mrmojorisin75 Posted July 18, 2008 Share Posted July 18, 2008 "considering the billionaire owner, the net spend of just about zero last summer and the increased TV income, we should be going out and spending £50m if keegan wants to, but i can't see it." you've just summed up my feelings on the matter entirely - my personal opinion is that a net spend of anything less than 30m is fucking disgrace and an insult to the fans Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted July 18, 2008 Share Posted July 18, 2008 no wonder we get called the most fickle fan's in the country some ppl still believe we are chasing champions league football we can't attract the players ffs, because we live too far north and can't offer any champions league football and when we DID spend money it almost got us relegated under souness we finished 12th ffs not 5th, so we can't compete with the like's everton for now we need to build a team long term, and get in hard working players that can compete in the premiership and are not injured every other game Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted July 18, 2008 Share Posted July 18, 2008 no wonder we get called the most fickle fan's in the country some ppl still believe we are chasing champions league football we can't attract the players ffs, because we live too far north and can't offer any champions league football and when we DID spend money it almost got us relegated under souness we finished 12th ffs not 5th, so we can't compete with the like's everton for now we need to build a team long term, and get in hard working players that can compete in the premiership and are not injured every other game again, can you actually read? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted July 18, 2008 Share Posted July 18, 2008 "considering the billionaire owner, the net spend of just about zero last summer and the increased TV income, we should be going out and spending £50m if keegan wants to, but i can't see it." you've just summed up my feelings on the matter entirely - my personal opinion is that a net spend of anything less than 30m is fucking disgrace and an insult to the fans our net spend under MR SHEPHERD NE5 for the 5 seasons under robson was 10 million and that was after qualifying for the champs league and getting to the uefa cup semi finals, not much more than ashley Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted July 18, 2008 Share Posted July 18, 2008 no wonder we get called the most fickle fan's in the country some ppl still believe we are chasing champions league football we can't attract the players ffs, because we live too far north and can't offer any champions league football and when we DID spend money it almost got us relegated under souness we finished 12th ffs not 5th, so we can't compete with the like's everton for now we need to build a team long term, and get in hard working players that can compete in the premiership and are not injured every other game again, can you actually read? you read ffs, honestly most of the fan's on here only like to complain about things Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted July 18, 2008 Share Posted July 18, 2008 "considering the billionaire owner, the net spend of just about zero last summer and the increased TV income, we should be going out and spending £50m if keegan wants to, but i can't see it." you've just summed up my feelings on the matter entirely - my personal opinion is that a net spend of anything less than 30m is fucking disgrace and an insult to the fans our net spend under MR SHEPHERD NE5 for the 5 seasons under robson was 10 million and that was after qualifying for the champs league and getting to the uefa cup semi finals, not much more than ashley who mentioned shepherd? not me, don't care about him he's the past mate...the present and future are important Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnypd Posted July 18, 2008 Share Posted July 18, 2008 no wonder we get called the most fickle fan's in the country some ppl still believe we are chasing champions league football we can't attract the players ffs, because we live too far north and can't offer any champions league football and when we DID spend money it almost got us relegated under souness we finished 12th ffs not 5th, so we can't compete with the like's everton for now we need to build a team long term, and get in hard working players that can compete in the premiership and are not injured every other game i'm not sure if you're being ironic or not. i don't see what being far north has to do with anything. does this mean portsmouth and fulham are likely to beat out northerners like liverpool and man utd? and why does this myth about needing hard working players when you'e down the bottom keep springing up? alan smith, james milner, joey barton and nicky butt are hard working players, what we need to climb up the table are talented players. when we improved last season is when we got martins, viduka and owen playing together, probably the three most talented lads at the club. every team does need hard workers in the mix but it's fair to say crap teams are full of hard workers and low on talent. yes we spent money under Souness but the difference is we now have a manager who knows how to spend money rather than one who was shite and fought with our best players. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted July 18, 2008 Share Posted July 18, 2008 "considering the billionaire owner, the net spend of just about zero last summer and the increased TV income, we should be going out and spending £50m if keegan wants to, but i can't see it." you've just summed up my feelings on the matter entirely - my personal opinion is that a net spend of anything less than 30m is fucking disgrace and an insult to the fans our net spend under MR SHEPHERD NE5 for the 5 seasons under robson was 10 million and that was after qualifying for the champs league and getting to the uefa cup semi finals, not much more than ashley who mentioned shepherd? not me, don't care about him he's the past mate...the present and future are important we want the club to progress, right? we have already went down the route of spending big wages on has-been players and where did that get us?? almost relegated we need another route, and the route the board is taking if done right, will benefit the club for the next 5-10 years i agree we need players, but we don't need a 28 year old who just got his side relegated, by offering him 50-60k a week there's still 4 weeks to get players and still don't see other clubs bringing in plenty of players Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UV Posted July 18, 2008 Share Posted July 18, 2008 I myself belive there is only one way to go, and that is to scare of all the "gold diggers" out there, and the way they are doing it now is the soloution. Aye, I'm sure a player who bought out his contract for what will probably be a relatively small amount so he can profit from a big signing on bonus rather than his old team receive a transfer fee will be a loyal servant to the club who is happy to accept a minimal wage just to play for the love of it. Edit: I'm not really having a go at Gutierrez here - fair played to him for getting as much financially out of his career as he can - but some of you are just naively delusional about players these days. There are very few around who wont be after every penny they can get out of the game, and the ones who aren't should get a new agent. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted July 18, 2008 Share Posted July 18, 2008 no wonder we get called the most fickle fan's in the country some ppl still believe we are chasing champions league football we can't attract the players ffs, because we live too far north and can't offer any champions league football and when we DID spend money it almost got us relegated under souness we finished 12th ffs not 5th, so we can't compete with the like's everton for now we need to build a team long term, and get in hard working players that can compete in the premiership and are not injured every other game i'm not sure if you're being ironic or not. i don't see what being far north has to do with anything. does this mean portsmouth and fulham are likely to beat out northerners like liverpool and man utd? and why does this myth about needing hard working players when you'e down the bottom keep springing up? alan smith, james milner, joey barton and nicky butt are hard working players, what we need to climb up the table are talented players. when we improved last season is when we got martins, viduka and owen playing together, probably the three most talented lads at the club. every team does need hard workers in the mix but it's fair to say crap teams are full of hard workers and low on talent. yes we spent money under Souness but the difference is we now have a manager who knows how to spend money rather than one who was shite and fought with our best players. I mean talented as well, but we can't go out like we did in the past and give 60k a week to a turk that was injured 1/3 of the time we need to get wages down, how can we spend money on players when 80% of our turnover is spent on wages ffs Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted July 18, 2008 Share Posted July 18, 2008 "considering the billionaire owner, the net spend of just about zero last summer and the increased TV income, we should be going out and spending £50m if keegan wants to, but i can't see it." you've just summed up my feelings on the matter entirely - my personal opinion is that a net spend of anything less than 30m is fucking disgrace and an insult to the fans our net spend under MR SHEPHERD NE5 for the 5 seasons under robson was 10 million and that was after qualifying for the champs league and getting to the uefa cup semi finals, not much more than ashley who mentioned shepherd? not me, don't care about him he's the past mate...the present and future are important we want the club to progress, right? we have already went down the route of spending big wages on has-been players and where did that get us?? almost relegated we need another route, and the route the board is taking if done right, will benefit the club for the next 5-10 years i agree we need players, but we don't need a 28 year old who just got his side relegated, by offering him 50-60k a week there's still 4 weeks to get players and still don't see other clubs bringing in plenty of players i'll try again - go back and read the little exchange between johhnypd and myself (top of page 2 ) and try and see that what we're discussing is in no way applicable to what you're talking about here...you're reading something that isn't there Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted July 18, 2008 Share Posted July 18, 2008 "considering the billionaire owner, the net spend of just about zero last summer and the increased TV income, we should be going out and spending £50m if keegan wants to, but i can't see it." you've just summed up my feelings on the matter entirely - my personal opinion is that a net spend of anything less than 30m is fucking disgrace and an insult to the fans our net spend under MR SHEPHERD NE5 for the 5 seasons under robson was 10 million and that was after qualifying for the champs league and getting to the uefa cup semi finals, not much more than ashley who mentioned shepherd? not me, don't care about him he's the past mate...the present and future are important we want the club to progress, right? we have already went down the route of spending big wages on has-been players and where did that get us?? almost relegated we need another route, and the route the board is taking if done right, will benefit the club for the next 5-10 years i agree we need players, but we don't need a 28 year old who just got his side relegated, by offering him 50-60k a week there's still 4 weeks to get players and still don't see other clubs bringing in plenty of players i'll try again - go back and read the little exchange between johhnypd and myself (top of page 2 ) and try and see that what we're discussing is in no way applicable to what you're talking about here...you're reading something that isn't there i agree that instead of getting chelsea reserve players coming here for their last pay day we need to get the best players from the rest of the teams thats what keegan did last time, so if we don't sign the superstars some ppl on here want, then that can work Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted July 18, 2008 Share Posted July 18, 2008 "considering the billionaire owner, the net spend of just about zero last summer and the increased TV income, we should be going out and spending £50m if keegan wants to, but i can't see it." you've just summed up my feelings on the matter entirely - my personal opinion is that a net spend of anything less than 30m is fucking disgrace and an insult to the fans our net spend under MR SHEPHERD NE5 for the 5 seasons under robson was 10 million and that was after qualifying for the champs league and getting to the uefa cup semi finals, not much more than ashley who mentioned shepherd? not me, don't care about him he's the past mate...the present and future are important we want the club to progress, right? we have already went down the route of spending big wages on has-been players and where did that get us?? almost relegated we need another route, and the route the board is taking if done right, will benefit the club for the next 5-10 years i agree we need players, but we don't need a 28 year old who just got his side relegated, by offering him 50-60k a week there's still 4 weeks to get players and still don't see other clubs bringing in plenty of players i'll try again - go back and read the little exchange between johhnypd and myself (top of page 2 ) and try and see that what we're discussing is in no way applicable to what you're talking about here...you're reading something that isn't there i agree that instead of getting chelsea reserve players coming here for their last pay day we need to get the best players from the rest of the teams thats what keegan did last time, so if we don't sign the superstars some ppl on here want, then that can work we were talking about the likes of muntari BEFORE they move to bigger clubs but would cost a decent fee still (7-10m say)..hardly superstars anyways we appear to agree fundamentally i'd suggest Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skirge Posted July 18, 2008 Share Posted July 18, 2008 I was not aware we get called the most fickle fans in the Country, I thought we got called the loyalist fans in the Country and it was football fans on the whole that are known as fickle. No mention of what players we missed out on from KK, but its good to see he is letting us know whats going on upto a point. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted July 18, 2008 Share Posted July 18, 2008 I was not aware we get called the most fickle fans in the Country, I thought we got called the loyalist fans in the Country and it was football fans on the whole that are known as fickle. No mention of what players we missed out on from KK, but its good to see he is letting us know whats going on upto a point. we are the most hated fans in the country by a mile after what happened last season Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Posted July 18, 2008 Share Posted July 18, 2008 I like it, we are buying players who are looking to prove themselves, are young, hungry and have scope for improvement rather than people who are here for a big day pay day. Fully agree with Johnnypd says, this is exactly what we should be looking to do, see how Portsmouth have adopted this strategy with great sucess. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UV Posted July 18, 2008 Share Posted July 18, 2008 we have already went down the route of spending big wages on has-been players and where did that get us?? almost relegated we need another route, and the route the board is taking if done right, will benefit the club for the next 5-10 years i agree we need players, but we don't need a 28 year old who just got his side relegated, by offering him 50-60k a week there's still 4 weeks to get players and still don't see other clubs bringing in plenty of players Average age of player signed Summer 2000 - mid July 2007: 25.3 Average age of player signed since mid July 2007 - : 26.6 Average age of player signed for > £5m Summer 2000 - mid July 2007: 23.9 Average age of player signed for > £5m since mid July 2007 - : 24.2 (The 00-01 season is as far back as I could be arsed to go. Mid July is when Ashely took full control, and even though Ashley was the major shareholder when we signed Viduka (31) I've put him & Barton in the pre-Ashley group) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted July 18, 2008 Share Posted July 18, 2008 we have already went down the route of spending big wages on has-been players and where did that get us?? almost relegated we need another route, and the route the board is taking if done right, will benefit the club for the next 5-10 years i agree we need players, but we don't need a 28 year old who just got his side relegated, by offering him 50-60k a week there's still 4 weeks to get players and still don't see other clubs bringing in plenty of players Average age of player signed Summer 2000 - mid July 2007: 25.3 Average age of player signed since mid July 2007 - : 26.6 Average age of player signed for > £5m Summer 2000 - mid July 2007: 23.9 Average age of player signed for > £5m since mid July 2007 - : 24.2 (The 00-01 season is as far back as I could be arsed to go. Mid July is when Ashely took full control, and even though Ashley was the major shareholder when we signed Viduka (31) I've put him & Barton in the pre-Ashley group) Looks like the 'Ashley will only buy younger players' thing is bollocks then, eh? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnypd Posted July 18, 2008 Share Posted July 18, 2008 we have already went down the route of spending big wages on has-been players and where did that get us?? almost relegated we need another route, and the route the board is taking if done right, will benefit the club for the next 5-10 years i agree we need players, but we don't need a 28 year old who just got his side relegated, by offering him 50-60k a week there's still 4 weeks to get players and still don't see other clubs bringing in plenty of players Average age of player signed Summer 2000 - mid July 2007: 25.3 Average age of player signed since mid July 2007 - : 26.6 Average age of player signed for > £5m Summer 2000 - mid July 2007: 23.9 Average age of player signed for > £5m since mid July 2007 - : 24.2 (The 00-01 season is as far back as I could be arsed to go. Mid July is when Ashely took full control, and even though Ashley was the major shareholder when we signed Viduka (31) I've put him & Barton in the pre-Ashley group) the transfer record in terms of outlay and ambition since the end of last season has been poor to say the least. but i'm not sure this new policy of getting younger players really came into effect until we'd appointed wise and co. before that was more about mort doing his 'strategic review' of the club and looking at ways to run the club in the future. mort has since came out and stated what the policy is about bringing players for the future. it's also worth bearing in mind that we sort of did that under Robson, buying a fair few young players until the end of his reign when we started trying to get in older players. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UV Posted July 18, 2008 Share Posted July 18, 2008 we have already went down the route of spending big wages on has-been players and where did that get us?? almost relegated we need another route, and the route the board is taking if done right, will benefit the club for the next 5-10 years i agree we need players, but we don't need a 28 year old who just got his side relegated, by offering him 50-60k a week there's still 4 weeks to get players and still don't see other clubs bringing in plenty of players Average age of player signed Summer 2000 - mid July 2007: 25.3 Average age of player signed since mid July 2007 - : 26.6 Average age of player signed for > £5m Summer 2000 - mid July 2007: 23.9 Average age of player signed for > £5m since mid July 2007 - : 24.2 (The 00-01 season is as far back as I could be arsed to go. Mid July is when Ashely took full control, and even though Ashley was the major shareholder when we signed Viduka (31) I've put him & Barton in the pre-Ashley group) the transfer record in terms of outlay and ambition since the end of last season has been poor to say the least. but i'm not sure this new policy of getting younger players really came into effect until we'd appointed wise and co. before that was more about mort doing his 'strategic review' of the club and looking at ways to run the club in the future. mort has since came out and stated what the policy is about bringing players for the future. it's also worth bearing in mind that we sort of did that under Robson, buying a fair few young players until the end of his reign when we started trying to get in older players. I agree really. The point of the post was not so much to say anything about the policy under Ashley (I just put that in for comparison purposes) but to try and put a stop to the myth that we typically used to spend loads of money on has beens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted July 18, 2008 Share Posted July 18, 2008 we have already went down the route of spending big wages on has-been players and where did that get us?? almost relegated we need another route, and the route the board is taking if done right, will benefit the club for the next 5-10 years i agree we need players, but we don't need a 28 year old who just got his side relegated, by offering him 50-60k a week there's still 4 weeks to get players and still don't see other clubs bringing in plenty of players Average age of player signed Summer 2000 - mid July 2007: 25.3 Average age of player signed since mid July 2007 - : 26.6 Average age of player signed for > £5m Summer 2000 - mid July 2007: 23.9 Average age of player signed for > £5m since mid July 2007 - : 24.2 (The 00-01 season is as far back as I could be arsed to go. Mid July is when Ashely took full control, and even though Ashley was the major shareholder when we signed Viduka (31) I've put him & Barton in the pre-Ashley group) the transfer record in terms of outlay and ambition since the end of last season has been poor to say the least. but i'm not sure this new policy of getting younger players really came into effect until we'd appointed wise and co. before that was more about mort doing his 'strategic review' of the club and looking at ways to run the club in the future. mort has since came out and stated what the policy is about bringing players for the future. it's also worth bearing in mind that we sort of did that under Robson, buying a fair few young players until the end of his reign when we started trying to get in older players. i don't think your including, the younger players kadar etc into that, they are signings Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnypd Posted July 18, 2008 Share Posted July 18, 2008 we have already went down the route of spending big wages on has-been players and where did that get us?? almost relegated we need another route, and the route the board is taking if done right, will benefit the club for the next 5-10 years i agree we need players, but we don't need a 28 year old who just got his side relegated, by offering him 50-60k a week there's still 4 weeks to get players and still don't see other clubs bringing in plenty of players Average age of player signed Summer 2000 - mid July 2007: 25.3 Average age of player signed since mid July 2007 - : 26.6 Average age of player signed for > £5m Summer 2000 - mid July 2007: 23.9 Average age of player signed for > £5m since mid July 2007 - : 24.2 (The 00-01 season is as far back as I could be arsed to go. Mid July is when Ashely took full control, and even though Ashley was the major shareholder when we signed Viduka (31) I've put him & Barton in the pre-Ashley group) the transfer record in terms of outlay and ambition since the end of last season has been poor to say the least. but i'm not sure this new policy of getting younger players really came into effect until we'd appointed wise and co. before that was more about mort doing his 'strategic review' of the club and looking at ways to run the club in the future. mort has since came out and stated what the policy is about bringing players for the future. it's also worth bearing in mind that we sort of did that under Robson, buying a fair few young players until the end of his reign when we started trying to get in older players. I agree really. The point of the post was not so much to say anything about the policy under Ashley (I just put that in for comparison purposes) but to try and put a stop to the myth that we typically used to spend loads of money on has beens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ericz Posted July 18, 2008 Share Posted July 18, 2008 Overall the long term strategy, of reducing wages will ultimely lead to more money to spend on players or we pay less for season that can only be a good thing can it?? I hope NE5 goes straight to bed when he gets in from the pub tonight. NE5 should try to consider other people's idea's, not just his NE5 knows best, and NE5 says that following this policy [ie competing at the level of the mediocre clubs] will lead us to be further behind the top clubs. Unfortunately, NE5 is not paying their exorbitant transfer fees and their wages. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Flair Posted July 18, 2008 Share Posted July 18, 2008 no wonder we get called the most fickle fan's in the country some ppl still believe we are chasing champions league football we can't attract the players ffs, because we live too far north and can't offer any champions league football and when we DID spend money it almost got us relegated under souness we finished 12th ffs not 5th, so we can't compete with the like's everton for now we need to build a team long term, and get in hard working players that can compete in the premiership and are not injured every other game Complete bullshiet. What has being north got to do with attarcting players? Then in that case Fulham would be far more attractive than Aston Villa. 12th isn't being anywhere near relegated. Yeah hard-working players. So the likes of Butt, Smith, Milner are the way forward. To progress you must buy quality, preferably up and comign quality. Quality only comes at a price and as a result money is needed to be spent. Sure you can get some bargains but running the club like Bolton, is it really the way forward? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MaetihS Posted July 18, 2008 Share Posted July 18, 2008 there's a level of player we need & have to be aiming at right now to make this "long term strategy" successful both in the long term and NOW seems that people see the two as mutually exclusive, to have the LTS we have to endure 3-5 years of dogshit and buying reserve players from liverpool etc... for me the type of player we need to target this summer are the sagnas & muntaris of this world - players who've appeared on the radar but crucially play for clubs we can sign players from (auxerre/udinese) and who won't consider themselves above us....i know sagna went to arsenal but when he signed for them if it had been us who bid the 7m with no other challengers i reckon he'd have come at that time there must be plenty of players of this level around european football, and i honestly assumed this was the type of player we'd be aiming for...the boy arda was another example of that but it seems gala have priced him out perhaps? although that's all speculation of course that's what i think about it anyhow, can't see how anyone could realistically expect us to blow 17m on bentley or something this summer 'cause he wouldn't come first and foremost (see above) and because it wouldn't be a sensible use of our resources given our squad size and depth if we continue filling the squad up with frees and 1m reserve players we'll get what we deserve imo ive also mentioned Muntari as the type of player we should be buying - a sizeable fee for a promising/developing player who the big clubs (man utd and juve in his case) are looking at but who haven't yet taken the plunge and signed. Berbatov is another example before he signed for Spurs and the likes of Turan, Pjanic, Cuellar, Montolivo, Zapata, Menez, Inler, Veloso, Romaric are examples knocking around this window. i'm thinking of players that will cost £5m-£15m, a calibre of two underneath the likes of VDV, Benzema or Diego as they will move on to big clubs and only stay put because they cost so much and because there's so few clubs who could buy these talents. though that's not to say if an experienced player comes along who would improve us, like Dunne or Fringes, that we shouldn't buy them. looking at even younger players that the likes of Vetere and Wise are supposedly tracking, it seems we haven't signed many of these, only Spear and even this isn't confirmed. even spurs have brought in 3 16 year olds like Bostock. not sure how the Modric bid fits into our overall transfer activity. it's ok saying we bid for him but for whatever reason we didn't land him. let's face it we can't offer players like that a great deal so we have to go into overdrive when it comes to attracting them here, rolling out keegan, private jet, 24/7 state of alert preparing to fly out anywhere, even if it means offering a bit extra money. i'd rather pay too much for a good team than pay the right amount for an average side. for anyone who disagrees, i'm sure hope the satisfaction of saving a few million over the course of a season compensates for poorer performances on the pitch. the modric bid does suggest we'll make one biggish signing (if we can actually close the deal) but i reckon the rest will be more along the lines of Larsson, Jonas or Guthrie ie £1m-£5m bracket and perhaps not players who you'd assume would walk into our side. not terrible buys by any means but these are the kind of transfers i'd expect a team like Middlesbrough to make, Emnes or Digard for instance. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now