Alan Pardew

[madras]

Blackpool also weren't offered 35 million for Adam.

 

And didnt think they were safe enough to get by without him this season.

do you think had spurs offered 12mill instead of 8mill adam would still be at blackpool ?

 

Probably not, that extra £4m in exchange for almost certain relegation would have been daft though. It was an easier decision for our mob to take big money at a supposed smaller risk. Blackpool put up more of a fight as opposed to a harder bargain.

have to say mind, spurs were quite adamant that the deal didn't go through due to time constraints as opposed to blackpool saying "no".

 

Quite possible yes not that i would accept arry's word for anything, but they did seem to be more determined than us. Didnt Adam publically say he wanted out and handed a transfer request the previous week?

not at all sure and i agree about 'arry but i think theres a lot more to it than simply "blackpool said no so we should of" (keeping neesy alive here folks)

[Guest Roger Kint]

I didnt say we should have said no at any point, just that circumstances were different.

[madras]

I didnt say we should have said no at any point, just that circumstances were different.

i see that but some are.

[Guest Roger Kint]

I didnt say we should have said no at any point, just that circumstances were different.

i see that but some are.

 

Ah sorry, thought it was at me.

[madras]

Best football we've seen since Robson tbh, not that there's much competition.

 

The spell under Keegan was the best i've seen us play live. But other than that, you're right.

you really ought to go and have a look at those games, we played well in 4 or five games if that, very well in 2 i think.

 

http://www.nufc.com/html/2007-08html/fixtures.html

 

 

[Guest Roger Kint]

Certainly the 2/3 week spell from HT at Birmingham

[Yorkie]

17th March till the 26th of April being the spell i'm referring to. When we played the 4-3-1-2. Though it was brief, it was the best football i've personally seen us play over the course of more than a couple of games.

 

Got a couple of injuries after that. Can remember Smith playing someone's role in that home game against Chelsea, complete mismatch.

[oldtype]

It was only against Spurs that we were really proper epic good. The rest was.. Okay.

 

Certainly miles better than the painful stuff we were exposed to immediately prior to and after KK.

[Yorkie]

Short memories. We took Reading to the cleaners at SJP. And were very convincing against the Mackems. Did well down at West Ham too, after going behind pretty early.

 

I'm not gonna bother debating it. My opinion won't budge.

 

The reaction to Keegan's departure (alone) wouldn't have been so monumental had that spell not have proven we were heading in a great direction.

[oldtype]

Short memories. We took Reading to the cleaners at SJP. And were very convincing against the Mackems. Did well down at West Ham too, after going behind pretty early.

 

I'm not gonna bother debating it. My opinion won't budge.

 

The reaction to Keegan's departure (alone) wouldn't have been so monumental had that spell not have proven we were heading in a great direction.

 

I was more impressed by opening day 2008/2009 against Man U than i was by any of those games that you mentioned.

 

Now that was proving we were heading in a great direction.

[madras]

17th March till the 26th of April being the spell i'm referring to. When we played the 4-3-1-2. Though it was brief, it was the best football i've personally seen us play over the course of more than a couple of games.

 

Got a couple of injuries after that. Can remember Smith playing someone's role in that home game against Chelsea, complete mismatch.

i see, just recently it seems like some have thought that keegans entire spell that season was good football...it wasn't.

[Yorkie]

Short memories. We took Reading to the cleaners at SJP. And were very convincing against the Mackems. Did well down at West Ham too, after going behind pretty early.

 

I'm not gonna bother debating it. My opinion won't budge.

 

The reaction to Keegan's departure (alone) wouldn't have been so monumental had that spell not have proven we were heading in a great direction.

 

I was more impressed by opening day 2008/2009 against Man U than i was by any of those games that you mentioned.

 

Now that was proving we were heading in a great direction.

 

Absolutely... that was the most excited i've been as a Newcastle fan about our future, possibly ever. Was still only 10 or so when Bobby started getting things so right in 2001 - i thought we were the nuts either way back then.

[alpal78]

The Ibrahimovic comparison's a bit daft tbh.  Yeah, he's achieved a hell of a lot more than Carroll but he's 29.  Unfortunately it's this 'resale value' issue again.

 

If Milan try to sell Ibra in 3 years they'll get coppers for him, whereas if Liverpool flog Carroll after 3 years they could quite easily make their money back if all goes well.  Of course it's a risk (mainly because of Carroll being a knacker) but they've bought someone who could lead their line for 10 years or that they could make good money back on if they ever decide to sell.

 

No it's not. Ibrahimovic has done all of that and is still only considered a 24m pound player, even at his height when he left Inter he cost £40m. Do you honestly think Carroll will achieve half of what he has? I bet he'll have less league winners medals than Alan Shearer.

 

Would you actually put money on that, or are you just trying to add a little emphasis?

 

Barring career-ending injuries, Carroll will dwarf what Shearer achieved, whether we like it or not.

 

Can you quantify what you mean? By Shearer's achievements do you refer to his trophy with Blackburn or do we include the number of goals he scored overall, including golden boot awards, his goals for Egland and being top scorer in a major tournament (Euro 96)?

 

That post would go lovely on his Wikipedia page, wouldn't it?

 

He'll achiveve more than Shearer, as I said. He'll win more trophies and probably score more goals at international level.

 

I have no idea what wikipedia has got to do anything?

 

More trophies possible, largely because Shearer only has one and spend majority of his years in a team that was not fighting for honours. Really doubt he can beat Shearer's goal per game ratio though, highly unlikely to me unless he improves his other attributes by leap and bounds in the next few years.

[alpal78]

http://www.premierleague.com/page/Headlines/0,,12306~2275463,00.html

 

I look forward to the day we have as much ambition as Blackpool.

 

Give over, the only reason Adam is still at the club is because of a fuckup getting the paperwork signed.

There was no valiant fight to reject Tottenhams offer.

 

 

I gather from that, you disagree?

 

Take it up with Redknapp:

we missed out by minutes... ...the chairman couldn't get hold of two shareholders who had to sign the forms as well. It's just one of those things."

 

 

I think it's naive to suggest that Blackpool didn't put up a fight to keep him.

 

Holloway, Jan 20th:

 

"Charlie has signed a contract and someone can come in all they like, but it's not his choice and it's not their choice. He belongs to us and he is contracted for 18 months.

 

"You have to behave with respect and not all players do that sometimes, but that is the way the game is.

 

"I think he is still improving, I think he belongs to us and if someone wants to offer money, I think they are wasting their time because we don't need to sell him at the moment."

 

Pardew, Jan 17th.

 

They can put together whatever they like. He is not for sale. I am going to say it for one last time, he is not for sale,

 

Holloway stuck to his word.

 

Pardew did not.

 

Man, we're going full circles with you. The point made was that Blackpool did not sell because of a fuck up in the paperwork not because they were holding on. You then countered this by showing some quotes from Holloway as proof that he wanted to keep Charlie Adam. When presented with a similiar quote by Pardew on Carroll you go back to the fact that Blackpool did not sell the player. The next response would be yes but that's only because there was  fuckup in the paperwork. Do you see where this is going?

[oldtype]

Have to say that Colocho is well on his way to becoming one of the defining posters of this forum.

[madras]

Have to say that Colocho is well on his way to becoming one of the defining posters of this forum.

well that could be read in either of two ways.

[Ronaldo]

We played excellent football under Roeder in his first season. We averaged about 2 points a game under him, did we not? Was good to watch, too. N'Zogbia, Emre and Bowyer running riot, not to mention Nobby's swansong as an attacking player.

[madras]

We played excellent football under Roeder in his first season. We averaged about 2 points a game under him, did we not? Was good to watch, too. N'Zogbia, Emre and Bowyer running riot, not to mention Nobby in his swanson as an attacking player.

bit of an exaggeration but headed the right way.

[Interpolic]

How I see it is everybody seems to accept that we wasn't in a position to start splashing around large sums of money on players any time soon, we need extra squad depth as well as making improvements in certain areas of the first team.

 

We then get presented with the amazing offer for a player who most wouldn't have thought was worth that much beforehand.

 

Now for me the options were this...

 

*We can keep Carroll, give him a pay rise, hope his form is permanent and hopefully carry the team for large parts and hope he can help cover where we're lacking in other areas of the team where we don't have massive amounts of money to fill those positions with better players.

 

*Sell him and take the risk of investing that cash in 4 or 5 players that will give us more depth as well as making 3 or 4 improvements to starting first team positions.

 

 

Now I liked Andy Carroll when he was here even if the football we played with him was awful to watch for the most part, however the chance to improve our squad and first team with potentially 4 or 5 bodies was a risk worth taking IMO, as I see it as just as much of a risk that Carroll could keep his consistency in front of goal in the first half of the season up.

 

How much improvement do people think we could have made with little money but keeping Carroll?

 

Now how much improvement do people think we could make with a potential pot of £35 million to play with?

 

Like I said it's a risk and Pardew could waste the lot however I see it as a risk worth taking rather.

 

 

Played some decent stuff all through 2010 imo.  Not every game like, and of course we mixed it up at times, but it's a myth that all we did was hoof it with Carroll in the side.

 

My views are based more around the Premiership season and not battering turds in the Championship.

 

The only games under Hughton I could say we played good stuff were Sunderland, Villa and Everton.

 

We outpassed Arsenal at their own ground imo and we dominated the game when we won at West Ham.  So I make that 5 entertaining, convincing wins in 15 games, which isn't bad at all.  And I don't agree that we were playing hoofball for the other 10 either.

[Yorkie]

We played excellent football under Roeder in his first season. We averaged about 2 points a game under him, did we not? Was good to watch, too. N'Zogbia, Emre and Bowyer running riot, not to mention Nobby's swansong as an attacking player.

 

Yeah, it was a staggering improvement from the mishapen hash of a football team that we looked under Souness. Unfortunately, though, we still had the same defense.

 

Emre was such a good player man.

[TRon]

We played excellent football under Roeder in his first season. We averaged about 2 points a game under him, did we not? Was good to watch, too. N'Zogbia, Emre and Bowyer running riot, not to mention Nobby's swansong as an attacking player.

 

Yes the football was great for a while, we had mobility in the right places. Signing Duff fucked up N'Zogbia and respect for Roeder nose-dived in the following season.

[Ronaldo]

We played excellent football under Roeder in his first season. We averaged about 2 points a game under him, did we not? Was good to watch, too. N'Zogbia, Emre and Bowyer running riot, not to mention Nobby's swansong as an attacking player.

 

Yeah, it was a staggering improvement from the mishapen hash of a football team that we looked under Souness. Unfortunately, though, we still had the same defense.

 

 

Where's the unfortunately coming from? We turned a terrible season into a very good one. We finished on 58 points - the most we've managed since finishing 3rd in 03.

[Yorkie]

Undeniably, but the defense was still, by far and away, the weakest part of the setup. It was particularly tragic that we didn't sign a left-back in the summer. That whole transfer window was an absolute calamity, Martins aside.

[Optimistic Nut]

Craig Moore was very good that run-in as well.

[colinmk]

How I see it is everybody seems to accept that we wasn't in a position to start splashing around large sums of money on players any time soon, we need extra squad depth as well as making improvements in certain areas of the first team.

 

We then get presented with the amazing offer for a player who most wouldn't have thought was worth that much beforehand.

 

Now for me the options were this...

 

*We can keep Carroll, give him a pay rise, hope his form is permanent and hopefully carry the team for large parts and hope he can help cover where we're lacking in other areas of the team where we don't have massive amounts of money to fill those positions with better players.

 

*Sell him and take the risk of investing that cash in 4 or 5 players that will give us more depth as well as making 3 or 4 improvements to starting first team positions.

 

 

Now I liked Andy Carroll when he was here even if the football we played with him was awful to watch for the most part, however the chance to improve our squad and first team with potentially 4 or 5 bodies was a risk worth taking IMO, as I see it as just as much of a risk that Carroll could keep his consistency in front of goal in the first half of the season up.

 

How much improvement do people think we could have made with little money but keeping Carroll?

 

Now how much improvement do people think we could make with a potential pot of £35 million to play with?

 

Like I said it's a risk and Pardew could waste the lot however I see it as a risk worth taking rather.

 

 

Played some decent stuff all through 2010 imo.  Not every game like, and of course we mixed it up at times, but it's a myth that all we did was hoof it with Carroll in the side.

 

My views are based more around the Premiership season and not battering turds in the Championship.

 

The only games under Hughton I could say we played good stuff were Sunderland, Villa and Everton.

 

We outpassed Arsenal at their own ground imo and we dominated the game when we won at West Ham.  So I make that 5 entertaining, convincing wins in 15 games, which isn't bad at all.  And I don't agree that we were playing hoofball for the other 10 either.

 

We deserved to win at Man City too and were good to watch. The 4-3 against Chelsea too!