we have a management structure that is shall we say "unappealing" to a proven manager and you simply think wtf (well I do). Arsenal have built from the bottom but they have always made sure that their first team squad is competitive. This area is being neglected and you really can't discount the potential for it all to go seriously wrong. Whats your professional view on the finances and how they were going and how do you view Ashleys method for addressing these issues? Was there any alternative for Ashley like loans etc?

I wasn't the one that originally brought up Ipswich, but a few that spring to mind are: - I'm surprised you forgot Dyer (probably better than every player you mentioned combined) - A £17m striker in Bent (he's not worth that, but apparently that's what big clubs do), - One Titus Bramble (ah how I miss those signings that said "ambition") - An international keeper in Richard Wright who won a Premier League winners medial IIRC. (Ok slightly different from us qualifying for Europe, but I'm sure he'll get over it) Good to see you didn't cherry pick too I never once mentioned being run like Ipswich. I merely suggested that we, or any team for that matter, will benefit from a good youth set up. What you do with them after that is a different argument. Your reasoning that because West Ham sell some of their youngsters, Ashley will get us relegated is, some might say, slightly warped. Surely even you can see your logic that because some teams with good youth set ups have struggled, therefore it must be a bad thing, is flawed. They also all had tea ladies as well. I can't even believe you're arguing about it. On second thoughts.... I did mention Dyer. I also deliberately missed out Bramble and Ambrose, because they were their "best" youngsters, who in the end arguably didn't prove good enough for us ala Ameobi, Chopra, Hughes etc. So. The only one is Bent, maybe. For Dyer, who we bought, being the bigger club, or rather we were at the time. Richard Wright v Steve Harper ? The bigger question being that it has been pointed out to you that these clubs who put the accent on finding the young players - as mentioned - have all sold them because they haven't "spunked money on bigger ready made players" to go with it, which is what the big clubs do, or do if they are actually big clubs. The ones that don't, lose their youngsters, as mentioned, just like Ipswich who have lost some to Newcastle, when they acted like a bigger club, but didn't when they didn't act like it as in the days when Bobby Robson was manager of Ipswich Town and showed very little interest in managing the much bigger club, his hometown club, Newcastle United. I just know you won't understand this, the same as the shitloads of people who also didn't understand it when it was pointed out that good owners choose to back managers, rather than choose to not back them . The difference now is beoming more clear to people, but not yet all it would seem. For people who cast envious glances at the likes of Ipswich town, its your prerogative, at least playing years in the 2nd division means they don't do embarrassing things, partly because it means they are out of sight and out of mind. Just like we used to be, and just like where we will end up again if the current regime stays as it is. so you would advocate just giving managers cash,racking up debt year on year hoping it works and not really caring about what happens if it doesn't.......have you noticed what clubs like west ham, portsmouth,everton and boro are now doing ? and to pre empt your call about we shouldn't be ranking ourselves alongside such clubs i'll say we should becuase the way the club has been ran we have as much available cash as these despite a higher turnover we also had much higher outgoings. THROWING THE BANKS MONEY AT A MANAGER YEAR ON YEAR IS NOT SUSTAINABLE. stand by to support a club making a profit in the championship then. Having said that, when gates are down to 30,000 and lower - like they were the last time the club acted like also rans - they didn't make money then either apart from when our best players wanted to leave for the big clubs. These supporters of Arsenal and Liverpool must be devastated supporting clubs that buy the best footballers. so you are advocating speneding the banks money year on year with no thought to what happens if/when the plan fails ? and doing this year on year do you think the time will come when the banks say "no, because we don't think you are in any position to pay it back" ? basically your plan is to just ignore any debt. I asked him a bit ago how he'd go about things and all i got was "back my manager". Which basically means he'd of put his personal money into the hands of another man to buy whomever they want ignoring debt, ignoring wage bill and not giving me any inclination as to where the next batch of dosh was coming from fornext seasons transfer budget. Apparently he;s sick and tired of telling us how simple this is... whats your recipe for getting back into europe then fredbob ? Even via the mediocrity and disgrace of needing the intertoto to qualify for it ? Do you still think we are heading in the right direction ie not wasting any money on better players according to the manager appointed by the club ? Yeh actually, i do think we're going in the right direction- in the long term. My only concern with whats happneing so far is that we have Kinnear in charge instead of a manager who could take us forwards, something which should of been done if the fans hadnt spit there dummies out. One of your famous quotes is "back your manager then balances the books later" well when is later? P.S Good answer. if you were one of one or two others, I'd keep that post Not that I hope it comes true, I hope he sells up asap to someone who will show more for the club. And believe it or not, we could still do worse, there are plenty of other tosspots out there who could buy the club. If he sells to one of those, those years of euroean qualifications, full stadiums, and top quality footballers under fat fred [and the Halls of course despite the notion some have that one person with less than 30% of shares ran the club single handed and told everybody else later what he was doing ] could be a distant fond memory indeed. I'm going to go here.......don't want to go down old familiar route, although I suspect some people enjoy it more than they admit You should keep it mate. The mere fact that you're avoiding the accounts thread like its got AIDs is enough for me. Good to see absoltuely no answers from you, as usual. "back your managers" its as simple as that!

Going down usually means having to sell, but we're in a situation now where we wouldnt have to sell so drasitcally ad at cut prices. Who knows? Much like Birmingham i dont think too many would leave and we'd bounce back soon enouhg.

The offer was take it or leave it. Then he should have left it. Ashley chose to take on this responsibility and has to live with the consequences of buying an institution and a buisness. And where would that of left the club? Isnt this the key issue here. If we have an uninterrupted summer of transfers who knows?

The offer was take it or leave it. I realise that but surely any buyer of a PLC business should have the right to complete due dillignece in its entirety? Just wondered if it was in the rules as im not an expert in this field.

They didn't do a full "Due Diligence" before buying the club as they didn't have the time because of deadlines set by Sir John Hall. They did go through the books before buying the club but other than looking at figures they had no time. Once the club was Ashley's Chris Mort came in and performed a strategic review, that's when the problems were found. The loans and overdraft were known about but what wasn’t known was the fact that the money that hadn’t came into the club from Northern Rock and Adidas had already been spent. Arent there any stock exchange rules to ensure that due dilligence is allowed to be completed?

Do you know much about the due dilligence process? Serious question becasue i remeber Mort also saying how it wasnt as simple as they'd first thought witht he 'incoming money' business - would due dilligence of revleaed this beforehand? To anyone out there?

I wasn't the one that originally brought up Ipswich, but a few that spring to mind are: - I'm surprised you forgot Dyer (probably better than every player you mentioned combined) - A £17m striker in Bent (he's not worth that, but apparently that's what big clubs do), - One Titus Bramble (ah how I miss those signings that said "ambition") - An international keeper in Richard Wright who won a Premier League winners medial IIRC. (Ok slightly different from us qualifying for Europe, but I'm sure he'll get over it) Good to see you didn't cherry pick too I never once mentioned being run like Ipswich. I merely suggested that we, or any team for that matter, will benefit from a good youth set up. What you do with them after that is a different argument. Your reasoning that because West Ham sell some of their youngsters, Ashley will get us relegated is, some might say, slightly warped. Surely even you can see your logic that because some teams with good youth set ups have struggled, therefore it must be a bad thing, is flawed. They also all had tea ladies as well. I can't even believe you're arguing about it. On second thoughts.... I did mention Dyer. I also deliberately missed out Bramble and Ambrose, because they were their "best" youngsters, who in the end arguably didn't prove good enough for us ala Ameobi, Chopra, Hughes etc. So. The only one is Bent, maybe. For Dyer, who we bought, being the bigger club, or rather we were at the time. Richard Wright v Steve Harper ? The bigger question being that it has been pointed out to you that these clubs who put the accent on finding the young players - as mentioned - have all sold them because they haven't "spunked money on bigger ready made players" to go with it, which is what the big clubs do, or do if they are actually big clubs. The ones that don't, lose their youngsters, as mentioned, just like Ipswich who have lost some to Newcastle, when they acted like a bigger club, but didn't when they didn't act like it as in the days when Bobby Robson was manager of Ipswich Town and showed very little interest in managing the much bigger club, his hometown club, Newcastle United. I just know you won't understand this, the same as the shitloads of people who also didn't understand it when it was pointed out that good owners choose to back managers, rather than choose to not back them . The difference now is beoming more clear to people, but not yet all it would seem. For people who cast envious glances at the likes of Ipswich town, its your prerogative, at least playing years in the 2nd division means they don't do embarrassing things, partly because it means they are out of sight and out of mind. Just like we used to be, and just like where we will end up again if the current regime stays as it is. so you would advocate just giving managers cash,racking up debt year on year hoping it works and not really caring about what happens if it doesn't.......have you noticed what clubs like west ham, portsmouth,everton and boro are now doing ? and to pre empt your call about we shouldn't be ranking ourselves alongside such clubs i'll say we should becuase the way the club has been ran we have as much available cash as these despite a higher turnover we also had much higher outgoings. THROWING THE BANKS MONEY AT A MANAGER YEAR ON YEAR IS NOT SUSTAINABLE. stand by to support a club making a profit in the championship then. Having said that, when gates are down to 30,000 and lower - like they were the last time the club acted like also rans - they didn't make money then either apart from when our best players wanted to leave for the big clubs. These supporters of Arsenal and Liverpool must be devastated supporting clubs that buy the best footballers. so you are advocating speneding the banks money year on year with no thought to what happens if/when the plan fails ? and doing this year on year do you think the time will come when the banks say "no, because we don't think you are in any position to pay it back" ? basically your plan is to just ignore any debt. I asked him a bit ago how he'd go about things and all i got was "back my manager". Which basically means he'd of put his personal money into the hands of another man to buy whomever they want ignoring debt, ignoring wage bill and not giving me any inclination as to where the next batch of dosh was coming from fornext seasons transfer budget. Apparently he;s sick and tired of telling us how simple this is... whats your recipe for getting back into europe then fredbob ? Even via the mediocrity and disgrace of needing the intertoto to qualify for it ? Do you still think we are heading in the right direction ie not wasting any money on better players according to the manager appointed by the club ? Yeh actually, i do think we're going in the right direction- in the long term. My only concern with whats happneing so far is that we have Kinnear in charge instead of a manager who could take us forwards, something which should of been done if the fans hadnt spit there dummies out. One of your famous quotes is "back your manager then balances the books later" well when is later? P.S Good answer.

perhaps you could input some relevant information into ANY thread anywhere, especially the one where I've asked you on numerous occasions what you think of appointing a manager who won 4 titles with 2 different clubs and 3 manager of the year awards, when you criticised the appointments. Would you like me to bump it for you rather than ruin this one ? What do you think of appointing a manager who won 3 titles 8 domestic cups with 4 different clubs?

No. But then I don't think Leeds was either. Its not just the squad, its a number of things like morale, the fans booing the team (or being silent), and the Manager (who is merely a reflection of the ownership ATM). Fair point.

I wasn't the one that originally brought up Ipswich, but a few that spring to mind are: - I'm surprised you forgot Dyer (probably better than every player you mentioned combined) - A £17m striker in Bent (he's not worth that, but apparently that's what big clubs do), - One Titus Bramble (ah how I miss those signings that said "ambition") - An international keeper in Richard Wright who won a Premier League winners medial IIRC. (Ok slightly different from us qualifying for Europe, but I'm sure he'll get over it) Good to see you didn't cherry pick too I never once mentioned being run like Ipswich. I merely suggested that we, or any team for that matter, will benefit from a good youth set up. What you do with them after that is a different argument. Your reasoning that because West Ham sell some of their youngsters, Ashley will get us relegated is, some might say, slightly warped. Surely even you can see your logic that because some teams with good youth set ups have struggled, therefore it must be a bad thing, is flawed. They also all had tea ladies as well. I can't even believe you're arguing about it. On second thoughts.... I did mention Dyer. I also deliberately missed out Bramble and Ambrose, because they were their "best" youngsters, who in the end arguably didn't prove good enough for us ala Ameobi, Chopra, Hughes etc. So. The only one is Bent, maybe. For Dyer, who we bought, being the bigger club, or rather we were at the time. Richard Wright v Steve Harper ? The bigger question being that it has been pointed out to you that these clubs who put the accent on finding the young players - as mentioned - have all sold them because they haven't "spunked money on bigger ready made players" to go with it, which is what the big clubs do, or do if they are actually big clubs. The ones that don't, lose their youngsters, as mentioned, just like Ipswich who have lost some to Newcastle, when they acted like a bigger club, but didn't when they didn't act like it as in the days when Bobby Robson was manager of Ipswich Town and showed very little interest in managing the much bigger club, his hometown club, Newcastle United. I just know you won't understand this, the same as the shitloads of people who also didn't understand it when it was pointed out that good owners choose to back managers, rather than choose to not back them . The difference now is beoming more clear to people, but not yet all it would seem. For people who cast envious glances at the likes of Ipswich town, its your prerogative, at least playing years in the 2nd division means they don't do embarrassing things, partly because it means they are out of sight and out of mind. Just like we used to be, and just like where we will end up again if the current regime stays as it is. so you would advocate just giving managers cash,racking up debt year on year hoping it works and not really caring about what happens if it doesn't.......have you noticed what clubs like west ham, portsmouth,everton and boro are now doing ? and to pre empt your call about we shouldn't be ranking ourselves alongside such clubs i'll say we should becuase the way the club has been ran we have as much available cash as these despite a higher turnover we also had much higher outgoings. THROWING THE BANKS MONEY AT A MANAGER YEAR ON YEAR IS NOT SUSTAINABLE. stand by to support a club making a profit in the championship then. Having said that, when gates are down to 30,000 and lower - like they were the last time the club acted like also rans - they didn't make money then either apart from when our best players wanted to leave for the big clubs. These supporters of Arsenal and Liverpool must be devastated supporting clubs that buy the best footballers. so you are advocating speneding the banks money year on year with no thought to what happens if/when the plan fails ? and doing this year on year do you think the time will come when the banks say "no, because we don't think you are in any position to pay it back" ? basically your plan is to just ignore any debt. I asked him a bit ago how he'd go about things and all i got was "back my manager". Which basically means he'd of put his personal money into the hands of another man to buy whomever they want ignoring debt, ignoring wage bill and not giving me any inclination as to where the next batch of dosh was coming from fornext seasons transfer budget. Apparently he;s sick and tired of telling us how simple this is...

Spot on, itd be a case of one step forward and 2 steps back if Jose signs. Still surpirsed at the lack of formal announcement about the offer.