manorpark

You are correct, I wasn't just alluding to the hometown club. At that point we all thought that we were going to if not win the league, KK was going to again have us up there and challenging for the title and cup and if Shearer didn't think we were he was going to Man U no if's no but's. Ok, I agree with the sentiment, yes we should be trying to sign the upper echelon of players but I also think we as supporters need to understand that the Rooneys, Lampards and Gerrards aren't obtainable to the club at this moment and therefore the signing of the Vidukas, Geremis and Rozehnals are what we should expect, welcome. That being said we should also hope that this is the minimum level of players we have in our whole squad, no Bernards, Damages or old bomb Carrs to make up the numbers. Just 'someone' would be good !!!! (I'm joking!) I do share the frustrations of many of us though, in this current "lull" in activity! Things will start moving very soon though, as the conclusion of the Review points Ashley in the obvious direction!

Babayaro? Carr? they have to go yes, but thats just because they are bad players, Dyer and McDermott are the remaining bad apples in the squad,club. Yeah, I know what you are saying - you feel that those you mention are part of the "corporate smell" of the old regime, that is nearly all gone now. I undertand that.

When you talk about players of "Shearer's calibre", you're talking about a bloke who was arguably in the top 3 strikers in the world at the time we signed him. I think there'll be a lot of wasted effort expended if we're trying to sign players of that calibre because they simply aren't coming to a club that's unlikely to win trophies and has no Europe/Champions League football to offer. It has to be a gradual process, as we have slipped such a lot in recent years. But, it is still only in "recent" years. We will find it so much more difficult to attract top quality than the current top clubs in our league (eg, Liverpool) do - at present, but we need to consistently establish our credibility, under Ashley. Thinking/acting big (without looking ridiculous) in a commonsense/credible/normal way - until we ARE big - is all part of this . . . we must do this! We need to get the balance right - no more of the obvious "one-off we can't afford any more" trophy-type signings. It has to be seen as part of a consistent programme of advancement - but within that we need to be seen as a (new style, for us) long-term thinking club, that will not accept second-best for long. We have to believe that this is Ashley's intention (unless we ever find out differently) - to be big and successful.

No one is suggesting that we aren't an attractive club to play for to a certain type/level of player. In my realistic/negative/call-it-what-you-like post, I just made the point that we have fallen away significantly from where we once were in terms of being able to attract bigger players. No one really thinks we're on the brink of winning things like they did under Keegan - they know there's the possibility, but that in all probability they aren't coming to Newcastle United to win trophies. And that's what the really top players look for in their choice of club. Yeah Newcastle isn't a bad city, we've got a decent forward-thinking manager, and there is the potential that a new owner might splash the cash. But don't Manchester City have that? Don't West Ham (ok, Alan Curbishley, maybe not)? Spurs? Villa? Yes, we are an attractive club to join (more attractive than 50%+ of the other premiership teams), but don't kid yourself that we are that far removed from some of the clubs above when you take into account the lure of London, etc. By the way, there's a good reason that it's easier to sound credible/realistic when being somewhat negative about Newcastle United. I don't think we are too far away from agreeing on this. I would just put the emphasis more positively (in some aspects a 'fair bit' more positively) that you do. For example "Newcastle isn't a bad city" (damming with faint praise" and very understated) . . . and . . . . "more attractive than 50% of other Premier League teams" (if I thought it was just as low a % as that, I would be seriously depressed!!).

Alan Shearer signed for us at the time, because everything about us said that we were about to 'take over', that we were indeed the next- big-thing, in a kind of "post Manchester United" era!! It was that strong. Shearer (simply) expected to win things here, he expected to dominate. Added to that (but not the reason he signed) was this most "amazing" factor for him - This club that he was joining, that were about-to-take-over the league, was actually his beloved home town club, the famous 'sleeping giant' for so many years - Newcastle United FC. That was fantastic, almost unbelievable for him. But that is NOT why he joined us. It is said (assumed) so many times that it WAS the reason he joined us - that it is accepted as 'true' by many. Particularly by the new/younger supporter, who was not old enough to know what was going on in 1996. That does not make it true. So you are agreeing with me? I certainly am, I agree with most of what you say, except: (1) The Shearer comment "sounded like" you were saying he joined us because we were his home-town club, though I think you weren't saying 'exactly' that (?). I still found it a useful opportunity to re-present the facts of the Shearer-signing issue, though! (2) When you say "we need to realise that we shouldn't be trying to attract players of Shearer's calibre", I disagree. That is exactly the sort of player we need to keep on trying to sign. We should also sign a lot of the Rozehnal / Geremi / Viduka level of player (DEFENDERS, ideally) to build up a reasonably sized good-quality squad. As we become 'more and more' attractive to 'more and more' players, our success rate in actually getting them, will rise - but we have to TRY, now, at this stage still.

Babayaro? Carr?

His health does sound bad, doesn't it. I share the strength of feeling of dislike (a stronger word could be used) for him, with many on here. But I have to say that I hope he does not die soon. He does not deserve that. I know you are not actually saying that you hope he dies soon, but to read it written in such a matter-of-fact way does not seem right to me. I hope he lives to see us perform far better as a company, club and team, than we ever did under him, and that he sees us win many trophies over the coming years and decades.

Alan Shearer signed for us at the time, because everything about us said that we were about to 'take over', that we were indeed the next- big-thing, in a kind of "post Manchester United" era!! It was that strong. Shearer (simply) expected to win things here, he expected to dominate. Added to that (but not the reason he signed) was this most "amazing" factor for him - This club that he was joining, that were about-to-take-over the league, was actually his beloved home town club, the famous 'sleeping giant' for so many years - Newcastle United FC. That was fantastic, almost unbelievable for him. But that is NOT why he joined us. It is said (assumed) so many times that it WAS the reason he joined us - that it is accepted as 'true' by many. Particularly by the new/younger supporter, who was not old enough to know what was going on in 1996. That does not make it true.

Chris Mort is working his bollocks off for the club, that's good enough for me at this time. The club has been run unprofessionally for years, the sooner we start moving forwards the better but I'd prefer the club to move forwards while knowing where we stand and not on guess work. If the review is holding us up for now then so be it, that will not always be the case, I see today’s developments as another sign of progress and also a sign of confidence that those running the club feel they can start to make decisions without the help of anybody. Very true, as I have just said to Parky, the length of time Ashley (via Mort and his review) is taking to prepare and build up for whatever it is he intends to do, is very professional - in my view.

Isn't that the sort of thing you'd do BEFORE spending £140m? I would!! But . . . . I am not a Billionaire as a result of my methods! So he'll recklessly throw £140m away (and take on the debt), but wont spend ~£5m on a left back which anyone is could tell him we need until a complete review has taken place? This is the only credible (logical) argument you've come up with? Same as I said to Parky, really. Do you think Sam should buy a slice of bread and dripping this week, when he could hopefully (and he is aware of this) be in a position to buy a ton of fillet steak NEXT week? I think you've misunderstood what medium and long term mean. We're talking from one year to 18 months and then again 4 to 5 years. That is what the review is about making a long term structure. It has no bearing on getting in for £3m def this week. I appreciate what you are saying, but my judgement of Ashley (and his 'park my tanks on their front lawn' methods) is, that he likes to react quickly. So, his 'short term' strategy is being decided also. He will react/act very quickly (I personally feel) but only when he is in possession of the information to enable him to do so - accurately. It will be soon. I agree and we have to also bear in mind that he is learning on the job...However he is a fast and proactive learner. I'm actually fascinated to see what business novelties he'll bring to the football club environment. I can't wait. I know people are getting frustrated as we appear to be in a bit of a 'lull' at the moment. But, I think we are in for some very exciting times. The length of time Ashley is taking to prepare and build up for whatever it is he intends to do, is very professional - in my view.

Isn't that the sort of thing you'd do BEFORE spending £140m? I would!! But . . . . I am not a Billionaire as a result of my methods! So he'll recklessly throw £140m away (and take on the debt), but wont spend ~£5m on a left back which anyone is could tell him we need until a complete review has taken place? This is the only credible (logical) argument you've come up with? Same as I said to Parky, really. Do you think Sam should buy a slice of bread and dripping this week, when he could hopefully (and he is aware of this) be in a position to buy a ton of fillet steak NEXT week? I think you've misunderstood what medium and long term mean. We're talking from one year to 18 months and then again 4 to 5 years. That is what the review is about making a long term structure. It has no bearing on getting in for £3m def this week. I appreciate what you are saying, but my judgement of Ashley (and his 'park my tanks on their front lawn' methods) is, that he likes to react quickly. So, his 'short term' strategy is being decided also. He will react/act very quickly (I personally feel) but only when he is in possession of the information to enable him to do so - accurately. It will be soon.

Personally, I like bread and dripping FRIED!! I was brought up on that! Explains a lot!!

Isn't that the sort of thing you'd do BEFORE spending £140m? I would!! But . . . . I am not a Billionaire as a result of my methods! So he'll recklessly throw £140m away (and take on the debt), but wont spend ~£5m on a left back which anyone is could tell him we need until a complete review has taken place? This is the only credible (logical) argument you've come up with? Same as I said to Parky, really. Do you think Sam should buy a slice of bread and dripping this week, when he could hopefully (and he is aware of this) be in a position to buy a ton of fillet steak NEXT week?

There has to be a reason why we ("but not at the moment") are not buying the players we need (at his time) to fill the obvious gaps in the team. People can give many reasons for this, but the only one that I can see that is credible, is the one I mention. Why do you see this only credible (logical) reason, as a smokescreen? A smokescreen for WHAT? Ashley would have known the bottom line before he bought the club. He doesn't need to wait for people to count pencils and paper clips. Parky, I agree wholeheartedy with that. However, that is not what the (strategic) review will be about. That sort of thing is 'low level'. What Mort will be doing is high level stuff. His report to Ashley (in my personal opinion) will all be about "where the club is in the football world" / "where can it relistically be in the football world" / "what do we need to do to get there, and when can we get there" / AND ALL THE FINANCIAL DATA TO BACK IT UP. Takes time does that, examining data and information on football clubs (football businesses) from all around the UK and Europe (possibly the world). Speculation (on all of that sort of thing) takes TEN MINUTES (or less). You and I could do that! But, real research and evidence and data and provable analysis - takes a LOT longer. Oh, and there will be a 'procedural review' into paperclips type-of-thing, going on at the same time, no doubt!! We're on the same page right? blueyes.gif My point is that this review doesn't stop us at this point being aggressive in the market. The two things aren't intrinsically linked, people have picked up on it as there aren't too many other clues. I think they are very linked. A "Strategic Review" is to decide strategy. Strategy 1 - Dont invest! Strategy 2 - INVEST! Action will not (CAN not) happen, until it is concluded. Strategic reviews by their very nature are medium to long term profile and risk assesment instruments that lay a footprint of strategies. They have nothing to do with not buying or buying a couple of defenders. OK then, do you think Sam should buy a slice of bread and dripping this week, when he could hopefully (and he is aware of this) be in a position to buy a ton of fillet steak NEXT week?

Honestly, I do not think that is how it works.

Isn't that the sort of thing you'd do BEFORE spending £140m? I would!! But . . . . I am not a Billionaire as a result of my methods!

There has to be a reason why we ("but not at the moment") are not buying the players we need (at his time) to fill the obvious gaps in the team. People can give many reasons for this, but the only one that I can see that is credible, is the one I mention. Why do you see this only credible (logical) reason, as a smokescreen? A smokescreen for WHAT? Ashley would have known the bottom line before he bought the club. He doesn't need to wait for people to count pencils and paper clips. Parky, I agree wholeheartedy with that. However, that is not what the (strategic) review will be about. That sort of thing is 'low level'. What Mort will be doing is high level stuff. His report to Ashley (in my personal opinion) will all be about "where the club is in the football world" / "where can it realistically be in the football world" / "what do we need to do to get there, and when can we get there" / AND ALL THE FINANCIAL DATA TO BACK IT UP. This sort of thing determines investment types and levels. Takes time does that, examining data and information on football clubs (football businesses) from all around the UK and Europe (possibly the world). Speculation (on all of that sort of thing) takes TEN MINUTES (or less). You and I could do that! But, real research and evidence and data and provable analysis - takes a LOT longer. Oh, and there will be a 'procedural review' into paperclips type-of-thing, going on at the same time, no doubt!! wouldn't a "football" man be better at assessing this than a sports lawyer ? Mort is running / leading the review, he is not 'doing' it all. Who he is using (football man/men, or whoever) I do not know. But he will be using his (Ashley's) "people" - which are likely to include the mentioned . . .

There has to be a reason why we ("but not at the moment") are not buying the players we need (at his time) to fill the obvious gaps in the team. People can give many reasons for this, but the only one that I can see that is credible, is the one I mention. Why do you see this only credible (logical) reason, as a smokescreen? A smokescreen for WHAT? Ashley would have known the bottom line before he bought the club. He doesn't need to wait for people to count pencils and paper clips. Parky, I agree wholeheartedy with that. However, that is not what the (strategic) review will be about. That sort of thing is 'low level'. What Mort will be doing is high level stuff. His report to Ashley (in my personal opinion) will all be about "where the club is in the football world" / "where can it relistically be in the football world" / "what do we need to do to get there, and when can we get there" / AND ALL THE FINANCIAL DATA TO BACK IT UP. Takes time does that, examining data and information on football clubs (football businesses) from all around the UK and Europe (possibly the world). Speculation (on all of that sort of thing) takes TEN MINUTES (or less). You and I could do that! But, real research and evidence and data and provable analysis - takes a LOT longer. Oh, and there will be a 'procedural review' into paperclips type-of-thing, going on at the same time, no doubt!! We're on the same page right? blueyes.gif My point is that this review doesn't stop us at this point being aggressive in the market. The two things aren't intrinsically linked, people have picked up on it as there aren't too many other clues. I think they are very linked. A "Strategic Review" is to decide strategy. Strategy 1 - Dont invest! Strategy 2 - INVEST! Action will not (CAN not) happen, until it is concluded.

There has to be a reason why we ("but not at the moment") are not buying the players we need (at his time) to fill the obvious gaps in the team. People can give many reasons for this, but the only one that I can see that is credible, is the one I mention. Why do you see this only credible (logical) reason, as a smokescreen? A smokescreen for WHAT? Ashley would have known the bottom line before he bought the club. He doesn't need to wait for people to count pencils and paper clips. Parky, I agree wholeheartedy with that. However, that is not what the (strategic) review will be about. That sort of thing is 'low level'. What Mort will be doing is high level stuff. His report to Ashley (in my personal opinion) will all be about "where the club is in the football world" / "where can it realistically be in the football world" / "what do we need to do to get there, and when can we get there" / AND ALL THE FINANCIAL DATA TO BACK IT UP. This sort of thing determines investment types and levels. Takes time does that, examining data and information on football clubs (football businesses) from all around the UK and Europe (possibly the world). Speculation (on all of that sort of thing) takes TEN MINUTES (or less). You and I could do that! But, real research and evidence and data and provable analysis - takes a LOT longer. Oh, and there will be a 'procedural review' into paperclips type-of-thing, going on at the same time, no doubt!!

There has to be a reason why we ("but not at the moment") are not buying the players we need (at this time) to fill the obvious gaps in the team. People can give many reasons for this, but the only one that I can see that is credible, is the one I mention. Why do you see this only credible (logical) reason, as a smokescreen? A smokescreen for WHAT?

that can be looked at in oh so many ways! In my view the key words are "but not at the moment". While this "Strategic Review" is going on, I do not think Ashley is going to release any real money. My personal opinion is that once it has concluded, real money WILL be released - otherwise the whole thing (Ashley buying the club) just makes no sense at all! So I am not worried about that. My main worry is TIME. Just 'when' will that review be concluded and the results analysed by Ashley. That is my main concern. Hopefully it will be by the end of this month??? Leaving us one whole month to get on with real business. Later than I would have liked, for obvious reasons, but lets hope that I am right . . . August could be fun!

To answer the question - YES. There can be no doubt about that, though that will not stop (some) people, quite eloquently, doing exactly that! Reading some of the posts on here, it strikes me how much easier it is to sound "credible" about us these days, by writing in a negative or semi-negative way. It is far far easier to present 'negative speculation and opinion' as FACT, than it is to present the positive alternative. The 'negative speculators' are more easily seen as (that dreaded word) "realistic", while the more positive amongst us are presented (by those same negative ones) as "unrealistic" and "biased", or even "deluded". The London-factor is much beloved of the negatives. It is a factor that is much overplayed, as is the (seen as) 'permanent big four' ("If the Big 4 want them, they will get them", etc). So, lets forget all the above easy-generalisations - and point to what we are / what we have to make us ATTRACTIVE as a club: (1) The location and the City : (The people who sell this short the most, are often those that live here. Even those that live here that love the place. They are often the worst, because they seem to think that 'being a local' is the only reason why 'this place' can be an attraction). (2) Sam Allardyce : (no more needs to be said). (3) The players we already have : (Many of those are seen in a far better light by their fellow players than some of us supporters see them). (4) Our fame / Our Status. (It exists and is a BIG factor. Again, many of us seem to think that we are not seen that way. There is an inherent 'inferiority complex' - similar to in point (1) - in some people about this). (5) Our new owner : (players KNOW about this. They can calculate what this will mean, when allied to what we already were financially. IE, we have been around and about the top ten richest clubs in the world, for years. They know what this will probably mean over the next few years). (6) Our support, ie "us" !! : (It is a definite pull factor. Who would not like the chance to 'hack it' in front of 52,000 every other week?) So (and there will be more I have forgotten) there are many many reasons to make the answer to the question a definite - YES. A final few other points : The current 'big four' are obviously not permanent (think I said that already) . . but also our other rivals, the 'newly rich' (note, I did not say the "other" newly rich, as we have always been rich) have all got far more negatives about them (just LOOK at some of the crap they are spending HUGE amounts of money on!) than we have. and finally . . wait (just wait!!) until the transfer window closes. You will see!

The time for "Trophy Signings" (from now onward, in this new era) is when - and only when - we are established enough at the top, for ALL our signings to be in that category (as Manchester United / Chelsea are now, for example). That is what we all hope our Mr Ashleys intended objective is. There has been NO (NIL / NOWT / NOTHING) sign of that yet . . . but we assume . . . (or is it HOPE!) . . . that this is what will happen. So - no 'Trophy Signings' until sufficient background / squad-building, actual REAL progress has been made to make them simply 'routine' signings - please!!

Can you please give me a link to that? http://home.skysports.com/list.aspx?hlid=466987

Bridge and Heinze (both of them) would be my first choices for our defence - fairly predictably I suppose, but they are both quality and both proven in the Premier League. Just think what a message to the others that would send, as well! Thing is, I think Heinze fancies going to a mainland European club, and I don't think Bridge is available. Apart from those little difficulties, "go get em Mike and Sammy"!!