Andy Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 I am talking about the here and now, its early in the season - he might have gone from strength to strength after that, now he takes that confidence and momentum to Villa, ive always thought he was a player with good atributtes, just needs it all to come together. I just hope we do have "irons in the fire" because if the deadline passes and the 12M was untouched due to deals breaking down - Like I said, it sends out all the wrong signals Yes, he might have gone to strength-to-strength, and he might have lived up to this so-called "potential..." But take a step back and look at the recent past... Dyer? Jenas? Ameobi? Viana? All had this "potential", yet all went either sideways or backwards instead of forward during their time here. Milner's displays last season did nothing to suggest that he would buck the trend -- he hasn't gone backwards by any means, but he certainly hasn't improved technically as a footballer. He hasn't worked on his weaknesses, and he simply hasn't progressed. He's a model professional and a great worker, for sure. But that only gets you so far. £12 million for Keegan to spend on Keegan-esque signings will get you a lot further. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tooj Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 I personally thought it would have been daft due to our lack of a squad as he would have made good cover, but £12 million is the best bit of business the club has done in a long time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Howaythetoon Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 Strange transfer all the same though. Methinks KK has something up his sleeve... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ikon Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 £12M :celb: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
La Parka Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 12m Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
afar Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 Strange transfer all the same though. Methinks KK has something up his sleeve... Still happy if we don't manage to bring anyone in ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Howaythetoon Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 Strange transfer all the same though. Methinks KK has something up his sleeve... Still happy if we don't manage to bring anyone in ? It wont effect my life put it that way. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmonkey Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 Niall and Biffa are both sound, from the times I've spoken to them. I'm sure Rich would back that up... I don't think they believe their opinions are more worthy than others, and when they "snipe" at forums they're referring to 606 and the like more often than not, as opposed to ours... However, their opinions are so far-reaching (and thus potentially damaging) that sometimes I can't help but feel that they'd be better off sticking to just posting facts... NUFC.com is a domain that really should be owned by the club, not two fans with often questionable and biased opinions. Compare that to eg: www.manutd.com www.chelseafc.com www.liverpoolfc.com www.arsenal.com etc etc. It's simply the case the .com is perceived to be more formal/official than a .co.uk or .net or any other extension, whilst the club is only ever going to have NUFC as the name of the site since that is logically what most of us who support the club would go for. Hence, NUFC.com should be the official club website. IMO they're simply taking advantage of having nabbed that web address first, which is fair enough, but with their increasingly biased bullshit opinions they're abusing that privileged position. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sniffer Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 So don't read them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmonkey Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 So don't read them. Why not? I can read and criticise if I want to. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sniffer Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 You're right. We all read everybody elses biased bullshit opinions so you might as well read theirs. I read yours after all. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.S.R. Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 The writing on that .com site is of an excellent standard. pity the ideas are holier than thou, patronising, aloof shite. nailed. beautifully crafted sanctimonious bullshit. From the website that brought you: "OMG We're giving Bramble away for nothing!" They're also referring to the 'Wow' rumour as if it were fact. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newcastle Fan Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 Milner £12 mill, Jonas £10 mill I would have spidey everytime. Jonas only costed us 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
afar Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 Niall and Biffa are both sound, from the times I've spoken to them. I'm sure Rich would back that up... I don't think they believe their opinions are more worthy than others, and when they "snipe" at forums they're referring to 606 and the like more often than not, as opposed to ours... However, their opinions are so far-reaching (and thus potentially damaging) that sometimes I can't help but feel that they'd be better off sticking to just posting facts... NUFC.com is a domain that really should be owned by the club, not two fans with often questionable and biased opinions. Compare that to eg: www.manutd.com www.chelseafc.com www.liverpoolfc.com www.arsenal.com etc etc. It's simply the case the .com is perceived to be more formal/official than a .co.uk or .net or any other extension, whilst the club is only ever going to have NUFC as the name of the site since that is logically what most of us who support the club would go for. Hence, NUFC.com should be the official club website. IMO they're simply taking advantage of having nabbed that web address first, which is fair enough, but with their increasingly biased bullshit opinions they're abusing that privileged position. I've made the point about their domain name for years, they were just in the right place at the right time. They generate huge hits from it, and of course they rake in the cash through their multitude of sponsors which allow them to finance the trips that prove they are soopafans. The general fans do see it as the official voice of NUFC fans more so than message boards like this, all because of their URL. Unfortunately NUFC isn't copyrighted by the club and hardly likely ever to be, while they hide behind the Newcastle Unnofical Fans Collaboration (I have no idea who they are actually collaborating with) bullshit then they are pretty safe. Two patronising arseholes IMO but I'll not deny they have a lot of talent at copy writing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thespence Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 I like NUFC.com the % of posters who post sense on there is higher than here but this place is home for me. I don't bother with Toontspastic aka the place this boards banned members live. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tooj Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 I like NUFC.com the % of posters who post sense on there is higher than here but this place is home for me. I don't bother with Toontspastic aka the place this boards banned members live. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sombrero Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 maybe he can get them a flukey goal too!, i dont know what is up behind the scenes but villa bought 8 players!, i dont know how many they sold or released but to get 8 in is not bad, we only got three? whats gaaaan on? unless im missing someone obvious 4 Bassong, Colo, Guthre, Jonas. ah yes ofcourse my bad! forgot bassong Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teasy Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 Is it 9M to us and 3M to Leeds for the sell on? If they had a 25% clause then yes, I'm not convinced they did, but its certainly possible. It all comes from Ken Bates rambling on about a player they have a sell on clause for who was likely to move soon. People have assumed its Milner, which is a fair assumption, but given its the transfer season it could potentially be any of a clutch of ex Leeds players (Lennon ect). I also agree with what someone said earlier about the initial fee, it was £3.5 million rising to £5 million on bonuses, considering he never played for England or in the Champions League there's no chance we paid the full £5 million, more like £4 million or so. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggio Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 Is it 9M to us and 3M to Leeds for the sell on? If they had a 25% clause then yes, I'm not convinced they did, but its certainly possible. It all comes from Ken Bates rambling on about a player they have a sell on clause for who was likely to move soon. People have assumed its Milner, which is a fair assumption, but given its the transfer season it could potentially be any of a clutch of ex Leeds players (Lennon ect). I also agree with what someone said earlier about the initial fee, it was £3.5 million rising to £5 million on bonuses, considering he never played for England or in the Champions League there's no chance we paid the full £5 million, more like £4 million or so. Leeds fans say Spurs bought out his sell on fee when they were in administration. Also if they do have a 25% sell on fee then it would likely be 25% of £8.4 million. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robm Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 Is it 9M to us and 3M to Leeds for the sell on? If they had a 25% clause then yes, I'm not convinced they did, but its certainly possible. It all comes from Ken Bates rambling on about a player they have a sell on clause for who was likely to move soon. People have assumed its Milner, which is a fair assumption, but given its the transfer season it could potentially be any of a clutch of ex Leeds players (Lennon ect). I also agree with what someone said earlier about the initial fee, it was £3.5 million rising to £5 million on bonuses, considering he never played for England or in the Champions League there's no chance we paid the full £5 million, more like £4 million or so. Leeds fans say Spurs bought out his sell on fee when they were in administration. Also if they do have a 25% sell on fee then it would likely be 25% of £8.4 million. Why would Spurs buy out Milners sell on fee? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
furney89 Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 I know alot of people are pleased to see milner gone, and that we've got 12million, but i think alot are missing the point in order to be a succesful team in the premier league, you need depth, you need milners in your squad, people who work hard look at aston villa,they hardly NEED him ,they are just adding to the depth of the team, adding to other young players such as ashley young ok he might not of been a fantastic player jimmy, but if we are going to challenge the top 8 at least, you need people like him in your squad, 12million or not, as keegan said the funding was already there even if he didnt leave, i belive this to be a poor decision as it leaves us further bare bones and putting more pressure to sign a replacement so yeah, we got more than hes probebly valued, but at this level if you want to hit the top 8, top 6 etc, i think you really need to keep hold of players like milner Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggio Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 Is it 9M to us and 3M to Leeds for the sell on? If they had a 25% clause then yes, I'm not convinced they did, but its certainly possible. It all comes from Ken Bates rambling on about a player they have a sell on clause for who was likely to move soon. People have assumed its Milner, which is a fair assumption, but given its the transfer season it could potentially be any of a clutch of ex Leeds players (Lennon ect). I also agree with what someone said earlier about the initial fee, it was £3.5 million rising to £5 million on bonuses, considering he never played for England or in the Champions League there's no chance we paid the full £5 million, more like £4 million or so. Leeds fans say Spurs bought out his sell on fee when they were in administration. Also if they do have a 25% sell on fee then it would likely be 25% of £8.4 million. Why would Spurs buy out Milners sell on fee? Lennon's you idiot. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 Why would Spurs buy out Milners sell on fee? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robm Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 Is it 9M to us and 3M to Leeds for the sell on? If they had a 25% clause then yes, I'm not convinced they did, but its certainly possible. It all comes from Ken Bates rambling on about a player they have a sell on clause for who was likely to move soon. People have assumed its Milner, which is a fair assumption, but given its the transfer season it could potentially be any of a clutch of ex Leeds players (Lennon ect). I also agree with what someone said earlier about the initial fee, it was £3.5 million rising to £5 million on bonuses, considering he never played for England or in the Champions League there's no chance we paid the full £5 million, more like £4 million or so. Leeds fans say Spurs bought out his sell on fee when they were in administration. Also if they do have a 25% sell on fee then it would likely be 25% of £8.4 million. Why would Spurs buy out Milners sell on fee? Lennon's you idiot. They we talking about the Milner sell on fee £9m to us £3 to Leeds. Sorry pissed Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ujpest doza Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 I know alot of people are pleased to see milner gone, and that we've got 12million, but i think alot are missing the point in order to be a succesful team in the premier league, you need depth, you need milners in your squad, people who work hard look at aston villa,they hardly NEED him ,they are just adding to the depth of the team, adding to other young players such as ashley young ok he might not of been a fantastic player jimmy, but if we are going to challenge the top 8 at least, you need people like him in your squad, 12million or not, as keegan said the funding was already there even if he didnt leave, i belive this to be a poor decision as it leaves us further bare bones and putting more pressure to sign a replacement so yeah, we got more than hes probebly valued, but at this level if you want to hit the top 8, top 6 etc, i think you really need to keep hold of players like milner he's a grafter, but his end product is rank. he has also shown himself to be a greedy bastard who wants to come and try and live in the real world. 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