The Newcastle United Transfer Thread: D-Day [Spoiler: Not Much Happens]

[fredbob]

I'll be surprised and relatively impressed if we spend £10m net in the next two weeks. Of course the squad being improved is miles more important than how much is spent, but spending money without recouping it by selling the better players we already have would be a significant (and required) show of intent and commitment.

 

The only thing that is important is that the squad is improved, if the squd is visibly improved by the end of this window i would be more happier if we'd spent £5k then i would if we'd spent £15m becasue that way it would prove the effectiveness and value of this set up and system.

 

And if changes were unsuccessful I'd give Ashley much more credit for committing money to it than not.

 

Good players are good players, if they fail when they come here it has nothing to do with there transfer fee. the only picture that people should be considering is how much the squad is improved.

 

The fact that a £10m failure would be more accpetable than a £10k failure says alot about you're way of thinking. I didnt relaise you were from the NE5 school of thinking.

 

Expenisve players = good players

Cheap players = shit players.

 

thats effectively what you;re saying.

[Dave]

so its loans, then kinnear says he got ash and lam in for talks, and today we've bid for players?  whats the problem? 

 

The setup evidently still doesn't work by any stretch of the imagination if that is the actual series of events.

 

i see where you're coming from but it depends on your definition of work, doesnt it? if we end up improving the squad then surely thats the ultimate test? not the series of events?

 

It's on the verge of collapse at all times if that's what is required every time the manager wants a meeting, or to get a budget.

 

just business isnt it? managers go to money men for more cash in plenty of areas, just the way of the world. anyway thats by the by, my point is if we improve the squad i dont think it matters how we get there. i.m.o.

 

As billytray says though, why are we halfway into the only chance to amend the squad and relying on our manager whinging to them before they sort out the details?

 

You're right in that the quality of the squad is the most important thing, but it concerns me hugely that they appear to have learnt nothing from the Keegan debacle. We're just lucky Kinnear is so desperate for this chance he'd not dream of walking out.

[Liam Liam Liam O]

We are in serious trouble and need good signings asap, not just to survive this season but to have for next season aswell, what do we get? £8 f***ing million, Ashley is a grade A c***.

how much of your money are you risking ?

 

I dont see what your point is, am I the owner of NUFC?

 

We need a new central midfielder worth at least £8million, never mind our whole budget being £8million.

 

So it's not possible to buy a good midfielder for less than £8 million?

 

In todays market? I wouldnt bank on them being much better than what we already have considering this budget will be split amongst at least 2 signings.

 

depends where you shop I would say, if you want Premiership proven then you will have to pay the going rate but there's plenty of talented players kicking around Europe if you know where to look.

 

Sounds easy, have you emailed the club?

 

Not sure what point you're trying to make tbh, are you saying we couldn't pick up a better midfielder than Butt in France for £4 million?

 

 

 

NUFC clearly don't believe so.

 

Why's that?

 

Because they haven't done it? Instead they've offered Butt a new contract and given Ameobi one.

 

I on't think they had a choice but to offer Butt one under the terms of his current deal.  That said they probably would have anyway.

[Kaizero]

I'll be surprised and relatively impressed if we spend £10m net in the next two weeks. Of course the squad being improved is miles more important than how much is spent, but spending money without recouping it by selling the better players we already have would be a significant (and required) show of intent and commitment.

 

The only thing that is important is that the squad is improved, if the squd is visibly improved by the end of this window i would be more happier if we'd spent £5k then i would if we'd spent £15m becasue that way it would prove the effectiveness and value of this set up and system.

 

And if changes were unsuccessful I'd give Ashley much more credit for committing money to it than not.

 

Good players are good players, if they fail when they come here it has nothing to do with there transfer fee. the only picture that people should be considering is how much the squad is improved.

 

The fact that a £10m failure would be more accpetable than a £10k failure says alot about you're way of thinking. I didnt relaise you were from the NE5 school of thinking.

 

Expenisve players = good players

Cheap players = shit players.

 

Good point. I'd rather us spend £100k trying to get the next Kaka than £100 Mill on the current one.

[Baggio]

We are in serious trouble and need good signings asap, not just to survive this season but to have for next season aswell, what do we get? £8 f***ing million, Ashley is a grade A c***.

how much of your money are you risking ?

 

I dont see what your point is, am I the owner of NUFC?

 

We need a new central midfielder worth at least £8million, never mind our whole budget being £8million.

 

So it's not possible to buy a good midfielder for less than £8 million?

 

In todays market? I wouldnt bank on them being much better than what we already have considering this budget will be split amongst at least 2 signings.

 

depends where you shop I would say, if you want Premiership proven then you will have to pay the going rate but there's plenty of talented players kicking around Europe if you know where to look.

 

Sounds easy, have you emailed the club?

 

Not sure what point you're trying to make tbh, are you saying we couldn't pick up a better midfielder than Butt in France for £4 million?

 

 

 

NUFC clearly don't believe so.

 

Why's that?

 

Because they haven't done it? Instead they've offered Butt a new contract and given Ameobi one.

 

Because the manager wanted them to stay as part of the squad?

 

That doesn't mean that Butt will be seen as a first choice player or that they won't try to bring in better, if Kinnear is after M'Bia then I don't see him coming here as back up to Butt.

[madras]

We are in serious trouble and need good signings asap, not just to survive this season but to have for next season aswell, what do we get? £8 f***ing million, Ashley is a grade A c***.

how much of your money are you risking ?

 

I dont see what your point is, am I the owner of NUFC?

 

We need a new central midfielder worth at least £8million, never mind our whole budget being £8million.

 

So it's not possible to buy a good midfielder for less than £8 million?

 

In todays market? I wouldnt bank on them being much better than what we already have considering this budget will be split amongst at least 2 signings.

 

depends where you shop I would say, if you want Premiership proven then you will have to pay the going rate but there's plenty of talented players kicking around Europe if you know where to look.

 

Sounds easy, have you emailed the club?

 

Not sure what point you're trying to make tbh, are you saying we couldn't pick up a better midfielder than Butt in France for £4 million?

 

 

 

NUFC clearly don't believe so.

 

Why's that?

 

Because they haven't done it? Instead they've offered Butt a new contract and given Ameobi one.

 

Because the manager wanted them to stay as part of the squad?

 

That doesn't mean that Butt will be seen as a first choice player or that they won't try to bring in better, if Kinnear is after M'Bia then I don't see him coming here as back up to Butt.

you could finish that sentence after "here"

[Thespence]

Expenisve players = good players

Cheap players = s*** players.

 

thats effectively what you;re saying.

 

You only have to look at our CB's to see that you can get shite (Colo) for huge £££'s & a good centre back for less than £2 million (Bassong).

 

But the clubs that win stuff show you have to spend big to compete.

[Dr Venkman]

so its loans, then kinnear says he got ash and lam in for talks, and today we've bid for players?  whats the problem? 

 

The setup evidently still doesn't work by any stretch of the imagination if that is the actual series of events.

 

i see where you're coming from but it depends on your definition of work, doesnt it? if we end up improving the squad then surely thats the ultimate test? not the series of events?

 

It's on the verge of collapse at all times if that's what is required every time the manager wants a meeting, or to get a budget.

 

just business isnt it? managers go to money men for more cash in plenty of areas, just the way of the world. anyway thats by the by, my point is if we improve the squad i dont think it matters how we get there. i.m.o.

 

As billytray says though, why are we halfway into the only chance to amend the squad and relying on our manager whinging to them before they sort out the details?

 

You're right in that the quality of the squad is the most important thing, but it concerns me hugely that they appear to have learnt nothing from the Keegan debacle. We're just lucky Kinnear is so desperate for this chance he'd not dream of walking out.

 

regarding your first sentence if i was to give the benefit of the doubt i'd say because ashley is trying to run the club without spending too much money and being 'responsible'. or i could just say he's a tight cunt. i dont know. the reason i keep coming back to improving the squad being the ultimate test is because post allardyce i've been happy with our transfer policy tbh and i dont see any reason why they wont continue in the same way. its my last shred of optimism tbh.

[Dave]

I'll be surprised and relatively impressed if we spend £10m net in the next two weeks. Of course the squad being improved is miles more important than how much is spent, but spending money without recouping it by selling the better players we already have would be a significant (and required) show of intent and commitment.

 

The only thing that is important is that the squad is improved, if the squd is visibly improved by the end of this window i would be more happier if we'd spent £5k then i would if we'd spent £15m becasue that way it would prove the effectiveness and value of this set up and system.

 

And if changes were unsuccessful I'd give Ashley much more credit for committing money to it than not.

 

Good players are good players, if they fail when they come here it has nothing to do with there transfer fee. the only picture that people should be considering is how much the squad is improved.

 

The fact that a £10m failure would be more accpetable than a £10k failure says alot about you're way of thinking. I didnt relaise you were from the NE5 school of thinking.

 

Expenisve players = good players

Cheap players = shit players.

 

thats effectively what you;re saying.

 

Not at all. Better players generally cost more money. This is indisputable; even the crappiest club knows when it has a decent player on its hands and can attempt to fleece a Premier League club.

 

Ashley has spent hardly anything so far, and to me that signifies a lack of ambition for the club. I'm not demanding we spend loads and loads of money, far from it. All I'm saying is that if we spend £10m net this window and keep players like Shay Given, not only will it almost guarantee a decent calibre of player coming in, it will be a major sign of commitment from our owner to me. A sign that perhaps he wasn't lying the other week when he said he was committed to moving us forward again. A sign that he wants to see us progress out of the mire. A sign that he's willing to invest in the playing staff.

 

If we can improve the squad for pennies then brilliant. I'd then want to know where that money saved is going.

[EthiGeordie]

  It would be miracle if they accpet Newcastles 4 million over Everton's 6 million?

[madras]

I'll be surprised and relatively impressed if we spend £10m net in the next two weeks. Of course the squad being improved is miles more important than how much is spent, but spending money without recouping it by selling the better players we already have would be a significant (and required) show of intent and commitment.

 

The only thing that is important is that the squad is improved, if the squd is visibly improved by the end of this window i would be more happier if we'd spent £5k then i would if we'd spent £15m becasue that way it would prove the effectiveness and value of this set up and system.

 

And if changes were unsuccessful I'd give Ashley much more credit for committing money to it than not.

 

Good players are good players, if they fail when they come here it has nothing to do with there transfer fee. the only picture that people should be considering is how much the squad is improved.

 

The fact that a £10m failure would be more accpetable than a £10k failure says alot about you're way of thinking. I didnt relaise you were from the NE5 school of thinking.

 

Expenisve players = good players

Cheap players = s*** players.

 

thats effectively what you;re saying.

 

Not at all. Better players generally cost more money. This is indisputable; even the crappiest club knows when it has a decent player on its hands and can attempt to fleece a Premier League club.

 

Ashley has spent hardly anything so far, and to me that signifies a lack of ambition for the club. I'm not demanding we spend loads and loads of money, far from it. All I'm saying is that if we spend £10m net this window and keep players like Shay Given, not only will it almost guarantee a decent calibre of player coming in, it will be a major sign of commitment from our owner to me. A sign that perhaps he wasn't lying the other week when he said he was committed to moving us forward again. A sign that he wants to see us progress out of the mire. A sign that he's willing to invest in the playing staff.

 

If we can improve the squad for pennies then brilliant. I'd then want to know where that money saved is going.

in general it costs big bucks to get good players.....however it is not a hard and fast rule,bosmans,good scouting etc

[Dave]

in general it costs big bucks to get good players.....however it is not a hard and fast rule,bosmans,good scouting etc

 

[Dave]

The fact that a £10m failure would be more accpetable than a £10k failure says alot about you're way of thinking.

 

FWIW I'd much rather not see us load all our eggs in one basket in our position if the budget is £10m, just in case that's what you think I mean.

 

Neither failure is acceptable because both cost the team, financially and probably on the pitch too. Only one approach though is ambitious, made with genuine commitment to bringing the best players in.

 

As always the answer is somewhere in the middle. It's wonderfully apt how our best CB partnership is Coloccini and Bassong. I just don't think spending £10m to add to the squad is an outrageous demand considering we must surely have some money left over from the Milner sale...

[Wullie]

I'll be surprised and relatively impressed if we spend £10m net in the next two weeks. Of course the squad being improved is miles more important than how much is spent, but spending money without recouping it by selling the better players we already have would be a significant (and required) show of intent and commitment.

 

The only thing that is important is that the squad is improved, if the squd is visibly improved by the end of this window i would be more happier if we'd spent £5k then i would if we'd spent £15m becasue that way it would prove the effectiveness and value of this set up and system.

 

And if changes were unsuccessful I'd give Ashley much more credit for committing money to it than not.

 

Good players are good players, if they fail when they come here it has nothing to do with there transfer fee. the only picture that people should be considering is how much the squad is improved.

 

The fact that a £10m failure would be more accpetable than a £10k failure says alot about you're way of thinking. I didnt relaise you were from the NE5 school of thinking.

 

Expenisve players = good players

Cheap players = shit players.

 

thats effectively what you;re saying.

 

Presumably in your world, Man Utd and Chelsea winning everything is in no way linked to the amount of money they spend.

[madras]

I'll be surprised and relatively impressed if we spend £10m net in the next two weeks. Of course the squad being improved is miles more important than how much is spent, but spending money without recouping it by selling the better players we already have would be a significant (and required) show of intent and commitment.

 

The only thing that is important is that the squad is improved, if the squd is visibly improved by the end of this window i would be more happier if we'd spent £5k then i would if we'd spent £15m becasue that way it would prove the effectiveness and value of this set up and system.

 

And if changes were unsuccessful I'd give Ashley much more credit for committing money to it than not.

 

Good players are good players, if they fail when they come here it has nothing to do with there transfer fee. the only picture that people should be considering is how much the squad is improved.

 

The fact that a £10m failure would be more accpetable than a £10k failure says alot about you're way of thinking. I didnt relaise you were from the NE5 school of thinking.

 

Expenisve players = good players

Cheap players = s*** players.

 

thats effectively what you;re saying.

 

Presumably in your world, Man Utd and Chelsea winning everything is in no way linked to the amount of money they spend.

man utd built on the nevilles,scholes,butt,giggs,beckham. the backbone of what they've achieved really.

[Wullie]

I'll be surprised and relatively impressed if we spend £10m net in the next two weeks. Of course the squad being improved is miles more important than how much is spent, but spending money without recouping it by selling the better players we already have would be a significant (and required) show of intent and commitment.

 

The only thing that is important is that the squad is improved, if the squd is visibly improved by the end of this window i would be more happier if we'd spent £5k then i would if we'd spent £15m becasue that way it would prove the effectiveness and value of this set up and system.

 

And if changes were unsuccessful I'd give Ashley much more credit for committing money to it than not.

 

Good players are good players, if they fail when they come here it has nothing to do with there transfer fee. the only picture that people should be considering is how much the squad is improved.

 

The fact that a £10m failure would be more accpetable than a £10k failure says alot about you're way of thinking. I didnt relaise you were from the NE5 school of thinking.

 

Expenisve players = good players

Cheap players = s*** players.

 

thats effectively what you;re saying.

 

Presumably in your world, Man Utd and Chelsea winning everything is in no way linked to the amount of money they spend.

man utd built on the nevilles,scholes,butt,giggs,beckham. the backbone of what they've achieved really.

 

What's your point?

[madras]

I'll be surprised and relatively impressed if we spend £10m net in the next two weeks. Of course the squad being improved is miles more important than how much is spent, but spending money without recouping it by selling the better players we already have would be a significant (and required) show of intent and commitment.

 

The only thing that is important is that the squad is improved, if the squd is visibly improved by the end of this window i would be more happier if we'd spent £5k then i would if we'd spent £15m becasue that way it would prove the effectiveness and value of this set up and system.

 

And if changes were unsuccessful I'd give Ashley much more credit for committing money to it than not.

 

Good players are good players, if they fail when they come here it has nothing to do with there transfer fee. the only picture that people should be considering is how much the squad is improved.

 

The fact that a £10m failure would be more accpetable than a £10k failure says alot about you're way of thinking. I didnt relaise you were from the NE5 school of thinking.

 

Expenisve players = good players

Cheap players = s*** players.

 

thats effectively what you;re saying.

 

Presumably in your world, Man Utd and Chelsea winning everything is in no way linked to the amount of money they spend.

man utd built on the nevilles,scholes,butt,giggs,beckham. the backbone of what they've achieved really.

 

What's your point?

you can improve without having to spend ridiculous amounts.

[Wullie]

I'll be surprised and relatively impressed if we spend £10m net in the next two weeks. Of course the squad being improved is miles more important than how much is spent, but spending money without recouping it by selling the better players we already have would be a significant (and required) show of intent and commitment.

 

The only thing that is important is that the squad is improved, if the squd is visibly improved by the end of this window i would be more happier if we'd spent £5k then i would if we'd spent £15m becasue that way it would prove the effectiveness and value of this set up and system.

 

And if changes were unsuccessful I'd give Ashley much more credit for committing money to it than not.

 

Good players are good players, if they fail when they come here it has nothing to do with there transfer fee. the only picture that people should be considering is how much the squad is improved.

 

The fact that a £10m failure would be more accpetable than a £10k failure says alot about you're way of thinking. I didnt relaise you were from the NE5 school of thinking.

 

Expenisve players = good players

Cheap players = s*** players.

 

thats effectively what you;re saying.

 

Presumably in your world, Man Utd and Chelsea winning everything is in no way linked to the amount of money they spend.

man utd built on the nevilles,scholes,butt,giggs,beckham. the backbone of what they've achieved really.

 

What's your point?

you can improve without having to spend ridiculous amounts.

 

So why does Fergie have three £30m centre forwards, a £30m centre half, four £20m midfielders?

[Dave]

I'll be surprised and relatively impressed if we spend £10m net in the next two weeks. Of course the squad being improved is miles more important than how much is spent, but spending money without recouping it by selling the better players we already have would be a significant (and required) show of intent and commitment.

 

The only thing that is important is that the squad is improved, if the squd is visibly improved by the end of this window i would be more happier if we'd spent £5k then i would if we'd spent £15m becasue that way it would prove the effectiveness and value of this set up and system.

 

And if changes were unsuccessful I'd give Ashley much more credit for committing money to it than not.

 

Good players are good players, if they fail when they come here it has nothing to do with there transfer fee. the only picture that people should be considering is how much the squad is improved.

 

The fact that a £10m failure would be more accpetable than a £10k failure says alot about you're way of thinking. I didnt relaise you were from the NE5 school of thinking.

 

Expenisve players = good players

Cheap players = s*** players.

 

thats effectively what you;re saying.

 

Presumably in your world, Man Utd and Chelsea winning everything is in no way linked to the amount of money they spend.

man utd built on the nevilles,scholes,butt,giggs,beckham. the backbone of what they've achieved really.

 

What's your point?

you can improve without having to spend ridiculous amounts.

 

That youth team was unbelievable though really. It single-handedly set them on the way in this era of domination. Crazy to think about all that talent coming though at the same time.

[johnnypd]

when it comes to assessing ashley, you have to look at how much he backs his manager, professionaly and financially. it is not up to ashley to pinpoint individual players but to give the manager a budget to work with. the smaller the budget the tougher it is likely to be as you limit the players obtainable and miss out on in-demand targets. investing in a scouting network is great but it should never be at the expense of spending, as you'll not get the best out of that expanded network for one thing. pick a good manager who you can work with and back him with funds. ashley's not been able to do this so far.

[madras]

I'll be surprised and relatively impressed if we spend £10m net in the next two weeks. Of course the squad being improved is miles more important than how much is spent, but spending money without recouping it by selling the better players we already have would be a significant (and required) show of intent and commitment.

 

The only thing that is important is that the squad is improved, if the squd is visibly improved by the end of this window i would be more happier if we'd spent £5k then i would if we'd spent £15m becasue that way it would prove the effectiveness and value of this set up and system.

 

And if changes were unsuccessful I'd give Ashley much more credit for committing money to it than not.

 

Good players are good players, if they fail when they come here it has nothing to do with there transfer fee. the only picture that people should be considering is how much the squad is improved.

 

The fact that a £10m failure would be more accpetable than a £10k failure says alot about you're way of thinking. I didnt relaise you were from the NE5 school of thinking.

 

Expenisve players = good players

Cheap players = s*** players.

 

thats effectively what you;re saying.

 

Presumably in your world, Man Utd and Chelsea winning everything is in no way linked to the amount of money they spend.

man utd built on the nevilles,scholes,butt,giggs,beckham. the backbone of what they've achieved really.

 

What's your point?

you can improve without having to spend ridiculous amounts.

 

So why does Fergie have three £30m centre forwards, a £30m centre half, four £20m midfielders?

why's he also got darren fletcher,john o'shea,evans,park and a good crop of youngsters.

 

 

did you read what i posted about "you can improve" ? which is what we need right now. if we want to challenge man utd we may need to spend big but as of right now improving in reality comes before dreaming.

[Wullie]

I'll be surprised and relatively impressed if we spend £10m net in the next two weeks. Of course the squad being improved is miles more important than how much is spent, but spending money without recouping it by selling the better players we already have would be a significant (and required) show of intent and commitment.

 

The only thing that is important is that the squad is improved, if the squd is visibly improved by the end of this window i would be more happier if we'd spent £5k then i would if we'd spent £15m becasue that way it would prove the effectiveness and value of this set up and system.

 

And if changes were unsuccessful I'd give Ashley much more credit for committing money to it than not.

 

Good players are good players, if they fail when they come here it has nothing to do with there transfer fee. the only picture that people should be considering is how much the squad is improved.

 

The fact that a £10m failure would be more accpetable than a £10k failure says alot about you're way of thinking. I didnt relaise you were from the NE5 school of thinking.

 

Expenisve players = good players

Cheap players = s*** players.

 

thats effectively what you;re saying.

 

Presumably in your world, Man Utd and Chelsea winning everything is in no way linked to the amount of money they spend.

man utd built on the nevilles,scholes,butt,giggs,beckham. the backbone of what they've achieved really.

 

What's your point?

you can improve without having to spend ridiculous amounts.

 

So why does Fergie have three £30m centre forwards, a £30m centre half, four £20m midfielders?

why's he also got darren fletcher,john o'shea,evans,park and a good crop of youngsters.

 

 

did you read what i posted about "you can improve" ? which is what we need right now. if we want to challenge man utd we may need to spend big but as of right now improving in reality comes before dreaming.

 

You can improve but it's unlikely. Generally clubs who spend nothing go nowhere.

[madras]

I'll be surprised and relatively impressed if we spend £10m net in the next two weeks. Of course the squad being improved is miles more important than how much is spent, but spending money without recouping it by selling the better players we already have would be a significant (and required) show of intent and commitment.

 

The only thing that is important is that the squad is improved, if the squd is visibly improved by the end of this window i would be more happier if we'd spent £5k then i would if we'd spent £15m becasue that way it would prove the effectiveness and value of this set up and system.

 

And if changes were unsuccessful I'd give Ashley much more credit for committing money to it than not.

 

Good players are good players, if they fail when they come here it has nothing to do with there transfer fee. the only picture that people should be considering is how much the squad is improved.

 

The fact that a £10m failure would be more accpetable than a £10k failure says alot about you're way of thinking. I didnt relaise you were from the NE5 school of thinking.

 

Expenisve players = good players

Cheap players = s*** players.

 

thats effectively what you;re saying.

 

Presumably in your world, Man Utd and Chelsea winning everything is in no way linked to the amount of money they spend.

man utd built on the nevilles,scholes,butt,giggs,beckham. the backbone of what they've achieved really.

 

What's your point?

you can improve without having to spend ridiculous amounts.

 

So why does Fergie have three £30m centre forwards, a £30m centre half, four £20m midfielders?

why's he also got darren fletcher,john o'shea,evans,park and a good crop of youngsters.

 

 

did you read what i posted about "you can improve" ? which is what we need right now. if we want to challenge man utd we may need to spend big but as of right now improving in reality comes before dreaming.

 

You can improve but it's unlikely. Generally clubs who spend nothing go nowhere.

generally we've outspent arsenal in tha past

[Guest ovesbar]

Ok, so we are after Mbia..Why the hell would Kinnear want to tell this to everyone before his club has decided if they want to accept a bid? Is he trying to push the price up? Notify all other potential interested clubs? He is either unbelivably stupid or just lying..or both.

[madras]

Ok, so we are after Mbia..Why the hell would Kinnear want to tell this to everyone before his club has decided if they want to accept a bid? Is he trying to push the price up? Notify all other potential interested clubs? He is either unbelivably stupid or just lying..or both.

wasn't so long ago everyone wanted to know everything that was going on....now he tells and it's wrong.