NUFC transfer rumours in the press

[Unbelievable]

 

 

Post falls down on that alone, Campbell proved to be a f***ing liability.

 

Ridiculous statement. He was there as an option to bring on if we needed him. Who do you suggest we bring on now we need cover for centre back who we didn't have last season?

 

No denying we're a body down, but my post was accuarate in that he was a liability. On that alone we can be no worse off as when he played he almost guaranteed the opposition a goal. I think he only had one decent game where he never made an error.

 

Look up. You were quite impressed when we got him. Now, with the benefit of hindsight, some rewriting of history and some spin that no cover is better than available cover you have convinced yourself that we are no worse off. Well done.

[Unbelievable]

Speaks volumes that nobody will take his bet tbh.

 

UV or Pip?  I'd be more inclined to take Pips but neither are entirely dependent on the activity of NUFC so it's f***ing nonsense - last year was widely recognised as an anomalous year for a lot of teams and based on that, if we stick as we are in the market, i reckon we'll end up doing worse despite having some better players on the books

 

I was referring to UV's proposal FWIW. Quite comical watching people try and squirm it into something else.

 

On the contrary I think most of those other people have explained their reasoning very well. UV's shallow point-scoring exercise of counting goals rather than results is petty at best. It says more about those who want to support such a narrow argument than it does about those who are disputing it.

 

To be fair, his bet was targeted at the supposed improved quality of our ATTACK. I would say goals scored is a pretty good measure for this, certainly better than the possession stat nonsense others have been coming up to counter his argument, wouldn't you agree?

 

No I wouldn't. While Carroll is a formidable centre forward, I have never rated Nolan so highly and neither it seems have the rest of the premiership clubs. Carroll and Nolan did provide an effective Stoke-style partnership but it severely limited our passing game due to Nolan's lack of movement. As Baggio pointed out earlier, we scored more goals than Spurs, does that mean our attacking play was more effective than theirs?

 

Yes, it means exactly that. Not sure how you could argue this... May not have been as pleasing on the eye as Barcelona style attacking, but effective it was.

 

Would you rather we still had last years' team than the current one then (plus the two signings we are supposedly still to bring in)?

 

As I've argued before and based on how it currently stands: a resounding yes.

 

In attack, we have lost Carroll, by far our best and most promising striker, and got in Ba, somebody with a decent enough record but not at the same level. Conclusion: degression

 

In midfield we have lost Nolan, our captain and scorer of many important goals for us in the last 2 seasons, and got in Cabaye and Marveaux, who look like good additions but have it all to prove in the Premiership. Conclusion: slight progress

 

In defense we have lost cover in Campbell and not got anybody in. Conclusion: slight degression.

 

Overall: we have lost almost half of our goals from the past 2 seasons and brought in some promising players with a lot to prove at this level. So yes, I would take last year's squad over the current one.

 

Speculating about the 2 players yet supposedly to come in and how they will affect the squad strength is pointless; they may or may not come (if you don't believe me, look up Pardew's statements in January about bringing in reinforcements), and we may just as well lose key players such as Tiote, Enrique and Barton before the end of the transfer window without replacing them, like we have done before multiple times.

 

Like everybody else I will have to wait until the transfer window is shut to judge whether we have gone forward or backward, but right now I think people are kidding themselves if they think our squad is stronger than it was last season.

 

Post falls down on that alone, Campbell proved to be a f***ing liability.

 

Ridiculous statement. He was there as an option to bring on if we needed him. Who do you suggest we bring on now we need cover for centre back who we didn't have last season?

 

What a stupid question.

 

Then answer it if you can.

 

You already answered it in a previous post in the quote.

 

In defense we have lost cover in Campbell and not got anybody in.

 

So if we've not brought anyone in at the back then nobody new can cover him obviously, which is why it was a stupid question.

 

Isn't the stupidity originating from the person implicitly arguing the contrary, i.e. Mr Logic in this case?

[Guest BooBoo]

I was quite pleased when we got Sol, but he was a disaster.

 

I think in retrospect, on the odd time that he played, we would have been no worse off playing Kadar.

[Unbelievable]

I was quite pleased when we got Sol, but he was a disaster.

 

I think in retrospect, on the odd time that he played, we would have been no worse off playing Kadar.

 

Kadar who played the grant total of 1 competitive match last season, mainly due to injury problems?

 

Correction: he played 3 competitive matches. The point largely stands.

[Baggio]

Speaks volumes that nobody will take his bet tbh.

 

UV or Pip?  I'd be more inclined to take Pips but neither are entirely dependent on the activity of NUFC so it's f***ing nonsense - last year was widely recognised as an anomalous year for a lot of teams and based on that, if we stick as we are in the market, i reckon we'll end up doing worse despite having some better players on the books

 

I was referring to UV's proposal FWIW. Quite comical watching people try and squirm it into something else.

 

On the contrary I think most of those other people have explained their reasoning very well. UV's shallow point-scoring exercise of counting goals rather than results is petty at best. It says more about those who want to support such a narrow argument than it does about those who are disputing it.

 

To be fair, his bet was targeted at the supposed improved quality of our ATTACK. I would say goals scored is a pretty good measure for this, certainly better than the possession stat nonsense others have been coming up to counter his argument, wouldn't you agree?

 

No I wouldn't. While Carroll is a formidable centre forward, I have never rated Nolan so highly and neither it seems have the rest of the premiership clubs. Carroll and Nolan did provide an effective Stoke-style partnership but it severely limited our passing game due to Nolan's lack of movement. As Baggio pointed out earlier, we scored more goals than Spurs, does that mean our attacking play was more effective than theirs?

 

Yes, it means exactly that. Not sure how you could argue this... May not have been as pleasing on the eye as Barcelona style attacking, but effective it was.

 

Would you rather we still had last years' team than the current one then (plus the two signings we are supposedly still to bring in)?

 

As I've argued before and based on how it currently stands: a resounding yes.

 

In attack, we have lost Carroll, by far our best and most promising striker, and got in Ba, somebody with a decent enough record but not at the same level. Conclusion: degression

 

In midfield we have lost Nolan, our captain and scorer of many important goals for us in the last 2 seasons, and got in Cabaye and Marveaux, who look like good additions but have it all to prove in the Premiership. Conclusion: slight progress

 

In defense we have lost cover in Campbell and not got anybody in. Conclusion: slight degression.

 

Overall: we have lost almost half of our goals from the past 2 seasons and brought in some promising players with a lot to prove at this level. So yes, I would take last year's squad over the current one.

 

Speculating about the 2 players yet supposedly to come in and how they will affect the squad strength is pointless; they may or may not come (if you don't believe me, look up Pardew's statements in January about bringing in reinforcements), and we may just as well lose key players such as Tiote, Enrique and Barton before the end of the transfer window without replacing them, like we have done before multiple times.

 

Like everybody else I will have to wait until the transfer window is shut to judge whether we have gone forward or backward, but right now I think people are kidding themselves if they think our squad is stronger than it was last season.

 

Post falls down on that alone, Campbell proved to be a f***ing liability.

 

Ridiculous statement. He was there as an option to bring on if we needed him. Who do you suggest we bring on now we need cover for centre back who we didn't have last season?

 

What a stupid question.

 

Then answer it if you can.

 

You already answered it in a previous post in the quote.

 

In defense we have lost cover in Campbell and not got anybody in.

 

So if we've not brought anyone in at the back then nobody new can cover him obviously, which is why it was a stupid question.

 

Isn't the stupidity originating from the person implicitly arguing the contrary, i.e. Mr Logic in this case?

 

It was a stupid question asked by you that you already answered yourself earlier in the quote.

 

I don't see him arguing the contrary either, unless he's saying a new player has come in to improve us in that position which I don't think he did.

[Guest BooBoo]

I was quite pleased when we got Sol, but he was a disaster.

 

I think in retrospect, on the odd time that he played, we would have been no worse off playing Kadar.

 

Kadar who played the grant total of 1 competitive match last season, mainly due to injury problems?

 

Correction: he played 3 competitive matches. The point largely stands.

 

Kadar was simply used as an example as an alternative to Sol who was simply a fat waste of time. Every time he played, we looked vulnerable at the back, no more so than at Stoke. Losing him, is little more than losing a body. He contributed next to nothing to the club and will be no miss whatsoever, depsite our admitted lack of numbers at the back.

[Mr Logic]

 

 

Post falls down on that alone, Campbell proved to be a f***ing liability.

 

Ridiculous statement. He was there as an option to bring on if we needed him. Who do you suggest we bring on now we need cover for centre back who we didn't have last season?

 

No denying we're a body down, but my post was accuarate in that he was a liability. On that alone we can be no worse off as when he played he almost guaranteed the opposition a goal. I think he only had one decent game where he never made an error.

 

Look up. You were quite impressed when we got him. Now, with the benefit of hindsight, some rewriting of history and some spin that no cover is better than available cover you have convinced yourself that we are no worse off. Well done.

 

Did you look it up? I can't recall but I imagine I may well have thought it (Sol signing) was a good idea at the time. And of course hindsight is a wonderful tool. It means with new information you can reassess an opinion you previously held in a new light. Changing your mind doesn't make you an idiot, it means you are willing to take new information on board, sticking to your guns in spite of new evidence is more the behaviour of an idiot in my mind.

 

As to cover I don't know enough about our upcoming reserves to comment. I see some praising Tavenier and Kadar, but I don't know them really. Are they a worse option than a diabolical campbell?

[Unbelievable]

Speaks volumes that nobody will take his bet tbh.

 

UV or Pip?  I'd be more inclined to take Pips but neither are entirely dependent on the activity of NUFC so it's f***ing nonsense - last year was widely recognised as an anomalous year for a lot of teams and based on that, if we stick as we are in the market, i reckon we'll end up doing worse despite having some better players on the books

 

I was referring to UV's proposal FWIW. Quite comical watching people try and squirm it into something else.

 

On the contrary I think most of those other people have explained their reasoning very well. UV's shallow point-scoring exercise of counting goals rather than results is petty at best. It says more about those who want to support such a narrow argument than it does about those who are disputing it.

 

To be fair, his bet was targeted at the supposed improved quality of our ATTACK. I would say goals scored is a pretty good measure for this, certainly better than the possession stat nonsense others have been coming up to counter his argument, wouldn't you agree?

 

No I wouldn't. While Carroll is a formidable centre forward, I have never rated Nolan so highly and neither it seems have the rest of the premiership clubs. Carroll and Nolan did provide an effective Stoke-style partnership but it severely limited our passing game due to Nolan's lack of movement. As Baggio pointed out earlier, we scored more goals than Spurs, does that mean our attacking play was more effective than theirs?

 

Yes, it means exactly that. Not sure how you could argue this... May not have been as pleasing on the eye as Barcelona style attacking, but effective it was.

 

Would you rather we still had last years' team than the current one then (plus the two signings we are supposedly still to bring in)?

 

As I've argued before and based on how it currently stands: a resounding yes.

 

In attack, we have lost Carroll, by far our best and most promising striker, and got in Ba, somebody with a decent enough record but not at the same level. Conclusion: degression

 

In midfield we have lost Nolan, our captain and scorer of many important goals for us in the last 2 seasons, and got in Cabaye and Marveaux, who look like good additions but have it all to prove in the Premiership. Conclusion: slight progress

 

In defense we have lost cover in Campbell and not got anybody in. Conclusion: slight degression.

 

Overall: we have lost almost half of our goals from the past 2 seasons and brought in some promising players with a lot to prove at this level. So yes, I would take last year's squad over the current one.

 

Speculating about the 2 players yet supposedly to come in and how they will affect the squad strength is pointless; they may or may not come (if you don't believe me, look up Pardew's statements in January about bringing in reinforcements), and we may just as well lose key players such as Tiote, Enrique and Barton before the end of the transfer window without replacing them, like we have done before multiple times.

 

Like everybody else I will have to wait until the transfer window is shut to judge whether we have gone forward or backward, but right now I think people are kidding themselves if they think our squad is stronger than it was last season.

 

Post falls down on that alone, Campbell proved to be a f***ing liability.

 

Ridiculous statement. He was there as an option to bring on if we needed him. Who do you suggest we bring on now we need cover for centre back who we didn't have last season?

 

What a stupid question.

 

Then answer it if you can.

 

You already answered it in a previous post in the quote.

 

In defense we have lost cover in Campbell and not got anybody in.

 

So if we've not brought anyone in at the back then nobody new can cover him obviously, which is why it was a stupid question.

 

Isn't the stupidity originating from the person implicitly arguing the contrary, i.e. Mr Logic in this case?

 

It was a stupid question asked by you that you already answered yourself earlier in the quote.

 

I don't see him arguing the contrary either, unless he's saying a new player has come in to improve us in that position which I don't think he did.

 

He is arguing the contrary because he doesn't seem to think losing a squad player and not bringing in another equates to a (slightly) weakened squad.

[Optimistic Nut]

I was quite pleased when we got Sol, but he was a disaster.

 

I think in retrospect, on the odd time that he played, we would have been no worse off playing Kadar.

 

Kadar who played the grant total of 1 competitive match last season, mainly due to injury problems?

 

Correction: he played 3 competitive matches. The point largely stands.

 

Kadar was simply used as an example as an alternative to Sol who was simply a fat waste of time. Every time he played, we looked vulnerable at the back, no more so than at Stoke. Losing him, is little more than losing a body. He contributed next to nothing to the club and will be no miss whatsoever, depsite our admitted lack of numbers at the back.

 

Not too dissimilar to saying our midfield would be weaker if Smith leaves.

[Guest BlacknWhiteArmy]

Not quite every time he played.

[EthiGeordie]

What Unbelievable comments.

[Guest BooBoo]

Not quite every time he played.

 

Not looking for an argument, but I'm just curious- when did Sol play and look anything other than miles past it and overly heavy/ cumbersome.

 

The stand outs are the hash he made v Liverpool and that wretched display at Stoke which basically announced his career as a professional was over. I recall he did okay when coming on as a sub at Eastlands but I recall few competent showings.

[Baggio]

Speaks volumes that nobody will take his bet tbh.

 

UV or Pip?  I'd be more inclined to take Pips but neither are entirely dependent on the activity of NUFC so it's f***ing nonsense - last year was widely recognised as an anomalous year for a lot of teams and based on that, if we stick as we are in the market, i reckon we'll end up doing worse despite having some better players on the books

 

I was referring to UV's proposal FWIW. Quite comical watching people try and squirm it into something else.

 

On the contrary I think most of those other people have explained their reasoning very well. UV's shallow point-scoring exercise of counting goals rather than results is petty at best. It says more about those who want to support such a narrow argument than it does about those who are disputing it.

 

To be fair, his bet was targeted at the supposed improved quality of our ATTACK. I would say goals scored is a pretty good measure for this, certainly better than the possession stat nonsense others have been coming up to counter his argument, wouldn't you agree?

 

No I wouldn't. While Carroll is a formidable centre forward, I have never rated Nolan so highly and neither it seems have the rest of the premiership clubs. Carroll and Nolan did provide an effective Stoke-style partnership but it severely limited our passing game due to Nolan's lack of movement. As Baggio pointed out earlier, we scored more goals than Spurs, does that mean our attacking play was more effective than theirs?

 

Yes, it means exactly that. Not sure how you could argue this... May not have been as pleasing on the eye as Barcelona style attacking, but effective it was.

 

Would you rather we still had last years' team than the current one then (plus the two signings we are supposedly still to bring in)?

 

As I've argued before and based on how it currently stands: a resounding yes.

 

In attack, we have lost Carroll, by far our best and most promising striker, and got in Ba, somebody with a decent enough record but not at the same level. Conclusion: degression

 

In midfield we have lost Nolan, our captain and scorer of many important goals for us in the last 2 seasons, and got in Cabaye and Marveaux, who look like good additions but have it all to prove in the Premiership. Conclusion: slight progress

 

In defense we have lost cover in Campbell and not got anybody in. Conclusion: slight degression.

 

Overall: we have lost almost half of our goals from the past 2 seasons and brought in some promising players with a lot to prove at this level. So yes, I would take last year's squad over the current one.

 

Speculating about the 2 players yet supposedly to come in and how they will affect the squad strength is pointless; they may or may not come (if you don't believe me, look up Pardew's statements in January about bringing in reinforcements), and we may just as well lose key players such as Tiote, Enrique and Barton before the end of the transfer window without replacing them, like we have done before multiple times.

 

Like everybody else I will have to wait until the transfer window is shut to judge whether we have gone forward or backward, but right now I think people are kidding themselves if they think our squad is stronger than it was last season.

 

Post falls down on that alone, Campbell proved to be a f***ing liability.

 

Ridiculous statement. He was there as an option to bring on if we needed him. Who do you suggest we bring on now we need cover for centre back who we didn't have last season?

 

What a stupid question.

 

Then answer it if you can.

 

You already answered it in a previous post in the quote.

 

In defense we have lost cover in Campbell and not got anybody in.

 

So if we've not brought anyone in at the back then nobody new can cover him obviously, which is why it was a stupid question.

 

Isn't the stupidity originating from the person implicitly arguing the contrary, i.e. Mr Logic in this case?

 

It was a stupid question asked by you that you already answered yourself earlier in the quote.

 

I don't see him arguing the contrary either, unless he's saying a new player has come in to improve us in that position which I don't think he did.

 

He is arguing the contrary because he doesn't seem to think losing a squad player and not bringing in another equates to a (slightly) weakened squad.

 

You could say the same about losing any member of our squad though but reality with some of them is that they won't be a loss to us because they simply offer very little.

 

I'd like a new centre back brought in btw however you have to wonder how much Campbell would feature next season with Kadar returning to fitness (I presume) and Huntington progressing.

[Pilko]

Not quite every time he played.

 

Not looking for an argument, but I'm just curious- when did Sol play and look anything other than miles past it and overly heavy/ cumbersome.

 

When he came on at Man City. That's about it, like.

[Unbelievable]

 

 

Post falls down on that alone, Campbell proved to be a f***ing liability.

 

Ridiculous statement. He was there as an option to bring on if we needed him. Who do you suggest we bring on now we need cover for centre back who we didn't have last season?

 

No denying we're a body down, but my post was accuarate in that he was a liability. On that alone we can be no worse off as when he played he almost guaranteed the opposition a goal. I think he only had one decent game where he never made an error.

 

Look up. You were quite impressed when we got him. Now, with the benefit of hindsight, some rewriting of history and some spin that no cover is better than available cover you have convinced yourself that we are no worse off. Well done.

 

Did you look it up? I can't recall but I imagine I may well have thought it (Sol signing) was a good idea at the time. And of course hindsight is a wonderful tool. It means with new information you can reassess an opinion you previously held in a new light. Changing your mind doesn't make you an idiot, it means you are willing to take new information on board, sticking to your guns in spite of new evidence is more the behaviour of an idiot in my mind.

 

As to cover I don't know enough about our upcoming reserves to comment. I see some praising Tavenier and Kadar, but I don't know them really. Are they a worse option than a diabolical campbell?

 

I am not advocating never changing your opinion. I just find it kind of ironic you have this firm believe that our new players are an improvement on what we had (mainly Carroll and Nolan), yet fail to see how they represent a gamble as much as Campbell did this time last season. Sol turned out to be disappointing when we needed him, but he was still better than not having any cover at the club if you ask me.

 

Tavenier and Kadar were at our disposal last season and we decided to loan them out. Kadar played one match for his club in the Championship. Tavernier did well a full 6 levels below the Premiership. To suggest either is ready to do a job in the Premiership seems to me like wishful thinking.

[Guest BooBoo]

Not quite every time he played.

 

Not looking for an argument, but I'm just curious- when did Sol play and look anything other than miles past it and overly heavy/ cumbersome.

 

When he came on at Man City. That's about it, like.

 

Aye I said that. I was at that game and remember thinking "Hmm, looks like we've made an astute capture here."

[Guest BlacknWhiteArmy]

Not quite every time he played.

 

Not looking for an argument, but I'm just curious- when did Sol play and look anything other than miles past it and overly heavy/ cumbersome.

 

The stand outs are the hash he made v Liverpool and that wretched display at Stoke which basically announced his career as a professional was over. I recall he did okay when coming on as a sub at Eastlands but I recall few competent showings.

 

Chelsea at home.

[Pilko]

Let's face it, his job was to cover, and for half the season he wasn't even able to sit on the bench due to niggles and illness. When he did appear, he was absolutely miles past it pretty much every time.

 

It's silly if Ashley uses him as reasoning never to sign any more players over 30 or whatever, but I'm not surprised if it's influenced his decision. Nowt wrong with some seasoned professionals imo as long as the contract and the wage are right; clearly Sol's wages were a bit hefty which understandably the powers that be won't have been too pleased with.

[Unbelievable]

Speaks volumes that nobody will take his bet tbh.

 

UV or Pip?  I'd be more inclined to take Pips but neither are entirely dependent on the activity of NUFC so it's f***ing nonsense - last year was widely recognised as an anomalous year for a lot of teams and based on that, if we stick as we are in the market, i reckon we'll end up doing worse despite having some better players on the books

 

I was referring to UV's proposal FWIW. Quite comical watching people try and squirm it into something else.

 

On the contrary I think most of those other people have explained their reasoning very well. UV's shallow point-scoring exercise of counting goals rather than results is petty at best. It says more about those who want to support such a narrow argument than it does about those who are disputing it.

 

To be fair, his bet was targeted at the supposed improved quality of our ATTACK. I would say goals scored is a pretty good measure for this, certainly better than the possession stat nonsense others have been coming up to counter his argument, wouldn't you agree?

 

No I wouldn't. While Carroll is a formidable centre forward, I have never rated Nolan so highly and neither it seems have the rest of the premiership clubs. Carroll and Nolan did provide an effective Stoke-style partnership but it severely limited our passing game due to Nolan's lack of movement. As Baggio pointed out earlier, we scored more goals than Spurs, does that mean our attacking play was more effective than theirs?

 

Yes, it means exactly that. Not sure how you could argue this... May not have been as pleasing on the eye as Barcelona style attacking, but effective it was.

 

Would you rather we still had last years' team than the current one then (plus the two signings we are supposedly still to bring in)?

 

As I've argued before and based on how it currently stands: a resounding yes.

 

In attack, we have lost Carroll, by far our best and most promising striker, and got in Ba, somebody with a decent enough record but not at the same level. Conclusion: degression

 

In midfield we have lost Nolan, our captain and scorer of many important goals for us in the last 2 seasons, and got in Cabaye and Marveaux, who look like good additions but have it all to prove in the Premiership. Conclusion: slight progress

 

In defense we have lost cover in Campbell and not got anybody in. Conclusion: slight degression.

 

Overall: we have lost almost half of our goals from the past 2 seasons and brought in some promising players with a lot to prove at this level. So yes, I would take last year's squad over the current one.

 

Speculating about the 2 players yet supposedly to come in and how they will affect the squad strength is pointless; they may or may not come (if you don't believe me, look up Pardew's statements in January about bringing in reinforcements), and we may just as well lose key players such as Tiote, Enrique and Barton before the end of the transfer window without replacing them, like we have done before multiple times.

 

Like everybody else I will have to wait until the transfer window is shut to judge whether we have gone forward or backward, but right now I think people are kidding themselves if they think our squad is stronger than it was last season.

 

Post falls down on that alone, Campbell proved to be a f***ing liability.

 

Ridiculous statement. He was there as an option to bring on if we needed him. Who do you suggest we bring on now we need cover for centre back who we didn't have last season?

 

What a stupid question.

 

Then answer it if you can.

 

You already answered it in a previous post in the quote.

 

In defense we have lost cover in Campbell and not got anybody in.

 

So if we've not brought anyone in at the back then nobody new can cover him obviously, which is why it was a stupid question.

 

Isn't the stupidity originating from the person implicitly arguing the contrary, i.e. Mr Logic in this case?

 

It was a stupid question asked by you that you already answered yourself earlier in the quote.

 

I don't see him arguing the contrary either, unless he's saying a new player has come in to improve us in that position which I don't think he did.

 

He is arguing the contrary because he doesn't seem to think losing a squad player and not bringing in another equates to a (slightly) weakened squad.

 

You could say the same about losing any member of our squad though but reality with some of them is that they won't be a loss to us because they simply offer very little.

 

I'd like a new centre back brought in btw however you have to wonder how much Campbell would feature next season with Kadar returning to fitness (I presume) and Huntington progressing.

 

Huntington?

[Mr Logic]

 

Did you look it up? I can't recall but I imagine I may well have thought it (Sol signing) was a good idea at the time. And of course hindsight is a wonderful tool. It means with new information you can reassess an opinion you previously held in a new light. Changing your mind doesn't make you an idiot, it means you are willing to take new information on board, sticking to your guns in spite of new evidence is more the behaviour of an idiot in my mind.

 

As to cover I don't know enough about our upcoming reserves to comment. I see some praising Tavenier and Kadar, but I don't know them really. Are they a worse option than a diabolical campbell?

 

I am not advocating never changing your opinion. I just find it kind of ironic you have this firm believe that our new players are an improvement on what we had (mainly Carroll and Nolan), yet fail to see how they represent a gamble as much as Campbell did this time last season. Sol turned out to be disappointing when we needed him, but he was still better than not having any cover at the club if you ask me.

 

Tavenier and Kadar were at our disposal last season and we decided to loan them out. Kadar played one match for his club in the Championship. Tavernier did well a full 6 levels below the Premiership. To suggest either is ready to do a job in the Premiership seems to me like wishful thinking.

 

In that you may have caught me out. I'm optimistic about them I agree. And I was never a fan of Nolan in spite of all his goals. In that I may be proved woefully wrong.

[TRon]

Speaks volumes that nobody will take his bet tbh.

 

UV or Pip?  I'd be more inclined to take Pips but neither are entirely dependent on the activity of NUFC so it's f***ing nonsense - last year was widely recognised as an anomalous year for a lot of teams and based on that, if we stick as we are in the market, i reckon we'll end up doing worse despite having some better players on the books

 

I was referring to UV's proposal FWIW. Quite comical watching people try and squirm it into something else.

 

On the contrary I think most of those other people have explained their reasoning very well. UV's shallow point-scoring exercise of counting goals rather than results is petty at best. It says more about those who want to support such a narrow argument than it does about those who are disputing it.

 

To be fair, his bet was targeted at the supposed improved quality of our ATTACK. I would say goals scored is a pretty good measure for this, certainly better than the possession stat nonsense others have been coming up to counter his argument, wouldn't you agree?

 

No I wouldn't. While Carroll is a formidable centre forward, I have never rated Nolan so highly and neither it seems have the rest of the premiership clubs. Carroll and Nolan did provide an effective Stoke-style partnership but it severely limited our passing game due to Nolan's lack of movement. As Baggio pointed out earlier, we scored more goals than Spurs, does that mean our attacking play was more effective than theirs?

 

Yes, it means exactly that. Not sure how you could argue this... May not have been as pleasing on the eye as Barcelona style attacking, but effective it was.

 

Would you rather we still had last years' team than the current one then (plus the two signings we are supposedly still to bring in)?

 

As I've argued before and based on how it currently stands: a resounding yes.

 

In attack, we have lost Carroll, by far our best and most promising striker, and got in Ba, somebody with a decent enough record but not at the same level. Conclusion: degression

 

In midfield we have lost Nolan, our captain and scorer of many important goals for us in the last 2 seasons, and got in Cabaye and Marveaux, who look like good additions but have it all to prove in the Premiership. Conclusion: slight progress

 

In defense we have lost cover in Campbell and not got anybody in. Conclusion: slight degression.

 

Overall: we have lost almost half of our goals from the past 2 seasons and brought in some promising players with a lot to prove at this level. So yes, I would take last year's squad over the current one.

 

Speculating about the 2 players yet supposedly to come in and how they will affect the squad strength is pointless; they may or may not come (if you don't believe me, look up Pardew's statements in January about bringing in reinforcements), and we may just as well lose key players such as Tiote, Enrique and Barton before the end of the transfer window without replacing them, like we have done before multiple times.

 

Like everybody else I will have to wait until the transfer window is shut to judge whether we have gone forward or backward, but right now I think people are kidding themselves if they think our squad is stronger than it was last season.

 

Since I'm of the firm belief that we could have no hope of progressing while Nolan was our key midfielder, I am planting myself firmly on the side of the club on this one, and in fact I wanted him gone even when we offered him a new contract. You can shout about his virtues all you like, it won't change the fact he ended up in the Championship to play under a long ball merchant. Speaks volumes for me.

[Ronaldo]

Speaks volumes that nobody will take his bet tbh.

 

UV or Pip?  I'd be more inclined to take Pips but neither are entirely dependent on the activity of NUFC so it's f***ing nonsense - last year was widely recognised as an anomalous year for a lot of teams and based on that, if we stick as we are in the market, i reckon we'll end up doing worse despite having some better players on the books

 

I was referring to UV's proposal FWIW. Quite comical watching people try and squirm it into something else.

 

On the contrary I think most of those other people have explained their reasoning very well. UV's shallow point-scoring exercise of counting goals rather than results is petty at best. It says more about those who want to support such a narrow argument than it does about those who are disputing it.

 

To be fair, his bet was targeted at the supposed improved quality of our ATTACK. I would say goals scored is a pretty good measure for this, certainly better than the possession stat nonsense others have been coming up to counter his argument, wouldn't you agree?

 

No I wouldn't. While Carroll is a formidable centre forward, I have never rated Nolan so highly and neither it seems have the rest of the premiership clubs. Carroll and Nolan did provide an effective Stoke-style partnership but it severely limited our passing game due to Nolan's lack of movement. As Baggio pointed out earlier, we scored more goals than Spurs, does that mean our attacking play was more effective than theirs?

 

Yes, it means exactly that. Not sure how you could argue this... May not have been as pleasing on the eye as Barcelona style attacking, but effective it was.

 

Would you rather we still had last years' team than the current one then (plus the two signings we are supposedly still to bring in)?

 

As I've argued before and based on how it currently stands: a resounding yes.

 

In attack, we have lost Carroll, by far our best and most promising striker, and got in Ba, somebody with a decent enough record but not at the same level. Conclusion: degression

 

In midfield we have lost Nolan, our captain and scorer of many important goals for us in the last 2 seasons, and got in Cabaye and Marveaux, who look like good additions but have it all to prove in the Premiership. Conclusion: slight progress

 

In defense we have lost cover in Campbell and not got anybody in. Conclusion: slight degression.

 

Overall: we have lost almost half of our goals from the past 2 seasons and brought in some promising players with a lot to prove at this level. So yes, I would take last year's squad over the current one.

 

Speculating about the 2 players yet supposedly to come in and how they will affect the squad strength is pointless; they may or may not come (if you don't believe me, look up Pardew's statements in January about bringing in reinforcements), and we may just as well lose key players such as Tiote, Enrique and Barton before the end of the transfer window without replacing them, like we have done before multiple times.

 

Like everybody else I will have to wait until the transfer window is shut to judge whether we have gone forward or backward, but right now I think people are kidding themselves if they think our squad is stronger than it was last season.

 

Post falls down on that alone, Campbell proved to be a f***ing liability.

 

Ridiculous statement. He was there as an option to bring on if we needed him. Who do you suggest we bring on now we need cover for centre back who we didn't have last season?

 

What a stupid question.

 

Then answer it if you can.

 

You already answered it in a previous post in the quote.

 

In defense we have lost cover in Campbell and not got anybody in.

 

So if we've not brought anyone in at the back then nobody new can cover him obviously, which is why it was a stupid question.

 

Isn't the stupidity originating from the person implicitly arguing the contrary, i.e. Mr Logic in this case?

 

It was a stupid question asked by you that you already answered yourself earlier in the quote.

 

I don't see him arguing the contrary either, unless he's saying a new player has come in to improve us in that position which I don't think he did.

 

He is arguing the contrary because he doesn't seem to think losing a squad player and not bringing in another equates to a (slightly) weakened squad.

 

You could say the same about losing any member of our squad though but reality with some of them is that they won't be a loss to us because they simply offer very little.

 

I'd like a new centre back brought in btw however you have to wonder how much Campbell would feature next season with Kadar returning to fitness (I presume) and Huntington progressing.

 

Huntington?

 

I can't figure out what in the hell he means, either.

[Sifu]

@MsiDouglas Mark Douglas

Pardew's forthright take on the striker hunt, Erdinç & Enrique in the Journal tomorrow. #nufc

9 minutes ago via Twitter for iPhone

[Dave]

'No, no, no.'

[Sifu]

 

I'm still going to keep my signature for the time being like