Timing: Our past, the present, our future? by NE5

[macbeth]

Top post.

 

But why is it strange that you agree with me?  :confused:

 

sorry, "strangely" wasn't aimed at you. I always have a post code in my head when I start these things. :winking:

[OzzieMandias]

Douglas Hall has the international remit for this  but that cannot be taken seriously at all. The best I can say about him is that he does not seem to making things worse.

 

He's pulling £500,000 a year. I wonder what proportion that represents of our actual income from "international marketing"? Shirt sales, basically. Maybe a bit of web business. But that's surely it.

[Howaythelads]

I look forward to the day when this thread is rendered completely pointless.  It's pretty close already.

 

It became that, when you decided to argue with factual information. However, the opportunity is still there to prove otherwise, so justifying your "opinion"

 

 

I might as well be arguing with a creationist.  You just sidestep arguments and bring up others that have no direct relevance to the core issue, play the 'facts' card and claim victory.  Personally I think you regard yourself as a better fan for supporting the current shower in charge at NUFC against the masses of those that disagree with you; you're more faithful, longer-serving.  Well done. 

 

Have NUFC declined, consistently, since the days of SJH/Keegan et al?  Apart from a brief reawakening under Bobby Robson, yes, we have.  More and more money spent on less and less return.  Apparently no-one's truly responsible for our decline as we have no divine right to be better, and if you weren't around when football was played between Chinese villages with a pig's bladder on a stick than you don't know how good you have it now.

 

"The masses" don't disagree. This forum is not representative of the match going supporter.

 

You've just taken two words out of context and made an irrelevant point, surely?  As no one person can say what 'the masses' may or may not think I don't claim to speak for them, it's disingenuous.  While we're on the subject however:

 

"The supporters have identified Glenn as the man they want.  We have listened to them."

 

Doesn't seem to bother him to claim to speak for us all now, does it?

 

The irony will no doubt escape you. Look at the two bits in bold and the bit in italic then check who posted that tripe.

 

 

Argh.  There isn't any irony to be doing any escaping.

 

"The masses of those that disagree".

 

Does not equal

 

"The masses"

 

And I never said it did.

 

'Masses of those that disagree' is a subsection of 'the masses'.  What do you want, a Venn diagram?

 

Less waffle from you would do for starters.

[Howaythelads]

Freddy Shepherd inherits a club that has 2nd biggest income in the country and the fans should be happy that he's taken it from title challenges to scraping Uefa Cup places However, NE5 believes that he can a good chairman can take us backwards.

 

Shepherd hasn't made us qualify for europe because he's built a club capable of european qualification FFS! We've qualified for europe because it's all part and parcel of the backwards steps we're taking. If I were to be Chelsea chairman this season, they wouldn't be in league 3 next season, as taking a club backwards cannot happen that quickly.

 

So what has Shepherd done since SJH that has actually been an improvement?

 

Your second sentence makes no sense in English. Please clarify what you mean.

 

Moving on to the second paragraph and the bit in bold. Why do you think it's impossible to go from solid finishes in the top 6 to consistent bottom half finishes?

 

Good to know that once again you confirm your belief that the club MUST spend the money generated. That's your biggest mistake and comes from your odd reluctance to accept lessons from the past.

 

A good Chairman and Board back their manager and then it's down to the manager to get it right regarding the playing staff. Souness got it wrong, which is why we are where we are and have gone backward.

 

Here's where you come back with the copy and paste reply that Fred appointed Souness blah blah blah......  :roll:

[NE5]

NE5, the board (or chairman rather) has shown the desire and intention to take the club forwards and upwards, and make it one of the most successful in Europe. Regardless of the past, he's done a good job of fucking things up when it really mattered (spending owt 2003, manner of sacking of SBR, hiring GS, backing GS, Rooneygate, NOTW, this transfer window, hiring GR, etc...). Now, you can have all the desire and intention in the world, but if you're shit at application, then you will be found out, and you will ultimately fail to reach your goal. IMO, these are the grounds that Shepherd should part with the club on. It has nothing to do with the past, when you look at it this way. He's set out to achieve goals, and failed. Simple as.

 

We should applaud Mr. Shepherd, and say thanks for some wonderful memories, but thats all. It's time to move on, as we have come as far (up or down) as we can go under his tenure.

 

you may be right, but believe me a far worse scenario is having a board who have no ambition or courage to compete with the other big clubs. I have tried to point this out - this is not directed at you mind just a general reply within the thread. When you have a board who is like this they can appoint managers until doomsday and if they are good we will lose them and we will never succeed.

 

I don't consider regular european football to be shit application by the way. Until Souness, the previous 3 managers were all appointments that a majority of fans were happy with, quite a lot of fans would have chosen those managers themselves in fact.

 

Don't expect me to back a change to people who may not have ambition or the good of the club at heart, this would be a nightmare scenario and unfortunately you yourself, despite a pretty decent post, also seem to be unaware that is it highly possible - at least that is how I read your comment about "shit application".

 

 

[NE5]

 

Well, I don't agree that "masses" disagree with me, there may be a fair few people on here that do, but everyone is entitled to an "opinon"....however your comment about playing "the facts card and claiming victory" is pretty damning because if you wish to argue against facts then it makes you look pretty daft. You can't argue against facts. As I have said, if you aren't happy with "only" qualifying for europe regularly, you must think we have a divine right to do better, which is - to be honest - the view of one extremely naive individual.

 

The sky is blue; that is a fact.  At least it is if you live anywhere other than the UK...

 

"5th best club over the last decade" - that is an opinion formed from an interpretation of selected facts.

 

Accuse me of being naive if you like, but I'm not naive enough not to know my own language.

 

I'm not going to argue the "divine right" thing again as you're just repeating yourself.  It's been done.

My expectations are obviously higher than yours, that's all.  I'm dying for NUFC to do better and you don't get better by resting on your laurels.  We'll see how it goes through doing so, shall we?

 

We definitely don't have a divine right to go from the calibre of Robson, to Souness, to Roeder. 

 

By your own standards that's an obvious demonstration of decline, and entirely factual.

 

I have said and agreed that on the field, we have not had a manager as good as Keegan. But in other areas, where do you get the notion that continuing to finance the manager to buy the top players, building a new training complex and expanding the stadium is "declining" ? The truth is, and I'm sure you won't admit it and you won't be the only one, is that these moves are in fact the "forward planning" that quite a lot of people accuse the club of not making....despite it being repeatedly pointed out.

 

I appreciate that we have a new training complex - pushed for by Bobby Robson as I recall, lest we forget -  and I appreciate the stadium has been expanded, thus generating more profit, to buy more 'top players', well, on average our squad isn't the most balanced it's ever been and the top, top players aren't at our club.  But relative quality of players is another argument.

 

You tell me why the quality of manager we can now attract is nowhere near what it was in mid-90s and during the afterglow of SJH's chairmanship.  I'm all ears.

 

Only 4 clubs have qualified for europe more than us in the last decade, the same 4 clubs are the only ones with a higher average league position.

 

What is so difficult in interpreting that 

[NE5]

Well it seems to me that NE5 and those who support him are doing what they criticise others for. There apperas to be a modern day tendenct and its prevalent on this board that you cannot voice an opinion of disapproval, if you do you are not supporting the club.

Absolute nonsense and even more nonsensical to suggest that you should not be  a ticket holder if you are going to criticise any of the hierarchy or players.

The comparison of pre 92 with today is ridiculous, as I've said before pre 92 the board was dickensian and Sir John Halls involvement put the club back in the limelight with major investment.

However you can compare 92-96 with today and was is indisputal, other than to complete idiots, is since Keegan we have gone backwards both in terms of league position and quality on the pitch.

To argue against that is a joke. NE5 knows it and so do his happy rose tinted band of merry men, which is why he constantly fails to respond to any points made and tries switching the subject.

Hopefully this is the last word, but I doubt it, as the sensible ones among us know the truth and to prolong discussion merely gives NE5 something to do.

 

 

what I am saying - is nobody forces anyone to go and spend money supporting the club. Long term supporters will tell you that when the club was shit, nobody did !!!!! [well not so many as now...] Also fairly obvious is that nobody has forced you to go, not even yourself.

 

So - if you are not happy with spending money on a shit club, keep it in your pocket. Watch NUFC play in europe on the telly.

 

 

 

Its true that nobody forces anyone to buy the shirt from the club shop, or anyone to attend the games there is a distinction between supporting the club and the board.

 

I don't agree with a lot of Freddy's decisions or motives and truth be told would love him to be replaced. However, even if he were to be chairman until I die and we got relegated I would still buy the shirt because I support the club and am proud to show my colours so to speak.

 

There is a clear distinction between supporting the club and the board, you can do one without the other

 

nobody supports the board. Everybody supports the club. The point is, they are supporting the club because the board has gave them a club worth supporting . If they didn't do that, people would stop going. Some people may not understand this or like it, but its true. When the club wasn't worth supporting, people didn't support the club, other than the hard core supporters of 15-20,000.

 

As HTL says, replacing the current board with another unambitious one like pre-1992, would be a disaster, and the odds on that are heavily in favour of that rather than them being better. That doesn't make people "shepherd lovers" as Gem and his ilk laughingly say, only realistic.

 

You can of course ignore the view of someone who has been there, and think you know best if you like - and that is not aimed at you specifically.

 

 

 

So it's better the devil you know?  Is that the crux of it?

 

Give me names of people who you guarantee will run the club better than the 5th best in the country over a decade, showing ambition and desire to take the club upwards, and I will go for it.

If you can't, don't expect me to back people who may take the club back to days when they settled for bottom half of the league positions, due to selling our best players, and buying cheap replacements.

 

That is the crux of it, if you don't understand that, then there is really nothing else to say to that will cure your extreme naivety. It's quite amazing the amount of people who simply don't attempt or read or understand factual information. If you think playing regularly in europe, is the "devil", then you really are a sad case, and not living in the real world.

 

Are you sure you aren't a dumb manu supporter, thinking you have a divine right to success  bluesleep.gif

 

 

 

:roll:  A straightforward question really, so there was no need to come out swinging at me.  You should follow HTL's lead, who actually makes perfect sense without the aggro, rather than acting like a care in the community nut job  bluebiggrin.gif.

 

Since you're fond of putting words into people's mouths and assuming what they think, I'll do the same for you: 

 

1.  You're happy with the current board

2.  This board is massively better than pre SJH boards

3.  We're better off with this board than with someone else

 

Agree with point 2, I don't think anybody disagrees.  Regarding point 1, they've done well in the past but could do better imo.  Regarding 3 well that's a matter of opinion, not fact and the past is irrelevant to the question.  So no need to post your stock facts about Europe, league position etc thanks  :winking:

 

No, I can't suggest anybody to take over but that's hardly a sensible question is it?  How many people could have come up with the names in the Magpie group?  Doesn't mean there isn't somebody better out there does it or that we should aim to do better?  Of course they could easily be worse, nobody's saying they couldn't be & any regime change involves risk - again, I can't see anybody arguing with you.  You prefer to settle for what you've got;  other people want somebody else to have a go & do better.  That's perfectly reasonable actually.

 

Funnily enough, I respect your opinion on this, even if you respect no-one else's.   

 

 

There a a fair few people who think the board isn't any better than the pre-1992 ones. Mick for one, who has said so.

 

As you say you have read HTL's post, I suggest you read it again - and my own lead article and follow up posts - if you think I would turn down the chance of a better board. I only think replacing them will be a very difficult task and one that could easily backfire badly, which I have stated.

 

I respect anyones opinion where it is based on fact and not wild naive "opinion" without a factual and/or realistic basis.

 

 

[Howaythelads]

Douglas Hall has the international remit for this  but that cannot be taken seriously at all. The best I can say about him is that he does not seem to making things worse.

 

He's pulling £500,000 a year. I wonder what proportion that represents of our actual income from "international marketing"? Shirt sales, basically. Maybe a bit of web business. But that's surely it.

 

Phew! When you mentioned pulling I thought you were back to your nob obsession.

[NE5]

A business that is runnign with a turnover of £80m needs more professional leadership.

There should be a Finance Director who understands football financial requirements. Who can spot when spending is not acceptable, who creates a budget for the business and ensures we that it is stuck to.

There should be a Marketing Director who leads us into new areas, projects us well within England and on to the European stage.

There should be a Director of Football who can lead the direction of the footballing part of the busines, who works with the team manager, but is more responsible for making sure that all the football parts of the business fit together. (We all have different views on the what omes uneder the label of "Director of Football" but it has to be accepted that without one the de facto one is Shepherd or Wilie Mackay).

The role of the chairman should be to co-ordinate all these board members to move the whole thing foward.

 

How would  we pay for all these directors ? Well back in 2001 was the last time we had a non Hall/Sheperd as a paid director int he shape of David Stonehouse. He was CEO of the company, and he was paid £150,000 per year, lets say £200,000 is required by that sort of person now. So five directors at that rate would cost £1m per year would cost us £1m, which is exactly the amount we are paying the board at the moment. So no extra cost, but far more talent on board.

 

Of course the only flaw in my argument is that the recruitment of these key appointments would normally be done through the chairman. 

 

Thing is though Macbeth that the title of Finance Director is just that, a title. I could pretty much guarantee that Shep has employed someone who performs the role of finance director and someone who performs the role of marketing direct. But they won't have director after their name to keep salary costs down. I would seriously doubt that Shep gets his hands dirty on financial or marketing activities apart from rubber stamping accounts or finalising details.

 

 

pretty much agree. It's quite amazing the amount of people who are obsessed by fancy titles, and other such dressings in this world we live in of "objectives", "investors for people" and other such shite - Adam Crozier - a man who macbeth admires - did a shit job for the FA but no doubt the job title of Chief Executive, or whatever it was, leads him to believe otherwise .....

 

Don't expect macbeth to give any credit to the board or chairman for keeping costs down - the simple fact is that in football the most effective financial input of all is gained through winning games on the pitch, and playing regularly in europe has put a lot of money through Newcastle United. Of course - everyone else does, so it doesn't make us one of the countries leading clubs in any shape of form 

 

 

[NE5]

Douglas Hall has the international remit for this  but that cannot be taken seriously at all. The best I can say about him is that he does not seem to making things worse.

 

He's pulling £500,000 a year. I wonder what proportion that represents of our actual income from "international marketing"? Shirt sales, basically. Maybe a bit of web business. But that's surely it.

 

How's your man Souness getting on these days ? 3rd request.

 

 

[Guest elbee909]

 

Less waffle from you would do for starters.

 

 

That's as close as you'll get to admitting you were wrong, so cheers.

[NE5]

 

Less waffle from you would do for starters.

 

 

That's as close as you'll get to admitting you were wrong, so cheers.

 

it made perfect sense to me

[Howaythelads]

 

Less waffle from you would do for starters.

 

 

That's as close as you'll get to admitting you were wrong, so cheers.

 

Eh?  It's my polite way of saying you're posting shite, buck up.

[Mick]

 

There a a fair few people who think the board isn't any better than the pre-1992 ones. Mick for one, who has said so.

 

As you say you have read HTL's post, I suggest you read it again - and my own lead article and follow up posts - if you think I would turn down the chance of a better board. I only think replacing them will be a very difficult task and one that could easily backfire badly, which I have stated.

 

I respect anyones opinion where it is based on fact and not wild naive "opinion" without a factual and/or realistic basis.

 

 

 

What would Shepherd have done better than the old board?

 

Better publicity? 

 

Appoint more trophy winning managers? 

 

Nice try at taking the heat off Shepherd, it doesn't make him any better than he actually is.

[Mick]

 

How's your man Souness getting on these days ? 3rd request.

 

 

 

How about asking the bloke that thought Souness was better than Bobby Robson and the right man to squander £50 million.

[Howaythelads]

 

There a a fair few people who think the board isn't any better than the pre-1992 ones. Mick for one, who has said so.

 

As you say you have read HTL's post, I suggest you read it again - and my own lead article and follow up posts - if you think I would turn down the chance of a better board. I only think replacing them will be a very difficult task and one that could easily backfire badly, which I have stated.

 

I respect anyones opinion where it is based on fact and not wild naive "opinion" without a factual and/or realistic basis.

 

 

 

What would Shepherd have done better than the old board?

 

Better publicity? 

 

Appoint more trophy winning managers? 

 

Nice try at taking the heat off Shepherd, it doesn't make him any better than he actually is.

 

Almost as nonsensical as the post you made a few pages ago.

[NE5]

 

There a a fair few people who think the board isn't any better than the pre-1992 ones. Mick for one, who has said so.

 

As you say you have read HTL's post, I suggest you read it again - and my own lead article and follow up posts - if you think I would turn down the chance of a better board. I only think replacing them will be a very difficult task and one that could easily backfire badly, which I have stated.

 

I respect anyones opinion where it is based on fact and not wild naive "opinion" without a factual and/or realistic basis.

 

 

 

What would Shepherd have done better than the old board?

 

Better publicity? 

 

Appoint more trophy winning managers? 

 

Nice try at taking the heat off Shepherd, it doesn't make him any better than he actually is.

 

nice of you to admit you see no difference between qualifying regularly for europe and buying major England players in their prime rather than one spending all its time near the foot of the top league or in the old 2nd division, and selling locally born England players

 

You simply could not make this up .... 

[macbeth]

 

pretty much agree. It's quite amazing the amount of people who are obsessed by fancy titles, and other such dressings in this world we live in of "objectives", "investors for people" and other such shite - Adam Crozier - a man who macbeth admires - did a shit job for the FA but no doubt the job title of Chief Executive, or whatever it was, leads him to believe otherwise .....

I don't want people with fancy titles, like for example "Executive Director of Newcastle United (International)". Now that one really winds me up.

What I want are people who fit the job spec I outlined. Some one who understands that the football club should spend its income, or as much of it as is can seriously afford. Currently we have no one doing this, instead we spend about £12m per year dmore than we take in. Not £12m of money Hall and a stupid way to run a business.Shepherd have invested, but £12m that we have to borrow. Every year. Not an ambitious way to run a business, just a stupid way. Douglas Hall has done this at Cameron Hall, now he is bringing that expertise to NUFC.             

Would you rather have someone lookign at the finances, or are you happy they just keep borrowing and borrowing so that the debts rise and rise ?

 

 

 

Don't expect macbeth to give any credit to the board or chairman for keeping costs down - the simple fact is that in football the most effective financial input of all is gained through winning games on the pitch, and playing regularly in europe has put a lot of money through Newcastle United. Of course - everyone else does, so it doesn't make us one of the countries leading clubs in any shape of form 

 

Under Douglas Hall and Shepherd we have lost £66m in 9 years. That is while you judge them as having been successful. If they can manage to lose that amount of money whiel being successful what do you think they will do if there is a downturn and we don't happen to have games in Europe ? I know what I'd be doing if I was them, I'd be looking at how bad it was and looking for some way to escape before "the masses" suddenly relaised what I done to the future of their team. Douglas has undoubtedly resognised that and is desperately trying to sell up, Shepherd is more stubborn. He, presumably blames Douglas.

 

Over the last 4 years the clubs "other" costs not including wages have been 20.1m,  20.7m, 21.5m, 26.7m. In the same period the wages have been 32.1m, 45.2m, 44.9m, 50.2m.  The overall total including interest payments have been 70.8m, 84.8m, 82.6m, 95.8m.

I am more than happy to credit them for keeping costs down, which ones are you refering to ?

These figures are from the clubs accounts, not opinions or anything like that, but fomr publications signed off by Shepherd as being accurate.

 

 

 

 

 

[NE5]

 

How's your man Souness getting on these days ? 3rd request.

 

 

 

How about asking the bloke that thought Souness was better than Bobby Robson and the right man to squander £50 million.

 

it was aimed at Mandy.....now if I wasn;t fairly certain you weren't Mandy ...

 

 

[NE5]

 

pretty much agree. It's quite amazing the amount of people who are obsessed by fancy titles, and other such dressings in this world we live in of "objectives", "investors for people" and other such shite - Adam Crozier - a man who macbeth admires - did a shit job for the FA but no doubt the job title of Chief Executive, or whatever it was, leads him to believe otherwise .....

I don't want people with fancy titles, like for example "Executive Director of Newcastle United (International)". Now that one really winds me up.

What I want are people who fit the job spec I outlined. Some one who understands that the football club should spend its income, or as much of it as is can seriously afford. Currently we have no one doing this, instead we spend about £12m per year dmore than we take in. Not £12m of money Hall and a stupid way to run a business.Shepherd have invested, but £12m that we have to borrow. Every year. Not an ambitious way to run a business, just a stupid way. Douglas Hall has done this at Cameron Hall, now he is bringing that expertise to NUFC.             

Would you rather have someone lookign at the finances, or are you happy they just keep borrowing and borrowing so that the debts rise and rise ?

 

 

 

Don't expect macbeth to give any credit to the board or chairman for keeping costs down - the simple fact is that in football the most effective financial input of all is gained through winning games on the pitch, and playing regularly in europe has put a lot of money through Newcastle United. Of course - everyone else does, so it doesn't make us one of the countries leading clubs in any shape of form 

 

Under Douglas Hall and Shepherd we have lost £66m in 9 years. That is while you judge them as having been successful. If they can manage to lose that amount of money whiel being successful what do you think they will do if there is a downturn and we don't happen to have games in Europe ? I know what I'd be doing if I was them, I'd be looking at how bad it was and looking for some way to escape before "the masses" suddenly relaised what I done to the future of their team. Douglas has undoubtedly resognised that and is desperately trying to sell up, Shepherd is more stubborn. He, presumably blames Douglas.

 

Over the last 4 years the clubs "other" costs not including wages have been 20.1m,  20.7m, 21.5m, 26.7m. In the same period the wages have been 32.1m, 45.2m, 44.9m, 50.2m.  The overall total including interest payments have been 70.8m, 84.8m, 82.6m, 95.8m.

I am more than happy to credit them for keeping costs down, which ones are you refering to ?

These figures are from the clubs accounts, not opinions or anything like that, but fomr publications signed off by Shepherd as being accurate.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Plenty of recruits to your crusade out there......

 

Crozier is your answer, right  :roll:

[OzzieMandias]

Douglas Hall has the international remit for this  but that cannot be taken seriously at all. The best I can say about him is that he does not seem to making things worse.

 

He's pulling £500,000 a year. I wonder what proportion that represents of our actual income from "international marketing"? Shirt sales, basically. Maybe a bit of web business. But that's surely it.

 

Phew! When you mentioned pulling I thought you were back to your nob obsession.

 

A little more maturity from you, please.

[NE5]

Douglas Hall has the international remit for this  but that cannot be taken seriously at all. The best I can say about him is that he does not seem to making things worse.

 

He's pulling £500,000 a year. I wonder what proportion that represents of our actual income from "international marketing"? Shirt sales, basically. Maybe a bit of web business. But that's surely it.

 

Phew! When you mentioned pulling I thought you were back to your nob obsession.

 

A little more maturity from you, please.

 

Are you still backing your man Souness ?

 

4th request

 

 

[Howaythelads]

Douglas Hall has the international remit for this  but that cannot be taken seriously at all. The best I can say about him is that he does not seem to making things worse.

 

He's pulling £500,000 a year. I wonder what proportion that represents of our actual income from "international marketing"? Shirt sales, basically. Maybe a bit of web business. But that's surely it.

 

Phew! When you mentioned pulling I thought you were back to your nob obsession.

 

A little more maturity from you, please.

 

That is mature, when compared against your classic nob rant.

[Baggio]

Anyone seen this? :shock:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2CD4oRPMf3I

 

 

[NE5]

Anyone seen this? :shock:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2CD4oRPMf3I

 

 

 

nice to see you get so emotional ... you should get out more....