Long Term Strategy

[Guest neesy111]

People need to wise up. The policy of buying big names coming to the end of their career worked for a while but there is a lot more competition now as the other clubs have moved past us. We need to build from the ground up instead of the quick fixes. This policy is the only viable option I can see for the club at this point. In a few years once we have a good nucleus of players then you can start adding the big name players to fill in the gaps and make us hopefully a very formidable team.

 

Remind me when this was again.

 

Kluivert being the best example. It was never a rule though, which is where people fall down in their arguments with NE5.

 

He doesn't seem to mind using the opposite (we've bought Guthrie, so all signings will be cheap) as an argument tbf.

 

Except Kluivert is the only example you can name, and pretty much everybody was happy with it too [except me, ironically]

 

don't let this fact get in the way of anyone's opinion though.

 

 

I wasn't happy with Kluivert either. In fact it was about 70/30 in favour, but plenty of people doubted the signing would be of any benefit.

 

Strangely though, a Kluivert/Bellamy partnership was actually very good; it was only Robson's desire to keep Shearer in the team which made Kluivert a poor signing.

 

I'm not really sure if that is true or fair. Kluivert did very little to earn his place.

 

 

 

kluivert only scored 3 goals less than shearer that season, and bellmay and kluivert looked a whole lot better

 

wud rather have kluivert than shola any day of the week minus the wages though

 

actually robson dropped shearer for that fatal villa game, it was souness that made them seperate, souness and shearer did damage the club that season considering they we're very close friends as well

[Coxaux]

How exactly is Jonas a 'Boro-esque signing?

 

Anyone care to explain

[Guest neesy111]

How exactly is Jonas a 'Boro-esque signing?

 

Anyone care to explain

 

ppl r saying it's like when they signed tuncay

 

difference is, tuncay was in the turkish league and jonas was in the spanish

 

big difference between them

 

and tuncay didn't do that bad for boro tbh

[Coxaux]

How exactly is Jonas a 'Boro-esque signing?

 

Anyone care to explain

 

ppl r saying it's like when they signed tuncay

 

difference is, tuncay was in the turkish league and jonas was in the spanish

 

big difference between them

 

and tuncay didn't do that bad for boro tbh

 

He's above average but nothing special.

 

The fact is a lad rated £8 million who has just broken into the Argentinian national side isn't going to be a mug, the issue is whether he'll adjust to the premier league.

 

His style of play suggest he may well.

[Consortium of one]

No strategy should be set in stone but should be flexible enough to make a grab for the gold ring when it presents itself.  The model for Newcastle should be to invest in scouting and development and concurrently signing younger players with potential to improve to fill in gaps in the roster.  The idea is to avoid overpaying for mediocre talent.  It sounds simple but it isn't because at some point the team may make a decision to overpay for a player.  This isn't a bad thing, in fact it should be part of the strategy to raise the team up to the desired level.  Take Pablo Aimar, just as an example:  if KK identified him as a real difference maker, the kind of player that can help the team move up a tier, you make the move for that player, even if you over pay for him.   He may not be worth every penny you pay him (or worth the length of his contract, maybe you add an extra year) but what he does for the team on the field, plus his reputation could help to make the club seem a more favorable place to play.  

 

I think the LTS should include the possibility of signing that fading star if it's the right player at the right time.  The model does not have to be exclusively signing young, up and coming talent.

[NE5]

No strategy should be set in stone but should be flexible enough to make a grab for the gold ring when it presents itself.  The model for Newcastle should be to invest in scouting and development and concurrently signing younger players with potential to improve to fill in gaps in the roster.  The idea is to avoid overpaying for mediocre talent.  It sounds simple but it isn't because at some point the team may make a decision to overpay for a player.  This isn't a bad thing, in fact it should be part of the strategy to raise the team up to the desired level.  Take Pablo Aimar, just as an example:  if KK identified him as a real difference maker, the kind of player that can help the team move up a tier, you make the move for that player, even if you over pay for him.   He may not be worth every penny you pay him (or worth the length of his contract, maybe you add an extra year) but what he does for the team on the field, plus his reputation could help to make the club seem a more favorable place to play.  

 

I think the LTS should include the possibility of signing that fading star if it's the right player at the right time.  The model does not have to be exclusively signing young, up and coming talent.

 

Excellent post mate.

 

 

[OzzieMandias]

 

Agreed, although value is dependent on the judgement of the manager when he assesse players

 

 

 

Bollocks. By that "logic", Marcelino, Luque, Boumsong, Viana, Duff and Smith were all good value.

 

neither was your hero.

 

 

 

Are you too thick to realise that you've just shafted your own "argument"?

 

[NE5]

 

Agreed, although value is dependent on the judgement of the manager when he assesse players

 

 

 

Bollocks. By that "logic", Marcelino, Luque, Boumsong, Viana, Duff and Smith were all good value.

 

neither was your hero.

 

 

 

Are you too thick to realise that you've just shafted your own "argument"?

 

 

my argument is that you have to judge quality and pay for it if necessary. Shame you still don't understand this Ozzie. The fact that YOU might be unrealistic enough to think that every signing you make ought to be a success, simply isn't worth commenting on. Self explanatory.

 

You also have to back your appointed manager. He may not be who you want, or who I want, but the people who appointed him - he's THEIR choice and so they should back him until such a time they feel he's making a bad job of it.

 

 

[UV]

 

Agreed, although value is dependent on the judgement of the manager when he assesse players

 

 

 

Bollocks. By that "logic", Marcelino, Luque, Boumsong, Viana, Duff and Smith were all good value.

 

neither was your hero.

 

 

 

Are you too thick to realise that you've just shafted your own "argument"?

 

 

my argument is that you have to judge quality and pay for it if necessary. Shame you still don't understand this Ozzie. The fact that YOU might be unrealistic enough to think that every signing you make ought to be a success, simply isn't worth commenting on. Self explanatory.

 

You also have to back your appointed manager. He may not be who you want, or who I want, but the people who appointed him - he's THEIR choice and so they should back him until such a time they feel he's making a bad job of it.

 

 

 

In Ozzie's world you don't pay any transfer fee or wages for 2 years, and then you only pay what you think the player was worth based on his performances for you.

[NE5]

 

Agreed, although value is dependent on the judgement of the manager when he assesse players

 

 

 

Bollocks. By that "logic", Marcelino, Luque, Boumsong, Viana, Duff and Smith were all good value.

 

neither was your hero.

 

 

 

Are you too thick to realise that you've just shafted your own "argument"?

 

 

my argument is that you have to judge quality and pay for it if necessary. Shame you still don't understand this Ozzie. The fact that YOU might be unrealistic enough to think that every signing you make ought to be a success, simply isn't worth commenting on. Self explanatory.

 

You also have to back your appointed manager. He may not be who you want, or who I want, but the people who appointed him - he's THEIR choice and so they should back him until such a time they feel he's making a bad job of it.

 

 

 

In Ozzie's world you don't pay any transfer fee or wages for 2 years, and then you only pay what you think the player was worth based on his performances for you.

 

on that basis, his hero would have only ever collected one weekly pay packet

 

 

[Thespence]

Long term strategy?!?! Football is a result industry, so most of the planning should be geared towards the here & now.

[Colos Short and Curlies]

Long term strategy?!?! Football is a result industry, so most of the planning should be geared towards the here & now.

 

Depends.

 

Do you throw £100m at the first team signing 4-5 top drawer 28-29 year olds and £10m at younger talent then have to repeat in 2-3 years time.

 

Or

 

Do you throw £10m at one or two good older players and the rest on younger players and continue to build the young core and add the occaisonal star.

 

No right answer!

[Guest MaetihS]

No strategy should be set in stone but should be flexible enough to make a grab for the gold ring when it presents itself.  The model for Newcastle should be to invest in scouting and development and concurrently signing younger players with potential to improve to fill in gaps in the roster.  The idea is to avoid overpaying for mediocre talent.  It sounds simple but it isn't because at some point the team may make a decision to overpay for a player.  This isn't a bad thing, in fact it should be part of the strategy to raise the team up to the desired level.  Take Pablo Aimar, just as an example:  if KK identified him as a real difference maker, the kind of player that can help the team move up a tier, you make the move for that player, even if you over pay for him.   He may not be worth every penny you pay him (or worth the length of his contract, maybe you add an extra year) but what he does for the team on the field, plus his reputation could help to make the club seem a more favorable place to play.  

 

I think the LTS should include the possibility of signing that fading star if it's the right player at the right time.  The model does not have to be exclusively signing young, up and coming talent.

 

 

[OzzieMandias]

 

Agreed, although value is dependent on the judgement of the manager when he assesse players

 

 

 

Bollocks. By that "logic", Marcelino, Luque, Boumsong, Viana, Duff and Smith were all good value.

 

neither was your hero.

 

 

 

Are you too thick to realise that you've just shafted your own "argument"?

 

 

my argument is that you have to judge quality and pay for it if necessary. Shame you still don't understand this Ozzie. The fact that YOU might be unrealistic enough to think that every signing you make ought to be a success, simply isn't worth commenting on. Self explanatory.

 

You also have to back your appointed manager. He may not be who you want, or who I want, but the people who appointed him - he's THEIR choice and so they should back him until such a time they feel he's making a bad job of it.

 

 

 

In Ozzie's world you don't pay any transfer fee or wages for 2 years, and then you only pay what you think the player was worth based on his performances for you.

 

on that basis, his hero would have only ever collected one weekly pay packet

 

 

 

Most people like to shag their wives or girlfriends, but there's always the odd couple of weirdos who prefer to stick their cocks into the raspy crevices of an inflatable straw man.

[mrmojorisin75]

How exactly is Jonas a 'Boro-esque signing?

 

Anyone care to explain

 

ppl r saying it's like when they signed tuncay

 

difference is, tuncay was in the turkish league and jonas was in the spanish

 

big difference between them

 

and tuncay didn't do that bad for boro tbh

 

i actually said both of them were 'boro-esque - just meant they're nothing signings really, bought on the cheap...might turn out OK but in no way are gonna be world beaters as much as we'd like them to be; the similarities with players 'boro have signed in the past are there if you want to see them, i suppose i'm talking about level of player when i say 'boro-esque

 

they'll both probably be decent players, maybe even good players for us

 

if you read about spiderpig playing against brazil recently he was brought in to cover for his fullback due to his hard working attitude on the pitch, his goals/assists record testifies to the type of winger he is

 

west ham are paying 5m for behrami by the way, wonder which of the two excites their respective fans the most next season?

[NE5]

Long term strategy?!?! Football is a result industry, so most of the planning should be geared towards the here & now.

 

yes, true. A point made before but well put and easy for some to grasp

 

 

[NE5]

Long term strategy?!?! Football is a result industry, so most of the planning should be geared towards the here & now.

 

Depends.

 

Do you throw £100m at the first team signing 4-5 top drawer 28-29 year olds and £10m at younger talent then have to repeat in 2-3 years time.

 

Or

 

Do you throw £10m at one or two good older players and the rest on younger players and continue to build the young core and add the occaisonal star.

 

No right answer!

 

you buy quality, but the fee reflects the age and sell on value if any.

 

 

[Thespence]

Long term strategy?!?! Football is a result industry, so most of the planning should be geared towards the here & now.

 

Depends.

 

Do you throw £100m at the first team signing 4-5 top drawer 28-29 year olds and £10m at younger talent then have to repeat in 2-3 years time.

 

Or

 

Do you throw £10m at one or two good older players and the rest on younger players and continue to build the young core and add the occaisonal star.

 

No right answer!

 

The right answer is the one that has the team winning most games.

 

I didn't mention age or fee's as for me ability is the key atm in time for Newcastle United. We need players who can hit the ground running now more than anything else & dramatically improve the first teams results.

 

Of course it is better for the club to produce its own players or buy in youngsters with potential than pay the market rate for proven top end quality BUT what they then must do is create an environment where potential becomes quality & then look after these players with £££'s & have the will power not sell if big clubs come offering £££'s.

[NE5]

Long term strategy?!?! Football is a result industry, so most of the planning should be geared towards the here & now.

 

Depends.

 

Do you throw £100m at the first team signing 4-5 top drawer 28-29 year olds and £10m at younger talent then have to repeat in 2-3 years time.

 

Or

 

Do you throw £10m at one or two good older players and the rest on younger players and continue to build the young core and add the occaisonal star.

 

No right answer!

 

The right answer is the one that has the team winning most games.

 

in a nutshell. Quite amazing the amount of people that appear to think the top 4 have been getting it wrong all these years  mackems.gif

 

 

[madras]

Long term strategy?!?! Football is a result industry, so most of the planning should be geared towards the here & now.

 

Depends.

 

Do you throw £100m at the first team signing 4-5 top drawer 28-29 year olds and £10m at younger talent then have to repeat in 2-3 years time.

 

Or

 

Do you throw £10m at one or two good older players and the rest on younger players and continue to build the young core and add the occaisonal star.

 

No right answer!

 

The right answer is the one that has the team winning most games.

 

in a nutshell. Quite amazing the amount of people that appear to think the top 4 have been getting it wrong all these years  mackems.gif

 

 

getting it wrong is being in the top four ,spending money you don't have to reach 13th

[Ericz]

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.

 

 

as a paying customer, I am. And have been since 1964

 

 

 

I remember NE5 once spoke about the world being realistic and trophies are the only ones that separate the victors from the losers and that is all that matters or something along the line...

 

Back to the 'as a paying customer, I am. And have been since 1964'... big deal? There are many others who are like that too.

 

Bluntly put, you have a choice, you are not being forced or anything. It is by your own voluntary free will. I would categorize it not as a 'paying customer' but as a 'freely willed voluntary supporter'.  Besides, being pragmatic and realistic, you would have realize that it is the football industry/business now you that you are talking about...

 

Also, even as a paying customer, contractually, you pay for your t-shirt, you pay to watch a match... you don't pay to contractually get them to win a trophy etc. In any case, the paying customer theory in realistic terms, or more important in legal terms, it is already satisfied and they really don't own you anything. Besides, how much can your financial support over the years be compared to the players' wages or even transfer fees? What faction of them? Ultimately, you aren't the one putting in all the cash hence you probably won't feel the pinch or won't feel the pinch that much. It's easier said than done really when you aren't the one dealing with the huge amount of wages and transfer fees.

[ChezGiven]

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.

 

 

as a paying customer, I am. And have been since 1964

 

 

 

I remember NE5 once spoke about the world being realistic and trophies are the only ones that separate the victors from the losers and that is all that matters or something along the line...

 

Back to the 'as a paying customer, I am. And have been since 1964'... big deal? There are many others who are like that too.

 

Bluntly put, you have a choice, you are not being forced or anything. It is by your own voluntary free will. I would categorize it not as a 'paying customer' but as a 'freely willed voluntary supporter'.  Besides, being pragmatic and realistic, you would have realize that it is the football industry/business now you that you are talking about...

 

Also, even as a paying customer, contractually, you pay for your t-shirt, you pay to watch a match... you don't pay to contractually get them to win a trophy etc. In any case, the paying customer theory in realistic terms, or more important in legal terms, it is already satisfied and they really don't own you anything. Besides, how much can your financial support over the years be compared to the players' wages or even transfer fees? What faction of them? Ultimately, you aren't the one putting in all the cash hence you probably won't feel the pinch or won't feel the pinch that much. It's easier said than done really when you aren't the one dealing with the huge amount of wages and transfer fees.

 

 

[NE5]

Agreed .

 

Sad isn't it

 

 

[ChezGiven]

Agreed .

 

Sad isn't it

 

 

 

Couldnt understand a fucking word the lad said. 

[Ericz]

It's pretty simple.

 

In short, NE5 portrayed himself as a 'paying customer'. However, I beg to differ. He should be a 'voluntarily willed supporter' instead. No one force or coerce him to support Newcastle United or pay for Newcastle United merchandise or tickets. It is all based on his own free will.

 

Even if he is indeed a paying customer, legally, the law of contract (offer, acceptance, consideration) states that NE5's money has bought him either the merchandise, or the opportunity to watch a match. From that, again legally, the contract is already considered legally fulfilled. Newcastle United does not own NE5 any other obligation and NE5 either got an opportunity to watch a match or obtain his rightful share of merchandise.

 

Again, it is all up to NE5's own free will. Nobody can force him or coerce him if he did not want to do so.

 

Like I aforementioned, NE5 did mention that winning trophies is the way to separate victors from losers, effective management from non-effective management. That is indeed a realistic and pragmatic point of view. However, by the same realistic and pragmatic point of view, football is now a business today. It is very much the truth regardless how much people are being deluded or continue to live in their fantasize world.

 

NE5's contribution over the years, dare I put forth to NE5 bluntly, is insignificant compared to the wages and transfer fees of the players. Again, Newcastle United, realistically and legally speaking, has no obligations towards NE5 at all. Also, NE5 is not the one paying for the exorbitant wages and transfer fees of the players. NE5 of course may argue that collectively, the supporters are paying for the exorbitant wages and transfer fees, however, it can be argued in two ways:

 

( 1 ) Is NE5's intention common with the rest of the supporters?

( 2 ) Legally, there is no legally binding contract that Newcastle United must obtain trophies. Also, NE5's contract has been legally fulfilled when NE5 paid for the merchandise/season ticket and in return he obtained the merchandise and season ticket. The same goes for the other supporters.

 

Well, of course, I do understand that NE5 and his supporters will say that Newcastle United owns them a moral obligation and also, it is the responsibility of a football club to repay the faithful fans' faith over the years. However it is merely a moral obligation that one can put it, is not legally binding in today's world. Perhaps, there may be repercussions, perhaps there may not be.

 

What I offer is another perspective. It may be sad. However, it is the world we live in today, a capitalist market. Additionally, the law is definitely not about morality.