fredbob

load of steaming bollocks imho. Berbs wanted to add this clause when he was negiotiating a new contract and Levy straight away rejected it, so i fail to see why we'd agree one for Modric. because you want to defend Spurs on a Newcastle board? It's hardly like you are an impartial observer here on issues like this one. Not about defending spurs. It's logic.... Where's the logic? It's a completely unsubtantiated claim. Its clear Modric has been told where to go - I'm basing that on the fact that he wasnt here when we were negotiaing with the Mamic brothers then swiftly signed for Spurs. Add to the fact we offered more money to the Mamic brothers and more money to Modric and you still wouldn't be able to see that there were obviously something in the Spurs deal which made them turn a blind eye to immediate extra cash from us....i see the logic in what James said, seems perfectly viable to me. How is the fact that Modric has a sale-on and minimum fee clause a substantiated claim? By who? Source. Mort said we offered more money and more wages, and that was it. Modric himself has come out to say that he picked Spurs because of the manager and because they're in Europe. Why do you believe Mort and not Modric? You're just cherry-picking which quotes to believe in, but if you believe both Mort and and Modric, it still makes perfect sense that he signed for Spurs. And there doesn't need to be any sale-on or minimum fee clause to make him signing for Spurs any more comprehensible. Like i say - it's been pretty well known that Modric wasnt there when negotiaions were taking place seems a bit strange to me, im not looking to try and convinve myself that there were other reasons for not him choosing spurs over us, im well aware that they are in a much much better situation than us, but im saying i find it strange that the Mamic brothers would turn down more money from the transfer fee and more money for Modric if there wasnt something else in it for them, surely you arent telling me the agenst and owners were looking for a better deal career wise for modric, are you? Its all fair and well Modric coming out after the negotioantions had taken place saying he wanted to sign for Spurs becasue blah blah blah but im pretty confident tevez and Mashcereno said simlair things when they signed for West Ham. Then again i could be talking bollocks.

Always liked Inter but i cant take these recent achievements seriously - they've still done very little in Europe and to be honest i couldnt see them beng so dominant if the other teams hadnt been relgated, they;ve just had 3 of the easiest years in Serie A history.

load of steaming bollocks imho. Berbs wanted to add this clause when he was negiotiating a new contract and Levy straight away rejected it, so i fail to see why we'd agree one for Modric. because you want to defend Spurs on a Newcastle board? It's hardly like you are an impartial observer here on issues like this one. Not about defending spurs. It's logic.... Where's the logic? It's a completely unsubtantiated claim. Its clear Modric has been told where to go - I'm basing that on the fact that he wasnt here when we were negotiaing with the Mamic brothers then swiftly signed for Spurs. Add to the fact we offered more money to the Mamic brothers and more money to Modric and you still wouldn't be able to see that there were obviously something in the Spurs deal which made them turn a blind eye to immediate extra cash from us....i see the logic in what James said, seems perfectly viable to me. ....and also it's Croatia ffs!!! There would be less strings signing a player from Sicily. Probably made them an offer they couldnt refuse...

I think they are spending on the basis they'll be champions league side next year. Could go horribly wrong......... or right if you hate them like I do. I think Spurs are perfectly safe to be honest - they spend what they make, dbt free so they can balance out tranfsers against revenue pretty effectively, no interest on debts etc...they're also being backed by Joe Lewis of ENIC so they've got a benefactory owner as well.

load of steaming bollocks imho. Berbs wanted to add this clause when he was negiotiating a new contract and Levy straight away rejected it, so i fail to see why we'd agree one for Modric. because you want to defend Spurs on a Newcastle board? It's hardly like you are an impartial observer here on issues like this one. Not about defending spurs. It's logic.... Where's the logic? It's a completely unsubtantiated claim. Its clear Modric has been told where to go - I'm basing that on the fact that he wasnt here when we were negotiaing with the Mamic brothers then swiftly signed for Spurs. Add to the fact we offered more money to the Mamic brothers and more money to Modric and you still wouldn't be able to see that there were obviously something in the Spurs deal which made them turn a blind eye to immediate extra cash from us....i see the logic in what James said, seems perfectly viable to me.

Just dont see Arsenal putting £20m+ on the table to be honest, even though this would be the summer to do so. I personally think he'll be at Barca or Madrid.

err are you sure about that? oh dear. Yes I am aware that Souness complained about only having 50m quid. There's always one mackems.gif And we sold... Jenas £7 million Bellamy £4.5 million Hughes £1 million O'Brien £2 million Ambrose £1 million Bernard £400,000 Total £15.9 million Add to that the money for Woodgate that was never spent which takes our income on player sales to £28.9 million. So basically Shepherd gave out roughly just over £21 million spread out over 2 season. Lets say £11 million a season to keep it simple. Well done Fred, I hope this current board match that figure this Summer. .....also id like to add a bit about woodgate, NE5, you cant use the sgining of woodgate as a sign of the boards ambitions when a season later they sell him for the profit, its so contradictory its untrue.

err are you sure about that? oh dear. Yes I am aware that Souness complained about only having 50m quid. There's always one mackems.gif What about Keegan and SBR? omg Am i missing something or was it not the case that SBR wasnt backed for 2 summers which he wasnt happy about? Are you pissed?

Gejon. All bases covered then.

err are you sure about that? oh dear. Yes I am aware that Souness complained about only having 50m quid. There's always one mackems.gif What about Keegan and SBR?

err are you sure about that?

So Chez's got the Paris restaurant covered for our potential targets, who;s got the chippy on Clayton street?

They might be 100% bang on with us being there, they might even be bang on about us watching the player mentioned. Doesn't mean there's any more chance of us getting him. Not seen him play btw. Yeh agree with that, there are some big teams in for him, to be fair ive havent seen him play aside from youtube ( ) but ive heard big things about him, alot of people seem to rate him very highly and his goal scroing record seems to justify the hype. Just trying to take some solice out the fact that there actually might be some legs to this one, makes a change from the "name plucked out the air approach the media like to take".

Yes please, no chance. .com based the story on a "private source" that to me suggests that this might have some legs, they're usually pretty stringent with what they put on the front page especially regarding transfer rumours- i get the feeling that theres definitely something in this one. Then again i could be talking bollocks.

Reading a few pre-Euro 2008 write ups & one said Veloso lacked pace. Big Phil also said "Those players that are two or three kilos overweight with a fat arse and are worried about other things, like nightlife or the catwalk, could miss the bus … I'm watching games, I read interviews, I'm studying [the players] … that's a warning" that remark was aimed at Veloso. He did get picked in the squad though. Is that right? That probably makes him more attainable for us, i for one really like him, pace isnt everything for a DM i think he'd be a brilliant signing to be honest, exactly what we need.

Have we been linked with many defensive players? Veloso has been the only defnsive target that has really excited me. Not exactly been linked with many young defenders in the same vain as the attackers.

£27 million plus. Doubt very much we'll accept anything less. WUM. What the hell are you on about? Is this the route you take when you disagree with something, someone said? Do you honestly believe his value has almost trippled since he signed for Spurs? Come off it. Ermmm did i say that?? Never did i say Berbs' true value is £27 million but that dosnt necessarily mean another team wont pay that. No doubt our stingy owners will take any intereted parties to the cleaners.. Did i think Carricks value went up more than 6 times, after 2 productive seasons at spurs? No Did we get £18 million for him? HELLL YEH. Look at the market. Torres only cost £20m-£25m. Think about it... To be fair- after 1 productive season, how much do you think he'll be worth now? Fair point, but being a star at Liverpool and scoring Champions League goals isn't quite the same as being top dog at Spurs is it? Also, consider what the player (and his agent) want. Spurs aren't in any position to get anywhere near £27m. Time may prove me wrong but I'm quite confident it won't. Persoanlly i dont thik he's worth £27m either but i think they'll get it, he's gonna beneift from all the publicity and the fact that he's got alot of interest in him.

To be fair- they dont need anyone. Not like we need x,y and z... dont think carrick will go anywhere for a long time-i have a feeling that Hargreaves will make a move if Veloso comes.

£27 million plus. Doubt very much we'll accept anything less. WUM. What the hell are you on about? Is this the route you take when you disagree with something, someone said? Do you honestly believe his value has almost trippled since he signed for Spurs? Come off it. Ermmm did i say that?? Never did i say Berbs' true value is £27 million but that dosnt necessarily mean another team wont pay that. No doubt our stingy owners will take any intereted parties to the cleaners.. Did i think Carricks value went up more than 6 times, after 2 productive seasons at spurs? No Did we get £18 million for him? HELLL YEH. Look at the market. Torres only cost £20m-£25m. Think about it... To be fair- after 1 productive season, how much do you think he'll be worth now?

I thought this too but they seem to be heavily linked with him despite having 2 top class DM - i dont think Hargreaves has impressed Fergie that much has had a few problems with timekeeping if i rememeber correctly, fergie hates that, think he could be a wildcard signing for someone in the Prem this summer. Do man u really need anyone?

Veloso will go to Man U i think - suprised Liverpool arent in for him especially as Barry seems difficult to obtian.

ok - its already been posted. Sorry

There are no figures available for the 2007/8 season (which as far as the club is concerned doesn't end until the end of June). However, according to this link posted ealier: http://www.newcastlefcweb.co.uk/Latest-Newcastle-News/Newcastle_United_finances_laid_bare_.php "The club’s wage bill was £62.5m, up more than £10m from 2006, due to the signing of Damian Duff, Obafemi Martins, Joey Barton and David Rozenhal. That means 72% – nearly three-quarters – of the money earned by the Magpies is shelled out in wages. Experts say businesses should have a wage bill of no more than 50% of revenue. And the situation could have been even worse had the FA not paid £6.7m in compensation to United after the £17m striker Michel Owen was injured." In other words, if the club had not been receiving compensation from the FA, the wage bill for the 2006/7 season would have been 80%. Given the additions to the squad made by Allardyce, I have no doubt that the wage bill for the 2007/8 season will be even higher. The only question is whether revenues have risen faster. 80% does look realistic... So we need to be cutting approx. £20m off our wage bill per annum whilst being able to add players? Unenviable task, suggest to me (captain obvious) that the clubs best route would be to increase revenue as means of balancing it out.

Thing is with Zog is that no-one has seen him get a good proper run in his favoured position for about 2 years now - he either didnt play or has been used at LB this term. I think Zog has all the potential to be quality- he needs to work on his crossing alittle bit which can be inconsistent at times and his awareness - his future definitely depends on what Keegan decided to use because quite frankly i see no use for him in the 3 man midfield.

.....that and the fact that thier parents still have sex.