jdckelly

Not quite true though is it? I hate the regime as much as anyone but usually sales from players is reinvested. We just don't spend at all outside of sales. Anyway two of those managers come from Lyon and Mainz which make us look like Man City. will the money be spent this window? All evidence says no it will not. So thats 6 months working with a team with 0 creativity in central midfield and a piss poor defense and getting paid in sports direct vouchers. Doesn't exactly look attractive to me

SSN Swansea and City in "advanced talks" over Bony

doubt we'll get any of the above and be stuck with Carver, why the fuck would you come to a club which is selling its best player asap and where the money will most certainly not be reinvested?

well we're going down then, Carver in charge for the forseeable future the only player worth a damn out of our central midfield options gone and probably going to sell Perez too

See I agree with this, but if you can buy a business like Rangers for £25m for arguments sake and get them in CL and making a profit does it matter ? compared to already making a profit here (and only going to get bigger with each tv deal) worldwide exposure every home game for his company and no major need to spend money on the club from his own pocket. I seriously don't get what he's trying with Rangers

Ashton :: other than that they could be right

expect something on Febuary 3rd right after Sissoko is sold at 10pm deadline day the night before

courtesy of Marc Duffy on twitter

there's something I do find rather enjoyable about watching a defense vs attack game like that (ie not one where the attack scores goal after goal after goal)

I'll be honest, I don't know who either of those dudes are and I'll take them here right now. You really don't want to. Worst Barça managers in the past... 40 years? Since I have been alive at least. What happened, you finished in third or something? FOURTH the horror

we could use tomkins right now tbh, prefer him to williamson

Virtually rules out all of the proposed British names, does it not? As a nation we still struggle with the concept of a manager having no say whatsoever on the players he has to work with. It's also viewed as a bad thing as well which I find laughable really. It's the logical way to work IMO, it gives you the best chance of stability. Spending millions building a squad around a manager that will only be in the job for a few years, then having to rebuild again, is really quite silly. It's not just seen as bad either, alot of people(and the media) are repulsed by the idea. I'm not so sure, after all if the transfers brought in are total s*** it ain't the director of football or whatever who loses his job its the manager burdened with those players he had 0 say on (see Spurs last season in particular, AVB gets the sack for the failure to spend the Bale money right while the guy who bought all those players is still there). Personally I think the manager should have a say in who goes in and out to just ignore him as Ashley will isn't a good way to run things at all. Manager should of course get an input I don't think anyone would disagree with that. What I'm referencing is managers bringing in their own players who they've worked with everywhere without a thought for the long term. which is a natural reaction to the very short term nature of a managers job, the moment things go slightly wrong instead of trying to let a guy work through the bad period the sack button is hit so he's obviously going to go for guys he knows and trusts. I ultimately believe football clubs employ managers for their football knowledge and to trust them to run the first team either they back that with his list of players to get or why are they employing him in the first place? We trust you to run the first team except who your signing? Most companies have people responsible for different things though. If you have one man in charge of everything then unless you find the perfect guy who is great at everything you end up having to decide wether to put up with the bad for the sake of the good or throw it all away and start again. If you go for the head coach/director of Football kind of system both parties should have input. The head coach wants player type A, so the recruitment team work on bringing that kind if player in. If there's a problem you then need to decide where that problem lies. Are the players coming in not good enough?, are the tactics wrong ect. If you have people working at the club who can do that then its a good system. It allows you to change certain things that you believe are going wrong without necessarily having to start all over again from scratch. Of course the people in charge here don't really have a clue so it really limits the system. Still there's no denying that had Pardew had control over recruitment we'd be absolutely up shit creek right now. we're up the shit creek regardless. Going nowhere fast just existing

http://www.nufc.co.uk/articles/20150104/ben-arfa-contract-terminated_2281670_4399456

Virtually rules out all of the proposed British names, does it not? As a nation we still struggle with the concept of a manager having no say whatsoever on the players he has to work with. It's also viewed as a bad thing as well which I find laughable really. It's the logical way to work IMO, it gives you the best chance of stability. Spending millions building a squad around a manager that will only be in the job for a few years, then having to rebuild again, is really quite silly. It's not just seen as bad either, alot of people(and the media) are repulsed by the idea. I'm not so sure, after all if the transfers brought in are total s*** it ain't the director of football or whatever who loses his job its the manager burdened with those players he had 0 say on (see Spurs last season in particular, AVB gets the sack for the failure to spend the Bale money right while the guy who bought all those players is still there). Personally I think the manager should have a say in who goes in and out to just ignore him as Ashley will isn't a good way to run things at all. Manager should of course get an input I don't think anyone would disagree with that. What I'm referencing is managers bringing in their own players who they've worked with everywhere without a thought for the long term. which is a natural reaction to the very short term nature of a managers job, the moment things go slightly wrong instead of trying to let a guy work through the bad period the sack button is hit so he's obviously going to go for guys he knows and trusts. I ultimately believe football clubs employ managers for their football knowledge and to trust them to run the first team either they back that with his list of players to get or why are they employing him in the first place? We trust you to run the first team except who your signing?

why was this game selected for tv coverage?

Virtually rules out all of the proposed British names, does it not? As a nation we still struggle with the concept of a manager having no say whatsoever on the players he has to work with. It's also viewed as a bad thing as well which I find laughable really. It's the logical way to work IMO, it gives you the best chance of stability. Spending millions building a squad around a manager that will only be in the job for a few years, then having to rebuild again, is really quite silly. It's not just seen as bad either, alot of people(and the media) are repulsed by the idea. I'm not so sure, after all if the transfers brought in are total shit it ain't the director of football or whatever who loses his job its the manager burdened with those players he had 0 say on (see Spurs last season in particular, AVB gets the sack for the failure to spend the Bale money right while the guy who bought all those players is still there). Personally I think the manager should have a say in who goes in and out to just ignore him as Ashley will isn't a good way to run things at all.

why the hell does this rumour keep appearing like clockwork every single window?

Shame for him

1-0 Sheffield Wednesday

Went to live in Spain didn't he? Set up that foundation thing. That and he probably thinks he is better than the damaged, dated goods he is. See Curbishley, Alan. Another weird one. Curiously went from almost getting the Liverpool Job to never working again. He never pulled up many trees but surprised he just simply never got another job. probably the manner of the way he left, walking off because a not very good player had been sold behind his back then suing for constructive dismissal probably put owners off.

monday morning: "Newcastle United are pleased to announce John Carver as Head Coach on a 8 year deal" Monday Evening: Offer accepted from Arsenal for Sissoko

Ashley would ask for just the Money, replace sissoko with someone with a higher wage and less sell on value (age) not a fucking hope in hell he'd ever agree to it

then he can just award himself dividends and still not spend anything

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/transfer-news/psg-plot-newcastle-transfer-swap-4913858

David O'Leary has champions league experience..........