RIP sale thread.

[JH]

As well as the manager, Shearer should have gone after we finished 3rd imo. Right or wrong, I said this at the time. The team needed a nudge into another direction at that time in order to push on and seriously challenge for the title.

 

 

Despite scoring 22 in the league the next season, with only Henry scoring more?

 

I kinda see where HTL is coming from.

 

It's not just Shearer's ability, but we were becoming too seriously reliant upon him and for a player so near to the end of his career that wasn't a good thing. In order to progress, we needed to move on and look forward.

 

Of course Shearer was still really influential and scored alot of goals, but we looked to him each time in a crisis. It was an unhealthy obsession that should have ended before it did.

 

He was like our comfort blanket.

[tmonkey]

Do you agree with me HTL that for Shepherd to be a decent option he'll have had to have learnt from his mistakes? We can't purely rely on him being willing to spend money - there's more to it that that.

 

In which case the debate isn't really about whether or not Shepherd will back his managers with funds but rather whether or not the same mistakes will be made again. Many simply don't believe he's capable of him learning from what went wrong before.

 

What is it he has to learn, Dave? That's a serious question and don't forget nobody can predict the future.

 

What would you prefer? A Board that backs the manager or one that doesn't?

 

Well I'm not going to list out all the things I think were mistakes, but generally I mean finding a more reasonable balance regarding the finances and the way he dealt with managerial appointments. I believe your question regarding backing a manager is far too simplistic - even if Ashley had spent more money his 'system' and the way he dealt with Keegan/Kinnear/Hughton etc was catastrophic. It's not just about money spent.

 

Do you believe Shepherd made any mistakes? I remember you saying if Roeder was a failure then it was someone else's turn.

 

I think his major mistake was not being prepared to change manager after we finished 3rd. 

 

I don't consider it a mistake to appoint a previously successful manager who is backed to the hilt but doesn't do the business at Newcastle. That's down to the manager.

 

Souness wanted Anelka and Boa Morte, Shepherd bidded low for them, then bidded double on the players he wanted, Owen and Luque.

 

Shepherd since Sir Bobby's latter years effectively turned into a s*** version of Real Madrid's President Fiorentino Perez, who buys and sells players based on his wants and not those of his managers. Except instead of the Zidane's, Figo's and Kaka's, we had the Owen's, Duff's and Luque's coming in.

 

I think in a way Shepherd losing faith in Sir Bobby's judgement (iirc there were stories of Shepherd being unhappy with signings like Viana for £9m) was the turning point for Shepherd himself. Ever since that point he clearly didn't have much faith in the guys he appointed, and so trusted his judgement before theirs.

[Dave]

After the fifth place (that we scraped) was the ideal time for a shake-up, both managerially and with the squad. We had quite clearly peaked and a more ruthless club committed to success would have addressed the situation. Like Liverpool did.

 

This is using the benefit of hindsight of course, before someone mentions it.

[Teasy]

I think it's mostly hope rather than any tangible evidence. What cannot be doubted is the pull he'll have in terms of attracting players, and I liked the fact he was willing to change things in terms of formations and personnel. It didn't work of course, but I preferred it to sticking with the same s*** that had got us in that position to begin with. Plus if Shepherd does come back in, there's already some knowledge of each other there.

 

There's no settling in period. He knows how it all runs, he's been there before and I doubt much has changed, he'll know the majority of the staff around the club, he knows who he wants to put in charge and such.

 

As soon as the takeover goes through, we can pretty much get started straight away. That's quite a plus considering how far down the line the Summer already is.

 

I agree with all of that and its all very positive, but what scares me is Shepherd with an iron grip on the club that won't be removed until we inevitably go into administration.  Of course no buyer scares me just as much.

[tmonkey]

IMO Shepherd therefore needs to learn the following lessons from his mistakes as chairman last time round:

 

1) Appoint competent/professional board memebers who will be able to split the load of running a Premiership club between themselves. So much needs to be done to keep abreast with world football, there's no way Shepherd will be able to do everything. If we need a new manager, will Shepherd have a good working knowledge of the European game so as to be able to approach various managers both within England and foreign countries like Spain, Portugal, France, etc? And at the same time, if he's out looking for a manager, who deals with player transfers? Or with any other form of recruitment, coaching, technology, so on and so forth? All of the big clubs have decent sized boards and a structured management system that splits the numerous tasks up accordingly. We on the other hand had Shepherd, Douglas Hall who wasn't in the country most of the time, and a couple of siblings. And we wondered why everything was so slow under Shepherd?

 

2) Back the manager's judgement of the valuation of players the manager wants. Michael Carrick as an example would have been here the entire time had he done this. If Shepherd doesn't think a player is worth several million more, then he should bite his tongue and let the manager live and die by his signings.

 

3) Implement a professional world-wide scouting network and use that to sign players instead of using a few agents who offer us shit players (Shepherd and/or his son benefitted from these deals financially no doubt, this needs to stop as it's not in the interest of the club).

 

4) Recognise the need for a Premiership team to have a squad with good depth in order for it to compete. How many seasons did big weaknesses just continue to get ignored under Shepherd? He can blame the manager if he wants to, but I doubt that was the case with us, because it ties in with the next point..

 

5) He needs to stop purchasing big-name has-beens to try to cover his own back. If fans were unhappy because the squad had gaping holes and nothing was being done about it, Shepherd's solution was to try to cover his back by doing something at the last minute that only made the situation worse, i.e go for a big name player past his best who's only reason for joining us is big wages. Maybe these trophy signings were down to point 1, in that Shepherd was often so slow to sign players that by the time the transfer deadline would come along he had little option/time but to do this?

 

6) Widen the manager recruitment criteria to include managers from foreign countries, at the very least Europe. If Shepherd doesn't do this, then if Shearer fails, most likely we'll be back to looking at appointing shit like Roeder, Allardyce and Souness again. There's no easy-option of a world class Geordie manager at the end of his career out there for Shepherd to appoint anymore. We need him to research managers in all the main European leagues, see who's capable of building a good squad, blooding youth, etc etc. When Arsenal went to Japan to approach Wenger, we went to the midlands to approach Dalglish, and shortly after London to approach Gullitt. When Liverpool went to Spain to approach Rafa, we went to Blackburn to speak to Souness. Shepherd needs to stop being so isolationist with respect to managers.

 

7) Show proper planning in replacing managers who have failed to deliver. We all know Shepherd showed bad timing on numerous occasions when getting rid of managers, with no planning involved (e.g. sack a manager on a Friday, then start the search for a new one on Monday and read through any applications that are submitted). Whenever a manager was sacked, we seemed to be the slowest club in the land to find a replacement.

 

8) Keep the debt within manageable levels and stop gambling the club's future by putting all our eggs in one basket. There's a fine line between ambition and stupidity, the big clubs can be ambitious because they can afford a £30m flop or two, we on the other hand never could and therefore were being stupid when we spent beyond our means on one player - which is partly why we've not won a trophy since 1995/96 when clubs that were below/around us at the time have won many.

 

9) Keep away from the media and only make sensible comments about the club, a match, the manager, etc etc. He needs to learn to keep his opinions to himself. Most other Premiership clubs over the past 15 years have not had a chairman like Shepherd who would put his foot in his mouth so regularly and so needlessly.

[Optimistic Nut]

I think Kluivert was intended to be Shearer's replacement with the intention to phase him out but it just didn't work out.

[Ronaldo]

There's a reason why it didn't work out, Greame Souness

[2sheds]

There's a reason why it didn't work out, Greame Souness

Or Alan Shearer

[Ronaldo]

Shearer wasn't to blame that his legs were gone and he had the match sharpness of a specially modified beachball

[dcmk]

I think Kluivert was intended to be Shearer's replacement with the intention to phase him out but it just didn't work out.

 

I don't think SBR wanted Kluivert though 

[Ronaldo]

I think Kluivert was intended to be Shearer's replacement with the intention to phase him out but it just didn't work out.

 

I don't think SBR wanted Kluivert though 

 

SBR hints in his book that he wanted to play Bellamy and Emile Mpenza together

[Tsunami]

There's a reason why it didn't work out, Greame Souness

Or Alan Shearer

 

Or Kluivert

[dcmk]

There's a reason why it didn't work out, Greame Souness

Or Alan Shearer

 

Or Kluivert

 

How about FFS, Bellamy and Yakubu

[Minhosa]

After the fifth place (that we scraped) was the ideal time for a shake-up, both managerially and with the squad. We had quite clearly peaked and a more ruthless club committed to success would have addressed the situation. Like Liverpool did.

 

This is using the benefit of hindsight of course, before someone mentions it.

 

Major turning point in the history of both clubs. They went off and found the best manager in Europe that was available and we eventually appointed Souness. FML.

[MW]

So sic of all this, just want it over. Cant even be bothered to read up what's going on anymore. I'l assume its not much.

[Howaythelads]

As well as the manager, Shearer should have gone after we finished 3rd imo. Right or wrong, I said this at the time. The team needed a nudge into another direction at that time in order to push on and seriously challenge for the title.

 

 

Despite scoring 22 in the league the next season, with only Henry scoring more?

 

 

 

Yes. That argument has been put forward before and my answer is the same. It's a team game and imo we needed a change of direction to move forward.

 

Sometimes big decisions have to be taken, it's why these people are paid good money and at that time the club could have got a decent fee for him. Robson should have been shuffled "upstairs" or something at the same time.

 

Great player of course, not saying otherwise, but there's no room for sentiment at the top level in football.

[Howaythelads]

As well as the manager, Shearer should have gone after we finished 3rd imo. Right or wrong, I said this at the time. The team needed a nudge into another direction at that time in order to push on and seriously challenge for the title.

 

 

Despite scoring 22 in the league the next season, with only Henry scoring more?

 

 

 

aye, he should have left after we finished 5th imo. He started the season brilliantly but then went seriously downhill and didn't manage an away goal in the whole of 2004 with the exception of a penalty at Boro. Certainly after seeing his performances at the end of 03-04 and start of 04-05 a lot of us knew it was the end and we had to replace him

 

Which is exactly why I'd have got rid after we finished 3rd, not 5th. We'd have got decent money for him.

[Howaythelads]

I think it's mostly hope rather than any tangible evidence. What cannot be doubted is the pull he'll have in terms of attracting players, and I liked the fact he was willing to change things in terms of formations and personnel. It didn't work of course, but I preferred it to sticking with the same s*** that had got us in that position to begin with. Plus if Shepherd does come back in, there's already some knowledge of each other there.

 

There's no settling in period. He knows how it all runs, he's been there before and I doubt much has changed, he'll know the majority of the staff around the club, he knows who he wants to put in charge and such.

 

As soon as the takeover goes through, we can pretty much get started straight away. That's quite a plus considering how far down the line the Summer already is.

 

Very good point. The importance of this can't be underestimated.

[Ronaldo]

We still would have finished 4th without doubt had SBR not sold Solano. But the indications were there and when Liverpool offered decent money for Shearer in the summer of 04 we should have accepted (funnily enough it was Shepherd, not Robson who said no)

 

ridiculous that a year later we extended his contract even further, I remember the city absolutely buzzing and me having about 15 arguments with 15 different people that day

[Howaythelads]

We still would have finished 4th without doubt had SBR not sold Solano. But the indications were there and when Liverpool offered decent money for Shearer in the summer of 04 we should have accepted (funnily enough it was Shepherd, not Robson who said no)

 

ridiculous that a year later we extended his contract even further, I remember the city absolutely buzzing and me having about 15 arguments with 15 different people that day

 

 

Yup. These were the only significant mistakes made by Fred. He wasn't prepared to tackle the positions of Robson and Shearer at the right moment.

[Frazzle]

As well as the manager, Shearer should have gone after we finished 3rd imo. Right or wrong, I said this at the time. The team needed a nudge into another direction at that time in order to push on and seriously challenge for the title.

 

 

Despite scoring 22 in the league the next season, with only Henry scoring more?

 

 

 

aye, he should have left after we finished 5th imo. He started the season brilliantly but then went seriously downhill and didn't manage an away goal in the whole of 2004 with the exception of a penalty at Boro. Certainly after seeing his performances at the end of 03-04 and start of 04-05 a lot of us knew it was the end and we had to replace him

 

Which is exactly why I'd have got rid after we finished 3rd, not 5th. We'd have got decent money for him.

 

And he'd have scored over 20 goals for one of our rivals.

[Teasy]

Yup. These were the only significant mistakes made by Fred. He wasn't prepared to tackle the positions of Robson and Shearer at the right moment.

 

Can't believe that like.  Not so much the Shearer thing, I disagree but I can see what you're getting at, rather that you think those were the only significant mistakes he made.

[thedudeabides]

We still would have finished 4th without doubt had SBR not sold Solano. But the indications were there and when Liverpool offered decent money for Shearer in the summer of 04 we should have accepted (funnily enough it was Shepherd, not Robson who said no)

 

ridiculous that a year later we extended his contract even further, I remember the city absolutely buzzing and me having about 15 arguments with 15 different people that day

 

 

Yup. These were the only significant mistakes made by Fred. He wasn't prepared to tackle the positions of Robson and Shearer at the right moment.

 

Is this some sort of sick joke?

 

Two questions for you.

 

Would you say Newcastle United were in good shape when Shepherd a) took charge of the club, and b) left the club?

 

 

[JH]

Two questions for you.

 

Would you say Newcastle United were in good shape when Shepherd a) took charge of the club, and b) left the club?

 

One question for you.

 

Would you prefer Newcastle United to be in a) the Premiership or b) the Championship?

[BONTEMPI]

Shepherd alone is not what we need

 

For one he doesn't have the finances for us to push on if we get back the the premiership and the way he goes about giving mega contracts to very average or ageing players is a joke.

 

Never go back as the saying goes and we really shouldn't on this one.