fredbob

But he looked really good early on in the season. What changed apart from Allardyce screwing him over. He was a really assured defender then lost his composure after Alalrdyce dropped him and Taylor after they seemed to be forming a half decent partnership. Was never the same since. Bring him back in the summer, let him get re settled, then see if he is definitely done as a EPL player, if not then sell.

Disagree with that to be honest, he's not as dominating as Faye but he's a very intelligent players, would like to see him with Faye more, a partner who will always attack the first ball. Taylor has been gettin away with it for far too long, i remeber him playing well, but i dont rememebr him ever dominating a forward or has a consistent run of excellent games. Cacapa's not as dominating as a jellyfish nevermind an actual defender like Faye. I heard he's played as many games as Milner or something like that. I now know why Cacapa has so many defects, he's inexperienced. No one's has a consistent run of excellent games, how you expect our youngest defender to do so in this mess is beyond me. No you're possibly right about Cacapa being dominating, again, it can be argued that physically Cacapa iswnt suite the best to this league, but i think that his intelligence has lead to alot of encouraging perfomances earlier in this season, even when he had that horrible game against Portsmouth he came back and shook that monkey off his back, he's been unlucky with rotation, as has Roz who i still believ is a good defender. As for Taylor, there has been nothing to stop him from being consistent, nothing at all, he's had 120 games for this club and had plenty of practise defending and hasnt really come on that much. Can you tell me any difference from Taylor on debut and Taylor now, personally i cant. i think his main problem is that he doesnt know what ype of defender he is. Also, in my opinion Faye has been consistent in a poor side. If Taylor was a foriegner then he wouldnt get half the portection he doesn now, look at all the people writing off Cacapa and Roz after half a season only a handful of people defending them, yet there are a lot more who defend Taylor after 120 first team appearences. Dont get me wrong, with the right coaching and mentality, i think Taylor could have a good chance of being a good defender but as of yet he hasnt learnt from his experiences at all, and that frustrates a lot fo people. It frustrates me as well, but i cannot lie the blame solely at Taylor, its the clubs fault he's failing more than anyone. The s*** state its been in, the chopping and changing of managers, the poor players playing with him and around him, the constant struggle to survive since he's come through. Its like trying to learn at school but without any equipment, a teacher, any lesson structure or support from piers. If Taylor emerged elsewhere he'd be years ahead of what he is now it he'd played the same amount of games, tragically he's wasting what ever amount of ability that came through at 1st by being here. Saying that, he could have done more by himself, especially this season, but that's really what its about, doing it by yourself as no one else is going to show you. tragic for any youngster coming though this club, and we wonder why Taylor's the best we've produced this millennium, maybe beyond. 100% agree with that. It makes me laugh that people can be so critical of some of our players despite the players playing under some real shit managers. In my eyes the only period that we can truly criticise a player would of been the SBR era where players were in a good stable healthy environment and had the set up to thrive. it was only a few weeks ago when people were writing off Martins and Owen and now they are our key players. The resurrection of threads about these players who have performed of late have really outlined the u turns that some people make. To be fair i really want to see Taylor come good for us, but everytime that ball bounces over his head it makes me cringe so badly. At the mo its diffcult to say whether he could be the "wall" type defender like Faye or Terry, or the "sweeper" like Ferdinand or Carhvallo. I'd like to see him as the latter because physically he does have the attributes to suceed but on the flip side it is a position which requires a lot of concentration and good positional sense.....its a question of whther he has those and so far, for me anyway, there hasnt been anything in the past 120 games which has suggested that he is learining from his experineces which is key for his development.

Disagree with that to be honest, he's not as dominating as Faye but he's a very intelligent players, would like to see him with Faye more, a partner who will always attack the first ball. Taylor has been gettin away with it for far too long, i remeber him playing well, but i dont rememebr him ever dominating a forward or has a consistent run of excellent games. Cacapa's not as dominating as a jellyfish nevermind an actual defender like Faye. I heard he's played as many games as Milner or something like that. I now know why Cacapa has so many defects, he's inexperienced. No one's has a consistent run of excellent games, how you expect our youngest defender to do so in this mess is beyond me. No you're possibly right about Cacapa being dominating, again, it can be argued that physically Cacapa iswnt suite the best to this league, but i think that his intelligence has lead to alot of encouraging perfomances earlier in this season, even when he had that horrible game against Portsmouth he came back and shook that monkey off his back, he's been unlucky with rotation, as has Roz who i still believ is a good defender. As for Taylor, there has been nothing to stop him from being consistent, nothing at all, he's had 120 games for this club and had plenty of practise defending and hasnt really come on that much. Can you tell me any difference from Taylor on debut and Taylor now, personally i cant. i think his main problem is that he doesnt know what ype of defender he is. Also, in my opinion Faye has been consistent in a poor side. If Taylor was a foriegner then he wouldnt get half the portection he doesn now, look at all the people writing off Cacapa and Roz after half a season only a handful of people defending them, yet there are a lot more who defend Taylor after 120 first team appearences. Dont get me wrong, with the right coaching and mentality, i think Taylor could have a good chance of being a good defender but as of yet he hasnt learnt from his experiences at all, and that frustrates a lot fo people.

Disagree with that to be honest, he's not as dominating as Faye but he's a very intelligent players, would like to see him with Faye more, a partner who will always attack the first ball. Taylor has been gettin away with it for far too long, i remeber him playing well, but i dont rememebr him ever dominating a forward or has a consistent run of excellent games.

it's good that Capapa is injured? pathetic Edgar? Taylor? Ramage? don't make me f****** laugh man Taylor is better than Cacapa Edgar is young and could use a chance to prove himself Ramage is fuckin s*** and don't think he'll get a game.. Edgar is better than Cacapa? You're funny. TAYLOR is better than Cacapa. Dont make me laugh man. Cacapa > Taylor

This aint a big deal at all, nothing to do with the club and wouldnt affect his personal wealth at all. I think people are thinking that £129m has been removed from his bank account and therefore cant be spent which is rubbish. HBOS will near enough recover there share price.

I thought we had s*** crowds? Well, we didn't fill a smaller ground, through not qualifying for europe and selling our best players, if thats what you mean. Still bigger than a s*** little club like Blackburn though. I hope by your comments in this thread, you aren't advocating going back to the days when we didn't attempt to utliise the fanbase after all the years of building it up to higher levels. Never mind. Do you at least acknowledge that we are no longer the only club with real potential now? Aside from passion of the fans (call it volatile if you want) we have nothing different to offer that our main rivals cant offer as well? This has only really occured this past year as well so it wrong to assume we should be able to hand pick players from "smaller clubs" becase of our potential.

well, I don't really think football has changed too much. Blackburn may be able to offer him more money than they used to be able to do because of sky etc, but from an ambition point of view, fans, and the type of area and football club, the likes of Newcastle beat them all ends up every time. Others do too unfortunately. Its a real coup for Hughes if he can persuade him to stay, but if I were Bentley I wouldn't stay at Blackburn. I disagree. Bentley is not going to leave Blackburn to make a sideways move. What would be the point him leaving to join Newcastle, Everton, Villa, Man City? There's slightly more likelihood of him joining Spurs for the London lifestyle, but other than that, he's very unlikely to do anything other than bide his time and wait for a move to one of the big four (three in his case, discounting Arsenal for obvious reasons). Theres little incentive in moving from one also-ran to another when the ultimate ambition is to be at one of the big boys. As you said, Sky money has distorted the situation, and although waving a huge wad of cash at players still does work from time to time, it isn't anywhere near as persuasive as it used to be. Neither is the 'footballing city' thing. Players these days care about one thing - themselves, unfortunately. I don't consider moving from Blackburn to Newcastle to be a "sideways" move, in the grand scheme of things. Aston Villa maybe. In the longer term, Blackburn may be above Newcastle at the moment, but not too many people will think that situation will continue for very long. Or that being a Blackburn player is preferable to being a Newcastle player in the long term either. I think you've become a little detached from reality if you don't think a move from Blackburn to Newcastle is a sideways move. And as for the comment about "s**** little clubs like Blackburn", that'd be Blackburn who've won the league even in the miniscule timeframe of the average Sky football fan? I've got a lot of time for you in much of what you post, but that is condescending bullshit of the type which gives Newcastle fans a bad name. Wimbledon are bigger than Liverpool because they beat them in the 1988 Cup final ? Notts Forest are bigger than Barcelona because they won the European Cup in 1979 and 1980 ? Bollocks Don't make me laugh. Even the biggest diehard Blackburn fan [all 8,000 of them] would concede they aren't as big a club as clubs like Newcastle, and just to prove I'm not being deliberately patronising, Sunderland too. Who are also a bigger club than Aston Villa who can't even fill a 44000 stadium. I didnt say Blackburn were as big a club as Newcastle. I said it was a sideways move. That's a totally different thing. You're putting words in my mouth and countering an argument I didn't actually make. We can't fill a 44,000 stadium mainly because we don't have a 44,000 stadium, it is a 42,640 stadium and it was full yesterday. However, since you're resorting to pettiness, I've supported Villa since I was 6. 1973. Since then: 1 European Cup 1 League Championship 1 European Super Cup 4 League Cups. and I'm still prepared to admit Blackburn to Villa is a sideways move these days. Still, you've got your big crowds and your sneering at other clubs to clutch on to. Wake up and smell the coffee. I edited the post and made a further point. You missed where I have said that in football terms in the long run, Newcastle is a step up from Blackburn, not current league positions. Players want to play for big clubs. If you were a footballer, who would YOU play for, Newcastle or Blackburn ? It's up to Newcastle to capitalise on the fanbase, and its up to the club to go to players like him and show him that we want him to play for us and we are a progressive club with far more potential than his current club and we have the intention of making our advantages count as soon as possilble and we see him as being an important player to help us to do this. All valid points, but to David Bentley sat there in Blackburn, right now or at the end of this season they won't matter a jot to him. He's not going to give a toss about the potential of Newcastle, he's going to care about the potential of David Bentley. Again, there's such a chasm between the big four and the rest, that choosing amongst the rest is really just choosing amongst the also-rans. That was my point. That's why Blackburn to Newcastle - right now - can be considered a sideways move. And it is likely to stay that way for a while. Not massively controversial, I'm just a bit disappointed you went for the aggressive, patronising route rather than looking at what i was actually saying. Theres also the appeal of Bentley being a big fish in what can be arrogantly called a small pond. A move to any of the chasing pack will do nothing to enhance his reputation and star quality.

well, I don't really think football has changed too much. Blackburn may be able to offer him more money than they used to be able to do because of sky etc, but from an ambition point of view, fans, and the type of area and football club, the likes of Newcastle beat them all ends up every time. Others do too unfortunately. Its a real coup for Hughes if he can persuade him to stay, but if I were Bentley I wouldn't stay at Blackburn. I disagree. Bentley is not going to leave Blackburn to make a sideways move. What would be the point him leaving to join Newcastle, Everton, Villa, Man City? There's slightly more likelihood of him joining Spurs for the London lifestyle, but other than that, he's very unlikely to do anything other than bide his time and wait for a move to one of the big four (three in his case, discounting Arsenal for obvious reasons). Theres little incentive in moving from one also-ran to another when the ultimate ambition is to be at one of the big boys. As you said, Sky money has distorted the situation, and although waving a huge wad of cash at players still does work from time to time, it isn't anywhere near as persuasive as it used to be. Neither is the 'footballing city' thing. Players these days care about one thing - themselves, unfortunately. I don't consider moving from Blackburn to Newcastle to be a "sideways" move, in the grand scheme of things. Aston Villa maybe. In the longer term, Blackburn may be above Newcastle at the moment, but not too many people will think that situation will continue for very long. Or that being a Blackburn player is preferable to being a Newcastle player in the long term either. I think you've become a little detached from reality if you don't think a move from Blackburn to Newcastle is a sideways move. And as for the comment about "s**** little clubs like Blackburn", that'd be Blackburn who've won the league even in the miniscule timeframe of the average Sky football fan? I've got a lot of time for you in much of what you post, but that is condescending bullshit of the type which gives Newcastle fans a bad name. Wimbledon are bigger than Liverpool because they beat them in the 1988 Cup final ? Notts Forest are bigger than Barcelona because they won the European Cup in 1979 and 1980 ? Bollocks Don't make me laugh. Even the biggest diehard Blackburn fan [all 8,000 of them] would concede they aren't as big a club as clubs like Newcastle, and just to prove I'm not being deliberately patronising, Sunderland too. Who are also a bigger club than Aston Villa who can't even fill a 44000 stadium. I didnt say Blackburn were as big a club as Newcastle. I said it was a sideways move. That's a totally different thing. You're putting words in my mouth and countering an argument I didn't actually make. We can't fill a 44,000 stadium mainly because we don't have a 44,000 stadium, it is a 42,640 stadium and it was full yesterday. However, since you're resorting to pettiness, I've supported Villa since I was 6. 1973. Since then: 1 European Cup 1 League Championship 1 European Super Cup 4 League Cups. and I'm still prepared to admit Blackburn to Villa is a sideways move these days. Still, you've got your big crowds and your sneering at other clubs to clutch on to. Wake up and smell the coffee. I edited the post and made a further point. You missed where I have said that in football terms in the long run, Newcastle is a step up from Blackburn, not current league positions. Players want to play for big clubs. If you were a footballer, who would YOU play for, Newcastle or Blackburn ? It's up to Newcastle to capitalise on the fanbase, and its up to the club to go to players like him and show him that we want him to play for us and we are a progressive club with far more potential than his current club and we have the intention of making our advantages count as soon as possilble and we see him as being an important player to help us to do this. What makes you say this? The days when we were part of the top 4 are now gone. We are not only out of the top 4 but also in a chasing pack of 5-6 clubs who can offer us pretty much exactly the same as us financially but maybe not as much in terms of passion. Nowadays in the wag and bling culture of the modern day football, does passwion actually count for that much? EDIT: I may be missing something, but what difference does that extra 7-8k of people who turn up make to the appeal of this club as opposed to the clubs we are in direct competition with in regard to signing players?

Cant agree with that to be honest, as much as i hate Man U, Chelsea are a team i have no time for, the idea that they bought the title doesnt sit right with me and the way they screwed themselves and the premier league by getting rid of one of the best characters in the game really pisses me off. Also have plastic fans, and to be fair Man U play football the way it should be and have some amazing player, which i cant help but like watching.

Just turned 30 aint he? Also Chimbonda is 28(?) So he doesnt exactly offer anything exceptional longevity-wise. £8m on a alebit proven 28year old, who has a habit of being an arse isnt what id call a good bit of future planning. Rather that £8m go on a younger player. Chimbonda turned 29 in february, Beye will be 31 in October. I think 2x MC, left winger, forward and a right winger should be higher on our priority list than getting a new right-back. Although we won't have a back-up with Carr gone this summer I think there are 3/4 absolute vital signings to be made, persoanlly think a DM, RW, AM and a CB. A CF would also be nice but i wouldnt be as bothered if we didnt go for antoher forward as i would if ther other positions werent addressed,

Just turned 30 aint he? Also Chimbonda is 28(?) So he doesnt exactly offer anything exceptional longevity-wise. £8m on a alebit proven 28year old, who has a habit of being an arse isnt what id call a good bit of future planning. Rather that £8m go on a younger player.

I'd love Chimbonda here, he'd be a big improvement on Beye. I thought Willie Mckay was his agent though? Would rather not to be honest, good player no doubt but has got a shitty attitude, i really dont want to see anymore disruptive influences at the club. Beye is only a year older and isnt bad to be fair. Stick with him for the time being. Funny that because when we had all the disruptive influences in the team we were in the Champions League, a good manager can cope with that through man management. Chimbonda is a big step up on Beye too. Aye and that ended well didnt it. Like i said, id rather not have him on the basis that he'd be a disruptive influence. There are obviously other options and i happen to like Beye, and dont regard Chimbonda as a "big step up" although he is an improvement. In my opinion i can afford some indiscipline to special players such as Cantona or Robert but Chimbonda, no thanks.

I'd love Chimbonda here, he'd be a big improvement on Beye. I thought Willie Mckay was his agent though? Would rather not to be honest, good player no doubt but has got a shitty attitude, i really dont want to see anymore disruptive influences at the club. Beye is only a year older and isnt bad to be fair. Stick with him for the time being.

Think you answered your own question. Why would Shepherd want to stay with a sinking ship and even acquire the club outright if things were so bad?? Ive heard pretty convincing arguments on this board about the debt at the club being 'manageable' , if so why did Ashley feel the need to plunge that extra £30m?? And make Allardyce operate on a effectively a buy to sell policy. It seems if people say we had a buy to sell policy enough then some people will obviously believe it. It was nothing of the sort though. What makes you so sure? All im saying is that effectively, the way we did business this sumer was akin to a buy to sell policy. Im not saying it was the case, and thats what definitely happened, but with the OP article statting that Ashley wanted to spend more this past summer but couldnt because of the debt, thenwhy did he fell the need to plunge that £30m into the debt which wasnt compulsory rather than give it to Allardyce outright. Like i say, im not categorically saying it WAS a buy to sell policy, im not using it as a stick to shake at Ashley etc but the transfers kind of worked that way. Significantly Parker - Barton Dyer - Smith Not So.. Then you have the rest Geremi,Enrique Roz, Faye, Beye and Cacapa. Aside from Enrique the others arent exaclty prolific signings and even half of that £30m could of been put to better use. If players leave you replace them, the West Ham deal was set up while we were looking at other midfielders but Allardyce wouldn't let him leave until he had Barton's word that he would join us, that's making sure you're not left with a small squad rather than operating at a buy to sell policy, Dyer is slightly different in that Allardyce didn't want him to leave, he lethim leave in the end though and had to go out and replace him, again I don't see that as a buy to sell policy, to me a buy to sell policy would be us having to sell players to finance new one's coming in and considering we spent something like £9 million net then that doesn't seem like the case. As for Allardyce not having more money to spend, I don't remember him saying the money wasn't there, he always said that he went to the board with the players he wanted and it was taken from there, that includes getting turned down by Silvestre and Dragutinovic, in fact I remember him saying he was happy to go with what he had before Beye and Faye came in. On the plus side we should be thankfull he didn't spend anymore because most of the money he spent was pissed up against the wall. Well this is why i said it was akin to a buy to sell policy in the sense that it looked from the outset that the transfers we made were dependent on the outgoing trasfers. Ie Dyer and Parker. The article just seems a tad strange when it says he wanted to pour more into the transfer side of things but couldnt because of the debt, which to me suggests that he didnt quite appreciate the true nature of the football businness where unlinke most business debt is part and parcel of the business. Its either that conclusion or the whole article in the other thread is a PR exercise, which i hope it isnt.

Think you answered your own question. Why would Shepherd want to stay with a sinking ship and even acquire the club outright if things were so bad?? Ive heard pretty convincing arguments on this board about the debt at the club being 'manageable' , if so why did Ashley feel the need to plunge that extra £30m?? And make Allardyce operate on a effectively a buy to sell policy. It seems if people say we had a buy to sell policy enough then some people will obviously believe it. It was nothing of the sort though. What makes you so sure? All im saying is that effectively, the way we did business this sumer was akin to a buy to sell policy. Im not saying it was the case, and thats what definitely happened, but with the OP article statting that Ashley wanted to spend more this past summer but couldnt because of the debt, thenwhy did he fell the need to plunge that £30m into the debt which wasnt compulsory rather than give it to Allardyce outright. Like i say, im not categorically saying it WAS a buy to sell policy, im not using it as a stick to shake at Ashley etc but the transfers kind of worked that way. Significantly Parker - Barton Dyer - Smith Not So.. Then you have the rest Geremi,Enrique Roz, Faye, Beye and Cacapa. Aside from Enrique the others arent exaclty prolific signings and even half of that £30m could of been put to better use.

Do you know what a change of ownership clause is, by the way? Yes thanks. But the extra £30m was nothing to do with that clause according to the clubs accounts.

Think you answered your own question. Why would Shepherd want to stay with a sinking ship and even acquire the club outright if things were so bad?? Ive heard pretty convincing arguments on this board about the debt at the club being 'manageable' , if so why did Ashley feel the need to plunge that extra £30m?? And make Allardyce operate on a effectively a buy to sell policy. Ashley must be a bad businessman Or he didnt understand the financial structure of a football business and thought it was imperative to clear the debt of the club rahter than put the funding on the field where it in needed the most. More nonsense Great retort, really slammed the point down there. There is hardly a club in england that operates without debt. Yet there are many wealthy owners who would be able to pay off the debts like Ashley has and make the club more profitable but they dont. What im trying to say is if the £60m was compulsory, then why did he think that ensuring we were debt free in his first season was more imporant than putting that extra £30m onto the field, where argunably it was more important. Its just that, relatively speaking, £30m doesnt seem like a lot of debt to me for a club our size, whereas £30m is a hell of a lot of money regrading transfers. And in my mind letting Allradyce build the squad he wanted was more important than clearing that £30m. Its just a small point, im not going all NE5 on you.

Think you answered your own question. Why would Shepherd want to stay with a sinking ship and even acquire the club outright if things were so bad?? Ive heard pretty convincing arguments on this board about the debt at the club being 'manageable' , if so why did Ashley feel the need to plunge that extra £30m?? And make Allardyce operate on a effectively a buy to sell policy. It seems if people say we had a buy to sell policy enough then some people will obviously believe it.

Think you answered your own question. Why would Shepherd want to stay with a sinking ship and even acquire the club outright if things were so bad?? Ive heard pretty convincing arguments on this board about the debt at the club being 'manageable' , if so why did Ashley feel the need to plunge that extra £30m?? And make Allardyce operate on a effectively a buy to sell policy. Ashley must be a bad businessman Or he didnt understand the financial structure of a football business and thought it was imperative to clear the debt of the club rahter than put the funding on the field where it in needed the most.

Hard to say to be honest. Have to say no though, hes a very tidy player and very intelligent but i think he;d get found out by a top midfilder such as the likes of Masch or Carrick who defend aggressvivley in the whole. I think Martins would be a good candidate but again im not sure he would be very intelligent with the possession, well not as intelligent as Owen. That position is made for Emre, if you ask me, the only thing he wouldnt offer is a danger in the box. Think he'd be excellent with Owen and Matins running off him.

Think you answered your own question. Why would Shepherd want to stay with a sinking ship and even acquire the club outright if things were so bad?? Ive heard pretty convincing arguments on this board about the debt at the club being 'manageable' , if so why did Ashley feel the need to plunge that extra £30m?? And make Allardyce operate on a effectively a buy to sell policy.

Would of been interesting to know the amount of cash he'd of handed over to Allardyce had he not have to pay off all that debt. Seems a bit strange though that he paid off that extra £30m rather than plunge it into the transfer kitty having paid the compulsory £60m, Were our finances really that bad??

Agree with that, ive noticed that he's not very agile, also, i know he's well built but he seems a bit sluggish maybe not the fittest at the moment. Is that just me who's thought this? Defensively i think he's very good though.

Missed the game today. How did we play? Did we have enough in the tank to see of most teams in the league or was it a performance that sunk a very poor side?