Mort - "not looking to make one-off signings to appease fans"

[STM]

You know that song by green day "walking contradiction".

[S.S.R.]

Signing Duff springs to mind.

 

We had a promising player in N'Zogbia, and desperately needed a left-back.

 

Unfortunately there weren't any big-name, shirt and season-ticket selling defenders availiable, so we pushed N'Zogbia out and played without a decent left-back.

[Liam Liam Liam O]

I haven't supported the club for over 40 years to "want" them to fail mate. Ludicrous idea.

 

I've seen the signs from "conservative" chairman in the past, thats all. Turning down the chance to sign a player like Thierry Henry is an absolute joke of an idea, unless you already have someone similar ie Manu or Chelsea.

 

Only a complete shambles of a club would do a thing like that.

 

You said you didn't want the club to sign Deco last Summer.

 

"We should not pay big money for players of this age, however much Ashley is prepared to throw at the club, which may not be much in actual fact, time will tell. It is not fair or reasonable to expect people to throw their own money at the club.

 

I don't consider this to be a signing towards the building of a team, it is for publicity, and in that respect is more of a trophy signing for publicity purposes more than any signing we ever made under the Halls and Shepherd, because we didn't buy a single player at that age for the amount of money he may cost.

 

We would be far better buying a quality player in their early 20's."

 

http://z3.invisionfree.com/NUFCforum/index.php?showtopic=2902&st=25

 

 

So basically you disagreed with them when they were rumoured to be after a big name signing because you didn't see it as building a team spending big money on someone that age, now that Mort as come out and agreed with you you're moaning about that and want us to sign Henry. mackems.gif

 

 

 

mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif

[NE5]

I haven't supported the club for over 40 years to "want" them to fail mate. Ludicrous idea.

 

I've seen the signs from "conservative" chairman in the past, thats all. Turning down the chance to sign a player like Thierry Henry is an absolute joke of an idea, unless you already have someone similar ie Manu or Chelsea.

 

Only a complete shambles of a club would do a thing like that.

 

You said you didn't want the club to sign Deco last Summer.

 

"We should not pay big money for players of this age, however much Ashley is prepared to throw at the club, which may not be much in actual fact, time will tell. It is not fair or reasonable to expect people to throw their own money at the club.

 

I don't consider this to be a signing towards the building of a team, it is for publicity, and in that respect is more of a trophy signing for publicity purposes more than any signing we ever made under the Halls and Shepherd, because we didn't buy a single player at that age for the amount of money he may cost.

 

We would be far better buying a quality player in their early 20's."

 

http://z3.invisionfree.com/NUFCforum/index.php?showtopic=2902&st=25

 

 

So basically you disagreed with them when they were rumoured to be after a big name signing because you didn't see it as building a team spending big money on someone that age, now that Mort as come out and agreed with you you're moaning about that and want us to sign Henry. mackems.gif

 

 

Henry is proven in the premiership Matthew lad. Deco isn't. Thanks for the interest, I know you can't resist trying to debate stuff with me though. Well done for raking through other peoples posts again, seriously, you are very sad if you've nothing better to do than this all the time. 

 

I'd prefer Bentley, for the reasons above ie he's younger. You are guilty of not reading the thread again though I've posted elsewhere my objection to Deco is on these playing grounds and the fact that he would indeed, truly be a "trophy" signing.

 

You have a short memory, as you backed last summers transfer dealings as being the way forward etc, and this "planning" blah blah. Its a mystery how Spurs didn't have the league wrapped up by March, as they planned for it. And how we got involved in a relegation scrap too, as we also planned last summer meticulously.

 

Simple fact is, you need 2 things to be successful. A manager who knows what he's doing and a board who backs him as much as possible. Thats always been the case. We've yet to see if the current board understand the need to back their manager.

 

 

[Mick]

 

do you or don't you agree that the club should show ambition to buy top quality footballers when they become available ?

 

Or do you think that buying average ones with an eye on the books and not taking risks to challenge the other top clubs is the way forward ?

 

Can't be much clearer than that. I won't bother answering you until I get a straight answer for once.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I think the club should appoint the right manager, which we've eventually done, then we should back the manager the best way we can without putting the club in danger.

 

If the right manager decides that he wants a £30,000,000 player or a £30,000 player then that's his decision and that's who we should go for.  The manager should be told what his transfer budget is and then it's up to him to get the players he wants in to the club.

[Mick]

 

mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif  mackems.gif

 

I don't know what you're laughing at, the admin must have edited his post, wait a minute, scratch that.  

[Guest Sniffer]

As long as it is the manager's decision and not a decision- by- committee made by the suits upstairs. I still have an uneasy feeling that KK could get us on the right track and see it all blow up in his face initiated by the cockney influence in the club.

[Minhosa]

NE5,

 

You seem to be soooooo anti-planning when, in my view, the act (or Business Model if you like) we should aspire to follow is Arsenals.

 

You can't tell me that they've got where they are today without any planning or strategy. They've punched above their weight for years and it's only really since the Stadium move that they have been confirmed as a genuine big hitter.

 

The reason for their success is down to three things imo;

 

1) The appointment of Wenger

2) The Boards belief in Wenger and

3) The vision of the club, along with the support system they've built around Wenger.

 

The Arsenal board has undoubtedly backed Wenger on his big buys but the first team has always been made up of low cost imports, high profile signings and young kids with raw talent. Even when they won the league that was the case.

 

I'd be happy with this approach at my club and, so long as we show signs of improvement and our strategy is clearly communicated to fans etc I'd be comfortable enough to see the club avoid big name buys should we have a poor run of form.

 

 

[NE5]

NE5,

 

You seem to be soooooo anti-planning when, in my view, the act (or Business Model if you like) we should aspire to follow is Arsenals.

 

You can't tell me that they've got where they are today without any planning or strategy. They've punched above their weight for years and it's only really since the Stadium move that they have been confirmed as a genuine big hitter.

 

The reason for their success is down to three things imo;

 

1) The appointment of Wenger

2) The Boards belief in Wenger and

3) The vision of the club, along with the support system they've built around Wenger.

 

The Arsenal board has undoubtedly backed Wenger on his big buys but the first team has always been made up of low cost imports, high profile signings and young kids with raw talent. Even when they won the league that was the case.

 

I'd be happy with this approach at my club and, so long as we show signs of improvement and our strategy is clearly communicated to fans etc I'd be comfortable enough to see the club avoid big name buys should we have a poor run of form.

 

 

Fair enough riches, but people like Arsene Wenger don't come along very often do they ? Setting one club as an example due to making an appointment of someone so exceptional isn't really being realistic about it. In fact, if we are to beat Arsenal we have to find somene better than Wenger.

 

Don't you think if it was so easy, numerous other clubs would also be doing it ?

 

I can't agree with you about bringing in "big name buys" [ie do you mean a big name player past it or a big name player with plenty of career time left] because - and this is where we started - ignoring the current and short term is extremely stupid, especially if you are in trouble.

 

There is no such thing as a bad time to get the right manager [we've just probably and hopefully proved this] and there is no bad time to bring in a quality footballer either.

 

 

[Liam Liam Liam O]

 

Henry is proven in the premiership Matthew lad. Deco isn't. Thanks for the interest, I know you can't resist trying to debate stuff with me though. Well done for raking through other peoples posts again, seriously, you are very sad if you've nothing better to do than this all the time

 

I'd prefer Bentley, for the reasons above ie he's younger. You are guilty of not reading the thread again though I've posted elsewhere my objection to Deco is on these playing grounds and the fact that he would indeed, truly be a "trophy" signing.

 

You have a short memory, as you backed last summers transfer dealings as being the way forward etc, and this "planning" blah blah. Its a mystery how Spurs didn't have the league wrapped up by March, as they planned for it. And how we got involved in a relegation scrap too, as we also planned last summer meticulously.

 

Simple fact is, you need 2 things to be successful. A manager who knows what he's doing and a board who backs him as much as possible. Thats always been the case. We've yet to see if the current board understand the need to back their manager.

 

 

 

 

http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php?topic=49877.msg1288843#msg1288843

 

 

 

[Baggio]

I haven't supported the club for over 40 years to "want" them to fail mate. Ludicrous idea.

 

I've seen the signs from "conservative" chairman in the past, thats all. Turning down the chance to sign a player like Thierry Henry is an absolute joke of an idea, unless you already have someone similar ie Manu or Chelsea.

 

Only a complete shambles of a club would do a thing like that.

 

You said you didn't want the club to sign Deco last Summer.

 

"We should not pay big money for players of this age, however much Ashley is prepared to throw at the club, which may not be much in actual fact, time will tell. It is not fair or reasonable to expect people to throw their own money at the club.

 

I don't consider this to be a signing towards the building of a team, it is for publicity, and in that respect is more of a trophy signing for publicity purposes more than any signing we ever made under the Halls and Shepherd, because we didn't buy a single player at that age for the amount of money he may cost.

 

We would be far better buying a quality player in their early 20's."

 

http://z3.invisionfree.com/NUFCforum/index.php?showtopic=2902&st=25

 

 

So basically you disagreed with them when they were rumoured to be after a big name signing because you didn't see it as building a team spending big money on someone that age, now that Mort as come out and agreed with you you're moaning about that and want us to sign Henry. mackems.gif

 

 

Henry is proven in the premiership Matthew lad. Deco isn't. Thanks for the interest, I know you can't resist trying to debate stuff with me though. Well done for raking through other peoples posts again, seriously, you are very sad if you've nothing better to do than this all the time. 

 

I'd prefer Bentley, for the reasons above ie he's younger. You are guilty of not reading the thread again though I've posted elsewhere my objection to Deco is on these playing grounds and the fact that he would indeed, truly be a "trophy" signing.

 

You have a short memory, as you backed last summers transfer dealings as being the way forward etc, and this "planning" blah blah. Its a mystery how Spurs didn't have the league wrapped up by March, as they planned for it. And how we got involved in a relegation scrap too, as we also planned last summer meticulously.

 

Simple fact is, you need 2 things to be successful. A manager who knows what he's doing and a board who backs him as much as possible. Thats always been the case. We've yet to see if the current board understand the need to back their manager.

 

 

 

You didn't mention anything in your previous post about Deco that I found about him not having played in the Premiership, you've just brought that up now you've been found to be 2 faced about the whole thing.

 

Yes I did back Allardyce's transfer strategy although I voiced my concern about not getting a replacement for Solano and replacing Dyer with Alan Smith, a player that you said was the perfect replacement for Alan Shearer.

 

As for Spurs, I don't remember saying they would have the league wrapped up at all but knowing you're a troll and in the 'How to be a good internet troll' handbook you use as a reference it tells you to make thing up, a bit like the other day when you said to Big Tron that he was probably one of the people who would rather sign Viduka on a free than spend £12 million on Tevez, just making stuff up basically to try and knock people.

 

Yes you need a good manager with money to be successful but the good manager has to spend that money well, spending big money on a player in his 30's who's game is built around pace isn't spending that money well, Henry was mostly injured in his last season at Arsenal and has been poor for Barcelona this year, that's 2 seasons where he hasn't been anything like the player he once was, buying him would be a short term fix for what would be a long term problem.

 

 

[NE5]

 

Henry is proven in the premiership Matthew lad. Deco isn't. Thanks for the interest, I know you can't resist trying to debate stuff with me though. Well done for raking through other peoples posts again, seriously, you are very sad if you've nothing better to do than this all the time

 

I'd prefer Bentley, for the reasons above ie he's younger. You are guilty of not reading the thread again though I've posted elsewhere my objection to Deco is on these playing grounds and the fact that he would indeed, truly be a "trophy" signing.

 

You have a short memory, as you backed last summers transfer dealings as being the way forward etc, and this "planning" blah blah. Its a mystery how Spurs didn't have the league wrapped up by March, as they planned for it. And how we got involved in a relegation scrap too, as we also planned last summer meticulously.

 

Simple fact is, you need 2 things to be successful. A manager who knows what he's doing and a board who backs him as much as possible. Thats always been the case. We've yet to see if the current board understand the need to back their manager.

 

 

 

 

http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php?topic=49877.msg1288843#msg1288843

 

 

 

 

this is the last post you made I see

 

Knew there would be somebody like 

[Baggio]

 

Henry is proven in the premiership Matthew lad. Deco isn't. Thanks for the interest, I know you can't resist trying to debate stuff with me though. Well done for raking through other peoples posts again, seriously, you are very sad if you've nothing better to do than this all the time

 

I'd prefer Bentley, for the reasons above ie he's younger. You are guilty of not reading the thread again though I've posted elsewhere my objection to Deco is on these playing grounds and the fact that he would indeed, truly be a "trophy" signing.

 

You have a short memory, as you backed last summers transfer dealings as being the way forward etc, and this "planning" blah blah. Its a mystery how Spurs didn't have the league wrapped up by March, as they planned for it. And how we got involved in a relegation scrap too, as we also planned last summer meticulously.

 

Simple fact is, you need 2 things to be successful. A manager who knows what he's doing and a board who backs him as much as possible. Thats always been the case. We've yet to see if the current board understand the need to back their manager.

 

 

 

 

http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php?topic=49877.msg1288843#msg1288843

 

 

 

 

mackems.gif

[Baggio]

NE5,

 

You seem to be soooooo anti-planning when, in my view, the act (or Business Model if you like) we should aspire to follow is Arsenals.

 

You can't tell me that they've got where they are today without any planning or strategy. They've punched above their weight for years and it's only really since the Stadium move that they have been confirmed as a genuine big hitter.

 

The reason for their success is down to three things imo;

 

1) The appointment of Wenger

2) The Boards belief in Wenger and

3) The vision of the club, along with the support system they've built around Wenger.

 

The Arsenal board has undoubtedly backed Wenger on his big buys but the first team has always been made up of low cost imports, high profile signings and young kids with raw talent. Even when they won the league that was the case.

 

I'd be happy with this approach at my club and, so long as we show signs of improvement and our strategy is clearly communicated to fans etc I'd be comfortable enough to see the club avoid big name buys should we have a poor run of form.

 

 

 

Good post.

[Minhosa]

NE5,

 

You seem to be soooooo anti-planning when, in my view, the act (or Business Model if you like) we should aspire to follow is Arsenals.

 

You can't tell me that they've got where they are today without any planning or strategy. They've punched above their weight for years and it's only really since the Stadium move that they have been confirmed as a genuine big hitter.

 

The reason for their success is down to three things imo;

 

1) The appointment of Wenger

2) The Boards belief in Wenger and

3) The vision of the club, along with the support system they've built around Wenger.

 

The Arsenal board has undoubtedly backed Wenger on his big buys but the first team has always been made up of low cost imports, high profile signings and young kids with raw talent. Even when they won the league that was the case.

 

I'd be happy with this approach at my club and, so long as we show signs of improvement and our strategy is clearly communicated to fans etc I'd be comfortable enough to see the club avoid big name buys should we have a poor run of form.

 

 

Fair enough riches, but people like Arsene Wenger don't come along very often do they ? Setting one club as an example due to making an appointment of someone so exceptional isn't really being realistic about it. In fact, if we are to beat Arsenal we have to find somene better than Wenger.

 

Don't you think if it was so easy, numerous other clubs would also be doing it ?

 

I can't agree with you about bringing in "big name buys" [ie do you mean a big name player past it or a big name player with plenty of career time left] because - and this is where we started - ignoring the current and short term is extremely stupid, especially if you are in trouble.

 

There is no such thing as a bad time to get the right manager [we've just probably and hopefully proved this] and there is no bad time to bring in a quality footballer either.

 

 

The Wengers of the this world aren't common, agreed.

 

However, the principals of the approach are sound in my opinion. The structure would be more sustainable and could prove beneficial to a few parties;-

 

a) Mike Ashley, who would probably be reluctant to spend £50m of his own cash on 'big name players' each summer/january.

 

b) The fans. Imagine how our fans would've taken to the likes of Ashley Cole, Vieira and Anelka as young kids.

 

c) Keegan, if he can buy his 'big name' stars to supplement the other good work being done by Wise and Mort team(s) behind the scenes.

 

d) Keegans replacement. This approach would allow for succession planning more than most. The downside being, as you've rightly pointed out, top Managers don't come along very often. However, even if it all falls down and we appoint another Souness the structure won't fall apart over night.

 

Arsenal have proved it can work with an unknown/unproven Manager (as Wenger was at the time, well relatively unknown).

 

I can see the argument that everyone would be doing it, if it was easy but most clubs whose owners are a little bit remote (Man Utd, Arsenal, Villa etc) seem to be doing similar things whereas the hands on Owners/Chairman (See Birmingham, Man City etc) seem to be dabbling more in proven players.

[NE5]

NE5,

 

You seem to be soooooo anti-planning when, in my view, the act (or Business Model if you like) we should aspire to follow is Arsenals.

 

You can't tell me that they've got where they are today without any planning or strategy. They've punched above their weight for years and it's only really since the Stadium move that they have been confirmed as a genuine big hitter.

 

The reason for their success is down to three things imo;

 

1) The appointment of Wenger

2) The Boards belief in Wenger and

3) The vision of the club, along with the support system they've built around Wenger.

 

The Arsenal board has undoubtedly backed Wenger on his big buys but the first team has always been made up of low cost imports, high profile signings and young kids with raw talent. Even when they won the league that was the case.

 

I'd be happy with this approach at my club and, so long as we show signs of improvement and our strategy is clearly communicated to fans etc I'd be comfortable enough to see the club avoid big name buys should we have a poor run of form.

 

 

Fair enough riches, but people like Arsene Wenger don't come along very often do they ? Setting one club as an example due to making an appointment of someone so exceptional isn't really being realistic about it. In fact, if we are to beat Arsenal we have to find somene better than Wenger.

 

Don't you think if it was so easy, numerous other clubs would also be doing it ?

 

I can't agree with you about bringing in "big name buys" [ie do you mean a big name player past it or a big name player with plenty of career time left] because - and this is where we started - ignoring the current and short term is extremely stupid, especially if you are in trouble.

 

There is no such thing as a bad time to get the right manager [we've just probably and hopefully proved this] and there is no bad time to bring in a quality footballer either.

 

 

The Wengers of the this world aren't common, agreed.

 

However, the principals of the approach are sound in my opinion. The structure would be more sustainable and could prove beneficial to a few parties;-

 

a) Mike Ashley, who would probably be reluctant to spend £50m of his own cash on 'big name players' each summer/january.

 

b) The fans. Imagine how our fans would've taken to the likes of Ashley Cole, Vieira and Anelka as young kids.

 

c) Keegan, if he can buy his 'big name' stars to supplement the other good work being done by Wise and Mort team(s) behind the scenes.

 

d) Keegans replacement. This approach would allow for succession planning more than most. The downside being, as you've rightly pointed out, top Managers don't come along very often. However, even if it all falls down and we appoint another Souness the structure won't fall apart over night.

 

Arsenal have proved it can work with an unknown/unproven Manager (as Wenger was at the time, well relatively unknown).

 

I can see the argument that everyone would be doing it, if it was easy but most clubs whose owners are a little bit remote (Man Utd, Arsenal, Villa etc) seem to be doing similar things whereas the hands on Owners/Chairman (See Birmingham, Man City etc) seem to be dabbling more in proven players.

 

so what do you think of manu, Liverpool and Chelseas approach ?

 

Don't they work either, in fact, over the years, the vast majority of teams are successful because they follow this route, rather than Arsenals ?

 

If its the route you have to take, then you must take it. Its small time thinking to try and avoid expenditure. Has anyone in this thread yet - apart from me - attempted to see Morts comments for what they are ? How exactly does he think Newcastle will be successful, what exactly does he mean, if he doesn't want to "appease" the fans ? I seriously think he should take his blinkers off and see that he is chairman of a club filling the ground ie "appeasing the fans" because of his predecessors, not because of anything  he has done since he came in.

 

 

[Baggio]

NE5,

 

You seem to be soooooo anti-planning when, in my view, the act (or Business Model if you like) we should aspire to follow is Arsenals.

 

You can't tell me that they've got where they are today without any planning or strategy. They've punched above their weight for years and it's only really since the Stadium move that they have been confirmed as a genuine big hitter.

 

The reason for their success is down to three things imo;

 

1) The appointment of Wenger

2) The Boards belief in Wenger and

3) The vision of the club, along with the support system they've built around Wenger.

 

The Arsenal board has undoubtedly backed Wenger on his big buys but the first team has always been made up of low cost imports, high profile signings and young kids with raw talent. Even when they won the league that was the case.

 

I'd be happy with this approach at my club and, so long as we show signs of improvement and our strategy is clearly communicated to fans etc I'd be comfortable enough to see the club avoid big name buys should we have a poor run of form.

 

 

Fair enough riches, but people like Arsene Wenger don't come along very often do they ? Setting one club as an example due to making an appointment of someone so exceptional isn't really being realistic about it. In fact, if we are to beat Arsenal we have to find somene better than Wenger.

 

Don't you think if it was so easy, numerous other clubs would also be doing it ?

 

I can't agree with you about bringing in "big name buys" [ie do you mean a big name player past it or a big name player with plenty of career time left] because - and this is where we started - ignoring the current and short term is extremely stupid, especially if you are in trouble.

 

There is no such thing as a bad time to get the right manager [we've just probably and hopefully proved this] and there is no bad time to bring in a quality footballer either.

 

 

The Wengers of the this world aren't common, agreed.

 

However, the principals of the approach are sound in my opinion. The structure would be more sustainable and could prove beneficial to a few parties;-

 

a) Mike Ashley, who would probably be reluctant to spend £50m of his own cash on 'big name players' each summer/january.

 

b) The fans. Imagine how our fans would've taken to the likes of Ashley Cole, Vieira and Anelka as young kids.

 

c) Keegan, if he can buy his 'big name' stars to supplement the other good work being done by Wise and Mort team(s) behind the scenes.

 

d) Keegans replacement. This approach would allow for succession planning more than most. The downside being, as you've rightly pointed out, top Managers don't come along very often. However, even if it all falls down and we appoint another Souness the structure won't fall apart over night.

 

Arsenal have proved it can work with an unknown/unproven Manager (as Wenger was at the time, well relatively unknown).

 

I can see the argument that everyone would be doing it, if it was easy but most clubs whose owners are a little bit remote (Man Utd, Arsenal, Villa etc) seem to be doing similar things whereas the hands on Owners/Chairman (See Birmingham, Man City etc) seem to be dabbling more in proven players.

 

so what do you think of manu, Liverpool and Chelseas approach ?

 

Don't they work either, in fact, over the years, the vast majority of teams are successful because they follow this route, rather than Arsenals ?

 

If its the route you have to take, then you must take it. Its small time thinking to try and avoid expenditure. Has anyone in this thread yet - apart from me - attempted to see Morts comments for what they are ? How exactly does he think Newcastle will be successful, what exactly does he mean, if he doesn't want to "appease" the fans ? I seriously think he should take his blinkers off and see that he is chairman of a club filling the ground ie "appeasing the fans" because of his predecessors, not because of anything  he has done since he came in.

 

 

 

We can't financially compete with those clubs over a sustained period.

[NE5]

rubbish

 

 

[Minhosa]

NE5,

 

You seem to be soooooo anti-planning when, in my view, the act (or Business Model if you like) we should aspire to follow is Arsenals.

 

You can't tell me that they've got where they are today without any planning or strategy. They've punched above their weight for years and it's only really since the Stadium move that they have been confirmed as a genuine big hitter.

 

The reason for their success is down to three things imo;

 

1) The appointment of Wenger

2) The Boards belief in Wenger and

3) The vision of the club, along with the support system they've built around Wenger.

 

The Arsenal board has undoubtedly backed Wenger on his big buys but the first team has always been made up of low cost imports, high profile signings and young kids with raw talent. Even when they won the league that was the case.

 

I'd be happy with this approach at my club and, so long as we show signs of improvement and our strategy is clearly communicated to fans etc I'd be comfortable enough to see the club avoid big name buys should we have a poor run of form.

 

 

Fair enough riches, but people like Arsene Wenger don't come along very often do they ? Setting one club as an example due to making an appointment of someone so exceptional isn't really being realistic about it. In fact, if we are to beat Arsenal we have to find somene better than Wenger.

 

Don't you think if it was so easy, numerous other clubs would also be doing it ?

 

I can't agree with you about bringing in "big name buys" [ie do you mean a big name player past it or a big name player with plenty of career time left] because - and this is where we started - ignoring the current and short term is extremely stupid, especially if you are in trouble.

 

There is no such thing as a bad time to get the right manager [we've just probably and hopefully proved this] and there is no bad time to bring in a quality footballer either.

 

 

The Wengers of the this world aren't common, agreed.

 

However, the principals of the approach are sound in my opinion. The structure would be more sustainable and could prove beneficial to a few parties;-

 

a) Mike Ashley, who would probably be reluctant to spend £50m of his own cash on 'big name players' each summer/january.

 

b) The fans. Imagine how our fans would've taken to the likes of Ashley Cole, Vieira and Anelka as young kids.

 

c) Keegan, if he can buy his 'big name' stars to supplement the other good work being done by Wise and Mort team(s) behind the scenes.

 

d) Keegans replacement. This approach would allow for succession planning more than most. The downside being, as you've rightly pointed out, top Managers don't come along very often. However, even if it all falls down and we appoint another Souness the structure won't fall apart over night.

 

Arsenal have proved it can work with an unknown/unproven Manager (as Wenger was at the time, well relatively unknown).

 

I can see the argument that everyone would be doing it, if it was easy but most clubs whose owners are a little bit remote (Man Utd, Arsenal, Villa etc) seem to be doing similar things whereas the hands on Owners/Chairman (See Birmingham, Man City etc) seem to be dabbling more in proven players.

 

so what do you think of manu, Liverpool and Chelseas approach ?

 

Don't they work either, in fact, over the years, the vast majority of teams are successful because they follow this route, rather than Arsenals ?

 

If its the route you have to take, then you must take it. Its small time thinking to try and avoid expenditure. Has anyone in this thread yet - apart from me - attempted to see Morts comments for what they are ? How exactly does he think Newcastle will be successful, what exactly does he mean, if he doesn't want to "appease" the fans ? I seriously think he should take his blinkers off and see that he is chairman of a club filling the ground ie "appeasing the fans" because of his predecessors, not because of anything  he has done since he came in.

 

 

 

I don't think they have actually tried to avoid expenditure though, have they?

 

The revenue costs (due to the wages of Viduka, Barton, Smith etc) would have been significantly increased in summer. And, at a time when the new Board were half way through due diligence this has to be commended imo.

 

I thought KK had been quoted as saying he had the money to buy Woodgate and/or others should he want it in January?

 

The reason I quoted Arsenals approach was because I think it's more sustainable than having an Abromovich or A.N Other wealthy owner throwing cash at problems.

 

The planned approach may set us up for medium/long term sustained success and, so long as thats the case, I'll not be getting an inferiority complex because we haven't spent as much on a Henry or Deco as Man Utd or whoever.

[James]

Bentley has publicly criticised our endless instability, and being the strong minded person he is, I doubt he'd want to come on those perceptions.

 

Where he got those perceptions from is another story.

[thomas]

rubbish

Certainly not Chelsea at least.  Their billionaire can beat up our billionaire. 

 

Liverpool possibly. 

 

Man U ... Sorry, no.  07 Revenue was £168m.  Ours was £86m. 

[Mick]

rubbish

 

 

 

We're a loss making club and have been for years.

[NE5]

rubbish

Certainly not Chelsea at least.  Their billionaire can beat up our billionaire. 

 

Liverpool possibly. 

 

Man U ... Sorry, no.  07 Revenue was £168m.  Ours was £86m.   

 

Since Abramovic, yes. Man u - yes but we nearly beat them in 1996 and who knows what would have been if we had.

 

With the 3rd biggest crowd and ground in the country, we can certainly beat Liverpool and Arsenal. With the 3rd biggest ground and support in the country we should act like it. And believe like it. We all say that nobody knows how big Newcastle should be, so why not believe in it ?

 

I don't accept this, our aim should be if they can do it then we certainly can, and we could too. But we won't if we don't believe its possible and take the risks now and again.

 

 

 

 

[Baggio]

rubbish

 

 

 

So where do we get the money from to compete with Chelsea long term now Abramovich is bankrolling them?

 

Or Man Utd who buy players out of the £50 million profits they turn out every year?

 

You've even said yourself that "It is not fair or reasonable to expect people to throw their own money at the club." so where does the money come from to compete with this lot over a long term period?

 

 

[NE5]

rubbish

 

 

 

We're a loss making club and have been for years.

 

aye, nobody else is are they, including the top 4  mackems.gif mackems.gif mackems.gif mackems.gif mackems.gif

 

We nearly went bankrupt once though, I'll give you that.