Guest thenorthumbrian Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Because he hasn't sold the club yet [/literal answer] You can hardly judge the man for taking 35mil+ for a player who has had 6 good months in the premiership and then we simply didn't have enough time to bring in an adequate replacement. By no means am I an Ashley fan, but all this Carroll s*** is starting to get boring. Agreed 100% When the hell is Andy Carroll going to be worth more than £35m? Even if he realises his potential I assume by then there would be some kind of financial regulations in place within football to stop enormous fees in the future. So long as the money is invested in the TEAM in the summer, Ashley did a very good bit of business with the Carroll sale. agree. especially when caroll asked nufc to match the wages liverpool was offering him! atm i like the wage-structure we have....its the only way to progress and it will more or less only attract players who really want to play for us! Yep. Said the same thing myself yesterday. Would be gutted if we broke our wage structure to accomodate a money-hungry player. The wage bill should be a bit less in the championship. Thats where unambitious, badly run clubs wind up. We managed to sign Cheik and Hatem within this structure. Proof that quality players will play for the club without demanding silly money. The wage structure is one of the few things the board have done right to be honest. Tiotti, Ben Arfur , Enrique, and Barton if United/Ashley get a reasonable offer for any one of these players they will be gone without a second thought. And they will be content to go, why would they stay at a club which is already proven not to have the drive to keep their best young players ? And to be honest we are now nothing more than a feeder club for “bigger” clubs and I am not talking about Man Utd, Man City, Arsenal or Chelsea but the likes of Spurs, Liverpool and Villa, clubs I think we should be more than able to compete with on at least equal terms. But we don’t and we never will as long as Ashley is here. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cubaricho Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 I fear a lot of people calling for Ashley to sell and for us to have a new owner are going to have to eat a lot of humble pie when faced with the alternatives that come in. Ashley is by no means a great owner, but we could be in a far worse ownership situation. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest VegasToon Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 I don't know and I really don't care right now who is to blame for Carroll. The fact is we still have a decent team to build around. We know we now have some money for transfers. I am going to wait till the summer to judge. Some good buys and we can make a push for Europe. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Because he hasn't sold the club yet [/literal answer] You can hardly judge the man for taking 35mil+ for a player who has had 6 good months in the premiership and then we simply didn't have enough time to bring in an adequate replacement. By no means am I an Ashley fan, but all this Carroll s*** is starting to get boring. Agreed 100% When the hell is Andy Carroll going to be worth more than £35m? Even if he realises his potential I assume by then there would be some kind of financial regulations in place within football to stop enormous fees in the future. So long as the money is invested in the TEAM in the summer, Ashley did a very good bit of business with the Carroll sale. agree. especially when caroll asked nufc to match the wages liverpool was offering him! atm i like the wage-structure we have....its the only way to progress and it will more or less only attract players who really want to play for us! Yep. Said the same thing myself yesterday. Would be gutted if we broke our wage structure to accomodate a money-hungry player. The wage bill should be a bit less in the championship. Thats where unambitious, badly run clubs wind up. We managed to sign Cheik and Hatem within this structure. Proof that quality players will play for the club without demanding silly money. The wage structure is one of the few things the board have done right to be honest. Tiotti, Ben Arfur , Enrique, and Barton if United/Ashley get a reasonable offer for any one of these players they will be gone without a second thought. And they will be content to go, why would they stay at a club which is already proven not to have the drive to keep their best young players ? And to be honest we are now nothing more than a feeder club for bigger clubs and I am not talking about Man Utd, Man City, Arsenal or Chelsea but the likes of Spurs, Liverpool and Villa, clubs I think we should be more than able to compete with on at least equal terms. But we dont and we never will as long as Ashley is here. Enrique, for one will want and will deserve to be playing champions league football in the next year or two. The signal he has been given loud and clear after this week is that it is not happening at this club now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
quayside Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 I fear a lot of people calling for Ashley to sell and for us to have a new owner are going to have to eat a lot of humble pie when faced with the alternatives that come in. Ashley is by no means a great owner, but we could be in a far worse ownership situation. I have said much the same on here before. We could easily end up with someone worse. Has anyone paused to think what might have happened if Baz Moat had got his mits on it? In football terms the man is an out and out pauper. At least Ashley can fund his own cock ups. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toon Hoser Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 For f*** sake. The first time I poke my head in this section after the match and I see this thread. Really? Thread title was creative, tho. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Because he hasn't sold the club yet [/literal answer] You can hardly judge the man for taking 35mil+ for a player who has had 6 good months in the premiership and then we simply didn't have enough time to bring in an adequate replacement. By no means am I an Ashley fan, but all this Carroll s*** is starting to get boring. Agreed 100% When the hell is Andy Carroll going to be worth more than £35m? Even if he realises his potential I assume by then there would be some kind of financial regulations in place within football to stop enormous fees in the future. So long as the money is invested in the TEAM in the summer, Ashley did a very good bit of business with the Carroll sale. agree. especially when caroll asked nufc to match the wages liverpool was offering him! atm i like the wage-structure we have....its the only way to progress and it will more or less only attract players who really want to play for us! Yep. Said the same thing myself yesterday. Would be gutted if we broke our wage structure to accomodate a money-hungry player. That's what big successful clubs do though. Unfortunately, that's the way football is. I'd rather compete with the best than watch Andy Carroll scoring for Liverpool from my moral high ground. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vinny Green Balls Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 If the club is sold, what do you bet it will be on August 31, and after replacing our best players with loan signings? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vinny Green Balls Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Wow, it really does sound like an argument about Mubarak now. How appropriate. "But what happens to Israel when Mubarak steps down?" Leave no doubts in your mind. Ashley has been fucking abysmal! And I state this objectively. We were relegated under his tenure, and he has continually touched us with his entropic hand whenever we have been in danger of seeing a bit of stability. We have some United States foreign policy architects following the Toon apparently. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BottledDog Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 If the club is sold, what do you bet it will be on August 31, and after replacing our best players with loan signings? To what end? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minhosa Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 I've got a feeling the club will be sold in the summer. I agree TT. I think he's been gearing up to that over the last twelve months and, in that respect, they couldn't have gone better for him. At this rate, he'll make nowhere near the loss he would have 2 years ago. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Decky Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 If the money isnt reinvested properly in the summer, we all may as well give up. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incognito Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 I think he'll sell up in the summer,even Pards' contract smacks of this.It must help a new owner knowing he can appoint his own man and not pay off the outgoing one. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest thenorthumbrian Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 I fear a lot of people calling for Ashley to sell and for us to have a new owner are going to have to eat a lot of humble pie when faced with the alternatives that come in. Ashley is by no means a great owner, but we could be in a far worse ownership situation. No means a great owner ?! This is the man whose series of terrible decisions got this club relegated, and might do so again. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hudson Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 I think he'll sell up in the summer,even Pards' contract smacks of this.It must help a new owner knowing he can appoint his own man and not pay off the outgoing one. What we have seen happen over the last few month's would suggest he running to an exit stratergy. Let's hope if this is the case the new owner has a bit ambition Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cannybagoftudor Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 I agree with Hudson there is definitely something in the exit strategy theory. He has sold and banked our most saleable asset, the balance sheet should look very healthy come the summer. Of course part of his strategy must depend upon NUFC retaining it's premiership status - so we have to look at his past gambling habits to see the modus operandi in his actions. Unfortunately we cannot do anything but watch on in ever increasing horror as he lurches from one horrendous football decision to another because of course these are not football decisions but business decisions. If we vote with our feet then he simply sells another asset to make up the difference whilst promising "better" replacements. I hope that the exit is soon and that the 35 mill has hastened this. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Venkman Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Because he hasn't sold the club yet [/literal answer] You can hardly judge the man for taking 35mil+ for a player who has had 6 good months in the premiership and then we simply didn't have enough time to bring in an adequate replacement. By no means am I an Ashley fan, but all this Carroll s*** is starting to get boring. Agreed 100% When the hell is Andy Carroll going to be worth more than £35m? Even if he realises his potential I assume by then there would be some kind of financial regulations in place within football to stop enormous fees in the future. So long as the money is invested in the TEAM in the summer, Ashley did a very good bit of business with the Carroll sale. agree. especially when caroll asked nufc to match the wages liverpool was offering him! atm i like the wage-structure we have....its the only way to progress and it will more or less only attract players who really want to play for us! Yep. Said the same thing myself yesterday. Would be gutted if we broke our wage structure to accomodate a money-hungry player. That's what big successful clubs do though. Unfortunately, that's the way football is. I'd rather compete with the best than watch Andy Carroll scoring for Liverpool from my moral high ground. exactly. all this bollocks about carroll's contract upsetting all the other players, bullshit. i'm sure sucessful teams dont have any players earning substantially more than some others, oh hang on....... i dont care who they are, if they dont want to be in a team with exceptional players who rightly get paid exceptional wages they can fuck off Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 If the money isnt reinvested properly in the summer, we all may as well give up. Groundhog day. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colocho Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 Was it Ashley that brought us financial stability, or was it relegation? Serious question. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Shaun Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 Was it Ashley that brought us financial stability, or was it relegation? Serious question. Both. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minhosa Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 Was it Ashley that brought us financial stability, or was it relegation? Serious question. Started by Ashley, expediated by relegation. Masterplan? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colocho Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 So the purchases of Xisco and Coloccini for example were a step towards financial stability Shaun? Even though combined, they cost £15 million, and were signed up for a total of more than £100,000 a week? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
quayside Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 Was it Ashley that brought us financial stability, or was it relegation? Serious question. The accounts are obviously going to look a lot better this season (even if you ignore the Carroll deal) but up until now I think the only thing that was stable about the club's finances was that the debt was owed to the owner rather than a bank. Relegation wasn't necessary to get us where we are. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fredbob Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 Was it Ashley that brought us financial stability, or was it relegation? Serious question. The accounts are obviously going to look a lot better this season (even if you ignore the Carroll deal) but up until now I think the only thing that was stable about the club's finances was that the debt was owed to the owner rather than a bank. Relegation wasn't necessary to get us where we are. Not that i want to get into a whole "relegation was good" debate but without relegation would we of realisitcally moved on the high earning wasters that were embedded at the club?! I say this because I can't see a scenario where any players who we'd have liked to of offloaded were offloaded and replaced without compromising on the quality of the squad allowing us to compete in the divisiopn anyway. Basically if we had cut our losses on the deadwood, i didnt envisage a situation where they'd of been replaced adequately enough to compete in the league anyway. The drop in quality of football allowed us to not strengthen as much, cut the wasters and still keep enough quality to get us back in in a much better situation. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
quayside Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 Was it Ashley that brought us financial stability, or was it relegation? Serious question. The accounts are obviously going to look a lot better this season (even if you ignore the Carroll deal) but up until now I think the only thing that was stable about the club's finances was that the debt was owed to the owner rather than a bank. Relegation wasn't necessary to get us where we are. Not that i want to get into a whole "relegation was good" debate but without relegation would we of realisitcally moved on the high earning wasters that were embedded at the club?! I say this because I can't see a scenario where any players who we'd have liked to of offloaded were offloaded and replaced without compromising on the quality of the squad allowing us to compete in the divisiopn anyway. Basically if we had cut our losses on the deadwood, i didnt envisage a situation where they'd of been replaced adequately enough to compete in the league anyway. The drop in quality of football allowed us to not strengthen as much, cut the wasters and still keep enough quality to get us back in in a much better situation. I think a reduction in the wage bill and a "cleansing" of the squad was quite possible without relegation. I would imagine that the players out and players in might not have been the same as they were but a big reduction in the wage bill could still have been possible. The next set of accounts will show the drop in revenue when the club got relegated. I will be interested to see what it is but if I had to guess I would say about £30 million down on the previous season. That's a huge chunk of money. Imo it was not necessary to surrender that revenue in order to put the club on a footing whereby it is not haemorrhaging money. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now