Hughesy

And how many times do we have to remind you that Tiote was unknown? Even the other names have some question mark of sort over them..... but i won't go there. Unknown to who? You? The football world at large? All scouts? European scouts? What a stupid thing to say. relatively unknown, then. Judging by your pedantic question, no player in the world is unknown since someone would know him. BTW, it was no more stupid than your question about Golfmag's claims about Pardew. Yeah, he clearly guessed it all, didn't he? Why try and claim he is unknown? He was an Ivory Coast international who played in the World Cup and was part of a team that won the Dutch league. I am not suggesting the average fan would know who he was, but he was clearly a fairly well known player in football circles. Have a read of the discussion re golfmag. Take it slowly if you like and then get back to me.

I think it's reasonable to accept that a large part of Pardew's salary is performance based, it's Ashley's MO and that's what the rumours were at the time (and also the rumours as to why Hughton was reluctant to sign the contract he was offered in the Summer) - relatively low basic pay with big bonuses for achieving performance targets. Now of course for a manager of a football club, the performance he can most directly affect is the team's progress in the league and cups. Given an agreed budget, and control of the incomings & outgoings, that's fine and acceptable, however if the management above you is going to, for example, constantly try to cut costs, and get rid of your biggest resources in achieving your targets for the year (and the bonuses associated with that), you're going to get rightly p*ssed off that the targets you thought were achievable are being sabotaged. So if that were the only way of achieving the bonuses you were relying on to make your wage competitive, you'd quit. The management at Ashley's companies are incentivised by the company's profit margins. If they can perform their jobs at an adequate level with lower costs (ie in our case the target is to stay in the Premier League), then they are contributing to the profit margins. They may get a slap on the wrist for too many complaints, but they probably don't get bonuses for customer satisfaction. It's not really a stretch to think that it would be part of Pardew's contract to get a bonus if the club makes a profit rather than finish higher in the table. That doesn't make any sense. If he doesn't have any influence on transfers there's nothing he can do directly to influence the club's profit margin at the end of the season... ...other than finishing higher in the league In any case, would make absolutely no sense for him to have a bonus based on profit margin. Most of his SD employees that recently got a bonus probably had very little directly to do with how the company made it's profit (they didn't buy the products or set the prices or the staff salaries), but if they kept their shop going at low cost, then they were part of the success of it. In comparison, keeping us in the Premier League with whatever squad he's given has probably the largest effect on our profit margin you can get. But that is purely a performance related bonus. If Pardew does well while costs are being cut, he gets a larger bonus than if he does badly. The cost cutting is merely an incidental factor that he has to work with.

then why would golfmag say it was a specific part of his remit? Did golfmag actually see the contract itself and read it or was he told by someone what was in it? It still doesn't make any sense though - it isn't within Pardew's power to perform what is supposedly within his remit.

Not decided on Defoe either way personally - but who are we actually comparing him to? His record at West Ham was 1 goal in 3. His record in his 1st spell at Spurs was 1 in 3. Portsmouth was 1 in 2. His second spell at Spurs it's hovering between 1 in 2 and 1 in 3. it's hardly an abysmal record.

Sports Direct signs surely?

Agreed, Golfmag just made a lucky guess and it's a fluke that everything he predicted long before Pardew arrived has come true. Biting. Doesn't really answer my point though. Witty though your response was.

And how many times do we have to remind you that Tiote was unknown? Even the other names have some question mark of sort over them..... but i won't go there. Unknown to who? You? The football world at large? All scouts? European scouts? What a stupid thing to say.

Don't read if easily depressed Was just thinking about this post and I don't think that these supposed 'terms' of Pardew's contract make any sense whatsoever. Ultimately Pardew has no say over who comes and goes from the club - he can't stop someone being sold and he can't insist somebody is bought. So quite why Pardew would be remunerated according to a reduction in the wage bill is beyond me. Logically it doesn't follow.

I swear Ryder has no idea what he's talking about. Spirit in and around the club is not good. Source? Scout at the club. Can you elaborate on what he told you? Any details?

I swear Ryder has no idea what he's talking about. Spirit in and around the club is not good. Source?

2 week fine - absolutely the right move.

What's the Captain gonna say? 'We're a f***ing selling club, everyone here knows he's only a window away from being f***ed off to another club if the owners are happy with the bid, so morale is a bit s***'? And people claim Pardew should come out and tell the 'truth'. Oh the irony.

Probably on a fair amount already tbh... so matching it is probably a fantastic offer. I'd say he's worth the wage of a top 4 fullback. You think he's on Evra money? Ashley Cole money? Hell, even Glen Johnson will earn more than him. Matching the guys current salary (when he signed he wasn't a big name, so won't be on mega bucks of Colo etc) is not an incredible offer. Liars. He isn't worth top 4 left back money. No way. Disagree. Fair enough - personally I don't think he is Champions League level. Still makes far too many stupid mistakes and found wanting positionally too many times to be at that level. Still a very very good player but I don't think he is top 4.

Probably on a fair amount already tbh... so matching it is probably a fantastic offer. I'd say he's worth the wage of a top 4 fullback. You think he's on Evra money? Ashley Cole money? Hell, even Glen Johnson will earn more than him. Matching the guys current salary (when he signed he wasn't a big name, so won't be on mega bucks of Colo etc) is not an incredible offer. Liars. He isn't worth top 4 left back money. No way.

Probably on a fair amount already tbh... so matching it is probably a fantastic offer.

I think the 'hatred' in all derbies is much more of a modern thing to be honest.

Bendtner seems massively underrated by some on here.

I kind of posted it thinking of him as a CB - but yes, I would pick him over Simpson. Not sure there is a huge huge amount in it though.

He would be first choice at right back or centre back. A year or two ago, I'd have agreed. I think his stock has fallen a little.

Sounds like Onuoha is out of favour at Man City. Would be tempted to get him as cover at CB and RB, or even pushing for a first team spot.

Increased bid of £1.8 million from Swansea, according to BBC.

Nailed on.

Because a large number of them are financed by generous benefactors who are happy to throw money at their clubs? Like Stoke and Wolves? Aye, righto. Ok - I'll try again - other clubs weren't trying to correct years of negligent ownership that had created an 100% unsustainable business. Any other examples you'd like me to bat back? How long are you going to bang this drum? Will you still be defending him in 2015 on the basis of "what Shepherd did"? At what point does it become his responsibility seeing as there isn't a contract at the club that wasn't signed under Ashley? I'd agree that there comes a point where Shepherd's mistakes become irrelevant (even if they did set off a chain of catastrophic events). But I am not sure that pointing out that none of the contracts at the club were not signed by Ashley makes a whole lot of difference. He still inherited a mess and has to try and clean up that mess.

Because a large number of them are financed by generous benefactors who are happy to throw money at their clubs? Like Stoke and Wolves? Aye, righto. Ok - I'll try again - other clubs weren't trying to correct years of negligent ownership that had created an 100% unsustainable business. Any other examples you'd like me to bat back?

Because a large number of them are financed by generous benefactors who are happy to throw money at their clubs?