NUFC transfer rumours in the press

[Mole_Toonfan]

I'd love a real wide player. One that doesn't mind staying wide to whip in a cross. Providing real width.

 

Same but if the fullbacks are getting forward and putting crosses in as much as it sounds like they are in pre season we might just get away with it.

[Ronaldo]

With no resale value and no real use to the squad other than being better than Shola.

 

Oh so we look for players that add to the quality of the squad, who offer potential resale value and who are within our financial means.  Sounds more realistic than "cheap" players, cos we'd have just gone out and landed Can't Control...

 

Within our financial means.

 

We're the 19th richest club in the world being consistently outspent by clubs who get half our attendances and you dare to actually to defend this bollocks?

 

No business supporting NUFC whatsoever.

 

 

[Ronaldo]

With no resale value and no real use to the squad other than being better than Shola.

 

So we do have reasons for signing the player other than he's going cheap yeah?

 

Ok fair enough, I know what you mean, it would be nice for price to be less of an issue than it is.  I just hate the whole "oh no this club has bought a more expensive player than we have" thing, as if there's a league table for who has spent the most on a player.  Who would you rather have, Ben Arfa at £5.75m or Stewart Downing at £20m?

 

Price is always the most important factor.

Balance of Price and Ability is, which is what we do and we do it well.

 

Can't disagree with that. So well in fact we've finished in the top half once since 2006.

New transfer system has only been in place since we went down.  We've done very well in terms of transfers since then, not their fault the managers a loon.

 

No, not one bit. At all.

 

Not their fault there's one goalscorer in the squad either.

[Teasy]

With no resale value and no real use to the squad other than being better than Shola.

 

Oh so we look for players that add to the quality of the squad, who offer potential resale value and who are within our financial means.  Sounds more realistic than "cheap" players, cos we'd have just gone out and landed Can't Control...

 

Within our financial means.

 

We're the 19th richest club in the world being consistently outspent by clubs who get half out attendances and you dare to actually to defend this bollocks?

 

No business supporting NUFC whatsoever.

 

Not doubting that we could afford to spend a bit more, but surely you realise that the "richest clubs list" is revenue not actual available cash and also that plenty of the clubs outspending us are just putting themselves in debt to do so.

[Ronaldo]

We were in debt during 93-97 too. I'd hate to contemplate a return that shite.

[TRon]

I'd love a real wide player. One that doesn't mind staying wide to whip in a cross. Providing real width.

 

Same but if the fullbacks are getting forward and putting crosses in as much as it sounds like they are in pre season we might just get away with it.

 

Debuchy can provide the crosses from the right, but Santon cuts in from the left so we are still going to have a problem with service from that side.

[Teasy]

With no resale value and no real use to the squad other than being better than Shola.

 

So we do have reasons for signing the player other than he's going cheap yeah?

 

Ok fair enough, I know what you mean, it would be nice for price to be less of an issue than it is.  I just hate the whole "oh no this club has bought a more expensive player than we have" thing, as if there's a league table for who has spent the most on a player.  Who would you rather have, Ben Arfa at £5.75m or Stewart Downing at £20m?

 

Price is always the most important factor.

Balance of Price and Ability is, which is what we do and we do it well.

 

Can't disagree with that. So well in fact we've finished in the top half once since 2006.

New transfer system has only been in place since we went down.  We've done very well in terms of transfers since then, not their fault the managers a loon.

 

No, not one bit. At all.

 

Not their fault there's one goalscorer in the squad either.

 

But if we sign Remy and Gomis we'd have three goal scorers but your complaints would remain the same.  All those clubs mentioned would still have out spent us and we'd still have brought in players of value rather than just going out and spending big.

[Mole_Toonfan]

I'd love a real wide player. One that doesn't mind staying wide to whip in a cross. Providing real width.

 

Same but if the fullbacks are getting forward and putting crosses in as much as it sounds like they are in pre season we might just get away with it.

 

Debuchy can provide the crosses from the right, but Santon cuts in from the left so we are still going to have a problem with service from that side.

 

It sounds like to me reading updates during those games that Santon is using his left a lot more and putting crosses into the box.

 

I can't really say for myself but from what i read it has been a feature of pre season, i'll judge closely for myself against Braga.

[Teasy]

We were in debt during 93-97 too. I'd hate to contemplate a return that shite.

 

There are different kinds of debt, some are sustainable and can even be positive and some are anything but.  Like I said I agree we could afford to spend a bit more and we may yet do so and we could spend a lot more this summer if Ashley was prepared to put some money in temporarily or get into some temporary debt (basically spend next seasons increased TV money now).  But talking about how other clubs are spending money without having any idea of how their finances are is nothing but ignorance.

[Shays Given Tim Flowers]

With no resale value and no real use to the squad other than being better than Shola.

 

So we do have reasons for signing the player other than he's going cheap yeah?

 

Ok fair enough, I know what you mean, it would be nice for price to be less of an issue than it is.  I just hate the whole "oh no this club has bought a more expensive player than we have" thing, as if there's a league table for who has spent the most on a player.  Who would you rather have, Ben Arfa at £5.75m or Stewart Downing at £20m?

 

Price is always the most important factor.

Balance of Price and Ability is, which is what we do and we do it well.

 

Can't disagree with that. So well in fact we've finished in the top half once since 2006.

New transfer system has only been in place since we went down.  We've done very well in terms of transfers since then, not their fault the managers a loon.

 

No, not one bit. At all.

 

Not their fault there's one goalscorer in the squad either.

 

Ronaldo's gripe is legitimate here. The players we actually sign represent good value. Barring last January has Ashley ever overseen a window where we bought what the squad has actually needed?  If the emphasis is on value either all of the time, or disproportionately then the squad has and will suffer.

 

We seemingly will only do a deal when it satisfies the 'value threshold'.  Our transfer policy does not seem to allow us to pay a premium for what we need.

[Disco]

With no resale value and no real use to the squad other than being better than Shola.

 

So we do have reasons for signing the player other than he's going cheap yeah?

 

Ok fair enough, I know what you mean, it would be nice for price to be less of an issue than it is.  I just hate the whole "oh no this club has bought a more expensive player than we have" thing, as if there's a league table for who has spent the most on a player.  Who would you rather have, Ben Arfa at £5.75m or Stewart Downing at £20m?

 

Price is always the most important factor.

Balance of Price and Ability is, which is what we do and we do it well.

 

Can't disagree with that. So well in fact we've finished in the top half once since 2006.

New transfer system has only been in place since we went down.  We've done very well in terms of transfers since then, not their fault the managers a loon.

 

No, not one bit. At all.

 

Not their fault there's one goalscorer in the squad either.

 

Ronaldo's gripe is legitimate here. The players we actually sign represent good value. Barring last January has Ashley ever overseen a window where we bought what the squad has actually needed?  If the emphasis is on value either all of the time, or disproportionately then the squad has and will suffer.

 

We seemingly will only do a deal when it satisfies the 'value threshold'.  Our transfer policy does not seem to allow us to pay a premium for what we need.

 

I think you have to look at is as 'Are we maximising our potential with being daft financially?', 'Are we looking down every avenue in order to improve the club and move forward?' etc.

[Shays Given Tim Flowers]

With no resale value and no real use to the squad other than being better than Shola.

 

So we do have reasons for signing the player other than he's going cheap yeah?

 

Ok fair enough, I know what you mean, it would be nice for price to be less of an issue than it is.  I just hate the whole "oh no this club has bought a more expensive player than we have" thing, as if there's a league table for who has spent the most on a player.  Who would you rather have, Ben Arfa at £5.75m or Stewart Downing at £20m?

 

Price is always the most important factor.

Balance of Price and Ability is, which is what we do and we do it well.

 

Can't disagree with that. So well in fact we've finished in the top half once since 2006.

New transfer system has only been in place since we went down.  We've done very well in terms of transfers since then, not their fault the managers a loon.

 

No, not one bit. At all.

 

Not their fault there's one goalscorer in the squad either.

 

Ronaldo's gripe is legitimate here. The players we actually sign represent good value. Barring last January has Ashley ever overseen a window where we bought what the squad has actually needed?  If the emphasis is on value either all of the time, or disproportionately then the squad has and will suffer.

 

We seemingly will only do a deal when it satisfies the 'value threshold'.  Our transfer policy does not seem to allow us to pay a premium for what we need.

 

I think you have to look at is as 'Are we maximising our potential with being daft financially?', 'Are we looking down every avenue in order to improve the club and move forward?' etc.

 

I don't think anyone is advocating being daft financially, secondly the vast majority of the footballing infrastructure at NUFC suggests a lack of ambition. Doesn't require a huge leap of faith to assume the answer to your second question is no.

[Disco]

With no resale value and no real use to the squad other than being better than Shola.

 

So we do have reasons for signing the player other than he's going cheap yeah?

 

Ok fair enough, I know what you mean, it would be nice for price to be less of an issue than it is.  I just hate the whole "oh no this club has bought a more expensive player than we have" thing, as if there's a league table for who has spent the most on a player.  Who would you rather have, Ben Arfa at £5.75m or Stewart Downing at £20m?

 

Price is always the most important factor.

Balance of Price and Ability is, which is what we do and we do it well.

 

Can't disagree with that. So well in fact we've finished in the top half once since 2006.

New transfer system has only been in place since we went down.  We've done very well in terms of transfers since then, not their fault the managers a loon.

 

No, not one bit. At all.

 

Not their fault there's one goalscorer in the squad either.

 

Ronaldo's gripe is legitimate here. The players we actually sign represent good value. Barring last January has Ashley ever overseen a window where we bought what the squad has actually needed?  If the emphasis is on value either all of the time, or disproportionately then the squad has and will suffer.

 

We seemingly will only do a deal when it satisfies the 'value threshold'.  Our transfer policy does not seem to allow us to pay a premium for what we need.

 

I think you have to look at is as 'Are we maximising our potential with being daft financially?', 'Are we looking down every avenue in order to improve the club and move forward?' etc.

 

I don't think anyone is advocating being daft financially, secondly the vast majority of the footballing infrastructure at NUFC suggests a lack of ambition. Doesn't require a huge leap of faith to assume the answer to your second question is no.

 

RE: point 1, I know but it's the classic straw man argument thrown around here so much that burns my brain.

 

Very few people are advocating 'going wild' - merely just spending the odd 1-2% of overall revenue of NUFC here or there.

 

Plus as was mentioned t'other day there is decidedly less fucking around (as shown in January) when there is true desire there to bring in players. when

[littlelunchbox]

With no resale value and no real use to the squad other than being better than Shola.

 

So we do have reasons for signing the player other than he's going cheap yeah?

 

Ok fair enough, I know what you mean, it would be nice for price to be less of an issue than it is.  I just hate the whole "oh no this club has bought a more expensive player than we have" thing, as if there's a league table for who has spent the most on a player.  Who would you rather have, Ben Arfa at £5.75m or Stewart Downing at £20m?

 

Price is always the most important factor.

Balance of Price and Ability is, which is what we do and we do it well.

 

Can't disagree with that. So well in fact we've finished in the top half once since 2006.

New transfer system has only been in place since we went down.  We've done very well in terms of transfers since then, not their fault the managers a loon.

 

No, not one bit. At all.

 

Not their fault there's one goalscorer in the squad either.

 

Ronaldo's gripe is legitimate here. The players we actually sign represent good value. Barring last January has Ashley ever overseen a window where we bought what the squad has actually needed?  If the emphasis is on value either all of the time, or disproportionately then the squad has and will suffer.

 

We seemingly will only do a deal when it satisfies the 'value threshold'.  Our transfer policy does not seem to allow us to pay a premium for what we need.

 

What is a premium, back in the days it was a 15 million pounds Shearer? 

 

in todays market a top tier marquee name equivilent of a Shearer in premiership will set us back how much?  £35-£50 mill for a Rooney, Aguero, RVP.    Our very own Andy Carroll cost the scouse £35 mill because they love the premium so much.

[Teasy]

Ronaldo's gripe is legitimate here. The players we actually sign represent good value. Barring last January has Ashley ever overseen a window where we bought what the squad has actually needed?  If the emphasis is on value either all of the time, or disproportionately then the squad has and will suffer.

 

We seemingly will only do a deal when it satisfies the 'value threshold'.  Our transfer policy does not seem to allow us to pay a premium for what we need.

 

I agree that sometimes we should be prepared to spend a bit more if we really need a player (though not on the occasions when clubs increase their demands in the middle of negotiations).  Its the complaints that we only sign whatever player is cheapest and wingeing about how club A has spent more than us and signed a more expensive player than we will that I hate.

[The College Dropout]

I'd love a real wide player. One that doesn't mind staying wide to whip in a cross. Providing real width.

Would be nice, they don't seem to exist as much now, they all want to cut in.

 

Valencia, Young, Bale can provide real width, Lennon, Walcott can provide real width

[Shays Given Tim Flowers]

With no resale value and no real use to the squad other than being better than Shola.

 

So we do have reasons for signing the player other than he's going cheap yeah?

 

Ok fair enough, I know what you mean, it would be nice for price to be less of an issue than it is.  I just hate the whole "oh no this club has bought a more expensive player than we have" thing, as if there's a league table for who has spent the most on a player.  Who would you rather have, Ben Arfa at £5.75m or Stewart Downing at £20m?

 

Price is always the most important factor.

Balance of Price and Ability is, which is what we do and we do it well.

 

Can't disagree with that. So well in fact we've finished in the top half once since 2006.

New transfer system has only been in place since we went down.  We've done very well in terms of transfers since then, not their fault the managers a loon.

 

No, not one bit. At all.

 

Not their fault there's one goalscorer in the squad either.

 

Ronaldo's gripe is legitimate here. The players we actually sign represent good value. Barring last January has Ashley ever overseen a window where we bought what the squad has actually needed?  If the emphasis is on value either all of the time, or disproportionately then the squad has and will suffer.

 

We seemingly will only do a deal when it satisfies the 'value threshold'.  Our transfer policy does not seem to allow us to pay a premium for what we need.

 

I think you have to look at is as 'Are we maximising our potential with being daft financially?', 'Are we looking down every avenue in order to improve the club and move forward?' etc.

 

I don't think anyone is advocating being daft financially, secondly the vast majority of the footballing infrastructure at NUFC suggests a lack of ambition. Doesn't require a huge leap of faith to assume the answer to your second question is no.

 

RE: point 1, I know but it's the classic straw man argument thrown around here so much that burns my brain.

 

Very few people are advocating 'going wild' - merely just spending the odd 1-2% of overall revenue of NUFC here or there.

 

Plus as was mentioned t'other day there is decidedly less f***ing around (as shown in January) when there is true desire there to bring in players. when

 

I think i'm agreeing with you here so apologies if I misconstrued your quoted post.

 

What is a premium, back in the days it was a 15 million pounds Shearer? 

 

in todays market a top tier marquee name equivilent of a Shearer in premiership will set us back how much?  £35-£50 mill for a Rooney, Aguero, RVP.    Our very own Andy Carroll cost the scouse £35 mill because they love the premium so much.

 

Citing players who are expensive is hardly the point I was getting at. Sorry I wasn't clearer.

 

A premium would be sometimes paying a little bit extra to get deals done when we need to. Take the Sissoko deal for example where we paid money for a player we could have gotten for free a few months later. Debuchy would be an example of when we didn't want to pay a premium (the summer before he signed).

 

Of course the necessity at play in buying Sissoko was that we were looking at being relegated.  The fact that the only window where we have bought what was necessary, was when we were staring down the barrel of our second relegation, indicates the ambition the powers that be have for the squad. This Summer a Centre Back, Striker and Left Winger Could be deemed necessary to move the forward. I doubt it will happen.

 

I hope you can distinguish this concept of a premium from breaking the world transfer fee record or the British transfer fee record.

[The College Dropout]

We need some width and pace. and a bigger man as a real first team option. Gomis is the latter. I guess Remy is kinda the former. Would prefer an Ince type signing...

[Skirge]

I could understand the delay if we were looking to sign players for lots of positions, I mean imagine if we had not done the business we did in January and were now relying on JFK to get those deals done.

I hated Lambias but cannot help feeling he might of had Remy and Gomis in by now working on the same budget guidelines JFK is.

[Guest bimpy474]

I could understand the delay if we were looking to sign players for lots of positions, I mean imagine if we had not done the business we did in January and were now relying on JFK to get those deals done.

I hated Lambias but cannot help feeling he might of had Remy and Gomis in by now working on the same budget guidelines JFK is.

 

Dont get sucked into thinking that, just take a little look back to last summer, Lambias was in charge then. It wouldn't matter who we had, we dont budge on our valuation of players

 

That's down to one man. Ashley. Although he doesn't value the players himself, he'll get told the valuation by, Pardew/Carr/Lambias/JFK and that's it, zero wiggle room.

[Shays Given Tim Flowers]

Skirge wants Lambeezy back.

 

 

 

lesser of two evils mind

 

[Skirge]

I could understand the delay if we were looking to sign players for lots of positions, I mean imagine if we had not done the business we did in January and were now relying on JFK to get those deals done.

I hated Lambias but cannot help feeling he might of had Remy and Gomis in by now working on the same budget guidelines JFK is.

 

Dont get sucked into thinking that, just take a little look back to last summer, Lambias was in charge then. It wouldn't matter who we had, we dont budge on our valuation of players

 

That's down to one man. Ashley. Although he doesn't value the players himself, he'll get told the valuation by, Pardew/Carr/Lambias/JFK and that's it, zero wiggle room.

 

I don't mean the valuation I mean the negotiating itself, think Lambias would be more persuading than JFK.

[Guest bimpy474]

I could understand the delay if we were looking to sign players for lots of positions, I mean imagine if we had not done the business we did in January and were now relying on JFK to get those deals done.

I hated Lambias but cannot help feeling he might of had Remy and Gomis in by now working on the same budget guidelines JFK is.

 

Dont get sucked into thinking that, just take a little look back to last summer, Lambias was in charge then. It wouldn't matter who we had, we dont budge on our valuation of players

 

That's down to one man. Ashley. Although he doesn't value the players himself, he'll get told the valuation by, Pardew/Carr/Lambias/JFK and that's it, zero wiggle room.

 

I don't mean the valuation I mean the negotiating itself, think Lambias would be more persuading than JFK.

 

Ah i see what you mean, i suppose if Ashley doesn't give them much room to increase offers, again it would difficult to negotiate for whoever it is. I know what mean though, lesser of two fuckwits i guess.

[littlelunchbox]

With no resale value and no real use to the squad other than being better than Shola.

 

So we do have reasons for signing the player other than he's going cheap yeah?

 

Ok fair enough, I know what you mean, it would be nice for price to be less of an issue than it is.  I just hate the whole "oh no this club has bought a more expensive player than we have" thing, as if there's a league table for who has spent the most on a player.  Who would you rather have, Ben Arfa at £5.75m or Stewart Downing at £20m?

 

Price is always the most important factor.

Balance of Price and Ability is, which is what we do and we do it well.

 

Can't disagree with that. So well in fact we've finished in the top half once since 2006.

New transfer system has only been in place since we went down.  We've done very well in terms of transfers since then, not their fault the managers a loon.

 

No, not one bit. At all.

 

Not their fault there's one goalscorer in the squad either.

 

Ronaldo's gripe is legitimate here. The players we actually sign represent good value. Barring last January has Ashley ever overseen a window where we bought what the squad has actually needed?  If the emphasis is on value either all of the time, or disproportionately then the squad has and will suffer.

 

We seemingly will only do a deal when it satisfies the 'value threshold'.  Our transfer policy does not seem to allow us to pay a premium for what we need.

 

I think you have to look at is as 'Are we maximising our potential with being daft financially?', 'Are we looking down every avenue in order to improve the club and move forward?' etc.

 

I don't think anyone is advocating being daft financially, secondly the vast majority of the footballing infrastructure at NUFC suggests a lack of ambition. Doesn't require a huge leap of faith to assume the answer to your second question is no.

 

RE: point 1, I know but it's the classic straw man argument thrown around here so much that burns my brain.

 

Very few people are advocating 'going wild' - merely just spending the odd 1-2% of overall revenue of NUFC here or there.

 

Plus as was mentioned t'other day there is decidedly less f***ing around (as shown in January) when there is true desire there to bring in players. when

 

I think i'm agreeing with you here so apologies if I misconstrued your quoted post.

 

What is a premium, back in the days it was a 15 million pounds Shearer? 

 

in todays market a top tier marquee name equivilent of a Shearer in premiership will set us back how much?  £35-£50 mill for a Rooney, Aguero, RVP.    Our very own Andy Carroll cost the scouse £35 mill because they love the premium so much.

 

Citing players who are expensive is hardly the point I was getting at. Sorry I wasn't clearer.

 

A premium would be sometimes paying a little bit extra to get deals done when we need to. Take the Sissoko deal for example where we paid money for a player we could have gotten for free a few months later. Debuchy would be an example of when we didn't want to pay a premium (the summer before he signed).

 

Of course the necessity at play in buying Sissoko was that we were looking at being relegated.  The fact that the only window where we have bought what was necessary, was when we were staring down the barrel of our second relegation, indicates the ambition the powers that be have for the squad. This Summer a Centre Back, Striker and Left Winger Could be deemed necessary to move the forward. I doubt it will happen.

 

I hope you can distinguish this concept of a premium from breaking the world transfer fee record or the British transfer fee record.

 

well i guess i should have been more clearer too,  i was talking about going back to the old days of paying premium for marquee names, some will want that of course.

 

i personally don't have a problem with us not paying a premium for those players you named above providing they have other options too.  Sissoko i dont believe he was the only midfield player that was available at the time.  Nor Debuchy was the only fullback available.    Thats where my problems is with this club,  tunnel vision going only for a small set of scouted players, mostly all based in france.

 

People say we overate our players,  but i think we overate our scouting system the most.

[Skirge]

I could understand the delay if we were looking to sign players for lots of positions, I mean imagine if we had not done the business we did in January and were now relying on JFK to get those deals done.

I hated Lambias but cannot help feeling he might of had Remy and Gomis in by now working on the same budget guidelines JFK is.

 

Dont get sucked into thinking that, just take a little look back to last summer, Lambias was in charge then. It wouldn't matter who we had, we dont budge on our valuation of players

 

That's down to one man. Ashley. Although he doesn't value the players himself, he'll get told the valuation by, Pardew/Carr/Lambias/JFK and that's it, zero wiggle room.

 

I don't mean the valuation I mean the negotiating itself, think Lambias would be more persuading than JFK.

 

Ah i see what you mean, i suppose if Ashley doesn't give them much room to increase offers, again it would difficult to negotiate for whoever it is. I know what mean though, lesser of two fuckwits i guess.

 

Yeah.. as a Chairman from another club I think you would rather deal with Lambias than Kinnear.