fredbob

I think its very imporant for a player, not so much the glamour of the competition but the fact that you are effectively testing yourselves as a player against the "2nd tier of European football" of teams in Europe, its more games for the player as well and possilby more chance for cash and it a marked level of achievement in your relative league which shows that your are going somewhere. A team that isnt in Europe cant as effectively prove there ambitions as a club that is in Europe, the club without would have to rely on words and money to help prove there ambition and that maybe more of a gamble for a player who can choose a club which already has European football in the bag and would by naturally hope to progress as a club with European qualification in the bag.

Bit gutted to of missed out on him, thought he would of made a good signing and would of been a name that would of got other players looking our way. 2 things that concern me with the transfer, one was the rumoured money issue, if we've underpaid or not offered him decent terms thats seems a bit strange unless he was being extorinate because that is our main selling point. If we cant outpay our main rivals then we dont have much else to offer except for our 'potential' which im sure is the same with most the clubs above us. Also i dont like the fact that Keegan isnt part of the transfer negotiations, i know Jiminez is meant to be the bees knees regarding transfer negotiations but i cant help but think that a dosage of Keegan enthusiasm and passion would help the process a little, surely he knows his plans for the club better than Wise and Jiminez and can therefore sell it a little better. Nee bother, there are obviously plenty of fish in the sea, its good though that the club are dfinitely looking in the right direction!

Im gonna go 'all in' and say that that might be legit. I hate the Sun with a passion but i think this one is legit for some reason. They've not really left themselves much room for manouevre in case its not actually signed sealed and delivered. Would be gutted but there are other talents out there, remember we missed Zenden and got Robert instead.

Just reading through the thread and i cant help but get the feeling that people are arguing completely different things. Which player the Morts quotes were aimed at Whether the old board did actually make statment signings Whether Owen was a statement buy Whether Owens signing was a good one in hindsight What are people debating?

I thinks that's the plan, to sell him before the EURO. Price can't be much bigger than what's being speculated atm. Wouldnt it be in the clubs best interest to sell him after the EUROs so that more clubs get to see him in action and get into a bidding war? I cant see the sense in wanting to sell one of the best youngsters around before a major tournament. They won't get much more than what we're offering before or after the tournament tbh. So wheres the sense in not giving him that oppurtunity to raise his value in a major tournament if the chances they wouldnt lose either way a la Royston Drenthe.

I thinks that's the plan, to sell him before the EURO. Price can't be much bigger than what's being speculated atm. Wouldnt it be in the clubs best interest to sell him after the EUROs so that more clubs get to see him in action and get into a bidding war? I cant see the sense in wanting to sell one of the best youngsters around before a major tournament.

pretty shocked by al this, i hope its true. talk about a conservative first signing! quotes from the Dinamo spokesman as well, does that make this an official attempt then rather than sepculation?

"games played" vs "league starts" ??

no, you're wrong. I've answered them before and mick knows the reply, and there are still 2 open ones for him. You are the first to complain if I repeat things I've said before, well the answer is if he replied to the factual information I wouldn't have to. Don't want to have to say this again, or you'll complain again How much do you think we'll spend this summer? How much ambition do you think the board will show?

Im not being funny, but i genuinely dont think there are too many signings out there that would be wildly unrealisitc. I know we havent been doing as well as a club of club but i think like Tottenham we are in a real position of strength come the end of the season, there will be players who will turn there noses up at us, and there will be players who are being courted by clubs in better situations than us, but if you ask yourself if a player would sign for us if we were the only club in for him then id be inclined to say that there is a chance of signing that player irrespective of his reputation. Look at Man City, they were a nothing club before Frank took over, now they are in for the 2/3 times World player of the year, thatis a true measure of how much things can change, and i dont see why it should be any different for us, except maybe, just maybe we are in a slighlty stronger position than Man City because of our recent history being so much better.

aye, ie planning, which he didn't do, apparently Are you for real?? The new board are lambasted for not signing players from "poxy clubs like Blackburn" but the old board arent lambasted for not being able to sell nufc to managers from 'poxy clubs likes Bolton" Also, what kind of a plan is it employ a manager you know you will sack? Thats a joke NE5, you know it. suppose thats a novel way of looking at it ! Well are you saying Shepherd was looking at Roeder for the long term? Are you saying he saw Roeder get us back into the CL?

aye, ie planning, which he didn't do, apparently Are you for real?? The new board are lambasted for not signing players from "poxy clubs like Blackburn" but the old board arent lambasted for not being able to sell nufc to managers from 'poxy clubs likes Bolton" Also, what kind of a plan is it employ a manager you know you will sack? Thats a joke NE5, you know it.

Was that before of after Souness was denied the significantly lower funds to purchase his number one striker Anelka... I don't want to get into this debate, but Owen was a trophy signing, to appease fans, to put bums on seats. No doubt Souness said aye to the idea of signing Owen, but the way I remember it he wanted Anelka first and we could have had him for £10m quid. The whole grande hotel business with Sky cameras poking out of the sky was all staged managed and need I say more about the official unveiling. Owen was also a panic signing, we'd started the season goaless as you said which only helped us come to the eventual fee we paid for him, way over the top. Some £6m more than what Anelka would have went for and double what Liverpool had offered for Owen. If Owen this proven goalscorer was a necessity, what was Anelka this proving goalscorer? Spin it all you like, there is no denying what kind of signing Owen was. All players are bought to put bums on seats. Souness said himself that he handed Shepherd a piece of paper with Owens name on it as the player he would most like to sign. I don't understand why people have a problem with signing a player of the calibre of Micheal Owen. Staggering. My problem with Owen's signing wasn't even about the whole fan appeasement thing, but about spending all that money on an injury prone player who didn't want to be here and the manner in which we went about it, i.e. doubling what Liverpool had offered for a player who last resort would only really sign for us on loan to preserve his England place, that was before Madrid laughed their arses off when we just hit them with £16m who they were quite prepared to let out on loan never mind selling. That and the fact we could have had Anelka for much cheaper, Souness' first choice who actually wanted to come. I remember myself and Wullie getting lots of stick for our views on the Owen signing, but like him I still stand by my comments he was a waste of money and while you could argue he was the right kind of player in terms of pedigree, name, quality etc., he was signed at the wrong time by the wrong set of people by the wrong kind of club, a club that needed to spend whatever money it had a hell of a lot more wisely, our subsequent debt levels showed that. Anyway, all under the bridge, he's playing well and if KK wants to keep him I back that decision all the way despite my personal feelings that we should still cut our losses. well, that wasn't what Souness said , unless he's a liar. Oh, wait a moment ............ Anelka was the one player Souness had tried to sign long before we showed any interest in Owen so he must have been pretty high up on his wishlist. And if Fenerbache are to be believed, the player's agent and Anelka himself, we'd been in touch and had offered what was considered a derisory offer by Fenerbache. I know Souness was angry about that because he said so live on TV in the buildup to our away match against Deportivo that sparked a huge thread on here debating whether FS was undermining his manager and just why, we weren't prepaired to meet their evaluation of a player the manager wanted which of course, become even more fishy when we then went and spent far more on Owen. I remember that, they spoke to Souness in the airport about it and he kept saying "You'd better ask the chairman" and that "I know the lads desperate to come here" Probably lying though, the chairmans never had a precedent of undermining his managers.

See my issue with the appointment of Roeder was that i couldnt see the point of it, the general consensus with that appointment that that he could possibly get us into the top half and stabilize us as a club. Why didnt we make an effort to get a manager who's had the ability to get us where we hoped to be in the end rather than a manager we knew who wouldnt get us where we wantedto be... It just didnt make sense in my head, it was an appointment which had a definite shelf life which meant we would need a new manager in the forseeable future again.

I simply don't think it's necassary. Enrique could very well be excellent if we just stick with him. The team's hardly going to drastically improve if we sign a better left-back. So what is Keegan going to do, is he looking for a player to compete/replace Enrique or is he going to be actively looking to someone with quality but is happy with the bench?

Sounds like a stupid question but would people care if we got a better albeit older LB which forced Enrique out the team?

Hence why i said "potential"? This is a speculation thread isnt it?

Who Ronaldihno? They havent agreed a transfer fee and Man City have 'confirmed' that they have had talks with his brother etc, nothing set in stone yet.

In light of the potential transfer of Ronaldihno to Man City, woud anyone go for Elano, he's seems to have goneoff the boil alittle but that could be down to being played out posiiton (in his words)?? I think it'd be worth a go, not exactly unrealistic either and a position we need to fill as well....

oh dear. 400m. I don;t know I'm not Chris Mort or Mike Ashley !!! What a question howay mate, keep it sensible It must be a good question because you refuse to answer it what don't you understand about "how am I supposed to know" You dont know how to give a good estimate of the clubs ambition? yes I do, but I haven't seen the right awareness from the chairman yet, quite the opposite in fact Whats that got to do with your estimate? In fact, if you dont think you've seen the "right awareness from the chairman", then your estimate must be pretty low....meaning you dont think the new boad will show much ambition? Yes? Is that right? I'll put my Captain Obvious hat on here and have a guess that you dont want to estimate because it will then contradict all your "foresight" and "superior knowledge" you have of the club having been a fan for over 100 years and witnessing some "real s*** boards". Thats pretty sad that you cant admit this. you are thompers without the death threats I am thompers without the death threat?? What are you on about? Got to say thats one of the best diversions ive seen from you in a while. I just dont understand why you dont answer the question, do you actually have something to lose from it?

With Ashley having put in so much money when maybe it wasnt SO neccessary in clearing the debts, i think its a safe be that he'll at least match the amount he put into debt management, transfer funding is an absolute priority in running a club and he'll know that. So i think he'll put in about £40m minimum.

oh dear. 400m. I don;t know I'm not Chris Mort or Mike Ashley !!! What a question howay mate, keep it sensible It must be a good question because you refuse to answer it what don't you understand about "how am I supposed to know" You dont know how to give a good estimate of the clubs ambition? yes I do, but I haven't seen the right awareness from the chairman yet, quite the opposite in fact Whats that got to do with your estimate? In fact, if you dont think you've seen the "right awareness from the chairman", then your estimate must be pretty low....meaning you dont think the new boad will show much ambition? Yes? Is that right? I'll put my Captain Obvious hat on here and have a guess that you dont want to estimate because it will then contradict all your "foresight" and "superior knowledge" you have of the club having been a fan for over 100 years and witnessing some "real shit boards". Thats pretty sad that you cant admit this.

oh dear. 400m. I don;t know I'm not Chris Mort or Mike Ashley !!! What a question howay mate, keep it sensible It must be a good question because you refuse to answer it what don't you understand about "how am I supposed to know" You dont know how to give a good estimate of the clubs ambition?

No place for him in a 4-3-3. And it looks like when we switch to 4-4-2 then Duff is the favoured option, possibly because Zog is proving to be a huffy bugger. Could we not scrap Geremi and bring in Zoggy? Geremi seems to me to be the weakest link in the mid. who's gonna get the assists then? Geremi had a few the last weeks.. Also with 3 in midfield its pretty imperative that things are kept simple and we DONT lose the ball. Zog hasnt got that in his game, he loses the ball alot.

Bingo. KK will get as much as he requires which will come in the shape of significant funds. As for Mort, he's the typical cautious chairman, but it's Ashley who has final say and I guarantee he will back his man with cash and lots of it. Be happy people, we're ganning places. It did strike me as ironic if not downright hypocritical to accuse the old board of doing things to appease the fans after pulling the biggest crowd pleasing stunt since we signed Shearer. To the outside world the appointment looked exactly like the managerial equivalent of signing a past-it big name player out for one last payday (they're wrong like). Good point, to be honest it struck me as a crowd pleaser as well, more in the sense that Keegan, Shearer or an absolute owrld class appointment would be the only appointment which would appease the fans.