Kevin Keegan

[Robster]

One day if I ever owned NUFC, SJP would be a shrine to all our former greats...

I'd rename it Stadium KK

[Cronky]

Don't forget the halo on top. 

[Interpolic]

One day if I ever owned NUFC, SJP would be a shrine to all our former greats...

 

Are you just constantly off your absolute tits or something?

[Hanshithispantz]

:lol:

[Andymc1]

One day if I ever owned NUFC, SJP would be a shrine to all our former greats...

 

Are you just constantly off your absolute tits or something?

 

[Guest Howaythetoon]

Nowt wrong my comment tbh.

[Guest firetotheworks]

TIL HTT is a multi-millionaire, at least.

[Guest Howaythetoon]

TIL HTT is a multi-millionaire, at least.

 

I wish!   If I had the money though I would buy NUFC and then somehow make it impossible for any one individual or business to own it, basically handing it to the fans. For me it’s not right that NUFC is owned by someone or a few people as it’s basically the city’s club. Long-term I’d love to see the club owned by the fans and I think it’s doable.

 

What we need is a team of serious businessmen and local leaders to develop a strategy to purchase the club from Ashley, draft up fan ownership and make it possible. It can be done, but it needs serious input from serious people.

[HaydnNUFC]

So wish football in the UK was like it is in Germany, everything the Germans go about it; safe standing, ticket price structure and the 50+1 rule. Red Bull can fuck off though.

[Guest Howaythetoon]

English football really is shit on every level. It sold its soul to the devil...

[xLiaaamx]

Keegan's side was better on the pitch. But I'd say Robson actually masked the issues at the club at the time. Without him turning us round I think Freddie would have ruined us a lot earlier.

[Guest Howaythetoon]

KK’s side was much better than Bobby’s, KK’s side had almost no weak points, other than only being able to play one way. I always though Bobby’s side was suspect to a heavy beating if they weren’t on their game. Very weak minded at times. Where as KK’s side even when not at their best, we’re still a formidable opponent. I kind of enjoyed Bobby’s team more in ways, especially on the counter, that pace, energy and power. KK’s team though were something else, non stop attacking from minute 1 to minute 90. I think the side that went up in 93 played the better football, followed by the 3rd place team with the 95/96 team more direct, but obviously better due to how balanced that side was in 4-4-2 format. Sir Bobby was the better all-round manager, tactically, man management, the lot. But KK was better at assembling a squad, making them play to their strengths better and was more ambitious. When we went top after beating Arsenal Sir Bobby was very dismissive of our chances, no doubt experience and scepticism from his vast years of having seen it all and done it all, but those players didn’t need that and were capable I thought.

[Guest Howaythetoon]

I feel priveleged to have seen both eras mind, but the KK years were about as good as it could get minus a trophy at the end of it. Great football, huge wins, beating teams like Liverpool and Man Utd, signing exciting players and as a club being able to compete with, match and even eclipse anyone else in the market for players. The stadium as well all filled in as a bowl almost and of course the atmosphere that accompanied it. Happy happy days.

[Sima]

I think Robson would have won the league with Keegan’s team in 96.

[HaydnNUFC]

KK’s side was much better than Bobby’s, KK’s side had almost no weak points, other than only being able to play one way. I always though Bobby’s side was suspect to a heavy beating if they weren’t on their game. Very weak minded at times. Where as KK’s side even when not at their best, we’re still a formidable opponent. I kind of enjoyed Bobby’s team more in ways, especially on the counter, that pace, energy and power. KK’s team though were something else, non stop attacking from minute 1 to minute 90. I think the side that went up in 93 played the better football, followed by the 3rd place team with the 95/96 team more direct, but obviously better due to how balanced that side was in 4-4-2 format. Sir Bobby was the better all-round manager, tactically, man management, the lot. But KK was better at assembling a squad, making them play to their strengths better and was more ambitious. When we went top after beating Arsenal Sir Bobby was very dismissive of our chances, no doubt experience and scepticism from his vast years of having seen it all and done it all, but those players didn’t need that and were capable I thought.

I've read people argue that the first 10 or so games of 1994/95 was peak Keegan.

[Guest firetotheworks]

KK’s side was much better than Bobby’s, KK’s side had almost no weak points, other than only being able to play one way. I always though Bobby’s side was suspect to a heavy beating if they weren’t on their game. Very weak minded at times. Where as KK’s side even when not at their best, we’re still a formidable opponent. I kind of enjoyed Bobby’s team more in ways, especially on the counter, that pace, energy and power. KK’s team though were something else, non stop attacking from minute 1 to minute 90. I think the side that went up in 93 played the better football, followed by the 3rd place team with the 95/96 team more direct, but obviously better due to how balanced that side was in 4-4-2 format. Sir Bobby was the better all-round manager, tactically, man management, the lot. But KK was better at assembling a squad, making them play to their strengths better and was more ambitious. When we went top after beating Arsenal Sir Bobby was very dismissive of our chances, no doubt experience and scepticism from his vast years of having seen it all and done it all, but those players didn’t need that and were capable I thought.

I've read people argue that the first 10 or so games of 1994/95 was peak Keegan.

Completely agree with that, the football was unbelievably good. Weirdly it was partly without Beardsley as well. Possibly peak Andy Cole, definitely peak Rob Lee.

 

[Guest]

Steve Watson as a makeshift striker in Beardsley's absence.

[Guest ElCid]

Keegan's side was better on the pitch. But I'd say Robson actually masked the issues at the club at the time. Without him turning us round I think Freddie would have ruined us a lot earlier.

 

Sir Bobby did a wonderful job but Keegan took this club from the verge of the old third division and with far far morew issues than the one inherited by Robson, made it into a club and team that everyone wanted to watch and put us into the elite group within 3 short years - sorry no comparison

[Guest Howaythetoon]

I think Robson would have won the league with Keegan’s team in 96.

 

Agreed, because he would have been able to set the team up to play another way/tactically see out a game. KK was very stubborn in that sense. People talk about Geordies preferring to lose 4-3 than win 1-0 which is bull shit, but KK himself has said a few times now that even though we lost that game to Liverpool it was the highlight of the season and I think he would actually rather lose 4-3 than win 1-0. That was our downfall. All out attack, keep going for goals etc. Even when 2-0 up.

[Guest Howaythetoon]

KK’s side was much better than Bobby’s, KK’s side had almost no weak points, other than only being able to play one way. I always though Bobby’s side was suspect to a heavy beating if they weren’t on their game. Very weak minded at times. Where as KK’s side even when not at their best, we’re still a formidable opponent. I kind of enjoyed Bobby’s team more in ways, especially on the counter, that pace, energy and power. KK’s team though were something else, non stop attacking from minute 1 to minute 90. I think the side that went up in 93 played the better football, followed by the 3rd place team with the 95/96 team more direct, but obviously better due to how balanced that side was in 4-4-2 format. Sir Bobby was the better all-round manager, tactically, man management, the lot. But KK was better at assembling a squad, making them play to their strengths better and was more ambitious. When we went top after beating Arsenal Sir Bobby was very dismissive of our chances, no doubt experience and scepticism from his vast years of having seen it all and done it all, but those players didn’t need that and were capable I thought.

I've read people argue that the first 10 or so games of 1994/95 was peak Keegan.

Completely agree with that, the football was unbelievably good. Weirdly it was partly without Beardsley as well. Possibly peak Andy Cole, definitely peak Rob Lee.

 

 

We started that season like a steam train, but we definitely played better football the previous two seasons IMO.

[Ketsbaia]

Would've been amazing if we could've attracted Bobby after Keegan ran off crying (first time). Without the Dalglish/Gullit years we could still be amongst the elite today.

[huss9]

think Bobby had less quality to work with than KK, and he had a lot more competition and money in the premiere league in his time.

[Guest Howaythetoon]

Bobby did an amazing job with that team, but KK did an amazin job with the club.

[Guest Howaythetoon]

Would've been amazing if we could've attracted Bobby after Keegan ran off crying (first time). Without the Dalglish/Gullit years we could still be amongst the elite today.

 

Bobby takes over KK’s team and we continue to compete and maybe win a trophy and howay, ran off crying?

[Guest Howaythetoon]

I was excited by Gullit mind, didn’t want Dalglish at all. We did try to get Bobby after KK, but he was a principled man and employed by Barca even if it was. Glorified DOF role. We actually wanted Fergie first of all and he kind of used our interest to get a better deal and more transfer spending at Man Utd, if he had taken over from KK we win our first title since 1927.