LucaAltieri

really? Played like absolutely shite vs City. Turd again vs Hammers, woeful again vs Fulham until the last half hour. Play well vs Villa. That's one and half good games. Way too soon to say a full pre-season of a settled squad proves anything. Better off than last season you say. Can it get much worse? What you're describing there is a team starting out without any confidence then slowly gaining it. It's not like Pardew suddenly decided to flip a switch against Fulham and make everyone play well. The team needs to feel like they can play and win together and that comes through experience. We're getting there.

Who's Dave?

This MySpace thing might have been what got him out. Food for thought.

Hi guys.

I like him too, a lot actually. Nice guy it seems, and gives a 100%. But i do not think he is among our 11 best players at the moment. Agreed 100%. He also has his uses. He's great at retaining the ball and relieving the pressure on the defense. That doesn't put him ahead of most of our wide players but he has his talents and certainly isn't the abomination people make him out to be.

I actually quite like Jonas, but I'll leave that one alone as I don't want the guilt for a dozen broken keyboards.

Pardew is like Benitez, Brett went mental on mushrooms, Ian.W joined Dave and San Toon in the jacuzzi of doubt. We're going to win both cups and Pardew will be here for the whole 8 years. Mental evening If I had to guess, I expect it would be a Europa League win. Ah finishing in the top 5 again too, i'll add that to the mental evening list in 8 years? ...I'm pretty confident in that one.

Pardew is like Benitez, Brett went mental on mushrooms, Ian.W joined Dave and San Toon in the jacuzzi of doubt. We're going to win both cups and Pardew will be here for the whole 8 years. Mental evening If I had to guess, I expect it would be a Europa League win.

I should also stipulate that this is relying on the kids making it beyond the 4th round.

Let's not forget how far behind the tops teams Liverpool were under Benitez. They still managed to have great cup runs including winning the Champion's League. We're obviously not that good but Pardew strikes me as a similar sort of manager and I certainly don't think a cup is out of our reach.

It'll be toward the end of that reign if it is IMO. Every single "big club" has a manager looking for a trophy too appease the fans at the moment. Can't see it myself like unless there is a stock mentality change at the club and we're so entrenched in midtable and safe we literally have nothing too lose. I think this is the season that either makes or breaks us. I think either Pardew has another decent season and we go on to build and win something or he has another relegation fight and he gets the boot. I'm confident that with this current squad we're going to have a good season similar to 11/12 but slightly better. We have a better squad at our disposal and we're starting to see the same stability creeping back into the side after last season's run sapped them of confidence. We're turning a corner and I can see the momentum carrying us to a strong league finish. During 11/12 Pardew was good at keeping us ticking along. While everyone from the mackems and the media thought it was just a matter of time that we "get found out" and fall to the league position we "should" be in, we never actually dropped below 7th. When we got thumped away at Fulham the squad didn't let their heads dip, they went away to Blackburn and picked up a win. After losing at Anfield we beat Man United. After getting beat by Man City we went and got a point at Old Trafford. Pardew kept heads up. I'll never understand people who claim he isn't a good man manger. In that season we never had more than 2 losses back-to-back. Towards the end of the season when everyone was expecting us to fade away we went and picked up 6 wins on the trot. If we have turned a corner (and I believe we have) then I can see silverware down the line.

I'm just going to put it out there... if Pardew sees out his 8 years I think we'll see a trophy in that time.

Oh, so it wasn't Pardew desperately trying to flog him despite the club rejecting Arsenal's bid? Funny that.

A few weeks back we were out of the playoff spots but that was mainly down to us having 4 games in hand. Even then when you averaged out points per game we were third. Still, this run we're on (8 wins in 9) hasn't hurt.

Full time, 2-0. Top of the league, bitches.

...unless something terrible happens, Sounders are 45 minutes from going top of the western conference. Currently 2-0 up over RSL. Martins and Neagle.

I don't think that a top half finish, pushing Europe, is out of the question for this squad. I think Ashley sees the same thing. Either I'm giving him too much credit or you lot aren't giving him enough. Time will tell.

Might as well have not bothered with those first two sentences there. It's unreal. Ashley's taking money out of the club that could be spent on improving the team and you get the odd sap loving his work. Can't believe what I'm reading. If it were your 200m (or whatever the club cost him to date) I'm sure you'd not worry too much about recouping some of that cash. If I had £200m or over a billion or whatever it is then I'd be dead in a gutter after snorting 10 grams of coke from a stripper's arsehole. It's not comparable. He's in fact a very rich man, you still seem to be stuck on the idea that he'd have to spend fortunes of his own money to make us competitive when I'm saying we should have spent a bit of the club's own money to get our squad where it needs to be, but instead we might see ourselves falling even further behind the likes of Swansea and Norwich. I can see where you're coming from both with spending and with the stripper's arsehole. But I think Mike thinks he's going to see a return on the investment he made in January and he's going to want to see that return before investing further. If it gets dire and we need rescuing again in January he'll reluctantly do it. But I can see why he'd wait it out.

Might as well have not bothered with those first two sentences there. It's unreal. Ashley's taking money out of the club that could be spent on improving the team and you get the odd sap loving his work. Can't believe what I'm reading. If it were your 200m (or whatever the club cost him to date) I'm sure you'd not worry too much about recouping some of that cash.

I can't take that. I just can't. 20th richest club in the world iirc. 3rd largest crowds in the PL. But for some completely f***ed up reason you say we can't compete with the big clubs. And since not a single one of us expects to compete financially with Man City and Chelsea, I can only assume that by "big" clubs you mean the likes of Southampton, Fulham and f***ing Norwich. Just f*** off you cowardly, lying cockend. We all know that we could compete with them easily if we wanted, we're just owned by a thief who is creaming money out of the club and into his horrid, tatty, charva clothes shop. I take your points but I don't think there's anything wrong with the statement "We haven't got the finances of a big team," of itself. We're not bankrolled by Russian or Arab oil money. We don't have the commercial reach of Man United to sell an ungodly number of shirts in every corner of the globe. You're right that doesn't mean we shouldn't be doing better in transfer windows. But there's nothing wrong with the actual statement. There is something utterly wrong with the statement though. He's insinuating that there's a problem with the fans expectations. Ie that we're being unrealistic. And that's simply not what's happening, we just don't expect to have our manager come out and say we can't compete financially with f***ing Southampton ffs. The money has always been there for players the club feel are the right fit. Stop right there brah. This premise here- this is a completely unproven and unprovable proposition that just so happens to fit your agenda. It is also the claim of proven liars who admitted to deliberately misleading and deceiving fans in the past. Its a load of shit really. I'm sorry, do we not sign anyone unless it's on a free? Er not unless the money is made back in sales no. Hypothetically, if we'd taken all the Carroll money and signed say, Ozil... - Ignore that he'd probably not come here. - Ignore that he cost a bit more than we made on Carroll. - Ignore that the gap between now and selling Carroll. - Ignore the wage bill. But if we had gone out and signed a top player like that. Showing the ambition that we all want to see. A real player of Champions League quality. Would we now be a better team than picking players for 5m here, 3m there? Where do you think we'd have been finishing in the league? Not sure what question you're asking here. I demand a crack at a Europa League place (i.e. finishing in one of the positions that may open up to qualify for that competition) as an absolute bare minimum. Once we get there, then the minimum requirement changes. I'm not overly arsed about who the personnel is that gets us there. Why would I give the slightest fuck about that? I've never been in the least bit interested in getting excited about "marquee" (vomit) signings - I was fucking foaming with rage the day we signed Michael Owen because I knew the squad wasn't good enough to meet that minimum requirement. Nor is this one. Fair point. Misinterpreted what you were after. You're not so bothered about one big signing, you just would rather we have a negative net spend as a show of some kind of ambition. Personally, I don't care about that. If we make a profit or a loss doesn't bother me (so long as it's sustainable). I just want the players we bring in to improve the team. I agree that Europa League is a reasonable aim. I also think that with the likes of HBA, Cabaye (who we actively held on to), Colo (who we actively held on to), Cisse, Remy, Sissoko, etc we have the makings of a decent squad that can push towards that goal this year. Everyone dropped a bollock last season. Our January signings (despite our collective creaming over them) weren't amazing when it came down to producing results. Now with them getting bedded into the squad we can expect better. Er no, I'd rather the club was reinvesting the money that I and thousands of other supporters put into it, and reinvesting the gargantuan sums being thrown at them by the TV companies. Even if we finish second having spent nothing, it's not good enough because had we invested, it could have been first. Every single decision the club makes should be for the benefit of the football team and the betterment of results and performances. What you're looking for is socialism in the wealthiest football league in the world. You're valuing something non-tangible. Something that can't be seen on a balance sheet. You're wanting us to live up to our full potential, a benefit to our little society, rather than looking at success through the lens of profit and loss. You're valuing the art of being the best we can be above the almighty dollar. I'm with you entirely. I just don't think any owner would agree with us. Since we need to make do with someone owning us, I feel like I understand and somewhat agree with Ashley's outlook. Apart from all those that have just spent the money generated by their respective clubs to improve their teams. They're acting in the interest of their wallets, too. They think they can spend their way to making more money this season. Ashley thinks he can squeeze the most out of every pound he spends through clever scouting and/or get away with not spending anything and still reaping the rewards. There are no owners with your philosophy of poo-pooing a second place finish because if they'd just spent a chunk more they could have been #1. When you also factor in we're not competing for #1 or #2 it becomes far less enticing to spend again... Is it worth it on the balance sheet to spend 10-20mil + wages to make the difference between 12th and 8th? The vast majority of owners would look at the numbers and probably conclude not. There are no benevolent owners. They decide what is successful based on the money coming in. Sometimes that means spending. Our owner believes in spending on something only if it's value for money. Socialism doesn't exist in the Premier League.

I can't take that. I just can't. 20th richest club in the world iirc. 3rd largest crowds in the PL. But for some completely f***ed up reason you say we can't compete with the big clubs. And since not a single one of us expects to compete financially with Man City and Chelsea, I can only assume that by "big" clubs you mean the likes of Southampton, Fulham and f***ing Norwich. Just f*** off you cowardly, lying cockend. We all know that we could compete with them easily if we wanted, we're just owned by a thief who is creaming money out of the club and into his horrid, tatty, charva clothes shop. I take your points but I don't think there's anything wrong with the statement "We haven't got the finances of a big team," of itself. We're not bankrolled by Russian or Arab oil money. We don't have the commercial reach of Man United to sell an ungodly number of shirts in every corner of the globe. You're right that doesn't mean we shouldn't be doing better in transfer windows. But there's nothing wrong with the actual statement. There is something utterly wrong with the statement though. He's insinuating that there's a problem with the fans expectations. Ie that we're being unrealistic. And that's simply not what's happening, we just don't expect to have our manager come out and say we can't compete financially with f***ing Southampton ffs. The money has always been there for players the club feel are the right fit. Stop right there brah. This premise here- this is a completely unproven and unprovable proposition that just so happens to fit your agenda. It is also the claim of proven liars who admitted to deliberately misleading and deceiving fans in the past. Its a load of shit really. I'm sorry, do we not sign anyone unless it's on a free? Er not unless the money is made back in sales no. Hypothetically, if we'd taken all the Carroll money and signed say, Ozil... - Ignore that he'd probably not come here. - Ignore that he cost a bit more than we made on Carroll. - Ignore that the gap between now and selling Carroll. - Ignore the wage bill. But if we had gone out and signed a top player like that. Showing the ambition that we all want to see. A real player of Champions League quality. Would we now be a better team than picking players for 5m here, 3m there? Where do you think we'd have been finishing in the league? Not sure what question you're asking here. I demand a crack at a Europa League place (i.e. finishing in one of the positions that may open up to qualify for that competition) as an absolute bare minimum. Once we get there, then the minimum requirement changes. I'm not overly arsed about who the personnel is that gets us there. Why would I give the slightest fuck about that? I've never been in the least bit interested in getting excited about "marquee" (vomit) signings - I was fucking foaming with rage the day we signed Michael Owen because I knew the squad wasn't good enough to meet that minimum requirement. Nor is this one. Fair point. Misinterpreted what you were after. You're not so bothered about one big signing, you just would rather we have a negative net spend as a show of some kind of ambition. Personally, I don't care about that. If we make a profit or a loss doesn't bother me (so long as it's sustainable). I just want the players we bring in to improve the team. I agree that Europa League is a reasonable aim. I also think that with the likes of HBA, Cabaye (who we actively held on to), Colo (who we actively held on to), Cisse, Remy, Sissoko, etc we have the makings of a decent squad that can push towards that goal this year. Everyone dropped a bollock last season. Our January signings (despite our collective creaming over them) weren't amazing when it came down to producing results. Now with them getting bedded into the squad we can expect better. Er no, I'd rather the club was reinvesting the money that I and thousands of other supporters put into it, and reinvesting the gargantuan sums being thrown at them by the TV companies. Even if we finish second having spent nothing, it's not good enough because had we invested, it could have been first. Every single decision the club makes should be for the benefit of the football team and the betterment of results and performances. What you're looking for is socialism in the wealthiest football league in the world. You're valuing something non-tangible. Something that can't be seen on a balance sheet. You're wanting us to live up to our full potential, a benefit to our little society, rather than looking at success through the lens of profit and loss. You're valuing the art of being the best we can be above the almighty dollar. I'm with you entirely. I just don't think any owner would agree with us. Since we need to make do with someone owning us, I feel like I understand and somewhat agree with Ashley's outlook.

I can't take that. I just can't. 20th richest club in the world iirc. 3rd largest crowds in the PL. But for some completely f***ed up reason you say we can't compete with the big clubs. And since not a single one of us expects to compete financially with Man City and Chelsea, I can only assume that by "big" clubs you mean the likes of Southampton, Fulham and f***ing Norwich. Just f*** off you cowardly, lying cockend. We all know that we could compete with them easily if we wanted, we're just owned by a thief who is creaming money out of the club and into his horrid, tatty, charva clothes shop. I take your points but I don't think there's anything wrong with the statement "We haven't got the finances of a big team," of itself. We're not bankrolled by Russian or Arab oil money. We don't have the commercial reach of Man United to sell an ungodly number of shirts in every corner of the globe. You're right that doesn't mean we shouldn't be doing better in transfer windows. But there's nothing wrong with the actual statement. There is something utterly wrong with the statement though. He's insinuating that there's a problem with the fans expectations. Ie that we're being unrealistic. And that's simply not what's happening, we just don't expect to have our manager come out and say we can't compete financially with f***ing Southampton ffs. The money has always been there for players the club feel are the right fit. Stop right there brah. This premise here- this is a completely unproven and unprovable proposition that just so happens to fit your agenda. It is also the claim of proven liars who admitted to deliberately misleading and deceiving fans in the past. Its a load of shit really. I'm sorry, do we not sign anyone unless it's on a free? Er not unless the money is made back in sales no. Hypothetically, if we'd taken all the Carroll money and signed say, Ozil... - Ignore that he'd probably not come here. - Ignore that he cost a bit more than we made on Carroll. - Ignore that the gap between now and selling Carroll. - Ignore the wage bill. But if we had gone out and signed a top player like that. Showing the ambition that we all want to see. A real player of Champions League quality. Would we now be a better team than picking players for 5m here, 3m there? Where do you think we'd have been finishing in the league? Not sure what question you're asking here. I demand a crack at a Europa League place (i.e. finishing in one of the positions that may open up to qualify for that competition) as an absolute bare minimum. Once we get there, then the minimum requirement changes. I'm not overly arsed about who the personnel is that gets us there. Why would I give the slightest fuck about that? I've never been in the least bit interested in getting excited about "marquee" (vomit) signings - I was fucking foaming with rage the day we signed Michael Owen because I knew the squad wasn't good enough to meet that minimum requirement. Nor is this one. Fair point. Misinterpreted what you were after. You're not so bothered about one big signing, you just would rather we have a negative net spend as a show of some kind of ambition. Personally, I don't care about that. If we make a profit or a loss doesn't bother me (so long as it's sustainable). I just want the players we bring in to improve the team. I agree that Europa League is a reasonable aim. I also think that with the likes of HBA, Cabaye (who we actively held on to), Colo (who we actively held on to), Cisse, Remy, Sissoko, etc we have the makings of a decent squad that can push towards that goal this year. Everyone dropped a bollock last season. Our January signings (despite our collective creaming over them) weren't amazing when it came down to producing results. Now with them getting bedded into the squad we can expect better.

In this summer transfer window, I agree. January; they were ace. Summer before that; shite again. Different situations, innit. If we're struggling in January we'll try to bail ourselves out again to preserve Premier League status, if we're midtable we'll plod along. Agreed. And it's frustrating. As fans we want to see the team go for broke. We want them to take the risks that might propel us back into the champions league where we feel we belong. I get it. I also get that it's much more sensible to build slowly and purposefully. I don't like us not bringing in the players required to improve us. I'm just saying I understand why it's is the way it is. Ultimately, if it were my cash on the line, I'd probably play it a little safer than my FM save too. "Going for broke" is a million miles off what anyone hopes or expects these days, improving on a squad that nearly got relegated did feature in most fans' expectations though. Seriously, why do all of these conversations fail to understand the happy medium which would make all of us, erm, happy? My point being that there's a philosophy at play and it somewhat makes sense. Yes, we want to see more players come in and do well, but at the same time that squad that almost got relegated massively under performed. Even if we'd signed no one whatsoever I'd have hoped those same players would have done better this season. We still added to the squad with Remy. I know you'll criticize it only being a loan signing. But frankly, would anyone want to have paid 8m (or whatever the asking price was) with a rape charge hanging over him? Also, if he's cleared and then signs on permanently, will we finally acknowledge his existence as a transfer deal?

I can't take that. I just can't. 20th richest club in the world iirc. 3rd largest crowds in the PL. But for some completely f***ed up reason you say we can't compete with the big clubs. And since not a single one of us expects to compete financially with Man City and Chelsea, I can only assume that by "big" clubs you mean the likes of Southampton, Fulham and f***ing Norwich. Just f*** off you cowardly, lying cockend. We all know that we could compete with them easily if we wanted, we're just owned by a thief who is creaming money out of the club and into his horrid, tatty, charva clothes shop. I take your points but I don't think there's anything wrong with the statement "We haven't got the finances of a big team," of itself. We're not bankrolled by Russian or Arab oil money. We don't have the commercial reach of Man United to sell an ungodly number of shirts in every corner of the globe. You're right that doesn't mean we shouldn't be doing better in transfer windows. But there's nothing wrong with the actual statement. There is something utterly wrong with the statement though. He's insinuating that there's a problem with the fans expectations. Ie that we're being unrealistic. And that's simply not what's happening, we just don't expect to have our manager come out and say we can't compete financially with f***ing Southampton ffs. The money has always been there for players the club feel are the right fit. Stop right there brah. This premise here- this is a completely unproven and unprovable proposition that just so happens to fit your agenda. It is also the claim of proven liars who admitted to deliberately misleading and deceiving fans in the past. Its a load of shit really. I'm sorry, do we not sign anyone unless it's on a free? Er not unless the money is made back in sales no. Hypothetically, if we'd taken all the Carroll money and signed say, Ozil... - Ignore that he'd probably not come here. - Ignore that he cost a bit more than we made on Carroll. - Ignore that the gap between now and selling Carroll. - Ignore the wage bill. But if we had gone out and signed a top player like that. Showing the ambition that we all want to see. A real player of Champions League quality. Would we now be a better team than picking players for 5m here, 3m there? Where do you think we'd have been finishing in the league?

In this summer transfer window, I agree. January; they were ace. Summer before that; shite again. Different situations, innit. If we're struggling in January we'll try to bail ourselves out again to preserve Premier League status, if we're midtable we'll plod along. Agreed. And it's frustrating. As fans we want to see the team go for broke. We want them to take the risks that might propel us back into the champions league where we feel we belong. I get it. I also get that it's much more sensible to build slowly and purposefully. I don't like us not bringing in the players required to improve us. I'm just saying I understand why it's is the way it is. Ultimately, if it were my cash on the line, I'd probably play it a little safer than my FM save too.