Our main problem...

[juniatmoko]

We have no leaders because we have nobody of genuine quality. Nobody to lead by example, in nearly every game.

 

 

very true.......

[Yorkie]

Our main problem is that we've got nowt in centre-midfield. A good centre-midfield improves everything, basically. Gives the strikers more service, gives the defense more protection, gives the wingers something to pick up on.

 

I don't think the personnel in defense or attack is that bad at all. I've maintained that from the word go. The centre-midfield is shocking. Emre is the best of the lot, and he can only play at home and is usually best as an impact sub. Barton's wank and as unstable as nitroglicerine. Butt is utterly woeful. Smith is utterly woeful. Geremi's alright but doesn't offer much.

[Guest fraser]

So, NE5, what you are actually saying here is that you are proud of yesterdays performance?

 

Maybe you were happy to see us gain valuable points against Bolton and Boro too?

 

Maybe you are also happy to note that the once great messiah has coached his team to get 4 shots on target in 5 games?

 

Lets be honest here, I dont rate Keegan, never really have to be honest and after conceding 4 against Villa yesterday and still playing the lokes of Carr, Butt and Smith when Viduka, Enrigue and Faye would have been better employed just reminds me what I already know.

 

Keegan is a nice bloke but we are heading towards the championship under his stewardship.

 

By the way, you dont need to show yourself up anymore than you normally do as being the prize dope of the forum by making silly little primary schoool remarks.

 

There again, carry on, dopey. Everyone on here needs to have a good laugh and you are certainly, by a long way, the CLOWN PRINCE of this forum.

 

shame but the last time you made those sort of comments, a few people came along and told you what a clown you were and agreed with me. See the link in my last post.

 

Only a complete idiot is judging Keegan after 5 games. Like those in your london press that you read. The same people who assured us ie you, that finishing runners up in the premiership is "tactically naive" and "failure".

 

I remember you being one of those people who said that Souness should have time, and you deny that of Keegan.

 

Only one clown here, cobber.

 

If we go down, the seeds of it were sown by the s*** transfer policy and sub standard players we brought in last summer, me and only a handful of others who said so at the time what it was and is now being exposed.

 

Change your long range telescope, or your newspaper, is my advice.

 

 

 

I could agree with this if not for  "If we go down, the seeds of it were sown by the s*** transfer policy and sub standard players we brought in last summer".

 

The present squad is a result of years of mismanagement at all levels of the club, probably starting with the recruitment of Bowyer. The squad here has had no depth in quality for years. You're right that Keegan is not to blame.

[Guest toonlass]

So, NE5, what you are actually saying here is that you are proud of yesterdays performance?

 

Maybe you were happy to see us gain valuable points against Bolton and Boro too?

 

Maybe you are also happy to note that the once great messiah has coached his team to get 4 shots on target in 5 games?

 

Lets be honest here, I dont rate Keegan, never really have to be honest and after conceding 4 against Villa yesterday and still playing the lokes of Carr, Butt and Smith when Viduka, Enrigue and Faye would have been better employed just reminds me what I already know.

 

Keegan is a nice bloke but we are heading towards the championship under his stewardship.

 

By the way, you dont need to show yourself up anymore than you normally do as being the prize dope of the forum by making silly little primary schoool remarks.

 

There again, carry on, dopey. Everyone on here needs to have a good laugh and you are certainly, by a long way, the CLOWN PRINCE of this forum.

 

shame but the last time you made those sort of comments, a few people came along and told you what a clown you were and agreed with me. See the link in my last post.

 

Only a complete idiot is judging Keegan after 5 games. Like those in your london press that you read. The same people who assured us ie you, that finishing runners up in the premiership is "tactically naive" and "failure".

 

I remember you being one of those people who said that Souness should have time, and you deny that of Keegan.

 

Only one clown here, cobber.

 

If we go down, the seeds of it were sown by the s*** transfer policy and sub standard players we brought in last summer, me and only a handful of others who said so at the time what it was and is now being exposed.

 

Change your long range telescope, or your newspaper, is my advice.

 

 

 

I could agree with this if not for  "If we go down, the seeds of it were sown by the s*** transfer policy and sub standard players we brought in last summer".

 

The present squad is a result of years of mismanagement at all levels of the club, probably starting with the recruitment of Bowyer. The squad here has had no depth in quality for years. You're right that Keegan is not to blame.

 

blueyes.gif

[Guest Sniffer]

Why starting with the recruitment of Bowyer?

 

Why not the fortunes wasted on the likes of cort, marcelhino, viana,luque..........

[Dave]

Why starting with the recruitment of Bowyer?

 

Why not the fortunes wasted on the likes of cort, marcelhino, viana,luque..........

 

Because that was the summer where significant investment may have pushed us on to the next level. We were primed for it having finished third, and all we signed was Bowyer on a free.

[Mr Logic]

Aye, there was a decision made, (in someone's pocket), that that would do. I think they niavely thought the squad was made for the forseeable future. Perhaps I'm being charitable there. It was a very bad decision that the club seems to have been struggling with ever since.

[Mick]

Why starting with the recruitment of Bowyer?

 

Why not the fortunes wasted on the likes of cort, marcelhino, viana,luque..........

 

Bobby Robson spent less than £6 million net per year, he also lifted us 10 league places which was worth £5 million one year on improved league places alone, two other years brought in an extra £4 million and £4.5 million, that's by using his starting position as a benchmark.  On top of that he also brought in money from the CL and other European games which we had under him.

 

In reality he didn't spend much at all so although he made mistakes, he probably financed them himself.  Robson must be one of the cheapest managers we've ever had.

[NE5]

Why starting with the recruitment of Bowyer?

 

Why not the fortunes wasted on the likes of cort, marcelhino, viana,luque..........

 

Because that was the summer where significant investment may have pushed us on to the next level. We were primed for it having finished third, and all we signed was Bowyer on a free.

 

we spent 40m quid in 2-3 years to get into the CL DAve, and 9m on Woodgate in the January, what budget did that come out of ?

 

We made "significant investment" under Souness, nobody can say for certain that MORE "significant investment" in that summer of 2003 woudln't also have been wasted. Then the club would be slated for wasting money.

 

Its an impossible call this one. I for one was happy with the club spendign what it did to get into the CL in the first place, thats not to say I didn't want to go further of course I did, but the club spent a lot of money.

 

 

[Guest fraser]

Why starting with the recruitment of Bowyer?

 

Why not the fortunes wasted on the likes of cort, marcelhino, viana,luque..........

 

Because that was the summer where significant investment may have pushed us on to the next level. We were primed for it having finished third, and all we signed was Bowyer on a free.

 

we spent 40m quid in 2-3 years to get into the CL DAve, and 9m on Woodgate in the January, what budget did that come out of ?

 

We made "significant investment" under Souness, nobody can say for certain that MORE "significant investment" in that summer of 2003 woudln't also have been wasted. Then the club would be slated for wasting money.

 

Its an impossible call this one. I for one was happy with the club spendign what it did to get into the CL in the first place, thats not to say I didn't want to go further of course I did, but the club spent a lot of money.

 

 

 

Recruiting Souness was part of the mismanagement.

[Dave]

Why starting with the recruitment of Bowyer?

 

Why not the fortunes wasted on the likes of cort, marcelhino, viana,luque..........

 

Because that was the summer where significant investment may have pushed us on to the next level. We were primed for it having finished third, and all we signed was Bowyer on a free.

 

we spent 40m quid in 2-3 years to get into the CL DAve, and 9m on Woodgate in the January, what budget did that come out of ?

 

We made "significant investment" under Souness, nobody can say for certain that MORE "significant investment" in that summer of 2003 woudln't also have been wasted. Then the club would be slated for wasting money.

 

Its an impossible call this one. I for one was happy with the club spendign what it did to get into the CL in the first place, thats not to say I didn't want to go further of course I did, but the club spent a lot of money.

 

 

 

Never said they didn't spend a lot of money, they obviously did. But we'd finished third. I just think what could have been if we'd done more that summer. Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but I can't imagine any of the other top clubs going an entire summer and only signing one person on a free. And a player like Bowyer too. As for your mention of Souness, was he ever likely to get us up there? Nope.

 

Anyway, I only posted the above in reply to Sniffer, who wondered why Bowyer was mentioned in particular. It was all downhill from there.

[Guest BooBoo]

The Bowyer summer followeby the shameful appointments of Graeme Soumess and Roeder have set us down a path where it now seems a long long way from European football (hell, even top half finishes).

[Guest Sniffer]

Then the post should say that the mismanagement started when we only signed Bowyer, Dave.

 

As it stands it implies that it was  Bowyer's fault when, in fact, he was just one of a long list of signings by a number of managers that didn't work out. At least he was the nice price unlike a lot of them.

[Dave]

Then the post should say that the mismanagement started when we only signed Bowyer, Dave.

 

As it stands it implies that it was  Bowyer's fault when, in fact, he was just one of a long list of signings by a number of managers that didn't work out. At least he was the nice price unlike a lot of them.

 

It doesn't read like that at all IMO. In any case, I'm sure he can explain it for himself.

[Mick]

 

we spent 40m quid in 2-3 years to get into the CL DAve, and 9m on Woodgate in the January, what budget did that come out of ?

 

We made "significant investment" under Souness, nobody can say for certain that MORE "significant investment" in that summer of 2003 woudln't also have been wasted. Then the club would be slated for wasting money.

 

Its an impossible call this one. I for one was happy with the club spendign what it did to get into the CL in the first place, thats not to say I didn't want to go further of course I did, but the club spent a lot of money.

 

 

 

We spent £58,790,000 gross in the three years leading up to the CL, £19,596,666 per year.  We brought in £24,050,000 in that time which gave us a net spend of £34,740,000 which works out at £11,580,000 (net) per year for the first three years leading up to the CL.

 

Bobby spent £75,290,000 in total and brought in £43,600,000.  Bobby had a net spend of £31,690,000 which works out at £6,338,000 per year.

 

Allardyce spent £24,300,000 and brought in £16,200,000 which is a net spend of £8,100,000, this includes the rumoured £2,000,000 we got for Luque.  Allardyce was given more per year than Sir Bobby both in terms of gross and net, Bobby was given a lot less to spend after we qualified so it's hardly surprising that we went backwards.

 

[Guest Sniffer]

Net spends are very misleading.

 

You can seemingly balance the books but leave the next manager with no saleable players because you bought so badly.

[Mick]

Net spends are very misleading.

 

You can seemingly balance the books but leave the next manager with no saleable players because you bought so badly.

 

Agreed, that's why I showed both so people could decide for themselves, it's easy using the figures which suit your argument the best, I didn't want to do that.

 

Bobby not spending the Woodgate money boosted his income and reduced his net spend but it was also part of the reason why he got the push, if he’d spent in on a replacement for Woodgate he might have not been sacked.

[NE5]

 

we spent 40m quid in 2-3 years to get into the CL DAve, and 9m on Woodgate in the January, what budget did that come out of ?

 

We made "significant investment" under Souness, nobody can say for certain that MORE "significant investment" in that summer of 2003 woudln't also have been wasted. Then the club would be slated for wasting money.

 

Its an impossible call this one. I for one was happy with the club spendign what it did to get into the CL in the first place, thats not to say I didn't want to go further of course I did, but the club spent a lot of money.

 

 

 

We spent £58,790,000 gross in the three years leading up to the CL, £19,596,666 per year.  We brought in £24,050,000 in that time which gave us a net spend of £34,740,000 which works out at £11,580,000 (net) per year for the first three years leading up to the CL.

 

Bobby spent £75,290,000 in total and brought in £43,600,000.  Bobby had a net spend of £31,690,000 which works out at £6,338,000 per year.

 

Allardyce spent £24,300,000 and brought in £16,200,000 which is a net spend of £8,100,000, this includes the rumoured £2,000,000 we got for Luque.  Allardyce was given more per year than Sir Bobby both in terms of gross and net, Bobby was given a lot less to spend after we qualified so it's hardly surprising that we went backwards.

 

 

console yourself if we are relegated with the thought that the new board did absolutely nothing in the January transfer window, putting us possibly in the worst position for many years ie relegated

 

Still, its good for the "business" as we can't have the club seeing the possibility of a relegation fight and actually attempting to do something to prevent it.

 

Maybe this 17 year old Italian kid can come into the team, being the new Michael Chopra etc etc perhaps this is the "plan"

 

Allardyce was commenting last August at how he felt isolated and was being given no support. Remember ? Actually, as you ignored it at the time I don't suppose you will acknowledge it now.

 

Meanwhile they have possibly appointed a manager without telling him about incorporating a new structure of management at the club, one which will possibly undermine him doing his job and lead to him walking out. Great eh. Its many years since I saw a Newcastle lose a manager through having his authority undermined. Oh wait a moment, it was Keegan, under Sir John Hall, when the club went PLC, despite you insisting that Sir John Hall should get all the credit for Keegans first spell even though he didn't want to appoint him and was then responsible for losing him.

 

Keegan may well have been promised funds, in fact he probably has otherwise he wouldn't be here. Lets hope they keep their word, and he doesn't say its "not like in the brochure" as he did under Sir John Hall, and also hope their Director of Football doesn't stick his nose into the managers job, where either scenario would lead to him walking out of the club. Another situation I'm sure wasn't explained to him because I just don't think he would have taken the job without total control.

 

This is relevant to the thread, and your post BTW. The management of the club this season has been a shambles.

 

 

[Guest Sniffer]

Deja vu all over again.

[Syrette]

http://www.uni.uiuc.edu/og/media/archive/photos/2007/04/25/gargoyle_guide_to_the_week_in_11/deja_vu.jpg

[NE5]

Deja vu all over again.

 

I agreed with your comments about net spend. We are in a very dangerous position, because we've played a dangerous game with lack of numbers and lack of quality. The amount of money needed to be spent to stay up is pretty much irrelevant, it will be an absolute disaster if we get relegated.

 

 

[Mick]

 

console yourself if we are relegated with the thought that the new board did absolutely nothing in the January transfer window, putting us nearer the position we were in before the worstest board in the world ever, found us 16 years ago, than we have ever been since.

 

Still, its good for the "business" as we can't have the club seeing the possibility of a relegation fight and actually attempting to do something to prevent it.

 

Maybe this 17 year old Italian kid can come into the team, being the new Michael Chopra etc etc perhaps this is the "plan"

 

Your excuses for the new board and determination to portray Shepherd in the worst light at any possible opportunity, knows no bounds.

 

Allardyce was commenting last August at how he felt isolated and was being given no support. Remember ? Actually, as you ignored it at the time I don't suppose you will acknowledge it now.

 

Meanwhile they have possibly appointed a manager without telling him about incorporating a new structure of management at the club, one which will possibly undermine him doing his job and lead to him walking out. Great eh. Its many years since I saw a Newcastle lose a manager through having his authority undermined. Oh wait a moment, it was Keegan, under Sir John Hall, when the club went PLC, despite you insisting that Sir John Hall should get all the credit for Keegans first spell even though he didn't want to appoint him and was then responsible for losing him.

 

You couldn't make it up.

 

Keegan may well have been promised funds, in fact he probably has otherwise he wouldn't be here. Lets hope they keep their word, and he doesn't say its "not like in the brochure" as he did under Sir John Hall, and also hope their Director of Football doesn't stick his nose into the managers job, where either scenario would lead to him walking out of the club. Another situation I'm sure wasn't explained to him because I just don't think he would have taken the job without total control.

 

Remind me again, how many managers complained about lack of support from the board between 1997 and last summer, to the extent that they walked out on the club.

 

This is relevant to the thread, and your post, it being about a comparison between the boards of the club, but I don't think for a moment you will correctly and honestly address the points I am making.

 

 

 

Nothing will be a consolation if we do get relegated, including the knowledge that Keegan was given money to spend in January and that we had a £7 million bid for Woodgate excepted only for him to turn us down, maybe Keegan and Boro were lying and we didn't make that offer because we weren’t going to back Keegan with cash.

 

I remember Allardyce complaining that things were moving too slowly in the transfer market when the club was first taken over, I also remember him thanking Chris Mort or Mike Ashley for allowing him to spend more money than he’d ever had in one transfer window, do you remember that?

 

Regarding the new structure, was Keegan lying when he recently said that he was informed about the changes?

 

You’ve just made up a baseless post and then commented that you couldn’t make it up, we’ll you’re wrong and you did make it up.

 

Keegan has said since joining us that he left because the job wasn’t what it said in the brochure, he then said this time he didn’t see a brochure.

 

Again, Keegan has said that he knew changes were going to be made at the club, and he knew Dennis Wise was an option.

 

Between 1997 and last summer we haven’t had one who has walked out and complained about a lack of support but we have had one come out and say he didn’t have much say in who came in as transfers, he also said he’d spoken to other former managers who complained about the same thing.  I'm not sure if that is true because he was s*** but at least I'm prepared to say he's probably bull-shitting, if it was the other way around, it would become fact as far as you were concerned.

[TRon]

Our main problem is that we've got nowt in centre-midfield. A good centre-midfield improves everything, basically. Gives the strikers more service, gives the defense more protection, gives the wingers something to pick up on.

 

I don't think the personnel in defense or attack is that bad at all. I've maintained that from the word go. The centre-midfield is shocking. Emre is the best of the lot, and he can only play at home and is usually best as an impact sub. Barton's wank and as unstable as nitroglicerine. Butt is utterly woeful. Smith is utterly woeful. Geremi's alright but doesn't offer much.

 

Just seen this post now, and I agree 100% (started a new topic because this one seemed to be about captaincy). Watch the better Premier sides and their movement and passing through the middle is in a different league.

[Guest Lefty Toon]

Why starting with the recruitment of Bowyer?

 

Why not the fortunes wasted on the likes of cort, marcelhino, viana,luque..........

 

Because that was the summer where significant investment may have pushed us on to the next level. We were primed for it having finished third, and all we signed was Bowyer on a free.

 

we spent 40m quid in 2-3 years to get into the CL DAve, and 9m on Woodgate in the January, what budget did that come out of ?

 

We made "significant investment" under Souness, nobody can say for certain that MORE "significant investment" in that summer of 2003 woudln't also have been wasted. Then the club would be slated for wasting money.

 

Its an impossible call this one. I for one was happy with the club spendign what it did to get into the CL in the first place, thats not to say I didn't want to go further of course I did, but the club spent a lot of money.

 

 

 

Recruiting Souness was part of the mismanagement.

NE5 that has to hurt ........The fat mans cookie started crumbing right at that moment.

[NE5]

Why starting with the recruitment of Bowyer?

 

Why not the fortunes wasted on the likes of cort, marcelhino, viana,luque..........

 

Because that was the summer where significant investment may have pushed us on to the next level. We were primed for it having finished third, and all we signed was Bowyer on a free.

 

we spent 40m quid in 2-3 years to get into the CL DAve, and 9m on Woodgate in the January, what budget did that come out of ?

 

We made "significant investment" under Souness, nobody can say for certain that MORE "significant investment" in that summer of 2003 woudln't also have been wasted. Then the club would be slated for wasting money.

 

Its an impossible call this one. I for one was happy with the club spendign what it did to get into the CL in the first place, thats not to say I didn't want to go further of course I did, but the club spent a lot of money.

 

 

Recruiting Souness was part of the mismanagement.

NE5 that has to hurt ........The fat mans cookie started crumbing right at that moment.

 

hurt ?

 

Why would it hurt ? The only thing that hurts is to see the club lurching from crisis to crisis and a relegation fight, because make no mistake about it, we are in a relegation fight, with a too small number of players, and not enough quality either. 

 

I'm not defending, or attacking anybody, to the point of paranoia. I'm just stating facts. The Halls and Shepherd appointed the disastrous Souness. Thats a fact too.

 

Mort and Ashley have done precisely nothing as yet, and have a long way to go to prove themselves as the equals of the people they replaced. Thats also a fact. I don't see the problem with saying this. I think those who say differently have a problem, not me. Like Chez Given and one or two others, I can point out that their running of the club so far has been an absolute shambles, and could yet result in relegation. And nothing was done about it in the transfer window. What sort of mismanagement would you call this ?

 

I don't really want to labour this point, but what then ?