NG32 Posted August 29, 2012 Share Posted August 29, 2012 I think uncal Eric has gone back to his class. Boring them with his transfer views. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Eric Posted August 29, 2012 Share Posted August 29, 2012 My point is that Pardew is being "supported" as much as any manager bar the mega-rich. Something you were arguing against, so I replied to you. If you've been disappointed by our recent signings then it's pointless discussing this with you, as that's a crazy point of view on any normal measure. Sunderland mega-rich? What about Norwich? Southampton? Liverpool who were in a worse state than us? Not that I was arguing anything of the sort anyway, but aye you just believe whatever suits your agenda and create a pathetic strawman to match. After all, this is just a sub-standard window we've picked. Again, nowhere, absolutely nowhere have I said I'm disappointed with our signings, yet everywhere I've said I'm disappointed with not signing players. It's absolutely pointless discussing anything with people who don't even possess the comprehension abilities of a kid and will defend the regime at all costs, I'm pretty sure I had the exact same conversation with you in a previous window, you defended them against everything that wasn't written and conveniently ignored everything that was, chief apologist. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Flash Posted August 29, 2012 Share Posted August 29, 2012 There's no ambition in having spent about £2million with nearly 2 days left. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted August 29, 2012 Share Posted August 29, 2012 My point is that Pardew is being "supported" as much as any manager bar the mega-rich. Something you were arguing against, so I replied to you. If you've been disappointed by our recent signings then it's pointless discussing this with you, as that's a crazy point of view on any normal measure. Sunderland mega-rich? What about Norwich? Southampton? Liverpool who were in a worse state than us? Not that I was arguing anything of the sort anyway, but aye you just believe whatever suits your agenda and create a pathetic strawman to match. After all, this is just a sub-standard window we've picked. Again, nowhere, absolutely nowhere have I said I'm disappointed with our signings, yet everywhere I've said I'm disappointed with not signing players. It's absolutely pointless discussing anything with people who don't even possess the comprehension abilities of a kid and will defend the regime at all costs, I'm pretty sure I had the exact same conversation with you in a previous window, you defended them against everything that wasn't written and conveniently ignored everything that was, chief apologist. Eric man, what's the point in descending to argument like this? Obviously everyone is disappointed with not signing players, that's so obvious that it hardly warrants a discussion. A 19-page thread could not be generated on that point. We should try to increase the size of our squad and address our main weaknesses as far as is possible while running the club in the way we've decided is best. The same way that delivered Cabaye, Tiote, Ba, Cisse etc. On the other clubs you mention, I wouldn't want our transfer policy to be anything like Sunderland's or Liverpool's. Obviously that's a personal preference. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Eric Posted August 29, 2012 Share Posted August 29, 2012 Not including fees recieved but here's Sky Sports club by club breakdown that proves Pardew's backing is surpassed only by the super-rich. http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/12040/8023964/Totaliser-table Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted August 29, 2012 Share Posted August 29, 2012 Not including fees recieved but here's Sky Sports club by club breakdown that proves Pardew's backing is surpassed only by the super-rich. http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/12040/8023964/Totaliser-table The amount of net spend is not the point, that's a fact and again is pointless arguing about. Judging a club's transfers by the amount spent is stupid, as we've proved by things like buying Cabaye for £5m while Liverpool buy Henderson for £23m. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mole_Toonfan Posted August 29, 2012 Share Posted August 29, 2012 Wigan have spent more Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbandit Posted August 29, 2012 Share Posted August 29, 2012 Aye, and it would take one first teamer to go above Man City into 8th. This discussion is pointless. There are several people on here, Ian W, Gimp, myself, High Five who think that our transfer policy works just fine because we're looking at how we've moved on in the past couple of years. There are several others who have the opposing view based upon what they think will happen if we don't change our policy. We may well sign a player still, we may not. Either way, I've been happy with the signings we've made this window and am happy with the way the club is going. We are looking at sustained long-term success and if it doesn't happen in this window, maybe it will in the next or the one after. No one's apologising for anything, we've gone from getting relegated to finishing fifth. We're not going to finish fifth this year but that doesn't mean we can't build more this year upon last year. Where you finish in the table isn't completely indicative of where your club is at Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jayson Posted August 29, 2012 Share Posted August 29, 2012 Wigan have spent more We'd have spent more if we were wigan aswell Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NG32 Posted August 29, 2012 Share Posted August 29, 2012 My point is that Pardew is being "supported" as much as any manager bar the mega-rich. Something you were arguing against, so I replied to you. If you've been disappointed by our recent signings then it's pointless discussing this with you, as that's a crazy point of view on any normal measure. Sunderland mega-rich? What about Norwich? Southampton? Liverpool who were in a worse state than us? Not that I was arguing anything of the sort anyway, but aye you just believe whatever suits your agenda and create a pathetic strawman to match. After all, this is just a sub-standard window we've picked. Again, nowhere, absolutely nowhere have I said I'm disappointed with our signings, yet everywhere I've said I'm disappointed with not signing players. It's absolutely pointless discussing anything with people who don't even possess the comprehension abilities of a kid and will defend the regime at all costs, I'm pretty sure I had the exact same conversation with you in a previous window, you defended them against everything that wasn't written and conveniently ignored everything that was, chief apologist. eh? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted August 29, 2012 Share Posted August 29, 2012 Aye, and it would take one first teamer to go above Man City into 8th. This discussion is pointless. There are several people on here, Ian W, Gimp, myself, High Five who think that our transfer policy works just fine because we're looking at how we've moved on in the past couple of years. There are several others who have the opposing view based upon what they think will happen if we don't change our policy. We may well sign a player still, we may not. Either way, I've been happy with the signings we've made this window and am happy with the way the club is going. We are looking at sustained long-term success and if it doesn't happen in this window, maybe it will in the next or the one after. No one's apologising for anything, we've gone from getting relegated to finishing fifth. We're not going to finish fifth this year but that doesn't mean we can't build more this year upon last year. Where you finish in the table isn't completely indicative of where your club is at Thank the Lord. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Eric Posted August 29, 2012 Share Posted August 29, 2012 That sky sports link doesn't show net spend I'm afraid, that's a fact and not something I'm arguing about How should we judge then Ian, you say it and it's true? Just like all those things you claim I said, which I didn't? Let's judge it on wages saved, Pardew wins, you're right, we're wonderful, he's backed more than anyone bar the super-rich, there's nowt to moan about, our club is perfect, our owners are awesome and anyone disagreeing wears a Sunderland shirt and rapes children . To think we have threads mocking RAWK & RTG Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbandit Posted August 29, 2012 Share Posted August 29, 2012 That sky sports link doesn't show net spend I'm afraid, that's a fact and not something I'm arguing about How should we judge then Ian, you say it and it's true? Just like all those things you claim I said, which I didn't? Let's judge it on wages saved, Pardew wins, you're right, we're wonderful, he's backed more than anyone bar the super-rich, there's nowt to moan about, our club is perfect, our owners are awesome and anyone disagreeing wears a Sunderland shirt and rapes children . To think we have threads mocking RAWK & RTG Mate, you've brought in some ridiculous, unnecessary references to Mike Ashley and Dekka. Seems like you've got a deeper problem here than the transfer dealings. Many people who support the transfer regime don't even like Ashley or Dekka, myself included. Stop bringing them into it and making pointless extraneous claims Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted August 29, 2012 Share Posted August 29, 2012 OK, one last attempt. My point is that we have a good transfer policy which will likely lead to steady progress to the point we can afford to reach. Additionally, we should not decide that it's a failure because we have a transfer window where things are a bit quiet. I'm not surprised that anyone is disappointed with this window a bit, I am myself. But it must be understood in a wider context. The end. (PS Thanks gbandit!) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbandit Posted August 29, 2012 Share Posted August 29, 2012 No worries Ian, the only time I ever get properly animated when talking about Nufc is when I'm talking about the transfer window. Quite enjoy talking about it even if it descends into these types of debates Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted August 29, 2012 Share Posted August 29, 2012 OK, one last attempt. My point is that we have a good transfer policy which will likely lead to steady progress to the point we can afford to reach. Additionally, we should not decide that it's a failure because we have a transfer window where things are a bit quiet. I'm not surprised that anyone is disappointed with this window a bit, I am myself. But it must be understood in a wider context. The end. (PS Thanks gbandit!) What on Earth is "the point we can afford to reach"? I don't like the idea of a transfer "policy" anyway - why would you put yourself in a position where you might miss out on a player you really want because he doesn't fit a very specific set of parameters? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NG32 Posted August 29, 2012 Share Posted August 29, 2012 That sky sports link doesn't show net spend I'm afraid, that's a fact and not something I'm arguing about How should we judge then Ian, you say it and it's true? Just like all those things you claim I said, which I didn't? Let's judge it on wages saved, Pardew wins, you're right, we're wonderful, he's backed more than anyone bar the super-rich, there's nowt to moan about, our club is perfect, our owners are awesome and anyone disagreeing wears a Sunderland shirt and rapes children . To think we have threads mocking RAWK & RTG The club is in the best state that I can ever remember and I have been following nufc since 1980. No one is suggesting its perfect but we recognise the fact the club is moving forward. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Eric Posted August 29, 2012 Share Posted August 29, 2012 Aye, and it would take one first teamer to go above Man City into 8th. This discussion is pointless. There are several people on here, Ian W, Gimp, myself, High Five who think that our transfer policy works just fine because we're looking at how we've moved on in the past couple of years. There are several others who have the opposing view based upon what they think will happen if we don't change our policy. We may well sign a player still, we may not. Either way, I've been happy with the signings we've made this window and am happy with the way the club is going. We are looking at sustained long-term success and if it doesn't happen in this window, maybe it will in the next or the one after. No one's apologising for anything, we've gone from getting relegated to finishing fifth. We're not going to finish fifth this year but that doesn't mean we can't build more this year upon last year. Where you finish in the table isn't completely indicative of where your club is at One final time, to try and get it into your head, nobody is complaining about the signings made, stop creating strawmen. Who isn't happy with the transfer policy? Name them? You're just making stuff up man, it looks to me that everyone is happy that we're after a RB and Forward (as well as the CB from January) we'd even settle for not landing all three (I would imagine everyone would be bastard delighted with all 3) but pissed off that it looks like we're not going to land them and that we haven't gone on to the next player on the list from those positions. I've answered every single one of your rubbish theories, yet you still come up with strawmen and utter bollocks, if that's not apologising what is? It may happen next window, or the one after that, oh well that's ok then, it worked last season, so it's bound to work everytime. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mole_Toonfan Posted August 29, 2012 Share Posted August 29, 2012 I don't think anyone wants the policy scrapped, in fact im pretty sure most prefer this policy to Shepherd's policy ( or lack of) I do think most of us would like to see more flexibility in negotiations though, as it seems we are very stubborn. Not asking to go completely mad and put the finances at risk, but if we want a player and our valuation and the club in questions valuation is not that far apart then i think there should be more flexibility in finding a happy medium. We won't be able to get bargains every window. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted August 29, 2012 Share Posted August 29, 2012 OK, one last attempt. My point is that we have a good transfer policy which will likely lead to steady progress to the point we can afford to reach. Additionally, we should not decide that it's a failure because we have a transfer window where things are a bit quiet. I'm not surprised that anyone is disappointed with this window a bit, I am myself. But it must be understood in a wider context. The end. (PS Thanks gbandit!) What on Earth is "the point we can afford to reach"? I don't like the idea of a transfer "policy" anyway - why on Earth would you put yourself in a position where you might miss out on a player you really want because he doesn't fit a very specific set of parameters? Well how strict the parameters are is debatable, flexibilty doesn't mean something's not a 'policy'. Obviously you should not miss out on a player for trivial reasons, but what constitutes trivial is hardly clearly defined. By policy I mean our approach to transfers, as in Jayson's post above. I wouldn't have thought that was confusing. By 'point we can afford to reach' I mean we will progress as well as we can within our limits. In football we will not challenge Man City and Chelsea because they will always be able to buy megastars whenever they like. Except if financial fair play works. I don't like it but that's a fact. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cp40 Posted August 29, 2012 Share Posted August 29, 2012 is otter in hospital yet? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Flash Posted August 29, 2012 Share Posted August 29, 2012 It's a shame some of us would rather consolidate rather than try to push on when the financial cost is so minimal and the opportunity so great. Keegan once banned the word "consolidation" when he was here btw. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ATB Posted August 29, 2012 Share Posted August 29, 2012 It´s nothing wrong with our transfer policy. It´s the lack of signings (which we can afford). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted August 29, 2012 Share Posted August 29, 2012 OK, one last attempt. My point is that we have a good transfer policy which will likely lead to steady progress to the point we can afford to reach. Additionally, we should not decide that it's a failure because we have a transfer window where things are a bit quiet. I'm not surprised that anyone is disappointed with this window a bit, I am myself. But it must be understood in a wider context. The end. (PS Thanks gbandit!) What on Earth is "the point we can afford to reach"? I don't like the idea of a transfer "policy" anyway - why on Earth would you put yourself in a position where you might miss out on a player you really want because he doesn't fit a very specific set of parameters? Well how strict the parameters are is debatable, flexibilty doesn't mean something's not a 'policy'. Obviously you should not miss out on a player for trivial reasons, but what constitutes trivial is hardly clearly defined. By policy I mean our approach to transfers, as in Jayson's post above. I wouldn't have thought that was confusing. By 'point we can afford to reach' I mean we will progress as well as we can within our limits. In football we will not challenge Man City and Chelsea because they will always be able to buy megastars whenever they like. Except if financial fair play works. I don't like it but that's a fact. Didn't we just finish above Chelsea? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted August 29, 2012 Share Posted August 29, 2012 It's a shame some of us would rather consolidate rather than try to push on when the financial cost is so minimal and the opportunity so great. If that was the case then nobody would be able to disagree with you, obviously. If you put the premise like that then it's impossible to argue with. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts