bealios

Without claiming to be ITK I do know a couple of people who meet with Mike Ashley regularly and from what they've said its pretty clear that he didn't have the faintest idea of how the football world worked before he bought the club - its not beyond the realms of possibility that if he had a close friend who he trusted who did have some experience he would rely heavily on any advice he gave.. MIKE: I'm thinking of buying Luka Modric PAUL: Nah, he's shite, don't offer more than £15m. MIKE: Ok Paul, you're right, I'll stick to my guns, no point paying over the odds. You were right about that crock Jonathan after all PAUL: Sorted.

From reading through all of the posts I think most people's view is that he's currently paid £100 - £110K per week. If you think about it, at the time, thats the sort of figure you could imagine Fat Fred offering when he factored in merchandising/shirt sales etc. I think any higher figure mentioned is only what people are speculating now as the number wanted by Owen's advisors i.e. a small (% wise) increase on the current salary. I stand by my ealier post and think signing Owen should be a priority, even if it costs 120K a week - but I would like to think that we could get to that figure by offering a lower basic, but with appearance/goal/european qualification related increases - even if they take the potential amount payable higher than £120K - if that happens it means we finish 6th so at the moment I imagine we would be happy with that and couldn't give a toss if our qualfication for Europe meant me had to shell out a bit more in wages - get all of the fuckers on it if you ask me!

Would love any away game where we get a big allocation. Although would rather avoid Emirates/Old Trafford or Stamford Minge early on

I disagree - put Eto in our side in the last 12 games of the season and I doubt very much he would have done as well as Owen, but I take your point re what we can afford. However, I still think that its not the 1 - 3 top earners that are going to cause any financial difficulty - its the load of average players on £50 - £60K per week that should cause concern.

Didn't they used to play in the FA Cup? Seem to recall going to watch a Blyth Spartans match that was on Match of the Day in the early 90's, I think they either lost, or drew and then went out in the replay.

If he wants anything up to around £120,000 a week then give it to him. When fit he's worth it. But more than that, it gives the club something they would otherwise not have - a world class name in the squad to attract those young players we are supposed to be going for that may not have heard of Keegan etc. I think if it were announced this afternoon that he had extended his contract the overall feeling would be positive. At the end of the day, who cares if it is at £80,000 or £120,000 - relative to the amount we pay some very average players it is nothing. And if he doesn't sign then we face the realistic prospect of facing the new season without a genuine world class player - its pretty unlikely we are going to get a ready made replacement this year without European football to offer.

Whilst its great to build a pool of youngsters <24 years old, they are never going to be the finished article. How do you get them to move on to the next level? Easy, make sure that they are training every day and playing alongside fully developed experienced players. IIRC Roy Keane wasn't brought into a side to play alongside a load of youngsters - he started in a midfield with Robson, and then played with Ince, Hughes, McClair etc. John Terry played with some world class defenders, admittedly towards the end of their career, and that must have rubbed off. Who do we have to train, play alongside and develop Steven Taylor? Bramble, Boumsong, Moore, Cacapa, Ramage - the list goes on. I'm all for taking chances on young players, and see the benefits of getting i.e. Carrick at an early age rather than paying £18m, but you need to have a basis of established professionals at the peak of their game to learn from if you're ever going to succeed. That is why we should offer Michael Owen (within reason) whatever he wants, why we should be buying an experienced central defender with regular Champions League experience, and then look towards some young potential stars to train with those players and develop. On a slight aside, I guess Beardsley when we signed him for the second time wouldn't fall within our current supposed "transfer policy", but who would object to signing him now (as he was when we signed him last time, not in his 40's!), even on £100,000 a week?

To be fair its not the journos' fault that there isn't really anything to report on. They have to put something on the back pages! I have to say that I'm more than happy that our transfer business isn't being conducted through the media. I know a lot on here are in a state of blind panic that we didn't sign anybody the moment the window opened, but I reckon (hope) its because the people in charge of acquisitions might think its a bad idea to come out and announce that we have £100m to spend and we are interested in Deco/Crouch/Bentley etc. - not exactly going to get you a good deal from the selling club.

Chelsea do seem to have a particular brand of fans who seem to live in the 80's though, revelling in past hooligan "glories". I watched the game yesterday in the pub opposite Fulham Broadway tube, legged it onto the tube as soon as the last penalty was taken - you could tell it was going to go off even before that.

Owen should be kept, maybe not at all costs, but certainly no attempt should be made to cut his wages. Owen's value to us goes way beyond his contribution in the team. If he signs he will be a talisman, in the same way Shearer was in helping us sign Owen in the first place. He has status is the modern game - more even than Keegan has. If we sell Owen, even to Man Utd., we are firmly back in the bad old days of selling our best players - Beardsley Gascoigne etc,. If Owen decides himself to go then fair enough, but we should not be trying to take the piss over a new contract.

To be honest would be surprised if it is a player. A lot of the time its the staff on the fringes who are a bit slack jawed with the press. Wasn't the whole saga about slamming Keegan's tactics before the Arsenal away game supposed to come from Nigel Pearson?

Beye has been far and away the most consistent performer this season, and his attitude etc. seem to have made him a fan favourite, however I thought we were in very deep poo at half time in the Birmingham game and I believe that Michael Owen has been the catalyst in the performances since then and has kept us up, not quite single-handedly but certainly the most influential player. If you replaced Michael Owen with Shola for instance we would have been in the bottom 3 now. If you replaced Beye with Carr in those games I still think we would have performed well and have beaten the drop.

Although a lot of of their fans are tw@ts it has to be Man Utd for the league, good team to watch, don't sit back on a lead and try and play out a 1-0 (as we found out!). Hope Chelsea finish with nothing, thats 2 years in a row with only an FA Cup and League Cup to shout about. I know we would love either, but for a team bankrolled with unlimited funds then its a bad return. The atmosphere at their home games is terrible as well, and it seems none of the fans really give that much of a toss. And while I'm at it, does this media created "Big Four" tag annoy people as much as me? Since when has it become a Big Four? If I was to concede anything its surely a "Big Three", with a fourth team that at the moment can just scrape 4th, but which is closer to being replaced in 5th than winning the league. They have 2 world class players, and then a very average remainder, no better than the 3 or 4 teams below them.

Reasonable post Northern Monkey, but I thing people dwelling on him walking out on jobs and saying that is a bad thing is wrong. We have had experience of managers who should have gone, but hung around to be sacked to pick up the compensation. Souness here and McClaren at England being prime examples, but it happens all the time. A manager knows he has lost the fans, the team and board room, goes to the papers and says I am not a quitter. Its all crap basically they are just saying they are hanging round for the comp. The game is full of managers picking up vast sums for failing, it shouldn't be held as a bad thing when somebody holds their hands up as saying that they weren't good enough, or that they didn't think they could give everything to it any more, and walking out with nothing.

I think the telling thing this season will be not which players Keegan brings in, but how much he can get out of the existing players. Smith seems to be unpopular amongst a lot of fans, but Fergie used to rate him. Barton has got potential. Defensively we have potential in Faye and Taylor, and Rozenhal has shown promise and is adapting. Biggest one will be Zog I think. If Keegan can get his confidence up so he starts enjoying games and plays to the level where Arsene Wenger thought he could be our key player. I think we have good enough players to challenge top 6/7. That has to be our realistice aim for the next 3 years. Top half this year, and the top 6/7 finish for two years consistently. Anything else is a bonus.

Turnbull - "Keegan has had his time and failed" - WTF!!!!!!? Trying not to get too emotionally involved, if you assess the club at his time as appointment as manager, and the date when he left, I'm sure you will appreciate your own comment is a little bit ridiculous.

Selfishly, brilliant news. Bring on Bolton. Hope we have some players left.

Gutted, sounds like the atmosphere is amazing, couldn't make it to the match, was about 300 miles from the ground, and hence my ticket when the appointment was announced. I'm now having to live with snippets from Sky, and necking a bottle of Christmas champagne on my own. Winner. Selfishly hope the big reception is saved for Saturday!

It just narks me a bit that the man is generally considered, outside of Newcastle, a failure as a manager. Even now the only footage Sky are playing is the Fergie rant and the footage from Liverpool's 4th goal in That Game. Didn't we play a few other decent games in that 5 year period. It seems a lot of people are too easily influenced by media columnists etc. these days. I hold my hands up and say that he didn't achieve at England, but who has? Only Robson in recent memory is generally considered a success (although personally I thought Sven wasn't that bad to be honest).

Being a bit more sensible, I agree with what this guy said, none of us are expecting or even hoping for the title this time, we need to break the top 6 again, and then challenge Liverpool (overated apart from Gerrard) for the Champions League spot. I have more confidence in Keegan doing that that what our realistic other options were - Redknapp, Hughes, McClaren or, sorry to say, Shearer.

Lot of myths seems to be circulated re this appointment. I'm not concerned he has been out of the game for 3 years, remind me how long he was out last time he came back? Football has changed too much since the 90's - Has it, that offside rule is a bit of a bugger, but thought the rules were the same otherwise? Keegan was defensively poor - Has somebody backed this up with fact. The year we lost the league, didn't we have the second best defensive record in the league, and pretty close to that in other seasons? He only did it because of the money he was given - Are you sure? When he turned round the nearly relegated team in 1992 only Beresford and Venison played regularly in that squad. Bracewell was injured, and Cole/Robinson and Sellars were signed when the league was in the bag. Even in the following season when we finished 3rd, we didn't spend a lot, Beardsley and Malcolm Allen being the two main signings I think. We need a foreign manager - Why is Keegan more of a risk than Deschamps who has not managed in this league? Houllier ruled himself out, and Mort pretty much said that some manager wouldn't come to a team outside the Champions League - i.e Mourinho, Van Gaal, Hiddink etc. Bottom line is I think with a bit of proper support I even think the current squad is top 6 material - FFS we only need to be better than Everton/Man City/Portsmouth to get there, and even if Keegan isn't the answer, it has galvanised our questionable home support. If it doesn't work out, Keegan will no doubt admit it and not hang around for compensation and leave with his reputation intact. Funny how that is considered to be a sign of a quitter, surely it shows an honourable man, similar to Stuart Pearce, who isn't in it only for the cash? Sorry for the defensive rant, I've got Sky on in the background and I'm getting carried away!

Whilst I understand the concerns re Keegan, can you imagine if back in 1992 Sir John Hall had considered Keegan but then thought "better not, he hasn't been in football for a few years". I personally think that the KK and Shearer risk would be preferable to a risk taken on Hughes. Ok, so football may have changed in the last 3 years, but surely it had changed between 1984 to 1992 wthe last time?! I would say that it would certainly worth having a Peter Kenyon type character if those two were chosen, at least initially to help out with the behind the scenes admin in the modern game. If everybody seems to think that Shearer will be manager at some point, but after some experience elsewhere. Does anybody realistically see him managing Hartlepool for a few years first or something. Completely unrealistic, how much do you think they would pay him for a start? Didn't Van Basten, Rjiikard etc all start off with big clubs?

God, sometimes our fans don't do us any favours. Try and form your own opinions rather than jumping on which ever bandwagon the vocal minority are riding on! Terry Mac was brought to the club by Keegan. Keegan valued him so much that he reportedly paid Terry Mac's wages out of his own pocket for an initial period. He was assistant manager, but his value to Keegan at least was that he acted as a buffer between senior players and manager, so that KK could keep a certain distance from players whilst still having good communication within the squad. He was act the club well before Shearer or before FFS was in charge. Subsequent managers have retained his services, you cannot be naive enough to think that if any manager didn't want him around or want his own man then he still would be employed. I'm not sure why so much animosity is directed to him now, what has changed since he assisted Keegan transform the club - where you all aware of what he did then, but have forgotten since then. Or where you not supporting in those pre Premier League years?