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

[STM]

It seems to me that the club is planning in doing a bit of both. On the one hand making sure we have a top notch scouting network across europe, in order to not only raise the standard of our youth set up (zamblera etc) but young stars into the first team set up too (boussafa etc).

 

On the other hand, keeping eye on what i would call current talent, which includes anything from mega star big names such as Henry and Deco, as well as your more do-able signings such Bentley.

 

Using phrases such as "trophy signings", "big names" and "big money" is all theoretical and in fact nonsense. What we really want be concentrating on is getting talent and value for our money regardless of age, name, nationality or what team we are buying them off.

 

If you offered me the chance of signing players such as Deco, Henry etc i'd snap your hand off (if their attitude was right) because i believe them to be highley talented footballers and would raise the bar of the players we intend to sign.

 

However if you gave me a choice between Henry and Bentley, i'd pick Bentley because i believe he will benefit the club long term.

[Rich]

Can't agree that Mort hasn't "done anything" to fill the ground. I'm sure many wouldn't have renewed had Shepherd stayed, to begin with, and now the ground is full because of Keegan, who was obviously brought back by him and who said himself he wouldn't have come back had it not been for the new men in charge.

 

It's a shame this thread was so utterly predictable after the title of the initial post. Well played that man.

 

[Liam Liam Liam O]

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.

 

 

 

 

 

So in fact you agree with Baggio?

[Baggio]

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.   

 

Liverpool make plenty more than us because they're a huge club who sell merchandise throughout the World, even they can't compete with Man Utd and Chelsea financially which is why they're looking to build a new stadium.

[Mick]

 

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.

 

 

 

 

 

Beating Liverpool and Arsenal will not be that easy, Arsenal have the 2nd biggest ground and they both play in the CL every season, we need to get amongst them before we can even think about beating them and that will not be easy and will take time.

 

At least we have the infrastructure in place to have a go.

[Minhosa]

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.

 

 

 

So then, you've answered you're own question about Man Utd, Liverpool and Chelsea in that we can't compete over a sustained period with two of them.

 

The third, Liverpool, could potentially be one of the clubs we look to overthrow in the top four.

 

Give me the choice between the Arsenal approach of the last 10 years (with the support of Wenger etc) and the Liverpool approach, if I owned a football club I'd base my strategy on the Arsenal model.

 

Of course we should have aspirations to challenge the top four and eventually break into but don't forget where we were when Ashley took us over. If thats not justification for a change of strategy and a chance to plan I don't know what is.

[Mick]

 

 

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.

 

 

 

We nearly went bankrupt twice. 

[Guest BooBoo]

NE5 is like a Fast Show character. He comes on every week, speaks the same old nonsense and everyone has a good old laugh at the daft sod. 

[Liam Liam Liam O]

NE5 is like a Fast Show character. He comes on every week, speaks the same old nonsense and everyone has a good old laugh at the daft sod. 

 

Here comes his post about you laughing at our players

[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. 

 

Liverpool make plenty more than us because they're a huge club who sell merchandise throughout the World, even they can't compete with Man Utd and Chelsea financially which is why they're looking to build a new stadium.

No question.  I was just responding to the list given with figures from Forbes -- Liverpool is in at £122m on there, 36m more, which, if we're talking strictly revenue generation, might be a well closed gap after ashleys takeover.  They're certainly a much larger and more marketable club than we.

[Guest BooBoo]

NE5 is like a Fast Show character. He comes on every week, speaks the same old nonsense and everyone has a good old laugh at the daft sod. 

 

Here comes his post about you laughing at our players

 

INCOMING!!!!

[Baggio]

It seems to me that the club is planning in doing a bit of both. On the one hand making sure we have a top notch scouting network across europe, in order to not only raise the standard of our youth set up (zamblera etc) but young stars into the first team set up too (boussafa etc).

 

On the other hand, keeping eye on what i would call current talent, which includes anything from mega star big names such as Henry and Deco, as well as your more do-able signings such Bentley.

 

Using phrases such as "trophy signings", "big names" and "big money" is all theoretical and in fact nonsense. What we really want be concentrating on is getting talent and value for our money regardless of age, name, nationality or what team we are buying them off.

 

If you offered me the chance of signing players such as Deco, Henry etc i'd snap your hand off (if their attitude was right) because i believe them to be highley talented footballers and would raise the bar of the players we intend to sign.

 

However if you gave me a choice between Henry and Bentley, i'd pick Bentley because i believe he will benefit the club long term.

 

Another good post in this thread.

 

 

[Liam Liam Liam O]

It seems to me that the club is planning in doing a bit of both. On the one hand making sure we have a top notch scouting network across europe, in order to not only raise the standard of our youth set up (zamblera etc) but young stars into the first team set up too (boussafa etc).

 

On the other hand, keeping eye on what i would call current talent, which includes anything from mega star big names such as Henry and Deco, as well as your more do-able signings such Bentley.

 

Using phrases such as "trophy signings", "big names" and "big money" is all theoretical and in fact nonsense. What we really want be concentrating on is getting talent and value for our money regardless of age, name, nationality or what team we are buying them off.

 

If you offered me the chance of signing players such as Deco, Henry etc i'd snap your hand off (if their attitude was right) because i believe them to be highley talented footballers and would raise the bar of the players we intend to sign.

 

However if you gave me a choice between Henry and Bentley, i'd pick Bentley because i believe he will benefit the club long term.

 

Another good post in this thread.

 

 

 

Agreed

[Mick]

Can't agree that Mort hasn't "done anything" to fill the ground. I'm sure many wouldn't have renewed had Shepherd stayed, to begin with, and now the ground is full because of Keegan, who was obviously brought back by him and who said himself he wouldn't have come back had it not been for the new men in charge.

 

It's a shame this thread was so utterly predictable after the title of the initial post. Well played that man.

 

 

Agreed, I still don't think Mort has done much wrong yet although we have no way of knowing what would have happened in Allardyce had been given more cash or we'd brought in somebody other than Keegan.  A complete guess is that we would be no better off than we are now.

[OzzieMandias]

NE5 is like a Fast Show character. He comes on every week, speaks the same old nonsense and everyone has a good old laugh at the daft sod. 

 

A cross between that and a fundamentalist Muslim, preposterously overreacting any time he considers his idol has been slighted.

[ChezGiven]

Can't agree that Mort hasn't "done anything" to fill the ground. I'm sure many wouldn't have renewed had Shepherd stayed, to begin with, and now the ground is full because of Keegan, who was obviously brought back by him and who said himself he wouldn't have come back had it not been for the new men in charge.

 

It's a shame this thread was so utterly predictable after the title of the initial post. Well played that man.

 

 

So he appeases the fans with managers not players then? 

 

 

[OzzieMandias]

 

 

Agreed, I still don't think Mort has done much wrong yet...

 

The timing and nature of the managerial change was a risky gamble -- but happily it seems to have paid off.

[Mick]

 

So he appeases the fans with managers not players then? 

 

 

 

[OzzieMandias]

Can't agree that Mort hasn't "done anything" to fill the ground. I'm sure many wouldn't have renewed had Shepherd stayed, to begin with, and now the ground is full because of Keegan, who was obviously brought back by him and who said himself he wouldn't have come back had it not been for the new men in charge.

 

It's a shame this thread was so utterly predictable after the title of the initial post. Well played that man.

 

 

So he appeases the fans with managers not players then? 

 

 

 

Yeah, I was just thinking about that.

[ChezGiven]

NE5 is like a Fast Show character. He comes on every week, speaks the same old nonsense and everyone has a good old laugh at the daft sod. 

 

A cross between that and a fundamentalist Muslim, preposterously overreacting any time he considers his idol has been slighted.

 

I thought he was just impatient for success and wants us to properly go for it with mega-investment, which he believes it will take.

 

Of course, others believe a long term building job is required, it could all boil down to age and the desire to see us lift a trophy in this lifetime.

[ChezGiven]

 

 

Agreed, I still don't think Mort has done much wrong yet...

 

The timing and nature of the managerial change was a risky gamble -- but happily it seems to have paid off.

 

Thats it basically, it was a gamble, made me nervous but its paid off. Not sure if luck should get the credit or Mort, maybe a bit of both.

[Mick]

 

The timing and nature of the managerial change was a risky gamble -- but happily it seems to have paid off.

 

I thought that the timing was wrong, I've changed my mind since as players who I didn't rate are playing better than expected and Keegan will have more money to spend on our weaker positions now that he's had more time to work with the players he inherited.

[Minhosa]

 

 

Agreed, I still don't think Mort has done much wrong yet...

 

The timing and nature of the managerial change was a risky gamble -- but happily it seems to have paid off.

 

Thats it basically, it was a gamble, made me nervous but its paid off. Not sure if luck should get the credit or Mort, maybe a bit of both.

 

Without wanting to muddy the waters, given I've shown my support for Mort throughout this thread, it was an Ashley appointment - wasn't it?

[Mick]

 

I thought he was just impatient for success and wants us to properly go for it with mega-investment, which he believes it will take.

 

Of course, others believe a long term building job is required, it could all boil down to age and the desire to see us lift a trophy in this lifetime.

 

We've spent loads of cash and it's won nothing so far although we've failed when the money has been given to the wrong person.

[Baggio]

 

 

Agreed, I still don't think Mort has done much wrong yet...

 

The timing and nature of the managerial change was a risky gamble -- but happily it seems to have paid off.

 

Thats it basically, it was a gamble, made me nervous but its paid off. Not sure if luck should get the credit or Mort, maybe a bit of both.

 

Without wanting to muddy the waters, given I've shown my support for Mort throughout this thread, it was an Ashley appointment - wasn't it?

 

I think most see them as a double act tbh.