Dr Venkman Posted July 5, 2011 Share Posted July 5, 2011 The world's best scout? Scouting is a much of a muchness really. Most clubs are aware of most players. disagree, the ability to spot potential is different from having a list of names and contract lengths Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxfree Posted July 5, 2011 Share Posted July 5, 2011 This obsession with the £35m from Carroll is bordering on the mental for me. The Carroll sale was a massive blow to the team and is still hard to accept, we did it because the deal was too good to turn down and the player fancied a shot at a bigger club. It's pointless to latch onto that one quote where Pardew said it would all be invested into the team. He was just responding to a question the best way he could in difficult circumstances, and he probably had no idea how much he would end up spending. To judge our transfers solely on whether we spend the magic figure of £35m is pointless IMO. As far as I can see we've made some good moves in the market so far, and are looking to make more. There might be a big departure (Enrqiue) but circumstances make that inevitable anyway. The club is running a regular loss, and there isn't a ring-fenced pot for transfer money. The club will spend what it thinks it can afford and when it can get the right deals. Let's judge that on it's own and stop bleating on about this magical £35m. Ultimately we've had six months to decide what to do with at least £30m of allegedly unexpected income, with the benefit of what some seem to say is the world's best scout and a manager who apparently has the full backing of his manager and the club owner. And yet here we are, with people happy to 'hope it allows us the ability to react to opportunities, if there are any'. If we're so hard up that we needed to sell our best striker and most promising talent for big money just to pay wages and to afford to bring in couple of free transfers, it makes you wonder if they'd fully intended on flogging Carroll all along. And if that is the case, who's next out of the door? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BottledDog Posted July 5, 2011 Share Posted July 5, 2011 i wonder if any of this will resonate next time it happens btw, if we sell another key player for money thats 'too good to turn down'. or if there'll still be 'lets wait and see what they do with it first' all over the place. If we are a stronger, better team next season, how will it resonate with you? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Venkman Posted July 5, 2011 Share Posted July 5, 2011 i wonder if any of this will resonate next time it happens btw, if we sell another key player for money thats 'too good to turn down'. or if there'll still be 'lets wait and see what they do with it first' all over the place. I don't know, we'll see if it happens. You seem to be reacting like this happens all the time, when Carroll is the only real example. my reaction is a continuation of the one i had when hughton was sacked for nothing and pardew brought in so ashley could sell/bring in whoever he wanted with no argument , IMO, it's all part of the same thing Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted July 5, 2011 Share Posted July 5, 2011 taxfree, why do agree so much that we "needed" to sell Carroll to buy the players we've bought? That doesn't seem to be a conclusion you can draw from anything we've done. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ponsaelius Posted July 5, 2011 Share Posted July 5, 2011 The world's best scout? Scouting is a much of a muchness really. Most clubs are aware of most players. disagree, the ability to spot potential is different from having a list of names and contract lengths Yeah but most good players are watched and rated by scouts from just about every club. Scenarios like the Tioté one are quite rare, even so weren't WBA sniffing around him when we signed him? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted July 5, 2011 Share Posted July 5, 2011 i wonder if any of this will resonate next time it happens btw, if we sell another key player for money thats 'too good to turn down'. or if there'll still be 'lets wait and see what they do with it first' all over the place. I don't know, we'll see if it happens. You seem to be reacting like this happens all the time, when Carroll is the only real example. my reaction is a continuation of the one i had when hughton was sacked for nothing and pardew brought in so ashley could sell/bring in whoever he wanted with no argument , IMO, it's all part of the same thing Hughton was widely criticised as a yes man when he was given the job originally, this thing about Pardew being a walkover is a non-starter IMO. Any manager sometimes has to acquiesce to the board, they would be resigning all the time if they didn't. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Venkman Posted July 5, 2011 Share Posted July 5, 2011 i wonder if any of this will resonate next time it happens btw, if we sell another key player for money thats 'too good to turn down'. or if there'll still be 'lets wait and see what they do with it first' all over the place. If we are a stronger, better team next season, how will it resonate with you? i'll be very happy if we're a stronger and better team, i try my best to separate this sort of thing from my actual enjoyment of watching the team play and i'm as positive as the rest when it come to the actual football. tends to irk me when i think someone's taking libs though Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BottledDog Posted July 5, 2011 Share Posted July 5, 2011 This obsession with the £35m from Carroll is bordering on the mental for me. The Carroll sale was a massive blow to the team and is still hard to accept, we did it because the deal was too good to turn down and the player fancied a shot at a bigger club. It's pointless to latch onto that one quote where Pardew said it would all be invested into the team. He was just responding to a question the best way he could in difficult circumstances, and he probably had no idea how much he would end up spending. To judge our transfers solely on whether we spend the magic figure of £35m is pointless IMO. As far as I can see we've made some good moves in the market so far, and are looking to make more. There might be a big departure (Enrqiue) but circumstances make that inevitable anyway. The club is running a regular loss, and there isn't a ring-fenced pot for transfer money. The club will spend what it thinks it can afford and when it can get the right deals. Let's judge that on it's own and stop bleating on about this magical £35m. Ultimately we've had six months to decide what to do with at least £30m of allegedly unexpected income, with the benefit of what some seem to say is the world's best scout and a manager who apparently has the full backing of his manager and the club owner. And yet here we are, with people happy to 'hope it allows us the ability to react to opportunities, if there are any'. If we're so hard up that we needed to sell our best striker and most promising talent for big money just to pay wages and to afford to bring in couple of free transfers, it makes you wonder if they'd fully intended on flogging Carroll all along. And if that is the case, who's next out of the door? Why are you taking the 'hope it allows us the ability to react to opportunities, if there are any' quote to task? Do you disagree with it? Do you disagree that having an influx of money might allow us to jump on unanticipated oportunities if they come up towards the end of a window, that we might not ordinarily be able to stretch to? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Venkman Posted July 5, 2011 Share Posted July 5, 2011 i wonder if any of this will resonate next time it happens btw, if we sell another key player for money thats 'too good to turn down'. or if there'll still be 'lets wait and see what they do with it first' all over the place. I don't know, we'll see if it happens. You seem to be reacting like this happens all the time, when Carroll is the only real example. my reaction is a continuation of the one i had when hughton was sacked for nothing and pardew brought in so ashley could sell/bring in whoever he wanted with no argument , IMO, it's all part of the same thing Hughton was widely criticised as a yes man when he was given the job originally, this thing about Pardew being a walkover is a non-starter IMO. Any manager sometimes has to acquiesce to the board, they would be resigning all the time if they didn't. Ian, you're a good lad and I enjoy our debates, but this just seems so naive to me. I'm aware I brought up Hughton but i reckon it's probs best for everyone if we dont go down this route again Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted July 5, 2011 Share Posted July 5, 2011 i wonder if any of this will resonate next time it happens btw, if we sell another key player for money thats 'too good to turn down'. or if there'll still be 'lets wait and see what they do with it first' all over the place. I don't know, we'll see if it happens. You seem to be reacting like this happens all the time, when Carroll is the only real example. my reaction is a continuation of the one i had when hughton was sacked for nothing and pardew brought in so ashley could sell/bring in whoever he wanted with no argument , IMO, it's all part of the same thing Hughton was widely criticised as a yes man when he was given the job originally, this thing about Pardew being a walkover is a non-starter IMO. Any manager sometimes has to acquiesce to the board, they would be resigning all the time if they didn't. Ian, you're a good lad and I enjoy our debates, but this just seems so naive to me. I'm aware I brought up Hughton but i reckon it's probs best for everyone if we dont go down this route again Same, I loved Hughton even though I was unsure when he was appointed. I do like Pardew as well though, seems he's working away quite well to improve our squad and style of play. For me it's more naive to think that a manager won't have to do what the board says quite often. For example, I don't believe for a second that Pardew "wanted" to sell Carroll, but I also don't believe it was his job, or within his power, to stop it. Anyway, I was encouraged with what he said on Total Sport (to get back on topic!) and I'll wait and see what we come up with before the end of the window. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BottledDog Posted July 5, 2011 Share Posted July 5, 2011 i wonder if any of this will resonate next time it happens btw, if we sell another key player for money thats 'too good to turn down'. or if there'll still be 'lets wait and see what they do with it first' all over the place. If we are a stronger, better team next season, how will it resonate with you? i'll be very happy if we're a stronger and better team, i try my best to separate this sort of thing from my actual enjoyment of watching the team play and i'm as positive as the rest when it come to the actual football. tends to irk me when i think someone's taking libs though Fair enough then. I still am pissed off with losing Carroll, but that's me being pretty sentimental. I think the only way to judge losing a player like him (and Nolan of course) is on the state of the team the following seasons. If we don't go backwards, and hell, the team actually not only goes in a different direction stylistically, but also moves forwards, then yes whatever money they brought in (or was ultimately spent), it was a good decision. If Ashley is cutting and running, it's all a fire sale and we end up in the shits, then there will rightly be hell on. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxfree Posted July 5, 2011 Share Posted July 5, 2011 taxfree, why do agree so much that we "needed" to sell Carroll to buy the players we've bought? That doesn't seem to be a conclusion you can draw from anything we've done. Because we seemingly are using the money of his sale to pay off other players wages. Simple. Not to mention the fact that we won't spend anywhere near £35m. Not really what I was going at though. This on the other hand: "And yet here we are, with people happy to 'hope it allows us the ability to react to opportunities, if there are any'. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted July 5, 2011 Share Posted July 5, 2011 taxfree, why do agree so much that we "needed" to sell Carroll to buy the players we've bought? That doesn't seem to be a conclusion you can draw from anything we've done. Because we seemingly are using the money of his sale to pay off other players wages. Simple. Not really what I was going at though. This on the other hand: "And yet here we are, with people happy to 'hope it allows us the ability to react to opportunities, if there are any'. But didn't the Carroll money just go onto our bottom line, and some money comes off our bottom line when we spend anything? I just don't see this logical link that because the Carroll sale happen it was needed to sanction the signing we've made. Every incoming and outgoing is just part of one balance sheet. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BottledDog Posted July 5, 2011 Share Posted July 5, 2011 taxfree, why do agree so much that we "needed" to sell Carroll to buy the players we've bought? That doesn't seem to be a conclusion you can draw from anything we've done. Because we seemingly are using the money of his sale to pay off other players wages. Simple. Not really what I was going at though. This on the other hand: "And yet here we are, with people happy to 'hope it allows us the ability to react to opportunities, if there are any'. Honesty man, what is wrong with my quote? We have done our planning and played the window well, but having the extra cash also might allow us take advantage of players coming onto the market we might not have anticipated. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxfree Posted July 5, 2011 Share Posted July 5, 2011 taxfree, why do agree so much that we "needed" to sell Carroll to buy the players we've bought? That doesn't seem to be a conclusion you can draw from anything we've done. Because we seemingly are using the money of his sale to pay off other players wages. Simple. Not really what I was going at though. This on the other hand: "And yet here we are, with people happy to 'hope it allows us the ability to react to opportunities, if there are any'. But didn't the Carroll money just go onto our bottom line, and some money comes off our bottom line when we spend anything? I just don't see this logical link that because the Carroll sale happen it was needed to sanction the signing we've made. Every incoming and outgoing is just part of one balance sheet. It shouldn't really. We were promised every penny was going to be spent. So they should. Not only because we "have to spend money", but because we actually need players. Both squad (Taylor) and quality (N'Zogbia, Sturridge etc.) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted July 5, 2011 Share Posted July 5, 2011 I agree we need players, I hope we get them and think we are trying. We've already done some good deals IMO. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Flash Posted July 5, 2011 Share Posted July 5, 2011 This obsession with the £35m from Carroll is bordering on the mental for me. The Carroll sale was a massive blow to the team and is still hard to accept, we did it because the deal was too good to turn down and the player fancied a shot at a bigger club. It's pointless to latch onto that one quote where Pardew said it would all be invested into the team. He was just responding to a question the best way he could in difficult circumstances, and he probably had no idea how much he would end up spending. To judge our transfers solely on whether we spend the magic figure of £35m is pointless IMO. As far as I can see we've made some good moves in the market so far, and are looking to make more. There might be a big departure (Enrqiue) but circumstances make that inevitable anyway. The club is running a regular loss, and there isn't a ring-fenced pot for transfer money. The club will spend what it thinks it can afford and when it can get the right deals. Let's judge that on it's own and stop bleating on about this magical £35m. Ultimately we've had six months to decide what to do with at least £30m of allegedly unexpected income, with the benefit of what some seem to say is the world's best scout and a manager who apparently has the full backing of his manager and the club owner. And yet here we are, with people happy to 'hope it allows us the ability to react to opportunities, if there are any'. If we're so hard up that we needed to sell our best striker and most promising talent for big money just to pay wages and to afford to bring in couple of free transfers, it makes you wonder if they'd fully intended on flogging Carroll all along. And if that is the case, who's next out of the door? Why are you taking the 'hope it allows us the ability to react to opportunities, if there are any' quote to task? Do you disagree with it? Do you disagree that having an influx of money might allow us to jump on unanticipated oportunities if they come up towards the end of a window, that we might not ordinarily be able to stretch to? If we've had a significant amount of money to spend for 8 months I'd have expected us to be finished our spending by the first game. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted July 5, 2011 Share Posted July 5, 2011 I'm reasonably happy with the players we've brought in so far, but with two months to go I still think we should have enough in our pot to sign Zog and one striker. I don't think that's going to happen but with the tv money we get from Sky to add to the Carroll money I would find it difficult to understand why not. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BottledDog Posted July 5, 2011 Share Posted July 5, 2011 This obsession with the £35m from Carroll is bordering on the mental for me. The Carroll sale was a massive blow to the team and is still hard to accept, we did it because the deal was too good to turn down and the player fancied a shot at a bigger club. It's pointless to latch onto that one quote where Pardew said it would all be invested into the team. He was just responding to a question the best way he could in difficult circumstances, and he probably had no idea how much he would end up spending. To judge our transfers solely on whether we spend the magic figure of £35m is pointless IMO. As far as I can see we've made some good moves in the market so far, and are looking to make more. There might be a big departure (Enrqiue) but circumstances make that inevitable anyway. The club is running a regular loss, and there isn't a ring-fenced pot for transfer money. The club will spend what it thinks it can afford and when it can get the right deals. Let's judge that on it's own and stop bleating on about this magical £35m. Ultimately we've had six months to decide what to do with at least £30m of allegedly unexpected income, with the benefit of what some seem to say is the world's best scout and a manager who apparently has the full backing of his manager and the club owner. And yet here we are, with people happy to 'hope it allows us the ability to react to opportunities, if there are any'. If we're so hard up that we needed to sell our best striker and most promising talent for big money just to pay wages and to afford to bring in couple of free transfers, it makes you wonder if they'd fully intended on flogging Carroll all along. And if that is the case, who's next out of the door? Why are you taking the 'hope it allows us the ability to react to opportunities, if there are any' quote to task? Do you disagree with it? Do you disagree that having an influx of money might allow us to jump on unanticipated oportunities if they come up towards the end of a window, that we might not ordinarily be able to stretch to? If we've had a significant amount of money to spend for 8 months I'd have expected us to be finished our spending by the first game. Sounds great, and we are clearly trying to do that with players tied up before the window even opened, and the next signing in hopefully before we hit America according to Pards. But I don't know outside of that what you're getting at. If we're prudent and a domino of transfers means a top player becomes available to us late in the window and we're able to stretch to him, that wouldn't be a bad thing, right? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted July 5, 2011 Share Posted July 5, 2011 Who knows, we havn't spent it all yet according to Pardew. Where are you getting the idea that we have? Actions speak louder than words and so far we have 2 free transfers and a training ground upgrade, I don't need Pardew to tell me we haven't spent it, and we're unlikely to spend it. Even though we were told that we were close to breaking even without selling Carroll. Apart from Man Utd, no one else has hardly signed anyone. Though I'm not surprised as this is typical response from you. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted July 5, 2011 Share Posted July 5, 2011 I agree we need players, I hope we get them and think we are trying. We've already done some good deals IMO. The fact is our first 2 choice strikers have turned us down, we can't do anything if our first choices did not want to sign. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Flash Posted July 5, 2011 Share Posted July 5, 2011 This obsession with the £35m from Carroll is bordering on the mental for me. The Carroll sale was a massive blow to the team and is still hard to accept, we did it because the deal was too good to turn down and the player fancied a shot at a bigger club. It's pointless to latch onto that one quote where Pardew said it would all be invested into the team. He was just responding to a question the best way he could in difficult circumstances, and he probably had no idea how much he would end up spending. To judge our transfers solely on whether we spend the magic figure of £35m is pointless IMO. As far as I can see we've made some good moves in the market so far, and are looking to make more. There might be a big departure (Enrqiue) but circumstances make that inevitable anyway. The club is running a regular loss, and there isn't a ring-fenced pot for transfer money. The club will spend what it thinks it can afford and when it can get the right deals. Let's judge that on it's own and stop bleating on about this magical £35m. Ultimately we've had six months to decide what to do with at least £30m of allegedly unexpected income, with the benefit of what some seem to say is the world's best scout and a manager who apparently has the full backing of his manager and the club owner. And yet here we are, with people happy to 'hope it allows us the ability to react to opportunities, if there are any'. If we're so hard up that we needed to sell our best striker and most promising talent for big money just to pay wages and to afford to bring in couple of free transfers, it makes you wonder if they'd fully intended on flogging Carroll all along. And if that is the case, who's next out of the door? Why are you taking the 'hope it allows us the ability to react to opportunities, if there are any' quote to task? Do you disagree with it? Do you disagree that having an influx of money might allow us to jump on unanticipated oportunities if they come up towards the end of a window, that we might not ordinarily be able to stretch to? If we've had a significant amount of money to spend for 8 months I'd have expected us to be finished our spending by the first game. Sounds great, and we are clearly trying to do that with players tied up before the window even opened, and the next signing in hopefully before we hit America according to Pards. But if we're prudent and a domino of transfers means a top player becomes available to us late in the window and we're able to stretch to him, that woldn't be a bad thing, right? It would be a good thing if he was a good player/good price etc, but I'd have hoped we wouldn't need to be doing this. We start with some hard games and ideally we should have our best players signed and ready for those games. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted July 5, 2011 Share Posted July 5, 2011 I agree we need players, I hope we get them and think we are trying. We've already done some good deals IMO. The fact is our first 2 choice strikers have turned us down, we can't do anything if our first choices did not want to sign. I know and I agree, that's why I'm positive about our work so far. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colocho Posted July 5, 2011 Share Posted July 5, 2011 You are positive about players turning us down? 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