Clear the Air Talks ?

[madras]

NE5:

 

The question was a joke, you miserable old bugger. I thought that would be fairly obvious after you had asked me the same thing earlier.

 

Rooney was going to cost a fair bit more than £17M though, wasn't he (the sum of Duff, Barton and Smith)? It's more apt to say would you rather have Rooney at £27M or whatever it was, than all of the players we signed in the summer this time around. Despite the failures of some of them, I still think that would have been the right way to go if we only had £27M to spend.

 

It's a w*** argument as it is like, but I'm trying to work with what you're giving me here. Totally different timings and circumstances.

 

As for you not criticising the club for signing "them" - has someone else been on your account since the summer, then?

 

All we've heard from you is about "Johnny Averages" and "no ambition", which is the polar opposite stance of what others have taken in the past. The last board couldn't win with certain people on here and the current board can't win with certain people on here, I find the whole thing more amusing than anything else.

 

At the end of the day all I want for the club is success and for it to keep existing, I don't care whether it comes one way or another, but I just hope it comes. That's why you don't tend to hear me moaning on too much these days, I've accepted that I've got no say in the grand scheme of things and I'm happy to ride the wave and see where it takes us.

 

I'm happy Shepherd is gone simply because I thought the man was a c*** and that he'd had his time here, I have no qualms admitting that he had his good spells and he did a lot of good, but the club was sinking fast and he'd lost the fans. His position was untenable. He's just a man though, like Ashley is, like Mort is, it's the club that matters.

 

not bad, some of what I said doesn't really look like I wanted.......look at it as meaning that even I can accept that every player can't cost 20m quid, and take it also as meaning that of course I'm aware that sometimes you find a gem for less money ......

 

Its the general attitude of the club, is what I'm talking about.

 

As said in the other post, when players become available, players so good that you have to have, then you simply MUST try and get the money and get them. For a club like Newcastle, this is quite simply not a problem or shouldn't be a problem. The club is too big to be run on over stringent prudency, but it bothers me that the new board appear to be making noises that suggest this is what they are going to do. You should ALWAYS be looking at buying players for any position, better than what you have.

 

It is what has led to the events of this week, and Keegan should know.

 

I've never denied that Shepherd may have been a c*** sometimes, but basically I'm not bothered by off the field things, up to a point. I just don't care. I don't want a nice man running the club who doesn't have any ambition for it, I saw that for 30 years, many other clubs still have it. I just don't want it. I just want a board who back its manager and aim for real success, and I don't care who they are, what their backround is, or what they do, so long as they deliver this. This is what the successful clubs do. Chelsea fans don't care where Abramovic makes his money, ManU fans didn't care about Edwards and for the moment may not like the  Glaziers but aren't making any noises because they are winning trophies too.

 

Thanks for calling me a miserable old bugger  ......... I'm neither, you young whippersnapper you .... 

 

 

 

Good post. I actually agree to some extent with alot of sentiment thats it that post but some of it regarding financial prudency is a bit unfair - esepcially as we have had substantials bits made for anumber of players.

 

Well, if we bought a centre forward with more mobility than Viduka, say Ashton - a midfield player such as Modric would have been, and a centre back like Richard Dunne to go alongside Taylor and Faye and fight for places and give us strength in depth, I'd be fairly pleased with that for the moment.

 

Then David Bentley came along and the club said he had spent his  budget.

 

Well, I would be unhappy with this. This is what I mean. Newcastle are too big to exercise such prudency. The spend would be worth it, and I'd be be dismayed to miss out on such a player and such an opportunity. This the difference between a truly ambitious club and a lesser one. Especially considering the ground we want to make up on the top teams.

 

Also consider that a "sell to buy" policy is inappropriate in such circumstances too.I can accept that in this event, one or two players would go ie Milner and/or Duff if he doesn't come good, but you sort the books out later and get the player while you can.

 

 

Again thats a fair point but id actually be more unhappy if it was the other way round and we missed out on Dunne, Ashton and Modric and got just Bentley instead. This is the crux of my argument.

 

EDIT: well how do you sort the books out later if what you do doesnt lead to success and financial benefits - at which point would we call it time on our expenditure and look to sell or lower wages, that seems a bit contradictory. Especially as that is exactly the situation we were in when Ashley came in. There needs to be a compromise somehwere and for me the best way to do it is to stick to a given budget - as much as id hate to miss out on Bentley if he were to come available but we had already spent our lot on him then thats tough - theres is always next season adn there are always other players.

 

 

fair enough, but essentially the truly successful clubs that win trophies would operate like that and buy Bentley. Thats my argument.

 

Wenger is the one manager that has been able to operate differently but now that he is losing his best players, even he may come to the conclusion that he'll have to modify his stance

 

And Arsenal now have a big debt due to building a new stadium, bad news for him eh ........ ring any bells ?

 

 

the truly succesful clubs have the money to do that or the turnover to finance the debt or abramovic.

 

 

maybe if we had built on our champs league appearances we'd be in liverpools place now.

 

maybe, if it was spent well, but I hope you aren't criticising the club for spending money they don't have when you say that.

 

 

theres a difference between spending money you don't have a being reckless

 

Well I think buying Woodgate in January before anyone else knew he was available, ahead of the summer, was pretty smart going myself.

 

 

yes it was........but not strengthening the midfield (bowyer) or forward line when in a position of strength on the field and financially was silly. after that they got very reckiless when not in a position to do so.

[NE5]

NE5, would you be happy if we spent £20m on Bentley this summer but only brought in two cheap others, both who weren't very good?

 

I'm guessing you wouldn't.

 

no, I don't see the point in any manager bringing in any player who he thinks isn't good enough to strengthen his team or at least strengthen a small squad, but generally speaking I don't see the point in paying good money for players who you think aren't of a particular standard.

 

I would rather he bought Bentley and nobody, rather than 2 other players not good enough. And if he bought nobody else, I would want to know why.

 

Its a strange one, there is always exceptions. The last time, he brought Allen and Mathie for cover for Cole and Beardsley, when Beardsley was injured pre-season, yet it didn't seem like lack of ambition because you knew the club were showing it, aiming for the top and were backing him as much as possible. He also bought Darren Huckerby for a small fee because he saw a potential in him. Didn't work out either but you didn't question the ambition, it was obviously there.

 

The thing is, smaller clubs than us will be spending more than 20m quid, and just right now, we sort of need at least 3 players to get back into the european places.

 

Don't think Bentley would cost 20m like, or he wouldn't have done in January, but he will do if he steps up a level and gets more England caps.

 

 

 

That's all people mean (I think) when they refer to trophy signings though mate; one big signature to pacify the fans, at the expence of the team as a whole. As you say, we need to be looking for more than that, and we need to be spending money similar or greater than those who we aspire to compete with this time. You may disagree, but I think we needed the takeover to ensure we were even in a position to attempt that.

 

Digressing though, I don't want to get into another argument about the board. You're an interesting poster when you look beyond the usernames (irony!) and don't see every opinion as an attack on Shepherd.

 

On Bentley, if we want him then England's failure to qualify for the Euros may do us a huge favour. A good showing there and I reckon Blackburn would definitely hold out for something like £20m. Even though I disagree with you that we can simply pluck their players at will, I think with the right conviction we could get him.

 

I look on it as having a player on board who is absolutely top notch, so you don't need to think of replacing him for a while ie a huge step towards putting together a quality team.

 

Why bother with 2nd best if you can get the best ?

 

Thats not a "trophy" signing, thats a top notch signing, that the top clubs should be lookign to make. That means us.

 

I won't dispute that football is changing, and due to the increasing number of clubs taken over by rich people, we needed similar. My reservation is simply centred on how much they want to be better than the rest. Just like the last ones in fact, they proved they wanted it, and did their best.

 

 

[Liam Liam Liam O]

NE5, would you be happy if we spent £20m on Bentley this summer but only brought in two cheap others, both who weren't very good?

 

I'm guessing you wouldn't.

 

no, I don't see the point in any manager bringing in any player who he thinks isn't good enough to strengthen his team or at least strengthen a small squad, but generally speaking I don't see the point in paying good money for players who you think aren't of a particular standard.

 

I would rather he bought Bentley and nobody, rather than 2 other players not good enough. And if he bought nobody else, I would want to know why.

 

Its a strange one, there is always exceptions. The last time, he brought Allen and Mathie for cover for Cole and Beardsley, when Beardsley was injured pre-season, yet it didn't seem like lack of ambition because you knew the club were showing it, aiming for the top and were backing him as much as possible. He also bought Darren Huckerby for a small fee because he saw a potential in him. Didn't work out either but you didn't question the ambition, it was obviously there.

 

The thing is, smaller clubs than us will be spending more than 20m quid, and just right now, we sort of need at least 3 players to get back into the european places.

 

Don't think Bentley would cost 20m like, or he wouldn't have done in January, but he will do if he steps up a level and gets more England caps.

 

 

 

That's all people mean (I think) when they refer to trophy signings though mate; one big signature to pacify the fans, at the expence of the team as a whole. As you say, we need to be looking for more than that, and we need to be spending money similar or greater than those who we aspire to compete with this time. You may disagree, but I think we needed the takeover to ensure we were even in a position to attempt that.

 

Digressing though, I don't want to get into another argument about the board. You're an interesting poster when you look beyond the usernames (irony!) and don't see every opinion as an attack on Shepherd.

 

On Bentley, if we want him then England's failure to qualify for the Euros may do us a huge favour. A good showing there and I reckon Blackburn would definitely hold out for something like £20m. Even though I disagree with you that we can simply pluck their players at will, I think with the right conviction we could get him.

 

Excellent Dave

[NE5]

NE5:

 

The question was a joke, you miserable old bugger. I thought that would be fairly obvious after you had asked me the same thing earlier.

 

Rooney was going to cost a fair bit more than £17M though, wasn't he (the sum of Duff, Barton and Smith)? It's more apt to say would you rather have Rooney at £27M or whatever it was, than all of the players we signed in the summer this time around. Despite the failures of some of them, I still think that would have been the right way to go if we only had £27M to spend.

 

It's a w*** argument as it is like, but I'm trying to work with what you're giving me here. Totally different timings and circumstances.

 

As for you not criticising the club for signing "them" - has someone else been on your account since the summer, then?

 

All we've heard from you is about "Johnny Averages" and "no ambition", which is the polar opposite stance of what others have taken in the past. The last board couldn't win with certain people on here and the current board can't win with certain people on here, I find the whole thing more amusing than anything else.

 

At the end of the day all I want for the club is success and for it to keep existing, I don't care whether it comes one way or another, but I just hope it comes. That's why you don't tend to hear me moaning on too much these days, I've accepted that I've got no say in the grand scheme of things and I'm happy to ride the wave and see where it takes us.

 

I'm happy Shepherd is gone simply because I thought the man was a c*** and that he'd had his time here, I have no qualms admitting that he had his good spells and he did a lot of good, but the club was sinking fast and he'd lost the fans. His position was untenable. He's just a man though, like Ashley is, like Mort is, it's the club that matters.

 

not bad, some of what I said doesn't really look like I wanted.......look at it as meaning that even I can accept that every player can't cost 20m quid, and take it also as meaning that of course I'm aware that sometimes you find a gem for less money ......

 

Its the general attitude of the club, is what I'm talking about.

 

As said in the other post, when players become available, players so good that you have to have, then you simply MUST try and get the money and get them. For a club like Newcastle, this is quite simply not a problem or shouldn't be a problem. The club is too big to be run on over stringent prudency, but it bothers me that the new board appear to be making noises that suggest this is what they are going to do. You should ALWAYS be looking at buying players for any position, better than what you have.

 

It is what has led to the events of this week, and Keegan should know.

 

I've never denied that Shepherd may have been a c*** sometimes, but basically I'm not bothered by off the field things, up to a point. I just don't care. I don't want a nice man running the club who doesn't have any ambition for it, I saw that for 30 years, many other clubs still have it. I just don't want it. I just want a board who back its manager and aim for real success, and I don't care who they are, what their backround is, or what they do, so long as they deliver this. This is what the successful clubs do. Chelsea fans don't care where Abramovic makes his money, ManU fans didn't care about Edwards and for the moment may not like the  Glaziers but aren't making any noises because they are winning trophies too.

 

Thanks for calling me a miserable old bugger  ......... I'm neither, you young whippersnapper you .... 

 

 

 

Good post. I actually agree to some extent with alot of sentiment thats it that post but some of it regarding financial prudency is a bit unfair - esepcially as we have had substantials bits made for anumber of players.

 

Well, if we bought a centre forward with more mobility than Viduka, say Ashton - a midfield player such as Modric would have been, and a centre back like Richard Dunne to go alongside Taylor and Faye and fight for places and give us strength in depth, I'd be fairly pleased with that for the moment.

 

Then David Bentley came along and the club said he had spent his  budget.

 

Well, I would be unhappy with this. This is what I mean. Newcastle are too big to exercise such prudency. The spend would be worth it, and I'd be be dismayed to miss out on such a player and such an opportunity. This the difference between a truly ambitious club and a lesser one. Especially considering the ground we want to make up on the top teams.

 

Also consider that a "sell to buy" policy is inappropriate in such circumstances too.I can accept that in this event, one or two players would go ie Milner and/or Duff if he doesn't come good, but you sort the books out later and get the player while you can.

 

 

Again thats a fair point but id actually be more unhappy if it was the other way round and we missed out on Dunne, Ashton and Modric and got just Bentley instead. This is the crux of my argument.

 

EDIT: well how do you sort the books out later if what you do doesnt lead to success and financial benefits - at which point would we call it time on our expenditure and look to sell or lower wages, that seems a bit contradictory. Especially as that is exactly the situation we were in when Ashley came in. There needs to be a compromise somehwere and for me the best way to do it is to stick to a given budget - as much as id hate to miss out on Bentley if he were to come available but we had already spent our lot on him then thats tough - theres is always next season adn there are always other players.

 

 

fair enough, but essentially the truly successful clubs that win trophies would operate like that and buy Bentley. Thats my argument.

 

Wenger is the one manager that has been able to operate differently but now that he is losing his best players, even he may come to the conclusion that he'll have to modify his stance

 

And Arsenal now have a big debt due to building a new stadium, bad news for him eh ........ ring any bells ?

 

 

the truly succesful clubs have the money to do that or the turnover to finance the debt or abramovic.

 

 

maybe if we had built on our champs league appearances we'd be in liverpools place now.

 

maybe, if it was spent well, but I hope you aren't criticising the club for spending money they don't have when you say that.

 

 

theres a difference between spending money you don't have a being reckless

 

Well I think buying Woodgate in January before anyone else knew he was available, ahead of the summer, was pretty smart going myself.

 

 

yes it was........but not strengthening the midfield (bowyer) or forward line when in a position of strength on the field and financially was silly. after that they got very reckiless when not in a position to do so.

 

you mean the manager got reckless ? and they backed their man ? Should have sacked him mind, but they backed their man, he was their choice, not mine or yours, but they backed their man. Shouldn't have appointed him.

 

Back him or sack him. Thats the question. Every club faces it with every manager.

 

If you want to talk about the debt, well very few clubs don't have debts, and when its due to a stadium expansion that you need, its a no brainer. Ask Arsenal and Liverpool

 

 

[Dave]

NE5, would you be happy if we spent £20m on Bentley this summer but only brought in two cheap others, both who weren't very good?

 

I'm guessing you wouldn't.

 

no, I don't see the point in any manager bringing in any player who he thinks isn't good enough to strengthen his team or at least strengthen a small squad, but generally speaking I don't see the point in paying good money for players who you think aren't of a particular standard.

 

I would rather he bought Bentley and nobody, rather than 2 other players not good enough. And if he bought nobody else, I would want to know why.

 

Its a strange one, there is always exceptions. The last time, he brought Allen and Mathie for cover for Cole and Beardsley, when Beardsley was injured pre-season, yet it didn't seem like lack of ambition because you knew the club were showing it, aiming for the top and were backing him as much as possible. He also bought Darren Huckerby for a small fee because he saw a potential in him. Didn't work out either but you didn't question the ambition, it was obviously there.

 

The thing is, smaller clubs than us will be spending more than 20m quid, and just right now, we sort of need at least 3 players to get back into the european places.

 

Don't think Bentley would cost 20m like, or he wouldn't have done in January, but he will do if he steps up a level and gets more England caps.

 

 

 

That's all people mean (I think) when they refer to trophy signings though mate; one big signature to pacify the fans, at the expence of the team as a whole. As you say, we need to be looking for more than that, and we need to be spending money similar or greater than those who we aspire to compete with this time. You may disagree, but I think we needed the takeover to ensure we were even in a position to attempt that.

 

Digressing though, I don't want to get into another argument about the board. You're an interesting poster when you look beyond the usernames (irony!) and don't see every opinion as an attack on Shepherd.

 

On Bentley, if we want him then England's failure to qualify for the Euros may do us a huge favour. A good showing there and I reckon Blackburn would definitely hold out for something like £20m. Even though I disagree with you that we can simply pluck their players at will, I think with the right conviction we could get him.

 

I look on it as having a player on board who is absolutely top notch, so you don't need to think of replacing him for a while ie a huge step towards putting together a quality team.

 

Why bother with 2nd best if you can get the best ?

 

Thats not a "trophy" signing, thats a top notch signing, that the top clubs should be lookign to make. That means us.

 

I won't dispute that football is changing, and due to the increasing number of clubs taken over by rich people, we needed similar. My reservation is simply centred on how much they want to be better than the rest. Just like the last ones in fact, they proved they wanted it, and did their best.

 

 

 

They certainly did their best, and they succeeded as much as they failed IMO. We had some cracking 'ups' but also some dismal 'downs'.

 

The key point is that the new lot have got their own man in now, and they have to prove they have the ambition required for this club. That starts in earnest this summer (consider that Allardyce wasn't theirs), and they have no excuse not to know it.

 

I've said all along that I'll wait until the end of the transfer window, and if they've failed Keegan they'll get what they deserve. That will be a lot of criticism. Hopefully both you and I are satisfied, and we don't have to fall back on these ludicrous arguments time and again.

[Baggio]

The stadium expansion cost £42 million the best part of a decade ago, they must have got a really shit loan rate if it cost £100 million to pay it off last Summer.

[fredbob]

My theory on debt is that it was actually (ironically) something which lead us to have to spend more in the transfer markets on these "trophy signings". Stadium debt was secured against Season ticket sales and after SBR had failed to get us to CL and there was disgruntle amongst the fans it showed in the level of season ticket sales, which are imperative to the clubs finances.

 

With the lack of interest after the poor season it made it obviosu in Shepherds eyes to get rid of SBR for risk of further failure and also meant that he was forced to put in a PR bid for Rooney which he helpfully annonuced to the world, this was something that got the interest going again and we were ok for that season. Then came the Souness debacle-again ST sales were poor after a shitty season and for the first time in a long time were forced to advertise the fact that ST sales were poor leading to a contversial spending spree where names apprenetly became the main fixture (trophy signing phrase applicable here).

 

I think it just lead to becoming a vicious circle which Shepherd couldnt rise above because the appoointemnts that he made werent great and his stock had fallen so low with the fans. If he just had the initiave to look beyond these shores and search for a worthy manager he could of broke the circle.

 

Im not saying that there would of been success if we went abroad but i think its clear that the calibre of manager abroad is higher than it is in England. In my opinion it would of taken only one good appointment for the circle to of been broken.

 

then again i could be completely wrong about everything ive just said.....  

[Guest East Stander]

The stadium expansion cost £42 million the best part of a decade ago, they must have got a really s*** loan rate if it cost £100 million to pay it off last Summer.

 

The initial amount was £55 mill before repayments were made. Note 29 of the latest accounts state that the noteholders exercised the option of having all payments made in 60 days after the buyout.

 

This came to £45,715,000 paid on September 10. £4,273,000 had also to be paid as an early payment charge. £13,303,000 of other loans were paid up.

 

Totalling £63,291,000.

 

 

[Mick]

My theory on debt is that it was actually (ironically) something which lead us to have to spend more in the transfer markets on these "trophy signings". Stadium debt was secured against Season ticket sales and after SBR had failed to get us to CL and there was disgruntle amongst the fans it showed in the level of season ticket sales, which are imperative to the clubs finances.

 

With the lack of interest after the poor season it made it obviosu in Shepherds eyes to get rid of SBR for risk of further failure and also meant that he was forced to put in a PR bid for Rooney which he helpfully annonuced to the world, this was something that got the interest going again and we were ok for that season. Then came the Souness debacle-again ST sales were poor after a shitty season and for the first time in a long time were forced to advertise the fact that ST sales were poor leading to a contversial spending spree where names apprenetly became the main fixture (trophy signing phrase applicable here).

 

I think it just lead to becoming a vicious circle which Shepherd couldnt rise above because the appoointemnts that he made werent great and his stock had fallen so low with the fans. If he just had the initiave to look beyond these shores and search for a worthy manager he could of broke the circle.

 

Im not saying that there would of been success if we went abroad but i think its clear that the calibre of manager abroad is higher than it is in England. In my opinion it would of taken only one good appointment for the circle to of been broken.

 

then again i could be completely wrong about everything ive just said.....  

 

Where did you get the information on season ticket sales while Robson was manager?  I remember us advertising season tickets on Metro Radio when Souness was in charge but don't remember anything like that before then.

 

You must know that our poor season had seen us finish 5th in the league and compete in the semi-final of the UEFA Cup which we would have possibly won if it wasn't for Jenas, Dyer and Bellamy missing both games due to injury and Woodgate missing the away game.  I'm sure somebody said yesterday that we even had to use Michael Bridges in the home game when he came on as sub for Ameobi.

[fredbob]

My theory on debt is that it was actually (ironically) something which lead us to have to spend more in the transfer markets on these "trophy signings". Stadium debt was secured against Season ticket sales and after SBR had failed to get us to CL and there was disgruntle amongst the fans it showed in the level of season ticket sales, which are imperative to the clubs finances.

 

With the lack of interest after the poor season it made it obviosu in Shepherds eyes to get rid of SBR for risk of further failure and also meant that he was forced to put in a PR bid for Rooney which he helpfully annonuced to the world, this was something that got the interest going again and we were ok for that season. Then came the Souness debacle-again ST sales were poor after a shitty season and for the first time in a long time were forced to advertise the fact that ST sales were poor leading to a contversial spending spree where names apprenetly became the main fixture (trophy signing phrase applicable here).

 

I think it just lead to becoming a vicious circle which Shepherd couldnt rise above because the appoointemnts that he made werent great and his stock had fallen so low with the fans. If he just had the initiave to look beyond these shores and search for a worthy manager he could of broke the circle.

 

Im not saying that there would of been success if we went abroad but i think its clear that the calibre of manager abroad is higher than it is in England. In my opinion it would of taken only one good appointment for the circle to of been broken.

 

then again i could be completely wrong about everything ive just said.....  

 

Where did you get the information on season ticket sales while Robson was manager?  I remember us advertising season tickets on Metro Radio when Souness was in charge but don't remember anything like that before then.

 

You must know that our poor season had seen us finish 5th in the league and compete in the semi-final of the UEFA Cup which we would have possibly won if it wasn't for Jenas, Dyer and Bellamy missing both games due to injury and Woodgate missing the away game.  I'm sure somebody said yesterday that we even had to use Michael Bridges in the home game when he came on as sub for Ameobi.

 

It was my theory - my point of view on how things transpired, im basing on the fact that the fans were extremely unhappy at the time and SBRs rating were really low, i think that might of lead to unprecedented poor season ticket sales. Hence why towards the end of the window Shepherd put in the bid for Rooney which was more pr than substance because SBR was out the door and Shepherd knew it.

 

Also that season Bellamy, Dyer, Jenas and Woodgate only played 5 times together all season- who's to say what could of beenin we had them all together.

[KaKa]

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/posts/view/37422/Kev-s-ordered-to-copy-Weng

[Dave]

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/posts/view/37422/Kev-s-ordered-to-copy-Weng

 

Good news and bad news.

 

If there's an ounce of truth in it, of course. Which I doubt.

[Teasy]

Does Ashley record all his conversations and send them to the press?  Absolutely amazing how these f****** idiots can get away with spouting whatever s*** they feel like while claiming it to be fact "Ashley thinks this", "Keegan was told do this or else".. complete and utter bollocks the lot of it!

[KaKa]

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/posts/view/37422/Kev-s-ordered-to-copy-Weng

 

Good news and bad news.

 

If there's an ounce of truth in it, of course. Which I doubt.

 

I feel like there is some truth to it. I think Keegan knew this is what he had to do from the outset and basically this is why he claimed we would be miles away from the top 4 and unable to challenge next year.

 

I don't think he feels he can make as much rapid progress under these conditions i.e. building a younger squad.

 

However, I am just as happy for us to make slower progress with a young talented squad and the idea of the likes of Veloso, Gomis, Nasri etc coming in excites me rather than the Crouches, Riises, Campbells etc.

 

I think I'm with Ashley on this one. Yeah it might take a little longer but we'll get there eventually as long as we can get the right players in.It will be really refreshing to have some top young talent at the club for a change.

[Coco]

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/posts/view/37422/Kev-s-ordered-to-copy-Weng

 

 

Good news and bad news.

 

If there's an ounce of truth in it, of course. Which I doubt.

 

I feel like there is some truth to it. I think Keegan knew this is what he had to do from the outset and basically this is why he claimed we would be miles away from the top 4 and unable to challenge next year.

 

I don't think he feels he can make as much rapid progress under these conditions i.e. building a younger squad.

 

However, I am just as happy for us to make slower progress with a young talented squad and the idea of the likes of Veloso, Gomis, Nasri etc coming in excites me rather than the Crouches, Riises, Campbells etc.

 

I think I'm with Ashley on this one. Yeah it might take a little longer but we'll get there eventually as long as we can get the right players in.It will be really refreshing to have some top young talent at the club for a change.

 

 

Bringing in Veloso, Gomis and Nasri would cost an absolute fortune, whereas Crouch, Riise and Campbell would not, relatively.

 

When Wenger came in he still signed some proven, "ready-made" players, like Overmars, Petit, Pires etc. If we expect to buy a bunch of 16yr olds and in 5-10 years have a top 4 team, it's lunacy...

[Mick]

 

It was my theory - my point of view on how things transpired, im basing on the fact that the fans were extremely unhappy at the time and SBRs rating were really low, i think that might of lead to unprecedented poor season ticket sales. Hence why towards the end of the window Shepherd put in the bid for Rooney which was more pr than substance because SBR was out the door and Shepherd knew it.

 

Also that season Bellamy, Dyer, Jenas and Woodgate only played 5 times together all season- who's to say what could of beenin we had them all together.

 

That's a good point about the number of times they played together, Jenas played the most league games out of those players and that was only on 26 league games, Bellamy only started 13 league games.

[Dave]

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/posts/view/37422/Kev-s-ordered-to-copy-Weng

 

Good news and bad news.

 

If there's an ounce of truth in it, of course. Which I doubt.

 

I feel like there is some truth to it. I think Keegan knew this is what he had to do from the outset and basically this is why he claimed we would be miles away from the top 4 and unable to challenge next year.

 

I don't think he feels he can make as much rapid progress under these conditions i.e. building a younger squad.

 

However, I am just as happy for us to make slower progress with a young talented squad and the idea of the likes of Veloso, Gomis, Nasri etc coming in excites me rather than the Crouches, Riises, Campbells etc.

 

I think I'm with Ashley on this one. Yeah it might take a little longer but we'll get there eventually as long as we can get the right players in.It will be really refreshing to have some top young talent at the club for a change.

 

The sensible approach - as usual - would be a compromise between the two. The two or three major signings Keegan has continually referred to are players that can go straight into the team. They might be young (Modric), but they're not youngsters in terms of being 'for the future'.

 

The ideal solution is say six or seven signings, with half being the likes of Modric, and the others being some warm/hot prospects who can bulk out the squad. Think Nani at Man Utd.

[lovejoy]

owen to run his contract down if tomorrows rags are to be believed, ashley wont pay his current wage and he wont take a cut

[Coco]

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/posts/view/37422/Kev-s-ordered-to-copy-Weng

 

Good news and bad news.

 

If there's an ounce of truth in it, of course. Which I doubt.

 

I feel like there is some truth to it. I think Keegan knew this is what he had to do from the outset and basically this is why he claimed we would be miles away from the top 4 and unable to challenge next year.

 

I don't think he feels he can make as much rapid progress under these conditions i.e. building a younger squad.

 

However, I am just as happy for us to make slower progress with a young talented squad and the idea of the likes of Veloso, Gomis, Nasri etc coming in excites me rather than the Crouches, Riises, Campbells etc.

 

I think I'm with Ashley on this one. Yeah it might take a little longer but we'll get there eventually as long as we can get the right players in.It will be really refreshing to have some top young talent at the club for a change.

 

The sensible approach - as usual - would be a compromise between the two. The two or three major signings Keegan has continually referred to are players that can go straight into the team. They might be young (Modric), but they're not youngsters in terms of being 'for the future'.

 

The ideal solution is say six or seven signings, with half being the likes of Modric, and the others being some warm/hot prospects who can bulk out the squad. Think Nani at Man Utd.

 

Nani and Anderson cost the best part of £30m did they not? I get your point though. IMO we might not see Nani type squad fillers, but maybe more like Tozer etc. and hopefully enough first choice players to make a difference...

[Dave]

Nani and Anderson cost the best part of £30m did they not? I get your point though. IMO we might not see Nani type squad fillers, but maybe more like Tozer etc. and hopefully enough first choice players to make a difference...

 

Maybe a bad example then, but I meant players who are young/inexperienced enough to not be automatic first-teamers, but good enough already to help out if required from the bench/in emergencies.

 

Hopefully, anyway.

[Teasy]

owen to run his contract down if tomorrows rags are to be believed. Ashley wont pay his current wage and he wont take a cut

 

Which they shouldn't be..  They constantly talk shit and contradict themselves week after week.

[Dave]

owen to run his contract down if tomorrows rags are to be believed. Ashley wont pay his current wage and he wont take a cut

 

Which they shouldn't be..  They constantly talk shit and contradict themselves week after week.

 

Aye, can't be right. He's off to Man Utd, remember.

 

Oh.

[fredbob]

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/posts/view/37422/Kev-s-ordered-to-copy-Weng

 

Good news and bad news.

 

If there's an ounce of truth in it, of course. Which I doubt.

 

I feel like there is some truth to it. I think Keegan knew this is what he had to do from the outset and basically this is why he claimed we would be miles away from the top 4 and unable to challenge next year.

 

I don't think he feels he can make as much rapid progress under these conditions i.e. building a younger squad.

 

However, I am just as happy for us to make slower progress with a young talented squad and the idea of the likes of Veloso, Gomis, Nasri etc coming in excites me rather than the Crouches, Riises, Campbells etc.

 

I think I'm with Ashley on this one. Yeah it might take a little longer but we'll get there eventually as long as we can get the right players in.It will be really refreshing to have some top young talent at the club for a change.

 

The sensible approach - as usual - would be a compromise between the two. The two or three major signings Keegan has continually referred to are players that can go straight into the team. They might be young (Modric), but they're not youngsters in terms of being 'for the future'.

 

The ideal solution is say six or seven signings, with half being the likes of Modric, and the others being some warm/hot prospects who can bulk out the squad. Think Nani at Man Utd.

 

Id agree with that and i'd go as far as saying that that is exactly what will happen. It wouldnt make sense for Keegan to be allowed to identify the targets if the club had very little intention of allowing them to come.

 

I dont think for a second that Keegan or Wise for that matter would allow the board to dictate the type of transfers that were allowed at the club to make especially with absoltutley no football epxerinece in them.

 

There has to be some compromise with the 2 people at this club who know what footballs all about.

 

[NE5]

NE5, would you be happy if we spent £20m on Bentley this summer but only brought in two cheap others, both who weren't very good?

 

I'm guessing you wouldn't.

 

no, I don't see the point in any manager bringing in any player who he thinks isn't good enough to strengthen his team or at least strengthen a small squad, but generally speaking I don't see the point in paying good money for players who you think aren't of a particular standard.

 

I would rather he bought Bentley and nobody, rather than 2 other players not good enough. And if he bought nobody else, I would want to know why.

 

Its a strange one, there is always exceptions. The last time, he brought Allen and Mathie for cover for Cole and Beardsley, when Beardsley was injured pre-season, yet it didn't seem like lack of ambition because you knew the club were showing it, aiming for the top and were backing him as much as possible. He also bought Darren Huckerby for a small fee because he saw a potential in him. Didn't work out either but you didn't question the ambition, it was obviously there.

 

The thing is, smaller clubs than us will be spending more than 20m quid, and just right now, we sort of need at least 3 players to get back into the european places.

 

Don't think Bentley would cost 20m like, or he wouldn't have done in January, but he will do if he steps up a level and gets more England caps.

 

 

 

That's all people mean (I think) when they refer to trophy signings though mate; one big signature to pacify the fans, at the expence of the team as a whole. As you say, we need to be looking for more than that, and we need to be spending money similar or greater than those who we aspire to compete with this time. You may disagree, but I think we needed the takeover to ensure we were even in a position to attempt that.

 

Digressing though, I don't want to get into another argument about the board. You're an interesting poster when you look beyond the usernames (irony!) and don't see every opinion as an attack on Shepherd.

 

On Bentley, if we want him then England's failure to qualify for the Euros may do us a huge favour. A good showing there and I reckon Blackburn would definitely hold out for something like £20m. Even though I disagree with you that we can simply pluck their players at will, I think with the right conviction we could get him.

 

I look on it as having a player on board who is absolutely top notch, so you don't need to think of replacing him for a while ie a huge step towards putting together a quality team.

 

Why bother with 2nd best if you can get the best ?

 

Thats not a "trophy" signing, thats a top notch signing, that the top clubs should be lookign to make. That means us.

 

I won't dispute that football is changing, and due to the increasing number of clubs taken over by rich people, we needed similar. My reservation is simply centred on how much they want to be better than the rest. Just like the last ones in fact, they proved they wanted it, and did their best.

 

 

 

They certainly did their best, and they succeeded as much as they failed IMO. We had some cracking 'ups' but also some dismal 'downs'.

 

The key point is that the new lot have got their own man in now, and they have to prove they have the ambition required for this club. That starts in earnest this summer (consider that Allardyce wasn't theirs), and they have no excuse not to know it.

 

I've said all along that I'll wait until the end of the transfer window, and if they've failed Keegan they'll get what they deserve. That will be a lot of criticism. Hopefully both you and I are satisfied, and we don't have to fall back on these ludicrous arguments time and again.

 

Failed ? 

 

Bollocks.

 

If you had asked all of the NUFC fans wiho have always supported the club and always will for evermore, in 1992, if they would take getting to 90 minutes from the premiership. 2 FA Cup Finals, an unrecognisable stadium filled with 52000 "loyal fans who will support you evermore", qualifying for Europe more than every team but 4 in the country..........

 

They would snatch your hand off.

 

Unfortunately, even people like mick who say they supported the club during this time, appear to be totally unaware of it, the obvious conclusion being that they weren't actually there like they said they were, otherwise they would realise the real scenario.,

 

I don't know  a single person who watched and supported the club at this time, who isnt' aware of the above.

 

At the time the Halls and Shepherd took over the club, the main priority was just to avoid going into the 3rd division and stabalise the club and save it from going to the wall.

 

To say the "failed" is mind boggling. But to be honest, I'm not surprised in the slightest that people like yourself can't recognise it. I've tried to tell you enough times, so if you don't get it by now, you never will

 

Its like the southern journalists saying how Keegan "failed" because he "Won nowt".

 

Clueless.

 

 

[Dave]

I'm assuming you're drunk.

 

Either that or a bot that just keys off certain words and ignores the rest of the post.