fredbob

How so? Because the club would have gone into administration if Ashley hadn't said he would keep financing the club it is that bad and even without spending money on transfers the club is still not making a profit, how much more do you want the financial state of the club to be pointed out? Yet people chirp up about how much better we would have been if Shepherd was still here showing ambition by borrowing more money to try and move us up the league, do these people have no grasp on reality? the accounts are from last year. i'd imagine without interest payments and the financing costs (£14m?) that we'll be making a day to day profit in 08-09 instead of a slight £2.2m loss. not that all our transfer funds should come from club profits, there's plenty of clubs making losses that still spend, most premiership clubs in actual fact. you have to spend to improve on the pitch, you have to invest money to get the greater turnover in the future. not investing will lead to stagnation at best and decline at worst. Didn't you claim that we should have made a £20 million profit last year that we should have had last Summer? Not being funny you haven't got a clue what the club should or shouldn't have. If any of the fat Fred bum boys want to tell me how we would be better off under him if he was still here then fire away, taking into account that Ashley has had to guarantee to finance us to stop us going into administration and having a -12 point deduction, the club making a loss before we even spend money in the transfer market and that we had already taken loans out against the stadium and the training ground. i looked at extra tv payments and reduced expenditure on debts. the first increased our income minus uefa cup money from 0607. the latter doesnt apply til this year as we were making interest and one off financial payments in the last accounts. it may have passed you by that im not a 'fat fred' bumboy. once again the deflection tactic comes into play. I didn't say you were, it was an open question to the people who think we would still have been better off if he was here, it's still open too if any of them want to try answering it. Like I said, you didn't know what the clubs financial situation was and like many others it's been an eye opener for you. Sunderland have a big debt in relation to their turnover, that they are still paying interest on, have made financial losses, yet spent over £70m net on transfers in the same time that Ashley has spent almost nothing. they took the policy of spending on transfers first to improve their on pitch results and reap the financial rewards that come as a consequence of that, and using the increased income to tackle debts later. some of our drop in revenue ie match day is directly caused by our lack of ambition. and had ashley backed keegan financially and in decisions i think we'd have a good chance of becoming a regular UEFA cup side again starting this or next season which would begin to improve our income. now the prospect of relegation this or next season seems much more likely and will probably cause a gradual decline in income. That was Leeds United's business plan under Peter Ridsdale. It's called punting the future of the club. Hopefully the Mackem's will go the same way as Leeds. I agree with Callimag that Ashley probably saved us from a similar fate because Fat Fred was following the Ridsdale model and we wouldn't have survived the current economic crisis. However, under Ashley's ownership I think we will suffer a long, slow, lingering slide into lower division mediocrity. Do you thinkour squad is one of the worst 3 squad in the league?

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.

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. I think our wingers would be twice as productive if we had Shearer up front, as it stands though we have zero aerial ability up front at all. roberts crosses would be half as effective in my opinion. i dont agree that we have zero aerial ability. we dont have anyone who can fight for long-balls up front as Shearer used to, but Owen can be lethal in the air, particular in how he times his runs to attack the ball, usually at the near post. One problem he has is not being able to keep up with the pace of the play at times and snatching at chances instead of coolly finishing them off. Martins too, while he doesnt have the same movement in the box, is also decent in the air, but mainly from set-pieces and mostly due to his extraordinary leap. My point is that Owen and Martins arent beating anyone in the air, if you at some of the goals that sheaers scores theres many where he's challenged a defender in the air, outleaped them or just been more physical etc. The same isnt true with Owen, he does score goals off his head but thats usually down to him having a free header which i suppose goes to his credit. With Shearer and Bellamy we had a very balnced forward line where the ball could be crossed from deep or from the byline, id say that alot of crosses would be wasted with Owen or Martins up front.

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. I think our wingers would be twice as productive if we had Shearer up front, as it stands though we have zero aerial ability up front at all. roberts crosses would be half as effective in my opinion.

What, 9 games without a win? People are deluded if they think we'd approach any sort of top 7 level under Keegan with this squad. When Souness came Robert still had some good performances but he was in decline as a player anyway, he had reached his 30s at that point. Not really, Keegan didnt get the team playing straight away, but when he did get the balance right it showed.

Not in his prime. Rewatch the games with him in. Which one of the players in our squad can strike the ball like him, either in play or from set pieces? Who can cross as good as him? He was pacier than any of our current squad other than Martins off the ball. Simple fact, we have a major lack of quality, people don't like to admit it. With a better manager obviously we'd be better but even with God as manager we wouldn't hit the top 6 with these players. What aobu tlast seasons run with Keegan - did it not show that a good manager could get good results with this squad?

Its entirely subjective and impossible to measure, it also helps Roberts stats when you have an all round world class striker like Shearer knocking them. Id also argue that the way SBR had us playing also dictated how many chances we created as a team. The only objective measure is to look at how they've performed and them as a player, remember Robert wasnt half as creative as he was once Souness came on board, and thats becasue of the way the team had played. Its telling thogh that you do compare this team with one we had 5 years ago. Thats the other measure of how much we've improved as a sqaud. Look at what keegan did last year to see the influence of a good manager with a good squad. The manager is the key. The quality of the ingredients isnt the most important thing, its the skill of the chef.

He's paid the debt off. as a loan As opposed to doing what? Genuine question. as opposed to 'putting his hand in his pocket to pay off the debt' something for which most on here praised him. for over a year. probably repeated a thousand times over. people thought that, dont try and reinvent the past to make it look like everyone thought it was a loan from the start. im not criticising Ashley for it but at the same time im not going to praise him as, thus far, we've not had the knock-on effect of the money freed up being used to make us better. So how would you account for it in the accounts? Putting his hand in his pocket is exactly what he has done. He's taken £100m from his bank & cleared the clubs debt with the loan holders. okay, maybe we should call it 'putting his hand in his pocket on the condition that he gets back at least the amount he took out of his pocket.' people on here seemed to think of it as a donation, not what it actually is. anyway, afk, donating to Oxfam on the condition that they give me all my money back in 4 years. You really don't get it, do you!?! If he "gives" the club the money, the value of the club goes up by that amount. If he "loans" the club the money, the value of the club stays the same and so does the debt. It equates to the same thing. If he sells the club he gets money for it, be that through an increased sale price or through repayment of debt, or are you hoping he'll give it away? The club was about £100m in debt when Ashley bought it, and it was still about £100m in debt at the end of the last full tax year. Hardly reason to ignore the state of the club is in two years after Ashley took over. So in your eyes theres absolutely no difference to the club having debt owed to 3rd parties like banks etc and owing it to Ashley? On top on the interest payments (approx £7m p/a) what do yout think would happen to this club if the bank decided to call in the debts?

NE5, do you think the players we've brought in we're better replacemnts than the ones we've allowed to leave?

Spot on! All we need is a good manager to pull this all together, its the thing im worried most about becasue i dont think Ashley et al have the brains to go for the best man they can get.

losers attitude, and back to the days of being 2nd raters. It's an attitude of someone accepting the current financial position at the club, something which you don't as you've avoided the thread about the clubs latest set of accounts like the plague. like I said, wait until you've had a dose of 2nd division football and sub 30,000 crowds for a few years and see what that does for the finances, unless you stupidly think all the successful clubs also have bulging bank acconts. Get another owner like your man Ashley to succeed him [easily possible, or worse] and the european qualifications, capacity stadiums, England players will be a golden era to you and others. You certainly won't bother yourself travelling to games when Bristol City are on a par with Newcastle. Then again, you won't admit your DOF bollocks has been proved to be exactly that ie propelling us the way of Leeds. Are you saying this is the first year we've ever faced a relegation battle? I've seen the club relegated twice, and saw what it took and how it happened. Have you ? That wasnt my question, my question is "Are you saying this is the first year we've ever faced a relegation battle?" What did you attribute all the relegation battles in the past down to?

losers attitude, and back to the days of being 2nd raters. It's an attitude of someone accepting the current financial position at the club, something which you don't as you've avoided the thread about the clubs latest set of accounts like the plague. like I said, wait until you've had a dose of 2nd division football and sub 30,000 crowds for a few years and see what that does for the finances, unless you stupidly think all the successful clubs also have bulging bank acconts. Get another owner like your man Ashley to succeed him [easily possible, or worse] and the european qualifications, capacity stadiums, England players will be a golden era to you and others. You certainly won't bother yourself travelling to games when Bristol City are on a par with Newcastle. Then again, you won't admit your DOF bollocks has been proved to be exactly that ie propelling us the way of Leeds. Are you saying this is the first year we've ever faced a relegation battle?

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. Bit of a myth really, they've both bought unknowns on a failry regular rate, only difference is that they've also had the financial benefits of consistent CL to supplemnt there purchases. What are we financially benefitting from having been out the CL for 6 years and spent incoming money before its arrived at the club?

losers attitude, and back to the days of being 2nd raters. It's an attitude of someone accepting the current financial position at the club, something which you don't as you've avoided the thread about the clubs latest set of accounts like the plague. Delicious.

course they would Someone better than what we've got. Why? Why the hell would they come here when we're knee-deep in this shite? Maybe on a loan, aye - but who the fuck is going to commit themselves to a long-term contract who is - like i say, an improvement on what we have? People really need to lessen their expectations of this window or there's going to be some burst blood vessels on the morning of Feb 2nd. MBia didnt seem to rule it out. Players will come irrespective of the manager and situaiton, players are meceranies, the way they see it is they get a good wage here and that will always be there base wage no matter who they're sold to, if we go down they get sold. The agents will always be having a sly word in there ears as well. good players will come, the problem is whether we're in a position to buy them, I'd imagine we're running the rule over a number of players who spurs are as well, and with spurs in the frame no club will be willing to sell so early when 10 days down the line they could get an extra £3m. Id be confused if there was a lot fo transfer acitivty going on so early in the window.

He's paid the debt off. as a loan As opposed to doing what? Genuine question. as opposed to 'putting his hand in his pocket to pay off the debt' something for which most on here praised him. for over a year. probably repeated a thousand times over. people thought that, dont try and reinvent the past to make it look like everyone thought it was a loan from the start. im not criticising Ashley for it but at the same time im not going to praise him as, thus far, we've not had the knock-on effect of the money freed up being used to make us better. Hold on, you think Ashley shouldnt gain credit for the debt repayment becasue it wasnt philantrathropic? It was argued many times over that the money would be added to the price of the club, by peiple who didnt want to credit Ashley. no, i dont think ashley needs to be praised in the way he was by some on here who believed he was some sort of saviour for doing that. Where would we be without his financial input?

He's paid the debt off. as a loan As opposed to doing what? Genuine question. as opposed to 'putting his hand in his pocket to pay off the debt' something for which most on here praised him. for over a year. probably repeated a thousand times over. people thought that, dont try and reinvent the past to make it look like everyone thought it was a loan from the start. im not criticising Ashley for it but at the same time im not going to praise him as, thus far, we've not had the knock-on effect of the money freed up being used to make us better. Hold on, you think Ashley shouldnt gain credit for the debt repayment becasue it wasnt philantrathropic? It was argued many times over that the money would be added to the price of the club, by peiple who didnt want to credit Ashley.

More so than 24 hours ago. My only major concern now is that Kinnear is too close to this club, other than that im reasonable satisfied that the club is in safe hands.

And I maintain that no, the squad has not improved, since the personnel isn't as balanced as it was, and since players reaching the end of their careers are getting older. We have replaced players without considering whether they would fit in. Jonas is an impressive player, but he creates nothing (he's got 3 assists, as many as Shola, James Milner has 5). Guthrie is fine if you consider he's young and cost very little, but he's also mediocre and creates nothing, and tends to go missing. Our midfield is worse than it was last year, and so are our strikers, since Viduka is no longer able to contribute anything. Admittiedly the squad problems arent fully addressed, i havent claimed otherwise, although many had pointed out that this squad was cpaable offininishing top 8. My point is that only 11 players can win a game of football, and if you look at this years first choice 11, and compare it with any of its predeccessors of the last 4 years, then you can see that the squad has improved dramatically. Im not sure id agree with you saying our midfield is worse this year than last, Emre barely played last year and he is the only noticable absent from last years midfield. Our strongest run was with Barton, Butt and Geremi in the centre of midifeld. For what its worth, I personally rate Guthrie, so did Keegan. Id prefer having the cinsistenetly available Guthrie to the injury prone Emre.

Do you not want to improve at better rate than your rivals? Is it really improved at all? Our defensive record is worse. Midfield is weaker, as Butt and Geremi are getting older and Guthrie isn't nearly as good as Emre. Attack is weaker as there's nothing to take advantage of whatever Jonas gives the team, and he rarely produces assists and never scores himself. The first choice defenders are better, but an injury to just one of them is disastrous as there's no backup. Yes it has, we might not be playing better but the personnel definitely has improved. Thats why i maintain that all we need is a good manager to pull it together.

Is it me or did he miss that trick long ago. I cant speak for everyone else but if he had come in, then as soon as he saw the state of the clubs finances, opened up to the fans, explained the shitehole we were dug into, and told us to prepare for some tough years ahead, I would have understood and he might also have actually pulled everyone together instead of letting it all spiral out of control. I appreciate there is probably a huge amount of naivity in therein that a huge business doesnt just tell the listening world that they are in trouble He kinda did, to be fair. No-one believed him. Yep. The "about to fold like a house of cards" quote from Mort was ridiculed no end. We were told on numerous occasions how bad things were.

The quiet before the storm...

Do you not want to improve at better rate than your rivals? Id love that to be the case, but as the account sheet shows its not an overly realisitc requirement at this point of time. Unless you suggest we go for a Shepherd style gamble. Supposing we keep the core of this squad together, minus Given and Owen then big improvemtns arent far away, my main concern now is the manager who can bring it toghether. Thats my main concern. Id be far more concerned if there didnt appear to be any plan and we were signing any old codger, but as far as i can see the scouting appears to be top notch and we've not compromised on quality for the price. Something im willing to credit them for.

I don't want to derail this thread but if you're suggesting the squad we have now is good enough, both in terms of numbers and quality, I completely disagree. Our league position reflects that. We spent naff all and it shows. That being a necessity doesn't make it any less a fact. Squads fine. Problem is bad decisions at the highest level have left us with Kinnear and not KK, which having seen the finances, must be considered the main beef with Ashley. One left back. One right back. Butt and Ameobi starting players both now and in the future. Fine my fucking arse. We're digressing though. So you're minimum requirement of the club was to have a complete squad by the end of he summer? Earlier in the season we were saying this squad was capable of a top8 fininsh. Whats changed? All i care about is that the squad is improved year on year - and it is, couple that with the financial mess which he appeas to be sorting out and that makes me a reasonable satisfied fan.

There is nothing in the tin; we're losing money. I think. This is what we'll do in this window too by the looks of things. The real question is: at what point will we be ABLE to spend more than nothing? We spent £5,000 pounds this summer and still improved the first team, why cant we carry on doing the same? Thats all any fan should ask as a minimum, until we do get ourselves into a position that Villa and Spurs found themselves in a few years ago.