Keegan will have £100M to spend

[madras]

So where's everyone who said it was a mistake that Keegan didn't sign anyone?

 

I'm here

 

We'll see in summer if it was a mistake or not though.

 

 

Whatever happens, Keegan made a decision which has given him 4 more months to take a look at the players that he has at his disposal and 4 more months for him to extensively scout the players that he might end up buying.

 

He's been vindicated in his decision to stick with the squad and see the season through

 

By not getting relegated? Thats all we cared about on Jan 15th? Ok

 

One performance doesnt make a season but if this is backed up by wins against Reading and Portsmouth, i'll agree with you.

 

As it stands, in reality, we are just another side to have knocked 4 past Spurs this season.

 

We were always going to end up as a mid-table team with or without Allardyce because we hadn't accumulated enough points in the easy part of our season so yea, I'd say yea, not getting relegated was the only major goal after Allardyce got sacked. We could have gotten an extra couple of mill from prize money but that would have meant Keegan needing to spend money on players he hadn't scouted and on positions he might have been unsure about (eg. leftback). European football wasn't on the table anyway considering the teams ahead of us at that time, and the fact that now there's only one automatic UEFA Cup place surely vindicates his decision not to spend any money even more.

 

I don't see how his decision not to sign anyone can be construed as a negative one, especially now with the benefit of hindsight and seeing that the short-term benefits weren't much (the aforementioned couple of mill of prize money) but there was a definitely a long-term risk (paying over-the-top fees and wages for average players) there. He gambled on us surviving and it's worked (barring a crazy collapse), and now he'll be way surer of the positions that need strengthening, the players that will stay/go and of course he's had lots of extra time to eye up prospective players as well.

i think we may well have gone down had allardyce stayed.

[Mick]

And if the gamble comes off, given the level of knowledge of those making those decisions and the probability of it possibly failing, i'm more inclined to hand lady-luck the credit than the Redknapp-tapper Mort.

 

I thought Keegan was approached at the same time as Redknapp but Keegan said that he wanted to speak to Ashley first, appointing Keegan had nothing to do with luck.

[Guest float one in]

So where's everyone who said it was a mistake that Keegan didn't sign anyone?

 

I'm here

 

We'll see in summer if it was a mistake or not though.

 

 

Whatever happens, Keegan made a decision which has given him 4 more months to take a look at the players that he has at his disposal and 4 more months for him to extensively scout the players that he might end up buying.

 

He's been vindicated in his decision to stick with the squad and see the season through

 

By not getting relegated? Thats all we cared about on Jan 15th? Ok

 

One performance doesnt make a season but if this is backed up by wins against Reading and Portsmouth, i'll agree with you.

 

As it stands, in reality, we are just another side to have knocked 4 past Spurs this season.

 

We were always going to end up as a mid-table team with or without Allardyce because we hadn't accumulated enough points in the easy part of our season so yea, I'd say yea, not getting relegated was the only major goal after Allardyce got sacked. We could have gotten an extra couple of mill from prize money but that would have meant Keegan needing to spend money on players he hadn't scouted and on positions he might have been unsure about (eg. leftback). European football wasn't on the table anyway considering the teams ahead of us at that time, and the fact that now there's only one automatic UEFA Cup place surely vindicates his decision not to spend any money even more.

 

I don't see how his decision not to sign anyone can be construed as a negative one, especially now with the benefit of hindsight and seeing that the short-term benefits weren't much (the aforementioned couple of mill of prize money) but there was a definitely a long-term risk (paying over-the-top fees and wages for average players) there. He gambled on us surviving and it's worked (barring a crazy collapse), and now he'll be way surer of the positions that need strengthening, the players that will stay/go and of course he's had lots of extra time to eye up prospective players as well.

i think we may well have gone down had allardyce stayed.

 

Was thinking that myself earlier on - imagining he stayed and assuming we got howked by Man U and Arsenal in similar fashion to how we did after he left (not an unreasonable assumption I reckon), would he have been able to get us mounting a recovery the way we have done under KK in the last month? The players didn't want to put it in for him before Christmas, so I'd think there mentality would have been even worse after the fixtures we had in Jan and Feb. Again all hypothetical of course!