leffe186

Anyone you'd fancy nicking off QPR's bloated squad list? Before Debuchy you could have taken Luke Young off their hands - they're paying him and he isn't even in their squad.

Their midfield looks distinctly mediocre tbh.

So who are you guys rooting for in the second match?

Chelsea's profit is smoke and mirrors.

He's on stupid wages though 160k is what I've read. Chelsea are wanting to reduce their wage bill massively apparently. I could be so wrong here, but I seriously don't think that Lampard is after the money after all. Think he's someone - like Shearer was for us - who would give and do everything to play for 'his' club. West Ham?

I'm with Disco on the "no gifs" here.

Going to be a massive punchup for CL this year.

Ok, thought I'd heard that somewhere.

I mentioned Lescott in the transfer thread - just to gauge people's reactions - but what about him or someone similar on loan? I have a vague memory of somebody (Pardew?) saying that you weren't interested in going down that route. Not sure who's out there, but I'd have thought that Lescott on loan right now would mean you were guaranteed to stay up.

No more highlights after the fourth on 59 mins in yours would have been nice.

Not a fan. Don't like the away, and the home has the wrong colour Adidas stripes for me, and the wrong sleeves. Other than that it's very nice, though.

Well, positional awareness for a start, which was something he lacked. I did hope that he'd learn that, the more he played. Sounds good, though.

Question ? Am only saying that he hasn't made himself look like dick but he has made those reacting to his wind up look like dicks, and laughing at them Speaking as somewhat of a neutral - he has made himself look like a dick.

TBF, they're just a wee club from the North-East. If they want to throw 10M at us - as many of them seem to - then I think that might do the trick. It's instructive how different their reaction is to Villa and Swansea's, though. Swansea loved Caulker, but knew that we'd only loaned him out to get game time, and that there was no chance of buying him. They were just happy to have him in their team. Villa were less happy to be helping us out, but for the most part accepted that he was going back to Spurs at the end of the season. Sunderland just sound a bit desperate. I think the desperation stems from us not having any real quality at full back since Makin and Gray more than a decade ago. Christ, Gardner looks a lot better there than some of the dross we've had over the years. That said I wouldn't pay £10m. Between £5m and £8m seems about right to me. Yeah, 10M sounds like a no-brainer. I'd be extremely surprised if we went for 5, but 8M might be a tough decision. The main issue is that we really do need a back-up at LB, and there aren't many out there. What do you think of him? I'd love to take most RTG comments at face value, but I worry that he's being over-praised. He hasn't convinced me at all in our shirt, although there were signs that he could make a decent LB, given time.

I can't make up my mind whether the plethora of redundant threads on RTG is a good or bad thing. On the one hand, if you want a good post-match gloat it's a pain in the arse having to trawl through pages and pages of guff. On the other, there's always an entertaining new thread around the corner.

I bet London clubs benefit the most each year. I think we have had 5 of our last 7 PL seasons with a double away Christmas and the others were one of each. Even in 2010/11 it was two away and City at home between 26th-2nd. We just played at Villa (late kick-off on Boxing Day, and so a tricky journey home), and of course we have a convenient 12.45 kick-off today in Sunderland. Thanks for the concern, though. I never knew Spurs were the only club in London, thanks for explaining that fact to me. Glad you've come round to my way of thinking! I just thought it was a lazy thing to say, and a suggestion that London clubs got favourable treatment. I stand to be corrected, of course. I mean, London clubs will get more local games, because there are more of them, obviously. If that was your point, then it's right, but doesn't need to be made. For the record - Spurs and Chelsea were away twice (Boxing Day and this weekend). Fulham, QPR and Arsenal were home twice. Sunderland were home twice. You guys were away twice.

TBF, they're just a wee club from the North-East. If they want to throw 10M at us - as many of them seem to - then I think that might do the trick. It's instructive how different their reaction is to Villa and Swansea's, though. Swansea loved Caulker, but knew that we'd only loaned him out to get game time, and that there was no chance of buying him. They were just happy to have him in their team. Villa were less happy to be helping us out, but for the most part accepted that he was going back to Spurs at the end of the season. Sunderland just sound a bit desperate.

This, man. I mean, I get it, but still. The wife is still asleep. I know she gets text alerts when goals go in, but I'm dreading her mood when she wakes up and sees the Villa score.

Naah, it's just different. He had more experienced (and generally better) players, and not many injuries. Ended up just trying to hold on. With Lambert, they've made a conscious decision to go for youth and save money on wages, looking to build for the future. The problem is that he's had appalling luck with injuries, and now it's only kids left. The Liverpool game is a case in point - it was all Liverpool but they hung on, then managed to grab goals on the break. They didn't really play that much better, but Benteke and Weimann were clinical. Then Baker - their one really decent remaining defender - got injured against us. They've got virtually no-one left. They usually get done by Wigan iirc too. Lambert spent £21m (net) in the summer. I know they've a few injuries though but some of those like Bent & Zog weren't playing much anyway. Yeah, he spent a fair bit, but I think they'd banked a fair bit the year before and all the incoming transfers were kids who'd be on relatively low wages. Even if the likes of Bent, Zog, Dunne etc hadn't been playing, he'd have been forced to put them in over the last month - and I think they'd at least have helped stem the tide. Not that I think he's done a great job - far from it - but my point was I don't think you can praise McLeish off the back of this season.

Finally voted - 3. Too much shit around you, and you have good players to come back. I can't see Villa finishing above you, and it the only thing I see undoing you is more injuries plus QPR going apeshit in the window. Even then, I'd expect either Southampton or Fulham to falter. The only reason I went for 3 and not 2 was the fact that you really shouldn't have got relegated last time, yet you did.

Naah, it's just different. He had more experienced (and generally better) players, and not many injuries. Ended up just trying to hold on. With Lambert, they've made a conscious decision to go for youth and save money on wages, looking to build for the future. The problem is that he's had appalling luck with injuries, and now it's only kids left. The Liverpool game is a case in point - it was all Liverpool but they hung on, then managed to grab goals on the break. They didn't really play that much better, but Benteke and Weimann were clinical. Then Baker - their one really decent remaining defender - got injured against us. They've got virtually no-one left. They usually get done by Wigan iirc too.

Anyone else watching the Man U game? They're fucking terrible, you know.

I know, but you're not going down, man. Have you seen Villa? Not really taking any pleasure in this, because my wife is Villa, and at this rate we will never ever talk about football again. Silver lining is that this will surely mean that Lerner will spend in January. Jenas and Bentley might be available *cough*.

you mean contractually? Because Levy is renowned for his lackadaisical attitude to players' contracts.

I know, but you're not going down, man. Have you seen Villa?