Kevin Keegan

[Guest Howaythetoon]

What fucked the club up was the IPO, knocked oeverything off course and unwinded the clock almost.

[summerof69]

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.

 

 

Completely agree with this btw, well aside from the fact that it's not doable in the slightest. love the romantacism though, HTT.  :love:

[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.

 

 

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

All about opinions innit, we certainly had a good few seasons to choose from.

[HaydnNUFC]

Did we not go for SBR after KK's departure in 1997? Or was that just rumours?

[Guest Howaythetoon]

Did we not go for SBR after KK's departure in 1997? Or was that just rumours?

 

We did aye.

[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.

All about opinions innit, we certainly had a good few seasons to choose from.

 

It says it all that the season we finished 5th after selling Cole, KK regarded it as a major disappointment and a failure of a season, yet many considered that we played the best footy that season. Again I disagree, but for a period we were unstoppable and did play good stuff.

[Guest neesy111]

Did we not go for SBR after KK's departure in 1997? Or was that just rumours?

 

We did, but he didn't want to break his contract with Barcelona.  He said that if had know that they were going to effectively sack him in the summer then he would of joined us.

[HaydnNUFC]

Did we not go for SBR after KK's departure in 1997? Or was that just rumours?

 

We did aye.

One of the many 'what ifs' in recent history. Would love to have seen how Bobby would've done with that team.

[Guest Howaythetoon]

I think again we would have continued to compete and maybe would have won something, I think he would have dealt with the IPO better as well given his contacts in the sport RE players and transfers. I don’t know how serious were were about Fergie. But if he arrived, it would have guaranteed a title IMO.

[Robster]

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.

Ran off crying? Embarrassing use of words.

[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.

 

 

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

All about opinions innit, we certainly had a good few seasons to choose from.

 

It says it all that the season we finished 5th after selling Cole, KK regarded it as a major disappointment and a failure of a season, yet many considered that we played the best footy that season. Again I disagree, but for a period we were unstoppable and did play good stuff.

6th and I only think the start of the season was peak Keegan. The away loss to Wimbledon before Christmas onwards we were nowhere near as good and then worse again after Cole was sold. That's how I remember it like...I was 10. Still got all the videos though.

 

[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.

All about opinions innit, we certainly had a good few seasons to choose from.

 

It says it all that the season we finished 5th after selling Cole, KK regarded it as a major disappointment and a failure of a season, yet many considered that we played the best footy that season. Again I disagree, but for a period we were unstoppable and did play good stuff.

6th and I only think the start of the season was peak Keegan. The away loss to Wimbledon before Christmas onwards we were nowhere near as good and then worse again after Cole was sold. That's how I remember it like...I was 10. Still got all the videos though.

 

 

Aye you are right. I liked Kitson, but he was no Cole and didn’t fully fit in with the style of play which hindered us. I’m sure we asked about Sir Les in January along with Collymore and Chris Armstrong. KK always wanted Ferdinand though.

[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.

 

 

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

All about opinions innit, we certainly had a good few seasons to choose from.

 

It says it all that the season we finished 5th after selling Cole, KK regarded it as a major disappointment and a failure of a season, yet many considered that we played the best footy that season. Again I disagree, but for a period we were unstoppable and did play good stuff.

6th and I only think the start of the season was peak Keegan. The away loss to Wimbledon before Christmas onwards we were nowhere near as good and then worse again after Cole was sold. That's how I remember it like...I was 10. Still got all the videos though.

 

 

Aye you are right. I liked Kitson, but he was no Cole and didn’t fully fit in with the style of play which hindered us. I’m sure we asked about Sir Les in January along with Collymore and Chris Armstrong. KK always wanted Ferdinand though.

 

Aye, being a daft 10 year old and not knowing any better, I was gutted that we didn't sign Roberto Baggio when we got Ferdinand though. On a similar note, thank we didn't get John Solako and went for Ginola as well.

[Guest Howaythetoon]

During those mad months we actually tried to sign or were linked to Baggio, Signori (a personal fave of mine), Le Tissier,  Bergkamp and Tino who we eventually signed. I was gutted we didn’t sign Armstrong mind being a Geordie. He was injury prone though.

[Tooj]

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.

Ran off crying? Embarrassing use of words.

Ridiculous that anybody would say such a thin really.

[binnsy]

We should start a crowd funding page to get a statue or monument of KK made, Sir Bobby has one plus a garden and as great as he was, his achievements are nothing compared to KK’s. Would love SJP to be lined with key players and people in our history in some form of recognition be it a statue, a plaque or whatever.

 

agree about KK 100%, he should certainly have a statue or stand named after him.  As much as i loved Sir Bobby it does seem bizarre that he has the statue and the garden while Joe Harvey, who's achievements at the club totally dwarf Sir Bobby just has a plaque on the side of the gallowgate.

[Altamullan]

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.

Alreet, TG?

[Cronky]

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

 

That's a good summary. Keegan transformed the whole thinking of the club, and in a sense we'll never go back to a pre-Keegan era, even though we haven't fulfilled his dreams of success.

 

But Robson had the characteristic of the great manager, which is to over-achieve on the resources available. He did it with Ipswich, and he did it with us.

 

Who knows whether he would have won in 96, because I think he would have felt the pressure as well. But for sure, if he'd have failed, he'd have picked himself up and kept going.

[UncleBingo]

 

 

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.

All about opinions innit, we certainly had a good few seasons to choose from.

 

It says it all that the season we finished 5th after selling Cole, KK regarded it as a major disappointment and a failure of a season, yet many considered that we played the best footy that season. Again I disagree, but for a period we were unstoppable and did play good stuff.

6th and I only think the start of the season was peak Keegan. The away loss to Wimbledon before Christmas onwards we were nowhere near as good and then worse again after Cole was sold. That's how I remember it like...I was 10. Still got all the videos though.

 

 

Aye you are right. I liked Kitson, but he was no Cole and didn’t fully fit in with the style of play which hindered us. I’m sure we asked about Sir Les in January along with Collymore and Chris Armstrong. KK always wanted Ferdinand though.

 

Aye, being a daft 10 year old and not knowing any better, I was gutted that we didn't sign Roberto Baggio when we got Ferdinand though. On a similar note, thank we didn't get John Solako and went for Ginola as well.

 

We actually had a deal agreed to buy George Weah and Ginola from PSG at the same time, but were gazumped by Milan.....Weah actually wanted the Newcastle move.

 

Just imagine man.....

[Yorkie]

There's a brilliant montage on YouTube compiling all of the local news stories about Keegan's return as manager in 1992. He has so much honesty and so much desire and love for the club and its fans. He really, truly believed he could bring us to the top (even then, from the doldrums) - which is so satisfying to watch in hindsight, knowing how great we became. Those weren't platitudes, he really believed it.

 

I'm too young to remember the period but I fully understand and appreciate the profound impact he had.

[Jackie Broon]

There's a brilliant montage on YouTube compiling all of the local news stories about Keegan's return as manager in 1992. He has so much honesty and so much desire and love for the club and its fans. He really, truly believed he could bring us to the top (even then, from the doldrums) - which is so satisfying to watch in hindsight, knowing how great we became. Those weren't platitudes, he really believed it.

 

I'm too young to remember the period but I fully understand and appreciate the profound impact he had.

 

I remember it like it was yesterday. On the day it was announced I was in an English lesson at school (Heaton Manor Benton site) and the deputy head burst into the room and said "guess who is the new Newcastle manager... Kevin Keegan!" he went round the whole school doing that.

 

I remember the impact he had on the city as a player as well. I was only 8 when he flew off in the helicopter and not interested in football at all but I loved Kevin Keegan.

[Guest Howaythetoon]

As kids before KK come most of the boys in my street and at school were not interested in football at all, then boom, every kid started playing football, talking about going to the match and wearing Toon tops. NUFC gained a whole new generation of lifelong fans as a result of KK because those kids, and I was one of them, would not have bothered otherwise and who could blame them. A tin pot club, run down stadium, likely to be playing 3rd tier football. Before the Magpie group and KK, fathers had given up on the club and again rightly so. Without KK and of course SJH we would have sunk and sunk and would be a club with 15-20k fans yo-yoing around the lower leagues in an old stadium not fit for top-flight football. Within 5 years we went from making a loss of 6m to turning over more than any other club in the world except for Man Utd. The stadium was rebuilt into one of the best in the world, we played some of the best football in the world and we also one of the best teams in the world with top players capable of beating anyone and winning anything. KK drove all of that because he believed we could be that kind of club when no one else could and that was remarkable. Turn back time and walk into that club and you would be sectioned for even thinking you could even get promoted that’s how shitty the club was.

[cp40]

As kids before KK come most of the boys in my street and at school were not interested in football at all, then boom, every kid started playing football, talking about going to the match and wearing Toon tops. NUFC gained a whole new generation of lifelong fans as a result of KK because those kids, and I was one of them, would not have bothered otherwise and who could blame them. A tin pot club, run down stadium, likely to be playing 3rd tier football. Before the Magpie group and KK, fathers had given up on the club and again rightly so. Without KK and of course SJH we would have sunk and sunk and would be a club with 15-20k fans yo-yoing around the lower leagues in an old stadium not fit for top-flight football. Within 5 years we went from making a loss of 6m to turning over more than any other club in the world except for Man Utd. The stadium was rebuilt into one of the best in the world, we played some of the best football in the world and we also one of the best teams in the world with top players capable of beating anyone and winning anything. KK drove all of that because he believed we could be that kind of club when no one else could and that was remarkable. Turn back time and walk into that club and you would be sectioned for even thinking you could even get promoted that’s how shitty the club was.

 

similar thing happened in 82- when he came here to play, and re-energised the club.

[Shearergol]

As kids before KK come most of the boys in my street and at school were not interested in football at all, then boom, every kid started playing football, talking about going to the match and wearing Toon tops. NUFC gained a whole new generation of lifelong fans as a result of KK because those kids, and I was one of them, would not have bothered otherwise and who could blame them. A tin pot club, run down stadium, likely to be playing 3rd tier football. Before the Magpie group and KK, fathers had given up on the club and again rightly so. Without KK and of course SJH we would have sunk and sunk and would be a club with 15-20k fans yo-yoing around the lower leagues in an old stadium not fit for top-flight football. Within 5 years we went from making a loss of 6m to turning over more than any other club in the world except for Man Utd. The stadium was rebuilt into one of the best in the world, we played some of the best football in the world and we also one of the best teams in the world with top players capable of beating anyone and winning anything. KK drove all of that because he believed we could be that kind of club when no one else could and that was remarkable. Turn back time and walk into that club and you would be sectioned for even thinking you could even get promoted that’s how shitty the club was.

 

similar thing happened in 82- when he came here to play, and re-energised the club.

 

The year they became my club. I was 5, he’s the reason i’m a fan. So I should hate him.

[Incognito]

 

 

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.

All about opinions innit, we certainly had a good few seasons to choose from.

 

It says it all that the season we finished 5th after selling Cole, KK regarded it as a major disappointment and a failure of a season, yet many considered that we played the best footy that season. Again I disagree, but for a period we were unstoppable and did play good stuff.

6th and I only think the start of the season was peak Keegan. The away loss to Wimbledon before Christmas onwards we were nowhere near as good and then worse again after Cole was sold. That's how I remember it like...I was 10. Still got all the videos though.

 

 

Aye you are right. I liked Kitson, but he was no Cole and didn’t fully fit in with the style of play which hindered us. I’m sure we asked about Sir Les in January along with Collymore and Chris Armstrong. KK always wanted Ferdinand though.

 

Aye, being a daft 10 year old and not knowing any better, I was gutted that we didn't sign Roberto Baggio when we got Ferdinand though. On a similar note, thank we didn't get John Solako and went for Ginola as well.

That Wimbledon defeat , I had the misfortune to be there at Selhurst Park for. We were bullied off the pitch , Warren Barton was superb for them. I'm sure that game made Kev buy him. Mike Hooper shit himself every time the ball got within 40 yards of the goal. Ruel Fox's debut too.