afar Posted July 25, 2008 Share Posted July 25, 2008 And another thing, this constant line that we are fed that "well other clubs aren't doing much either" is complete and utter bollocks. We need much more work than most teams in the league, in fact I can only think of the 3 promoted teams that need more than us. Yet we have managed to weaken our squad in numbers by 4 players. Despite what we think of the quality of those we've let go, when injuries bite we are going to be well and truely f***ed. How have we weakened our squad by 4 players? Diatta came in as a short term replacement for Rozehnal and if you want to include Troisi then surely you should add Frank Dequah who's been handed a professional contract with us as Troisi never made a first team appearance for us as far as I remember. Whatever, if it's 3 or 4, it doesn't matter, my point is we are still weaker, and we were already a thin squad. That's just a waste of your time to write a reply to be honest, and equally a waste of time for me to reply to your reply. Not weaker really when the contribution of the departing players last season was practically nil. James, as I said in my first post, the quality of those we let go is questionable to say the least but come mid winter when injuries mount up and if we still have this paper thin squad, we are forced to dip into a reserve team that opened up pre-season with a 6-2 loss to Newcastle Benefield and a lucky 1-1 draw with Gateshead. Then we are most certainly weaker. You can't just judge strength by the quality of your first 11, you have to judge it by your best 17 or 18 players, and to be honest I'm struggling to find 17 or 18 who are of a high quality at the club right now. Like I said we are weaker until the squad is filled again, at this rate that might not happen this summer. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
afar Posted July 25, 2008 Share Posted July 25, 2008 And another thing, this constant line that we are fed that "well other clubs aren't doing much either" is complete and utter bollocks. We need much more work than most teams in the league, in fact I can only think of the 3 promoted teams that need more than us. Yet we have managed to weaken our squad in numbers by 4 players. Despite what we think of the quality of those we've let go, when injuries bite we are going to be well and truely f***ed. How have we weakened our squad by 4 players? Diatta came in as a short term replacement for Rozehnal and if you want to include Troisi then surely you should add Frank Dequah who's been handed a professional contract with us as Troisi never made a first team appearance for us as far as I remember. Whatever, if it's 3 or 4, it doesn't matter, my point is we are still weaker, and we were already a thin squad. That's just a waste of your time to write a reply to be honest, and equally a waste of time for me to reply to your reply. It was a waste of my time to point out you were wrong? Then why bother ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggio Posted July 25, 2008 Share Posted July 25, 2008 And another thing, this constant line that we are fed that "well other clubs aren't doing much either" is complete and utter bollocks. We need much more work than most teams in the league, in fact I can only think of the 3 promoted teams that need more than us. Yet we have managed to weaken our squad in numbers by 4 players. Despite what we think of the quality of those we've let go, when injuries bite we are going to be well and truely f***ed. How have we weakened our squad by 4 players? Diatta came in as a short term replacement for Rozehnal and if you want to include Troisi then surely you should add Frank Dequah who's been handed a professional contract with us as Troisi never made a first team appearance for us as far as I remember. Whatever, if it's 3 or 4, it doesn't matter, my point is we are still weaker, and we were already a thin squad. That's just a waste of your time to write a reply to be honest, and equally a waste of time for me to reply to your reply. It was a waste of my time to point out you were wrong? They why bother ? Excuse me? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
afar Posted July 25, 2008 Share Posted July 25, 2008 And another thing, this constant line that we are fed that "well other clubs aren't doing much either" is complete and utter bollocks. We need much more work than most teams in the league, in fact I can only think of the 3 promoted teams that need more than us. Yet we have managed to weaken our squad in numbers by 4 players. Despite what we think of the quality of those we've let go, when injuries bite we are going to be well and truely f***ed. How have we weakened our squad by 4 players? Diatta came in as a short term replacement for Rozehnal and if you want to include Troisi then surely you should add Frank Dequah who's been handed a professional contract with us as Troisi never made a first team appearance for us as far as I remember. Whatever, if it's 3 or 4, it doesn't matter, my point is we are still weaker, and we were already a thin squad. That's just a waste of your time to write a reply to be honest, and equally a waste of time for me to reply to your reply. It was a waste of my time to point out you were wrong? Then why bother ? Excuse me? Why did you fart or something ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggio Posted July 25, 2008 Share Posted July 25, 2008 And another thing, this constant line that we are fed that "well other clubs aren't doing much either" is complete and utter bollocks. We need much more work than most teams in the league, in fact I can only think of the 3 promoted teams that need more than us. Yet we have managed to weaken our squad in numbers by 4 players. Despite what we think of the quality of those we've let go, when injuries bite we are going to be well and truely f***ed. How have we weakened our squad by 4 players? Diatta came in as a short term replacement for Rozehnal and if you want to include Troisi then surely you should add Frank Dequah who's been handed a professional contract with us as Troisi never made a first team appearance for us as far as I remember. Whatever, if it's 3 or 4, it doesn't matter, my point is we are still weaker, and we were already a thin squad. That's just a waste of your time to write a reply to be honest, and equally a waste of time for me to reply to your reply. It was a waste of my time to point out you were wrong? Then why bother ? Excuse me? Why did you fart or something ? lol Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted July 25, 2008 Share Posted July 25, 2008 To be honest, if I had the choice of being paid a very high Portuguese wage of £30k per week, when I could be paid an average English wage of £40k per week, I'd go for Benfica, as they were clearly pulling out all the stops. Not that I believe the newspapers. that a serious opinion or am i missing the sarcasm? either way i'd tend to agree, especially if you consider benfica might have an outside chance of a title challenge too... It is an opinion, but it only applies if we have missed out. If so, it is the fault of the previous chairman for playing in a market that was unsustainable in the long term. james, i'm gonna resist the urge to respond to this with "what the fuck are you on about" and instead say: unless this is an attempt to be witty i'm gonna assume you mean that we could only offer aimar 40k a week (for example) due to the extravagent wages FS and his board laid out on players, if that hadn't been the case we might have offered more wages to aimar and he'd have perhaps come? if i'm right with this interpretation that is so far beyond common sense & logical reasoning there isn't even a word or measurement for it if that's not what you meant or you were being funny then what did you really mean? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Posted July 25, 2008 Share Posted July 25, 2008 To be honest, if I had the choice of being paid a very high Portuguese wage of £30k per week, when I could be paid an average English wage of £40k per week, I'd go for Benfica, as they were clearly pulling out all the stops. Not that I believe the newspapers. that a serious opinion or am i missing the sarcasm? either way i'd tend to agree, especially if you consider benfica might have an outside chance of a title challenge too... It is an opinion, but it only applies if we have missed out. If so, it is the fault of the previous chairman for playing in a market that was unsustainable in the long term. james, i'm gonna resist the urge to respond to this with "what the fuck are you on about" and instead say: unless this is an attempt to be witty i'm gonna assume you mean that we could only offer aimar 40k a week (for example) due to the extravagent wages FS and his board laid out on players, if that hadn't been the case we might have offered more wages to aimar and he'd have perhaps come? if i'm right with this interpretation that is so far beyond common sense & logical reasoning there isn't even a word or measurement for it if that's not what you meant or you were being funny then what did you really mean? My point is that the club can't afford to be paying the type of wages Shepherd was handing out, and thus when we offer players a fraction of Owen's wage, they are likely to be offended. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winn Posted July 25, 2008 Share Posted July 25, 2008 We need left back, centre back, centre mid and possibly a right back depending on whether geremi can cover right back. After them possitions have been covered we should have a strong enough squad therefore able to freely buy whatever takes kevs fancy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Flair Posted July 25, 2008 Share Posted July 25, 2008 And another thing, this constant line that we are fed that "well other clubs aren't doing much either" is complete and utter bollocks. We need much more work than most teams in the league, in fact I can only think of the 3 promoted teams that need more than us. Yet we have managed to weaken our squad in numbers by 4 players. Despite what we think of the quality of those we've let go, when injuries bite we are going to be well and truely f***ed. How have we weakened our squad by 4 players? Diatta came in as a short term replacement for Rozehnal and if you want to include Troisi then surely you should add Frank Dequah who's been handed a professional contract with us as Troisi never made a first team appearance for us as far as I remember. Rozenhal, Emre, Ramage, Carr. Isn't that 4 players? You can also throw in Diatta and Troisi. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted July 25, 2008 Share Posted July 25, 2008 To be honest, if I had the choice of being paid a very high Portuguese wage of £30k per week, when I could be paid an average English wage of £40k per week, I'd go for Benfica, as they were clearly pulling out all the stops. Not that I believe the newspapers. that a serious opinion or am i missing the sarcasm? either way i'd tend to agree, especially if you consider benfica might have an outside chance of a title challenge too... It is an opinion, but it only applies if we have missed out. If so, it is the fault of the previous chairman for playing in a market that was unsustainable in the long term. james, i'm gonna resist the urge to respond to this with "what the fuck are you on about" and instead say: unless this is an attempt to be witty i'm gonna assume you mean that we could only offer aimar 40k a week (for example) due to the extravagent wages FS and his board laid out on players, if that hadn't been the case we might have offered more wages to aimar and he'd have perhaps come? if i'm right with this interpretation that is so far beyond common sense & logical reasoning there isn't even a word or measurement for it if that's not what you meant or you were being funny then what did you really mean? My point is that the club can't afford to be paying the type of wages Shepherd was handing out, and thus when we offer players a fraction of Owen's wage, they are likely to be offended. in the style of kyle from south park: "reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeally?" so shepherd was handing out wages & that was bad, yet if he hadn't done that ashley would be able to offer aimar high wages to tempt him to the club? i was right in the first place, are you kidding me man? you can see that makes no sense right? you've invented your own version of catch 22 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggio Posted July 25, 2008 Share Posted July 25, 2008 And another thing, this constant line that we are fed that "well other clubs aren't doing much either" is complete and utter bollocks. We need much more work than most teams in the league, in fact I can only think of the 3 promoted teams that need more than us. Yet we have managed to weaken our squad in numbers by 4 players. Despite what we think of the quality of those we've let go, when injuries bite we are going to be well and truely f***ed. How have we weakened our squad by 4 players? Diatta came in as a short term replacement for Rozehnal and if you want to include Troisi then surely you should add Frank Dequah who's been handed a professional contract with us as Troisi never made a first team appearance for us as far as I remember. Rozenhal, Emre, Ramage, Carr. Isn't that 4 players? You can also throw in Diatta and Troisi. And we've signed 2 players, correct? So we've weakened our squad by 2 players. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Posted July 25, 2008 Share Posted July 25, 2008 And another thing, this constant line that we are fed that "well other clubs aren't doing much either" is complete and utter bollocks. We need much more work than most teams in the league, in fact I can only think of the 3 promoted teams that need more than us. Yet we have managed to weaken our squad in numbers by 4 players. Despite what we think of the quality of those we've let go, when injuries bite we are going to be well and truely f***ed. How have we weakened our squad by 4 players? Diatta came in as a short term replacement for Rozehnal and if you want to include Troisi then surely you should add Frank Dequah who's been handed a professional contract with us as Troisi never made a first team appearance for us as far as I remember. Rozenhal, Emre, Ramage, Carr. Isn't that 4 players? You can also throw in Diatta and Troisi. And how many of those were seriously available for enough games in 2008 to be considered missing players now Deep? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveMc Posted July 25, 2008 Share Posted July 25, 2008 And we bought 2. So we are weakened by 2 net! I think we all agree we could do with a few before the window is through though. KK agrees and says he's going to get them. So chill the fook out Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Posted July 25, 2008 Share Posted July 25, 2008 To be honest, if I had the choice of being paid a very high Portuguese wage of £30k per week, when I could be paid an average English wage of £40k per week, I'd go for Benfica, as they were clearly pulling out all the stops. Not that I believe the newspapers. that a serious opinion or am i missing the sarcasm? either way i'd tend to agree, especially if you consider benfica might have an outside chance of a title challenge too... It is an opinion, but it only applies if we have missed out. If so, it is the fault of the previous chairman for playing in a market that was unsustainable in the long term. james, i'm gonna resist the urge to respond to this with "what the fuck are you on about" and instead say: unless this is an attempt to be witty i'm gonna assume you mean that we could only offer aimar 40k a week (for example) due to the extravagent wages FS and his board laid out on players, if that hadn't been the case we might have offered more wages to aimar and he'd have perhaps come? if i'm right with this interpretation that is so far beyond common sense & logical reasoning there isn't even a word or measurement for it if that's not what you meant or you were being funny then what did you really mean? My point is that the club can't afford to be paying the type of wages Shepherd was handing out, and thus when we offer players a fraction of Owen's wage, they are likely to be offended. in the style of kyle from south park: "reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeally?" so shepherd was handing out wages & that was bad, yet if he hadn't done that ashley would be able to offer aimar high wages to tempt him to the club? i was right in the first place, are you kidding me man? you can see that makes no sense right? you've invented your own version of catch 22 Shepherd created a market where any proven player would expect to get at least £50k. Had he not done so, expectations abroad would be lower, and therefore we could compete with Monaco and Benfica. Fact is that he was throwing cash away with only the short term in mind. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted July 25, 2008 Share Posted July 25, 2008 To be honest, if I had the choice of being paid a very high Portuguese wage of £30k per week, when I could be paid an average English wage of £40k per week, I'd go for Benfica, as they were clearly pulling out all the stops. Not that I believe the newspapers. that a serious opinion or am i missing the sarcasm? either way i'd tend to agree, especially if you consider benfica might have an outside chance of a title challenge too... It is an opinion, but it only applies if we have missed out. If so, it is the fault of the previous chairman for playing in a market that was unsustainable in the long term. james, i'm gonna resist the urge to respond to this with "what the f*** are you on about" and instead say: unless this is an attempt to be witty i'm gonna assume you mean that we could only offer aimar 40k a week (for example) due to the extravagent wages FS and his board laid out on players, if that hadn't been the case we might have offered more wages to aimar and he'd have perhaps come? if i'm right with this interpretation that is so far beyond common sense & logical reasoning there isn't even a word or measurement for it if that's not what you meant or you were being funny then what did you really mean? My point is that the club can't afford to be paying the type of wages Shepherd was handing out, and thus when we offer players a fraction of Owen's wage, they are likely to be offended. in the style of kyle from south park: "reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeally?" so shepherd was handing out wages & that was bad, yet if he hadn't done that ashley would be able to offer aimar high wages to tempt him to the club? i was right in the first place, are you kidding me man? you can see that makes no sense right? you've invented your own version of catch 22 Shepherd created a market where any proven player would expect to get at least £50k. Had he not done so, expectations abroad would be lower, and therefore we could compete with Monaco and Benfica. Fact is that he was throwing cash away with only the short term in mind. that takes some believing.........if we offer more than benfica or monaco then if the player is after money alone he'd come regardless of wether he expected more or would have gor more a couple of years ago Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Flair Posted July 25, 2008 Share Posted July 25, 2008 And another thing, this constant line that we are fed that "well other clubs aren't doing much either" is complete and utter bollocks. We need much more work than most teams in the league, in fact I can only think of the 3 promoted teams that need more than us. Yet we have managed to weaken our squad in numbers by 4 players. Despite what we think of the quality of those we've let go, when injuries bite we are going to be well and truely f***ed. How have we weakened our squad by 4 players? Diatta came in as a short term replacement for Rozehnal and if you want to include Troisi then surely you should add Frank Dequah who's been handed a professional contract with us as Troisi never made a first team appearance for us as far as I remember. Rozenhal, Emre, Ramage, Carr. Isn't that 4 players? You can also throw in Diatta and Troisi. And how many of those were seriously available for enough games in 2008 to be considered missing players now Deep? That's like saying if Arsenal let Rosicky, Eduardo and Van Persie go that they wern't weakening their squad by three. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thespence Posted July 25, 2008 Share Posted July 25, 2008 We have a small squad KK has said so & everyone knows it. I think from Roeder leaving to where we are now via Big Sam the the squad as group has shrunk quite a bit iirc. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Flair Posted July 25, 2008 Share Posted July 25, 2008 And another thing, this constant line that we are fed that "well other clubs aren't doing much either" is complete and utter bollocks. We need much more work than most teams in the league, in fact I can only think of the 3 promoted teams that need more than us. Yet we have managed to weaken our squad in numbers by 4 players. Despite what we think of the quality of those we've let go, when injuries bite we are going to be well and truely f***ed. How have we weakened our squad by 4 players? Diatta came in as a short term replacement for Rozehnal and if you want to include Troisi then surely you should add Frank Dequah who's been handed a professional contract with us as Troisi never made a first team appearance for us as far as I remember. Rozenhal, Emre, Ramage, Carr. Isn't that 4 players? You can also throw in Diatta and Troisi. And how many of those were seriously available for enough games in 2008 to be considered missing players now Deep? That's like saying if Arsenal let Rosicky, Eduardo and Van Persie go that they wern't weakening their squad by three. As you can see your argument is complete nonsense. When Owen was injured for the whole season and if we let him go, would we not be weakening our squad? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Posted July 25, 2008 Share Posted July 25, 2008 To be honest, if I had the choice of being paid a very high Portuguese wage of £30k per week, when I could be paid an average English wage of £40k per week, I'd go for Benfica, as they were clearly pulling out all the stops. Not that I believe the newspapers. that a serious opinion or am i missing the sarcasm? either way i'd tend to agree, especially if you consider benfica might have an outside chance of a title challenge too... It is an opinion, but it only applies if we have missed out. If so, it is the fault of the previous chairman for playing in a market that was unsustainable in the long term. james, i'm gonna resist the urge to respond to this with "what the f*** are you on about" and instead say: unless this is an attempt to be witty i'm gonna assume you mean that we could only offer aimar 40k a week (for example) due to the extravagent wages FS and his board laid out on players, if that hadn't been the case we might have offered more wages to aimar and he'd have perhaps come? if i'm right with this interpretation that is so far beyond common sense & logical reasoning there isn't even a word or measurement for it if that's not what you meant or you were being funny then what did you really mean? My point is that the club can't afford to be paying the type of wages Shepherd was handing out, and thus when we offer players a fraction of Owen's wage, they are likely to be offended. in the style of kyle from south park: "reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeally?" so shepherd was handing out wages & that was bad, yet if he hadn't done that ashley would be able to offer aimar high wages to tempt him to the club? i was right in the first place, are you kidding me man? you can see that makes no sense right? you've invented your own version of catch 22 Shepherd created a market where any proven player would expect to get at least £50k. Had he not done so, expectations abroad would be lower, and therefore we could compete with Monaco and Benfica. Fact is that he was throwing cash away with only the short term in mind. that takes some believing.........if we offer more than benfica or monaco then if the player is after money alone he'd come regardless of wether he expected more or would have gor more a couple of years ago Like I explained in the post that started the argument, say Benfica offered to make you the highest paid player at the club, but Newcastle offerred a higher wage which is less than what gets paid to the likes of Duff, who would you choose for footballing reasons? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Posted July 25, 2008 Share Posted July 25, 2008 And another thing, this constant line that we are fed that "well other clubs aren't doing much either" is complete and utter bollocks. We need much more work than most teams in the league, in fact I can only think of the 3 promoted teams that need more than us. Yet we have managed to weaken our squad in numbers by 4 players. Despite what we think of the quality of those we've let go, when injuries bite we are going to be well and truely f***ed. How have we weakened our squad by 4 players? Diatta came in as a short term replacement for Rozehnal and if you want to include Troisi then surely you should add Frank Dequah who's been handed a professional contract with us as Troisi never made a first team appearance for us as far as I remember. Rozenhal, Emre, Ramage, Carr. Isn't that 4 players? You can also throw in Diatta and Troisi. And how many of those were seriously available for enough games in 2008 to be considered missing players now Deep? That's like saying if Arsenal let Rosicky, Eduardo and Van Persie go that they wern't weakening their squad by three. As you can see your argument is complete nonsense. When Owen was injured for the whole season and if we let him go, would we not be weakening our squad? Perhaps, if the four players mentioned actually improved the squad which they didn't, they were much of a muchness. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Flair Posted July 25, 2008 Share Posted July 25, 2008 And another thing, this constant line that we are fed that "well other clubs aren't doing much either" is complete and utter bollocks. We need much more work than most teams in the league, in fact I can only think of the 3 promoted teams that need more than us. Yet we have managed to weaken our squad in numbers by 4 players. Despite what we think of the quality of those we've let go, when injuries bite we are going to be well and truely f***ed. How have we weakened our squad by 4 players? Diatta came in as a short term replacement for Rozehnal and if you want to include Troisi then surely you should add Frank Dequah who's been handed a professional contract with us as Troisi never made a first team appearance for us as far as I remember. Rozenhal, Emre, Ramage, Carr. Isn't that 4 players? You can also throw in Diatta and Troisi. And how many of those were seriously available for enough games in 2008 to be considered missing players now Deep? That's like saying if Arsenal let Rosicky, Eduardo and Van Persie go that they wern't weakening their squad by three. As you can see your argument is complete nonsense. When Owen was injured for the whole season and if we let him go, would we not be weakening our squad? Perhaps, if the four players mentioned actually improved the squad which they didn't, they were much of a muchness. Tbh James, Rozenhal could have provided important cover. As could have Peter Ramage. In regards to Emre, I thought when he played, he was very good on the ball and would have been better than Geremi on corners or free kicks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UV Posted July 25, 2008 Share Posted July 25, 2008 To be honest, if I had the choice of being paid a very high Portuguese wage of £30k per week, when I could be paid an average English wage of £40k per week, I'd go for Benfica, as they were clearly pulling out all the stops. Not that I believe the newspapers. that a serious opinion or am i missing the sarcasm? either way i'd tend to agree, especially if you consider benfica might have an outside chance of a title challenge too... It is an opinion, but it only applies if we have missed out. If so, it is the fault of the previous chairman for playing in a market that was unsustainable in the long term. james, i'm gonna resist the urge to respond to this with "what the f*** are you on about" and instead say: unless this is an attempt to be witty i'm gonna assume you mean that we could only offer aimar 40k a week (for example) due to the extravagent wages FS and his board laid out on players, if that hadn't been the case we might have offered more wages to aimar and he'd have perhaps come? if i'm right with this interpretation that is so far beyond common sense & logical reasoning there isn't even a word or measurement for it if that's not what you meant or you were being funny then what did you really mean? My point is that the club can't afford to be paying the type of wages Shepherd was handing out, and thus when we offer players a fraction of Owen's wage, they are likely to be offended. in the style of kyle from south park: "reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeally?" so shepherd was handing out wages & that was bad, yet if he hadn't done that ashley would be able to offer aimar high wages to tempt him to the club? i was right in the first place, are you kidding me man? you can see that makes no sense right? you've invented your own version of catch 22 Shepherd created a market where any proven player would expect to get at least £50k. Had he not done so, expectations abroad would be lower, and therefore we could compete with Monaco and Benfica. Fact is that he was throwing cash away with only the short term in mind. that takes some believing.........if we offer more than benfica or monaco then if the player is after money alone he'd come regardless of wether he expected more or would have gor more a couple of years ago Like I explained in the post that started the argument, say Benfica offered to make you the highest paid player at the club, but Newcastle offerred a higher wage which is less than what gets paid to the likes of Duff, who would you choose for footballing reasons? That's a ludicrous argument. If it were purely for footballing reasons, the money wouldn't come into it at all. What you are saying is that he would be more attracted by the status of being a high wage earner at one club than being a mid-range earner (albeit on a higher wage) at another club. You seem to be implying that the player not being motivated by the larger wage would be a good thing, but IMO it would be a far worse attitude if he was motivated by being the star player in a team. Being motivated by money is not necessarily a bad thing - the player will be striving to prove that he is worth more than he is currently getting. Being motivated by status gives no incentive for the player to do anything other than to glory in his own self-importance and go off in a huff when he's not playing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colos Short and Curlies Posted July 25, 2008 Share Posted July 25, 2008 To be honest, if I had the choice of being paid a very high Portuguese wage of £30k per week, when I could be paid an average English wage of £40k per week, I'd go for Benfica, as they were clearly pulling out all the stops. Not that I believe the newspapers. that a serious opinion or am i missing the sarcasm? either way i'd tend to agree, especially if you consider benfica might have an outside chance of a title challenge too... It is an opinion, but it only applies if we have missed out. If so, it is the fault of the previous chairman for playing in a market that was unsustainable in the long term. james, i'm gonna resist the urge to respond to this with "what the f*** are you on about" and instead say: unless this is an attempt to be witty i'm gonna assume you mean that we could only offer aimar 40k a week (for example) due to the extravagent wages FS and his board laid out on players, if that hadn't been the case we might have offered more wages to aimar and he'd have perhaps come? if i'm right with this interpretation that is so far beyond common sense & logical reasoning there isn't even a word or measurement for it if that's not what you meant or you were being funny then what did you really mean? My point is that the club can't afford to be paying the type of wages Shepherd was handing out, and thus when we offer players a fraction of Owen's wage, they are likely to be offended. in the style of kyle from south park: "reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeally?" so shepherd was handing out wages & that was bad, yet if he hadn't done that ashley would be able to offer aimar high wages to tempt him to the club? i was right in the first place, are you kidding me man? you can see that makes no sense right? you've invented your own version of catch 22 Shepherd created a market where any proven player would expect to get at least £50k. Had he not done so, expectations abroad would be lower, and therefore we could compete with Monaco and Benfica. Fact is that he was throwing cash away with only the short term in mind. that takes some believing.........if we offer more than benfica or monaco then if the player is after money alone he'd come regardless of wether he expected more or would have gor more a couple of years ago Like I explained in the post that started the argument, say Benfica offered to make you the highest paid player at the club, but Newcastle offerred a higher wage which is less than what gets paid to the likes of Duff, who would you choose for footballing reasons? That's a ludicrous argument. If it were purely for footballing reasons, the money wouldn't come into it at all. What you are saying is that he would be more attracted by the status of being a high wage earner at one club than being a mid-range earner (albeit on a higher wage) at another club. You seem to be implying that the player not being motivated by the larger wage would be a good thing, but IMO it would be a far worse attitude if he was motivated by being the star player in a team. Being motivated by money is not necessarily a bad thing - the player will be striving to prove that he is worth more than he is currently getting. Being motivated by status gives no incentive for the player to do anything other than to glory in his own self-importance and go off in a huff when he's not playing. Or you go to a club for talks and get told that you will earn less than Duff and Smith. You don't have to be motivated by money to be offended at that Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted July 25, 2008 Share Posted July 25, 2008 That's a ludicrous argument. If it were purely for footballing reasons, the money wouldn't come into it at all. What you are saying is that he would be more attracted by the status of being a high wage earner at one club than being a mid-range earner (albeit on a higher wage) at another club. You seem to be implying that the player not being motivated by the larger wage would be a good thing, but IMO it would be a far worse attitude if he was motivated by being the star player in a team. Being motivated by money is not necessarily a bad thing - the player will be striving to prove that he is worth more than he is currently getting. Being motivated by status gives no incentive for the player to do anything other than to glory in his own self-importance and go off in a huff when he's not playing. Sorry but that post goes against everything I've ever learned or experienced where motivation is concerned, I doubt that you're working in management. If what you are saying is true then we would never finish outside of the top 4 or top 5. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest kevarmy Posted July 25, 2008 Share Posted July 25, 2008 if clubs like wigan can tie down players,then why cant we.must say i'm slightly starting to panic,i believe we need at least 5 top quality players just to secures a top half finish/ 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