Pablo Aimar joins Benfica

[NE5]

Got to love NE5. A couple of nights ago we were lacking ambition for signing Aimar, now we've got no ambition because we didn't sign him.

 

so which is it NE5?

 

I'm not a fence sitter myself, but it appears you're swinging your views back and forth as it suits. Please clarify if you've got the time. Thanks

 

its quite simple. We failed to sign a player the manager wanted, and in this case, he wasn't even first choice.

 

 

 

well, let's assume KK wanted Aimar, and agreed with Wise and co to go for him. We put in a bid, which was accepted by all "press" accounts. Let's also say that said club and player had other offers on the table. Doesn't said player then get to choose which club he wants to play for? naturally factoring in his own ambition, the club's ambition, wages, european football, city, climate etc...etc...

 

what if the player really did turn us down in favour of Benfica? why does that automatically indicate failure on our part? he's south american remember, and has been a relatively big name charlie for a few yrs now. There may be several reasons why he would choose Benfica over us, and none of them have to be automatically due to our club failing at boardroom/Wise level.

 

just the same way you accuse people of having an agenda against the old board, you clearly use every chance you get to criticize the new board, even when factual information is scarce and all that's available is unsubstantiated drivel written up by some 2 bit journo.

 

 

 

the club are missing out on managers targets for not showing ambition/having the setup to persuade them to come/not being urgent enough to go and get them, whatever the reason, and making noises about putting in place a policy that I basically think is the wrong way to get among the top clubs and you think they shouldn't be criticised ?

 

You bet your arse I'll criticise mate, and whats more its justified as well.

 

 

 

What about when a player has a better option?

 

we have to make ourselves a better option than clubs where we sould be a better option. Like we've done for the majority of our recent past, I know this is something we don't agree on mate but the club has to make its own effort and a much better one to sell itself.

 

 

[NE5]

 

said this ages ago and mick in his wisdom [among others] rejected it

 

 

 

Liar.

 

I can't be bothered to look for that thread about a "bootroom", look for it yourself.

 

 

[NE5]

Got to love NE5. A couple of nights ago we were lacking ambition for signing Aimar, now we've got no ambition because we didn't sign him.

 

so which is it NE5?

 

I'm not a fence sitter myself, but it appears you're swinging your views back and forth as it suits. Please clarify if you've got the time. Thanks

 

its quite simple. We failed to sign a player the manager wanted, and in this case, he wasn't even first choice.

 

 

 

well, let's assume KK wanted Aimar, and agreed with Wise and co to go for him. We put in a bid, which was accepted by all "press" accounts. Let's also say that said club and player had other offers on the table. Doesn't said player then get to choose which club he wants to play for? naturally factoring in his own ambition, the club's ambition, wages, european football, city, climate etc...etc...

 

what if the player really did turn us down in favour of Benfica? why does that automatically indicate failure on our part? he's south american remember, and has been a relatively big name charlie for a few yrs now. There may be several reasons why he would choose Benfica over us, and none of them have to be automatically due to our club failing at boardroom/Wise level.

 

just the same way you accuse people of having an agenda against the old board, you clearly use every chance you get to criticize the new board, even when factual information is scarce and all that's available is unsubstantiated drivel written up by some 2 bit journo.

 

 

 

the club are missing out on managers targets for not showing ambition/having the setup to persuade them to come/not being urgent enough to go and get them, whatever the reason, and making noises about putting in place a policy that I basically think is the wrong way to get among the top clubs and you think they shouldn't be criticised ?

 

You bet your arse I'll criticise mate, and whats more its justified as well.

 

 

 

Show me one piece of hard evidence that suggests that Aimar was a Keegan target.

 

Also, what kind of set up are you on about? The type where we spend 9 million on the likes of Boumsong and Luque? we have a top class stadium, top class training facilities (all thanks to Shepherd no doubt of course)

 

Well, as it happens, the Halls and Shepherd. Yes. Of course, who else do you think its down to, the tea lady ?

 

, a (small) crop of high profile players, and a decent record in the past 10 or 15 years. So what set up would that be mate?

 

are you saying the last 15 years have been shite 

 

You can't do f*** all about a player who wants to join a London club or a club playing in Europe. And if we throw crazy money at players, we'd end up with mercenaries who you (yes you personally!) would be wanting shot of for being lazy mercenary types.

 

The rebuilding will have to be gradual, and we'll have to step up a gear in terms of league finish first before we can attract the top calibre players we used to.

 

edit: oh, and kindly leave my arse well alone. cheers 

 

you have to sell the club. Thats football, in fact thats life.

 

 

[thedudeabides]

Got to love NE5. A couple of nights ago we were lacking ambition for signing Aimar, now we've got no ambition because we didn't sign him.

 

so which is it NE5?

 

I'm not a fence sitter myself, but it appears you're swinging your views back and forth as it suits. Please clarify if you've got the time. Thanks

 

its quite simple. We failed to sign a player the manager wanted, and in this case, he wasn't even first choice.

 

 

 

well, let's assume KK wanted Aimar, and agreed with Wise and co to go for him. We put in a bid, which was accepted by all "press" accounts. Let's also say that said club and player had other offers on the table. Doesn't said player then get to choose which club he wants to play for? naturally factoring in his own ambition, the club's ambition, wages, european football, city, climate etc...etc...

 

what if the player really did turn us down in favour of Benfica? why does that automatically indicate failure on our part? he's south american remember, and has been a relatively big name charlie for a few yrs now. There may be several reasons why he would choose Benfica over us, and none of them have to be automatically due to our club failing at boardroom/Wise level.

 

just the same way you accuse people of having an agenda against the old board, you clearly use every chance you get to criticize the new board, even when factual information is scarce and all that's available is unsubstantiated drivel written up by some 2 bit journo.

 

 

 

the club are missing out on managers targets for not showing ambition/having the setup to persuade them to come/not being urgent enough to go and get them, whatever the reason, and making noises about putting in place a policy that I basically think is the wrong way to get among the top clubs and you think they shouldn't be criticised ?

 

You bet your arse I'll criticise mate, and whats more its justified as well.

 

 

 

What about when a player has a better option?

 

we have to make ourselves a better option than clubs where we sould be a better option. Like we've done for the majority of our recent past, I know this is something we don't agree on mate but the club has to make its own effort and a much better one to sell itself.

 

 

 

I take your point and agree the club has to sell itself..........BUT, how can we compete with a club that can offer European football, or for a player who wants to live in London?

The only way we can possibly attract a top player is to pay ridiculous wages like we have in the past. Are you saying you want to see players signed who are only here for one thing?

[Mick]

 

I can't be bothered to look for that thread about a "bootroom", look for it yourself.

 

 

 

Apology accepted. 

[NE5]

nobody.. now stop the crap

 

well, I've news for you.

 

More crap?

 

Shepherd and Cushing went to do the deal. See 3rd link. All that way to back the manager for a player he wanted and get him before others. And cut an agent out too. FAncy that eh 

 

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_20001007/ai_n14349875

 

http://archive.thenorthernecho.co.uk/2000/10/4/190390.html

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2000/oct/10/newsstory.sport2

[NE5]

 

I can't be bothered to look for that thread about a "bootroom", look for it yourself.

 

 

 

Apology accepted. 

 

no, I said you criticised my comment, but I can't be arsed to look for it.

 

 

[NE5]

Got to love NE5. A couple of nights ago we were lacking ambition for signing Aimar, now we've got no ambition because we didn't sign him.

 

so which is it NE5?

 

I'm not a fence sitter myself, but it appears you're swinging your views back and forth as it suits. Please clarify if you've got the time. Thanks

 

its quite simple. We failed to sign a player the manager wanted, and in this case, he wasn't even first choice.

 

 

 

well, let's assume KK wanted Aimar, and agreed with Wise and co to go for him. We put in a bid, which was accepted by all "press" accounts. Let's also say that said club and player had other offers on the table. Doesn't said player then get to choose which club he wants to play for? naturally factoring in his own ambition, the club's ambition, wages, european football, city, climate etc...etc...

 

what if the player really did turn us down in favour of Benfica? why does that automatically indicate failure on our part? he's south american remember, and has been a relatively big name charlie for a few yrs now. There may be several reasons why he would choose Benfica over us, and none of them have to be automatically due to our club failing at boardroom/Wise level.

 

just the same way you accuse people of having an agenda against the old board, you clearly use every chance you get to criticize the new board, even when factual information is scarce and all that's available is unsubstantiated drivel written up by some 2 bit journo.

 

 

 

the club are missing out on managers targets for not showing ambition/having the setup to persuade them to come/not being urgent enough to go and get them, whatever the reason, and making noises about putting in place a policy that I basically think is the wrong way to get among the top clubs and you think they shouldn't be criticised ?

 

You bet your arse I'll criticise mate, and whats more its justified as well.

 

 

 

What about when a player has a better option?

 

we have to make ourselves a better option than clubs where we sould be a better option. Like we've done for the majority of our recent past, I know this is something we don't agree on mate but the club has to make its own effort and a much better one to sell itself.

 

 

 

I take your point and agree the club has to sell itself..........BUT, how can we compete with a club that can offer European football, or for a player who wants to live in London?

The only way we can possibly attract a top player is to pay ridiculous wages like we have in the past. Are you saying you want to see players signed who are only here for one thing?

 

of course not, but I just can't accept that there are quality players who won't see playing for Newcastle as the big draw that it is.

 

Basically, we may not be in europe next season, but most players will know that we should be, they will know what happened the last time under Keegan and any player worth his salt should consider that and see it as superior to most options apart from the 4 obvious ones in the premiership.

 

 

[Guest elbee909]

nobody.. now stop the crap

 

well, I've news for you.

 

More crap?

 

Shepherd and Cushing went to do the deal. See 3rd link. All that way to back the manager for a player he wanted and get him before others. And cut an agent out too. FAncy that eh 

 

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_20001007/ai_n14349875

 

http://archive.thenorthernecho.co.uk/2000/10/4/190390.html

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2000/oct/10/newsstory.sport2

 

Does anyone see the point here?  You're applauding the fact they were nearly reported to Fifa?  If anyone under the current board did it you'd have a go at them for it!

 

They probably just fancied a trip to the Buenos Aires brothels, a bit of a jolly at NUFC's expense.

[Mick]

 

no, I said you criticised my comment, but I can't be arsed to look for it.

 

 

 

Only about Keegan meeting Shearer in his boot room when it was public knowledge that they met down south.  I didn't say that Keegan shouldn't talk to potential signings like you've just tried to imply.

 

Keegan should meet players, something we know he did when we went for Modric because Keegan is quoted talking about when they came face to face.

[NE5]

nobody.. now stop the crap

 

well, I've news for you.

 

More crap?

 

Shepherd and Cushing went to do the deal. See 3rd link. All that way to back the manager for a player he wanted and get him before others. And cut an agent out too. FAncy that eh 

 

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_20001007/ai_n14349875

 

http://archive.thenorthernecho.co.uk/2000/10/4/190390.html

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2000/oct/10/newsstory.sport2

 

Does anyone see the point here?  You're applauding the fact they were nearly reported to Fifa?  If anyone under the current board did it you'd have a go at them for it!

 

They probably just fancied a trip to the Buenos Aires brothels, a bit of a jolly at NUFC's expense.

 

rubbish.

 

They got their man, and thats all that counts

 

 

[afar]

It's an interesting point that NE5 brings up, we were very much a more appealing proposition in the past and proved it by signing players in spite of tough competitions from other clubs. Competing with the likes of Villa, Everton, Portsmouth, Man City and even Spurs was not even close, rarely would a player have gone to one of those clubs ahead of us. However things have changed in recent years, and they probably started changing before FS left. The majority of people on this forum regard all the above as more attractive than ourselves. Is this purely down to succces on the field or because they are located in more exciting locations ? Well that didn't seem to be a problem only a few years ago when we were beating Champs League Everton to the signature of players, or players spurning the bright lights to sign for us ahead of Spurs.

 

Unfortunately, despite the fact that we all know Newcastle is a great city, with a lot of things going for it. There are still a lot of people who regard it as a backwater and mock it. This means you really do have to sell the place, the best way to sell a move to Newcastle is for the club to be successful on the pitch, the next is to offer a better compensation package to your employees. I think we have to face the fact that we'll probably always have to pay a little more for the same quality of player than other sides until we can generate some sustained success.

[Guest elbee909]

I remember someone making an argument along the lines of "so because the club haven't signed whom you want them to sign, you think they're in the wrong".  I'm paraphrasing but that was the gist.

 

Funny how that doesn't apply now though, isn't it.

[thedudeabides]

Got to love NE5. A couple of nights ago we were lacking ambition for signing Aimar, now we've got no ambition because we didn't sign him.

 

so which is it NE5?

 

I'm not a fence sitter myself, but it appears you're swinging your views back and forth as it suits. Please clarify if you've got the time. Thanks

 

its quite simple. We failed to sign a player the manager wanted, and in this case, he wasn't even first choice.

 

 

 

well, let's assume KK wanted Aimar, and agreed with Wise and co to go for him. We put in a bid, which was accepted by all "press" accounts. Let's also say that said club and player had other offers on the table. Doesn't said player then get to choose which club he wants to play for? naturally factoring in his own ambition, the club's ambition, wages, european football, city, climate etc...etc...

 

what if the player really did turn us down in favour of Benfica? why does that automatically indicate failure on our part? he's south american remember, and has been a relatively big name charlie for a few yrs now. There may be several reasons why he would choose Benfica over us, and none of them have to be automatically due to our club failing at boardroom/Wise level.

 

just the same way you accuse people of having an agenda against the old board, you clearly use every chance you get to criticize the new board, even when factual information is scarce and all that's available is unsubstantiated drivel written up by some 2 bit journo.

 

 

 

the club are missing out on managers targets for not showing ambition/having the setup to persuade them to come/not being urgent enough to go and get them, whatever the reason, and making noises about putting in place a policy that I basically think is the wrong way to get among the top clubs and you think they shouldn't be criticised ?

 

You bet your arse I'll criticise mate, and whats more its justified as well.

 

 

 

What about when a player has a better option?

 

we have to make ourselves a better option than clubs where we sould be a better option. Like we've done for the majority of our recent past, I know this is something we don't agree on mate but the club has to make its own effort and a much better one to sell itself.

 

 

 

I take your point and agree the club has to sell itself..........BUT, how can we compete with a club that can offer European football, or for a player who wants to live in London?

The only way we can possibly attract a top player is to pay ridiculous wages like we have in the past. Are you saying you want to see players signed who are only here for one thing?

 

of course not, but I just can't accept that there are quality players who won't see playing for Newcastle as the big draw that it is.

 

Basically, we may not be in europe next season, but most players will know that we should be, they will know what happened the last time under Keegan and any player worth his salt should consider that and see it as superior to most options apart from the 4 obvious ones in the premiership.

 

 

 

Sadly, we are not a big draw anymore as we've been going backwards since we sacked Robson. Having a new manager virtually every season, hasn't exactly done wonders for our image too.

 

In terms of attracting players, I would put Spurs, Everton, Portsmouth, Man City and possibly Villa ahead of us at present. I don't like it, but you've got to be realistic about these things.

 

 

[WhatTheFunk]

Got to love NE5. A couple of nights ago we were lacking ambition for signing Aimar, now we've got no ambition because we didn't sign him.

 

so which is it NE5?

 

I'm not a fence sitter myself, but it appears you're swinging your views back and forth as it suits. Please clarify if you've got the time. Thanks

 

its quite simple. We failed to sign a player the manager wanted, and in this case, he wasn't even first choice.

 

 

 

well, let's assume KK wanted Aimar, and agreed with Wise and co to go for him. We put in a bid, which was accepted by all "press" accounts. Let's also say that said club and player had other offers on the table. Doesn't said player then get to choose which club he wants to play for? naturally factoring in his own ambition, the club's ambition, wages, european football, city, climate etc...etc...

 

what if the player really did turn us down in favour of Benfica? why does that automatically indicate failure on our part? he's south american remember, and has been a relatively big name charlie for a few yrs now. There may be several reasons why he would choose Benfica over us, and none of them have to be automatically due to our club failing at boardroom/Wise level.

 

just the same way you accuse people of having an agenda against the old board, you clearly use every chance you get to criticize the new board, even when factual information is scarce and all that's available is unsubstantiated drivel written up by some 2 bit journo.

 

 

 

the club are missing out on managers targets for not showing ambition/having the setup to persuade them to come/not being urgent enough to go and get them, whatever the reason, and making noises about putting in place a policy that I basically think is the wrong way to get among the top clubs and you think they shouldn't be criticised ?

 

You bet your arse I'll criticise mate, and whats more its justified as well.

 

 

 

Show me one piece of hard evidence that suggests that Aimar was a Keegan target.

 

Also, what kind of set up are you on about? The type where we spend 9 million on the likes of Boumsong and Luque? we have a top class stadium, top class training facilities (all thanks to Shepherd no doubt of course)

 

Well, as it happens, the Halls and Shepherd. Yes. Of course, who else do you think its down to, the tea lady ?

 

, a (small) crop of high profile players, and a decent record in the past 10 or 15 years. So what set up would that be mate?

 

are you saying the last 15 years have been s**** 

 

You can't do f*** all about a player who wants to join a London club or a club playing in Europe. And if we throw crazy money at players, we'd end up with mercenaries who you (yes you personally!) would be wanting shot of for being lazy mercenary types.

 

The rebuilding will have to be gradual, and we'll have to step up a gear in terms of league finish first before we can attract the top calibre players we used to.

 

edit: oh, and kindly leave my arse well alone. cheers 

 

you have to sell the club. Thats football, in fact thats life.

 

 

 

Mate i'm not disagreeing with you! I think we've been quite successful in the past 10-15 yrs. It's been an important part of the club's history, and gave us all something to truly cheer about. But that era is over, and we need to find our feet again to get back up there again.

 

For the record, my comment regarding the stadium, profile, facilities and Shepherd, was NOT sarcastic! I am the first to say it was all down to the SJH's vision and FS's execution. I'm not doubting that or taking the piss.

 

By the way, themanupstairs is me work account. Sorry if thats against the rules, but for some reason I can't sign in with this account at work

[Parky]

nobody.. now stop the crap

 

well, I've news for you.

 

More crap?

 

Shepherd and Cushing went to do the deal. See 3rd link. All that way to back the manager for a player he wanted and get him before others. And cut an agent out too. FAncy that eh 

 

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_20001007/ai_n14349875

 

http://archive.thenorthernecho.co.uk/2000/10/4/190390.html

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2000/oct/10/newsstory.sport2

 

Benfica flew a delegation out when they heard we were in the running. That was it..game over. MA has to come to terms with the fact that we will initially have to pay over the odds in wages for good players. Later when we are more competitive is the time to attract them with other reasons.

[colinmk]

Crazy thread, I take it there has been no confirmed bids from us in the first place? Even if we did bid it is hardly surprising he wants to play in the champions league is it?

[Guest elbee909]

Crazy thread, I take it there has been no confirmed bids from us in the first place? Even if we did bid it is hardly surprising he wants to play in the champions league is it?

 

Apparently though, we should just throw more and more wages at them because we're not in Europe.  Overpaid mercenaries, that's what we need!

[James]

 

By the way, themanupstairs is me work account. Sorry if thats against the rules, but for some reason I can't sign in with this account at work

 

Thanks for clearing that up.

[Guest Mucky01]

it’s not exactly hard work in the Portuguese league is it, just what you need if you know you can’t hack it anymore week in week  out.

 

That’s what Schmiechel said and did when he left ManUre.

[NE5]

Got to love NE5. A couple of nights ago we were lacking ambition for signing Aimar, now we've got no ambition because we didn't sign him.

 

so which is it NE5?

 

I'm not a fence sitter myself, but it appears you're swinging your views back and forth as it suits. Please clarify if you've got the time. Thanks

 

its quite simple. We failed to sign a player the manager wanted, and in this case, he wasn't even first choice.

 

 

 

well, let's assume KK wanted Aimar, and agreed with Wise and co to go for him. We put in a bid, which was accepted by all "press" accounts. Let's also say that said club and player had other offers on the table. Doesn't said player then get to choose which club he wants to play for? naturally factoring in his own ambition, the club's ambition, wages, european football, city, climate etc...etc...

 

what if the player really did turn us down in favour of Benfica? why does that automatically indicate failure on our part? he's south american remember, and has been a relatively big name charlie for a few yrs now. There may be several reasons why he would choose Benfica over us, and none of them have to be automatically due to our club failing at boardroom/Wise level.

 

just the same way you accuse people of having an agenda against the old board, you clearly use every chance you get to criticize the new board, even when factual information is scarce and all that's available is unsubstantiated drivel written up by some 2 bit journo.

 

 

 

the club are missing out on managers targets for not showing ambition/having the setup to persuade them to come/not being urgent enough to go and get them, whatever the reason, and making noises about putting in place a policy that I basically think is the wrong way to get among the top clubs and you think they shouldn't be criticised ?

 

You bet your arse I'll criticise mate, and whats more its justified as well.

 

 

 

What about when a player has a better option?

 

we have to make ourselves a better option than clubs where we sould be a better option. Like we've done for the majority of our recent past, I know this is something we don't agree on mate but the club has to make its own effort and a much better one to sell itself.

 

 

 

I take your point and agree the club has to sell itself..........BUT, how can we compete with a club that can offer European football, or for a player who wants to live in London?

The only way we can possibly attract a top player is to pay ridiculous wages like we have in the past. Are you saying you want to see players signed who are only here for one thing?

 

of course not, but I just can't accept that there are quality players who won't see playing for Newcastle as the big draw that it is.

 

Basically, we may not be in europe next season, but most players will know that we should be, they will know what happened the last time under Keegan and any player worth his salt should consider that and see it as superior to most options apart from the 4 obvious ones in the premiership.

 

 

 

Sadly, we are not a big draw anymore as we've been going backwards since we sacked Robson. Having a new manager virtually every season, hasn't exactly done wonders for our image too.

 

In terms of attracting players, I would put Spurs, Everton, Portsmouth, Man City and possibly Villa ahead of us at present. I don't like it, but you've got to be realistic about these things.

 

 

I'm not disputing that Souness should never have been appointed, but I'm just looking at the way back, and not just this, but the tried and tested method of gaining success, which means spending top dollar sometimes and making players see you as a progressive club they want to play for.

 

 

[NE5]

nobody.. now stop the crap

 

well, I've news for you.

 

More crap?

 

Shepherd and Cushing went to do the deal. See 3rd link. All that way to back the manager for a player he wanted and get him before others. And cut an agent out too. FAncy that eh 

 

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_20001007/ai_n14349875

 

http://archive.thenorthernecho.co.uk/2000/10/4/190390.html

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2000/oct/10/newsstory.sport2

 

Benfica flew a delegation out when they heard we were in the running. That was it..game over. MA has to come to terms with the fact that we will initially have to pay over the odds in wages for good players. Later when we are more competitive is the time to attract them with other reasons.

 

Well put

 

 

[NE5]

Got to love NE5. A couple of nights ago we were lacking ambition for signing Aimar, now we've got no ambition because we didn't sign him.

 

so which is it NE5?

 

I'm not a fence sitter myself, but it appears you're swinging your views back and forth as it suits. Please clarify if you've got the time. Thanks

 

its quite simple. We failed to sign a player the manager wanted, and in this case, he wasn't even first choice.

 

 

 

well, let's assume KK wanted Aimar, and agreed with Wise and co to go for him. We put in a bid, which was accepted by all "press" accounts. Let's also say that said club and player had other offers on the table. Doesn't said player then get to choose which club he wants to play for? naturally factoring in his own ambition, the club's ambition, wages, european football, city, climate etc...etc...

 

what if the player really did turn us down in favour of Benfica? why does that automatically indicate failure on our part? he's south american remember, and has been a relatively big name charlie for a few yrs now. There may be several reasons why he would choose Benfica over us, and none of them have to be automatically due to our club failing at boardroom/Wise level.

 

just the same way you accuse people of having an agenda against the old board, you clearly use every chance you get to criticize the new board, even when factual information is scarce and all that's available is unsubstantiated drivel written up by some 2 bit journo.

 

 

 

the club are missing out on managers targets for not showing ambition/having the setup to persuade them to come/not being urgent enough to go and get them, whatever the reason, and making noises about putting in place a policy that I basically think is the wrong way to get among the top clubs and you think they shouldn't be criticised ?

 

You bet your arse I'll criticise mate, and whats more its justified as well.

 

 

 

Show me one piece of hard evidence that suggests that Aimar was a Keegan target.

 

Also, what kind of set up are you on about? The type where we spend 9 million on the likes of Boumsong and Luque? we have a top class stadium, top class training facilities (all thanks to Shepherd no doubt of course)

 

Well, as it happens, the Halls and Shepherd. Yes. Of course, who else do you think its down to, the tea lady ?

 

, a (small) crop of high profile players, and a decent record in the past 10 or 15 years. So what set up would that be mate?

 

are you saying the last 15 years have been s**** 

 

You can't do f*** all about a player who wants to join a London club or a club playing in Europe. And if we throw crazy money at players, we'd end up with mercenaries who you (yes you personally!) would be wanting shot of for being lazy mercenary types.

 

The rebuilding will have to be gradual, and we'll have to step up a gear in terms of league finish first before we can attract the top calibre players we used to.

 

edit: oh, and kindly leave my arse well alone. cheers 

 

you have to sell the club. Thats football, in fact thats life.

 

 

 

Mate i'm not disagreeing with you! I think we've been quite successful in the past 10-15 yrs. It's been an important part of the club's history, and gave us all something to truly cheer about. But that era is over, and we need to find our feet again to get back up there again.

 

For the record, my comment regarding the stadium, profile, facilities and Shepherd, was NOT sarcastic! I am the first to say it was all down to the SJH's vision and FS's execution. I'm not doubting that or taking the piss.

 

By the way, themanupstairs is me work account. Sorry if thats against the rules, but for some reason I can't sign in with this account at work

 

OK 

 

 

[Guest newcastle4life]

Dissapointed we missed out on Aimar still hope some good signings come in.

[Guest SpinTheBlackCircle]

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2008/jul/18/newcastleunited.premierleague?gusrc=rss&feed=football

 

Newcastle United's manager, Kevin Keegan, is disappointed Pablo Aimar, the Argentine playmaker, opted to leave Real Zaragoza for Benfica rather than St James' Park.

 

Although the Tyneside club finalised a fee with Zaragoza, Aimar is understood to have failed to agree personal terms with Newcastle, who are not offering the top-dollar salaries available in the past.