Alan Pardew

[Interpolic]

Actually more to the point with LucaAlteri's Ozil post, I have no problems with our recruitment policy to a degree.

 

The problems I do have with it are:

 

- When it doesn't work it leaves us short.  We sometimes have to pay something approaching a player's market value, especially when our initial approach consists of finding a player who is unhappy at their club, unsettling the player and pissing the selling club off.  These stand-offs often happen and it's obvious why.

- The scouting is not aligned to the manager.  Either sack the manager or buy the cloggers he needs to make his system work.

- We often buy players just because they're cheap rather than plugging the positional gap we need.  When Robson needed something extra he got Bellamy and Robert and we went from 11th to 4th.

 

The prevailing theme is we end up spending the same or less than we bring in.  I think that's why we wanted to shift Cabaye. 

 

TV money might bring us a bit more Mike generosity eventually, and again it'll be spun like we should be grateful.  We shouldn't.

 

We're half the club we were when he took over in terms of the perceptions of the rest of the world IMO, and that's why you see unprecedented numbers of NUFC fans completely fed up, as the hope is disappearing.  When you see NUFC aspiring to something you buy into it right or wrong, but at the minute there's nowt happening that inspires any confidence whatsoever that we're even much of a better club than Southampton.  And we are a better club than Southampton.

you talk like anything would change transfer wise if Pardew left.

 

Erm, are you missing the point entirely?  I'm saying that the scouting needs to be aligned with what the manager wants to work with.

[Wullie]

Another minimum requirement btw is that we go into games with the intention to attack teams, score lots of goals and win the match. Can't cope with any more of Pardew's soul-destroying approach to the game of football.

[Mick]

 

 

Erm, are you missing the point entirely?   I'm saying that the scouting needs to be aligned with what the manager wants to work with.

 

  As if he wasn't going to.

[Interpolic]

Sorry, but

 

We haven't got the finances of a big team

 

I can't take that. I just can't.

 

20th richest club in the world iirc. 3rd largest crowds in the PL. But for some completely f***ed up reason you say we can't compete with the big clubs. And since not a single one of us expects to compete financially with Man City and Chelsea, I can only assume that by "big" clubs you mean the likes of Southampton, Fulham and f***ing Norwich.

 

Just f*** off you cowardly, lying cockend. We all know that we could compete with them easily if we wanted, we're just owned by a thief who is creaming money out of the club and into his horrid, tatty, charva clothes shop.

 

I take your points but I don't think there's anything wrong with the statement "We haven't got the finances of a big team," of itself. We're not bankrolled by Russian or Arab oil money. We don't have the commercial reach of Man United to sell an ungodly number of shirts in every corner of the globe.

 

You're right that doesn't mean we shouldn't be doing better in transfer windows. But there's nothing wrong with the actual statement.

 

There is something utterly wrong with the statement though. He's insinuating that there's a problem with the fans expectations. Ie that we're being unrealistic. And that's simply not what's happening, we just don't expect to have our manager come out and say we can't compete financially with f***ing Southampton ffs.

 

The money has always been there for players the club feel are the right fit.

 

Stop right there brah. This premise here- this is a completely unproven and unprovable  proposition that just so happens to fit your agenda.

 

It is also the claim of proven liars who admitted to deliberately misleading and deceiving fans in the past.

 

Its a load of shit really.

 

I'm sorry, do we not sign anyone unless it's on a free?

 

Er not unless the money is made back in sales no.

 

Hypothetically, if we'd taken all the Carroll money and signed say, Ozil...

 

- Ignore that he'd probably not come here.

- Ignore that he cost a bit more than we made on Carroll.

- Ignore that the gap between now and selling Carroll.

- Ignore the wage bill.

 

But if we had gone out and signed a top player like that. Showing the ambition that we all want to see. A real player of Champions League quality.

 

Would we now be a better team than picking players for 5m here, 3m there?

 

Where do you think we'd have been finishing in the league?

 

Not sure what question you're asking here. I demand a crack at a Europa League place (i.e. finishing in one of the positions that may open up to qualify for that competition) as an absolute bare minimum. Once we get there, then the minimum requirement changes.

 

I'm not overly arsed about who the personnel is that gets us there. Why would I give the slightest fuck about that? I've never been in the least bit interested in getting excited about "marquee" (vomit) signings - I was fucking foaming with rage the day we signed Michael Owen because I knew the squad wasn't good enough to meet that minimum requirement. Nor is this one.

 

Fair point. Misinterpreted what you were after. You're not so bothered about one big signing, you just would rather we have a negative net spend as a show of some kind of ambition.

 

Personally, I don't care about that. If we make a profit or a loss doesn't bother me (so long as it's sustainable). I just want the players we bring in to improve the team. I agree that Europa League is a reasonable aim. I also think that with the likes of HBA, Cabaye (who we actively held on to), Colo (who we actively held on to), Cisse, Remy, Sissoko, etc we have the makings of a decent squad that can push towards that goal this year.

 

Everyone dropped a bollock last season. Our January signings (despite our collective creaming over them) weren't amazing when it came down to producing results. Now with them getting bedded into the squad we can expect better.

 

Er no, I'd rather the club was reinvesting the money that I and thousands of other supporters put into it, and reinvesting the gargantuan sums being thrown at them by the TV companies. Even if we finish second having spent nothing, it's not good enough because had we invested, it could have been first.

 

Every single decision the club makes should be for the benefit of the football team and the betterment of results and performances.

 

What you're looking for is socialism in the wealthiest football league in the world.

 

You're valuing something non-tangible. Something that can't be seen on a balance sheet. You're wanting us to live up to our full potential, a benefit to our little society, rather than looking at success through the lens of profit and loss. You're valuing the art of being the best we can be above the almighty dollar.

 

I'm with you entirely. I just don't think any owner would agree with us. Since we need to make do with someone owning us, I feel like I understand and somewhat agree with Ashley's outlook.

 

So the summer was cool then?  And whatever he decides to do going forward is cool?

 

Dress it up as much as you want, it's bollocks and everyone knows it's bollocks apart from a handful of people who think they're cleverer than everyone else.

[Wullie]

Sorry, but

 

We haven't got the finances of a big team

 

I can't take that. I just can't.

 

20th richest club in the world iirc. 3rd largest crowds in the PL. But for some completely f***ed up reason you say we can't compete with the big clubs. And since not a single one of us expects to compete financially with Man City and Chelsea, I can only assume that by "big" clubs you mean the likes of Southampton, Fulham and f***ing Norwich.

 

Just f*** off you cowardly, lying cockend. We all know that we could compete with them easily if we wanted, we're just owned by a thief who is creaming money out of the club and into his horrid, tatty, charva clothes shop.

 

I take your points but I don't think there's anything wrong with the statement "We haven't got the finances of a big team," of itself. We're not bankrolled by Russian or Arab oil money. We don't have the commercial reach of Man United to sell an ungodly number of shirts in every corner of the globe.

 

You're right that doesn't mean we shouldn't be doing better in transfer windows. But there's nothing wrong with the actual statement.

 

There is something utterly wrong with the statement though. He's insinuating that there's a problem with the fans expectations. Ie that we're being unrealistic. And that's simply not what's happening, we just don't expect to have our manager come out and say we can't compete financially with f***ing Southampton ffs.

 

The money has always been there for players the club feel are the right fit.

 

Stop right there brah. This premise here- this is a completely unproven and unprovable  proposition that just so happens to fit your agenda.

 

It is also the claim of proven liars who admitted to deliberately misleading and deceiving fans in the past.

 

Its a load of shit really.

 

I'm sorry, do we not sign anyone unless it's on a free?

 

Er not unless the money is made back in sales no.

 

Hypothetically, if we'd taken all the Carroll money and signed say, Ozil...

 

- Ignore that he'd probably not come here.

- Ignore that he cost a bit more than we made on Carroll.

- Ignore that the gap between now and selling Carroll.

- Ignore the wage bill.

 

But if we had gone out and signed a top player like that. Showing the ambition that we all want to see. A real player of Champions League quality.

 

Would we now be a better team than picking players for 5m here, 3m there?

 

Where do you think we'd have been finishing in the league?

 

Not sure what question you're asking here. I demand a crack at a Europa League place (i.e. finishing in one of the positions that may open up to qualify for that competition) as an absolute bare minimum. Once we get there, then the minimum requirement changes.

 

I'm not overly arsed about who the personnel is that gets us there. Why would I give the slightest fuck about that? I've never been in the least bit interested in getting excited about "marquee" (vomit) signings - I was fucking foaming with rage the day we signed Michael Owen because I knew the squad wasn't good enough to meet that minimum requirement. Nor is this one.

 

Fair point. Misinterpreted what you were after. You're not so bothered about one big signing, you just would rather we have a negative net spend as a show of some kind of ambition.

 

Personally, I don't care about that. If we make a profit or a loss doesn't bother me (so long as it's sustainable). I just want the players we bring in to improve the team. I agree that Europa League is a reasonable aim. I also think that with the likes of HBA, Cabaye (who we actively held on to), Colo (who we actively held on to), Cisse, Remy, Sissoko, etc we have the makings of a decent squad that can push towards that goal this year.

 

Everyone dropped a bollock last season. Our January signings (despite our collective creaming over them) weren't amazing when it came down to producing results. Now with them getting bedded into the squad we can expect better.

 

Er no, I'd rather the club was reinvesting the money that I and thousands of other supporters put into it, and reinvesting the gargantuan sums being thrown at them by the TV companies. Even if we finish second having spent nothing, it's not good enough because had we invested, it could have been first.

 

Every single decision the club makes should be for the benefit of the football team and the betterment of results and performances.

 

What you're looking for is socialism in the wealthiest football league in the world.

 

You're valuing something non-tangible. Something that can't be seen on a balance sheet. You're wanting us to live up to our full potential, a benefit to our little society, rather than looking at success through the lens of profit and loss. You're valuing the art of being the best we can be above the almighty dollar.

 

I'm with you entirely. I just don't think any owner would agree with us. Since we need to make do with someone owning us, I feel like I understand and somewhat agree with Ashley's outlook.

 

Apart from all those that have just spent the money generated by their respective clubs to improve their teams.

[Mick]

 

 

Apart from all those that have just spent the money generated by their respective clubs to improve their teams.

 

So, apart from every other owner, name an owner who would agree.

[Belfast Mags]

Another minimum requirement btw is that we go into games with the intention to attack teams, score lots of goals and win the match. Can't cope with any more of Pardew's soul-destroying approach to the game of football.

 

this is it in a nutshell, I think even if you come away with a defeat, but it's clear everybody busted a gut for the cause, gave it everything they'd got, then you can still walk away satisfied (to a point)  that all efforts were employed.

It's being as weak as piss and entirely negative that drive everyone to distraction

[Disco]

I'm with you entirely. I just don't think any owner would agree with us. Since we need to make do with someone owning us, I feel like I understand and somewhat agree with Ashley's outlook.

 

Might as well have not bothered with those first two sentences there.

[Interpolic]

Another minimum requirement btw is that we go into games with the intention to attack teams, score lots of goals and win the match. Can't cope with any more of Pardew's soul-destroying approach to the game of football.

 

this is it in a nutshell, I think even if you come away with a defeat, but it's clear everybody busted a gut for the cause, gave it everything they'd got, then you can still walk away satisfied (to a point)  that all efforts were employed.

It's being as weak as piss and entirely negative that drive everyone to distraction

 

Unrealistic.  This isn't 1996, it's 2013 and we're not Southampton Football Club.

[jdckelly]

Actually more to the point with LucaAlteri's Ozil post, I have no problems with our recruitment policy to a degree.

 

The problems I do have with it are:

 

- When it doesn't work it leaves us short.  We sometimes have to pay something approaching a player's market value, especially when our initial approach consists of finding a player who is unhappy at their club, unsettling the player and pissing the selling club off.  These stand-offs often happen and it's obvious why.

- The scouting is not aligned to the manager.  Either sack the manager or buy the cloggers he needs to make his system work.

- We often buy players just because they're cheap rather than plugging the positional gap we need.  When Robson needed something extra he got Bellamy and Robert and we went from 11th to 4th.

 

The prevailing theme is we end up spending the same or less than we bring in.  I think that's why we wanted to shift Cabaye. 

 

TV money might bring us a bit more Mike generosity eventually, and again it'll be spun like we should be grateful.  We shouldn't.

 

We're half the club we were when he took over in terms of the perceptions of the rest of the world IMO, and that's why you see unprecedented numbers of NUFC fans completely fed up, as the hope is disappearing.  When you see NUFC aspiring to something you buy into it right or wrong, but at the minute there's nowt happening that inspires any confidence whatsoever that we're even much of a better club than Southampton.  And we are a better club than Southampton.

you talk like anything would change transfer wise if Pardew left.

 

Erm, are you missing the point entirely?  I'm saying that the scouting needs to be aligned with what the manager wants to work with.

and it won't ever be or to any football philosophy only to sell on value. By itself thats not the worst since even clubs like Man Utd prefer to buy players who they could at least make their money back most of the time (RVP is an exception to the norm) so long as its also being used as part of a plan which the manager agrees with on the type of footballer the club buys, this is not the case here and the squad shows this ridiculous imbalance.

[Interpolic]

I'm with you entirely. I just don't think any owner would agree with us. Since we need to make do with someone owning us, I feel like I understand and somewhat agree with Ashley's outlook.

 

Might as well have not bothered with those first two sentences there.

 

It's unreal.  Ashley's taking money out of the club that could be spent on improving the team and you get the odd sap loving his work.  Can't believe what I'm reading.

[Belfast Mags]

IP's in crazy good form tonight 

[LucaAltieri]

Sorry, but

 

We haven't got the finances of a big team

 

I can't take that. I just can't.

 

20th richest club in the world iirc. 3rd largest crowds in the PL. But for some completely f***ed up reason you say we can't compete with the big clubs. And since not a single one of us expects to compete financially with Man City and Chelsea, I can only assume that by "big" clubs you mean the likes of Southampton, Fulham and f***ing Norwich.

 

Just f*** off you cowardly, lying cockend. We all know that we could compete with them easily if we wanted, we're just owned by a thief who is creaming money out of the club and into his horrid, tatty, charva clothes shop.

 

I take your points but I don't think there's anything wrong with the statement "We haven't got the finances of a big team," of itself. We're not bankrolled by Russian or Arab oil money. We don't have the commercial reach of Man United to sell an ungodly number of shirts in every corner of the globe.

 

You're right that doesn't mean we shouldn't be doing better in transfer windows. But there's nothing wrong with the actual statement.

 

There is something utterly wrong with the statement though. He's insinuating that there's a problem with the fans expectations. Ie that we're being unrealistic. And that's simply not what's happening, we just don't expect to have our manager come out and say we can't compete financially with f***ing Southampton ffs.

 

The money has always been there for players the club feel are the right fit.

 

Stop right there brah. This premise here- this is a completely unproven and unprovable  proposition that just so happens to fit your agenda.

 

It is also the claim of proven liars who admitted to deliberately misleading and deceiving fans in the past.

 

Its a load of shit really.

 

I'm sorry, do we not sign anyone unless it's on a free?

 

Er not unless the money is made back in sales no.

 

Hypothetically, if we'd taken all the Carroll money and signed say, Ozil...

 

- Ignore that he'd probably not come here.

- Ignore that he cost a bit more than we made on Carroll.

- Ignore that the gap between now and selling Carroll.

- Ignore the wage bill.

 

But if we had gone out and signed a top player like that. Showing the ambition that we all want to see. A real player of Champions League quality.

 

Would we now be a better team than picking players for 5m here, 3m there?

 

Where do you think we'd have been finishing in the league?

 

Not sure what question you're asking here. I demand a crack at a Europa League place (i.e. finishing in one of the positions that may open up to qualify for that competition) as an absolute bare minimum. Once we get there, then the minimum requirement changes.

 

I'm not overly arsed about who the personnel is that gets us there. Why would I give the slightest fuck about that? I've never been in the least bit interested in getting excited about "marquee" (vomit) signings - I was fucking foaming with rage the day we signed Michael Owen because I knew the squad wasn't good enough to meet that minimum requirement. Nor is this one.

 

Fair point. Misinterpreted what you were after. You're not so bothered about one big signing, you just would rather we have a negative net spend as a show of some kind of ambition.

 

Personally, I don't care about that. If we make a profit or a loss doesn't bother me (so long as it's sustainable). I just want the players we bring in to improve the team. I agree that Europa League is a reasonable aim. I also think that with the likes of HBA, Cabaye (who we actively held on to), Colo (who we actively held on to), Cisse, Remy, Sissoko, etc we have the makings of a decent squad that can push towards that goal this year.

 

Everyone dropped a bollock last season. Our January signings (despite our collective creaming over them) weren't amazing when it came down to producing results. Now with them getting bedded into the squad we can expect better.

 

Er no, I'd rather the club was reinvesting the money that I and thousands of other supporters put into it, and reinvesting the gargantuan sums being thrown at them by the TV companies. Even if we finish second having spent nothing, it's not good enough because had we invested, it could have been first.

 

Every single decision the club makes should be for the benefit of the football team and the betterment of results and performances.

 

What you're looking for is socialism in the wealthiest football league in the world.

 

You're valuing something non-tangible. Something that can't be seen on a balance sheet. You're wanting us to live up to our full potential, a benefit to our little society, rather than looking at success through the lens of profit and loss. You're valuing the art of being the best we can be above the almighty dollar.

 

I'm with you entirely. I just don't think any owner would agree with us. Since we need to make do with someone owning us, I feel like I understand and somewhat agree with Ashley's outlook.

 

Apart from all those that have just spent the money generated by their respective clubs to improve their teams.

 

They're acting in the interest of their wallets, too. They think they can spend their way to making more money this season. Ashley thinks he can squeeze the most out of every pound he spends through clever scouting and/or get away with not spending anything and still reaping the rewards.

 

There are no owners with your philosophy of poo-pooing a second place finish because if they'd just spent a chunk more they could have been #1.

 

When you also factor in we're not competing for #1 or #2 it becomes far less enticing to spend again... Is it worth it on the balance sheet to spend 10-20mil + wages to make the difference between 12th and 8th?

 

The vast majority of owners would look at the numbers and probably conclude not.

 

There are no benevolent owners. They decide what is successful based on the money coming in. Sometimes that means spending. Our owner believes in spending on something only if it's value for money.

 

Socialism doesn't exist in the Premier League.

[LucaAltieri]

I'm with you entirely. I just don't think any owner would agree with us. Since we need to make do with someone owning us, I feel like I understand and somewhat agree with Ashley's outlook.

 

Might as well have not bothered with those first two sentences there.

 

It's unreal.  Ashley's taking money out of the club that could be spent on improving the team and you get the odd sap loving his work.  Can't believe what I'm reading.

 

If it were your 200m (or whatever the club cost him to date) I'm sure you'd not worry too much about recouping some of that cash.

[Hanshithispantz]

Aye, salivating over 'polic here like.

[Interpolic]

Actually more to the point with LucaAlteri's Ozil post, I have no problems with our recruitment policy to a degree.

 

The problems I do have with it are:

 

- When it doesn't work it leaves us short.  We sometimes have to pay something approaching a player's market value, especially when our initial approach consists of finding a player who is unhappy at their club, unsettling the player and pissing the selling club off.  These stand-offs often happen and it's obvious why.

- The scouting is not aligned to the manager.  Either sack the manager or buy the cloggers he needs to make his system work.

- We often buy players just because they're cheap rather than plugging the positional gap we need.  When Robson needed something extra he got Bellamy and Robert and we went from 11th to 4th.

 

The prevailing theme is we end up spending the same or less than we bring in.  I think that's why we wanted to shift Cabaye. 

 

TV money might bring us a bit more Mike generosity eventually, and again it'll be spun like we should be grateful.  We shouldn't.

 

We're half the club we were when he took over in terms of the perceptions of the rest of the world IMO, and that's why you see unprecedented numbers of NUFC fans completely fed up, as the hope is disappearing.  When you see NUFC aspiring to something you buy into it right or wrong, but at the minute there's nowt happening that inspires any confidence whatsoever that we're even much of a better club than Southampton.  And we are a better club than Southampton.

you talk like anything would change transfer wise if Pardew left.

 

Erm, are you missing the point entirely?  I'm saying that the scouting needs to be aligned with what the manager wants to work with.

and it won't ever be or to any football philosophy only to sell on value. By itself thats not the worst since even clubs like Man Utd prefer to buy players who they could at least make their money back most of the time (RVP is an exception to the norm) so long as its also being used as part of a plan which the manager agrees with on the type of footballer the club buys, this is not the case here and the squad shows this ridiculous imbalance.

 

We sign technically good players, Graham Carr seems to like them.  Pardew can't work with them.  We need to change the manager or change the chief scout, not sure why this is such a difficult concept for you to comprehend.

[Interpolic]

I'm with you entirely. I just don't think any owner would agree with us. Since we need to make do with someone owning us, I feel like I understand and somewhat agree with Ashley's outlook.

 

Might as well have not bothered with those first two sentences there.

 

It's unreal.  Ashley's taking money out of the club that could be spent on improving the team and you get the odd sap loving his work.  Can't believe what I'm reading.

 

If it were your 200m (or whatever the club cost him to date) I'm sure you'd not worry too much about recouping some of that cash.

 

If I had £200m or over a billion or whatever it is then I'd be dead in a gutter after snorting 10 grams of coke from a stripper's arsehole.  It's not comparable.

 

He's in fact a very rich man, you still seem to be stuck on the idea that he'd have to spend fortunes of his own money to make us competitive when I'm saying we should have spent a bit of the club's own money to get our squad where it needs to be, but instead we might see ourselves falling even further behind the likes of Swansea and Norwich.

[jdckelly]

Actually more to the point with LucaAlteri's Ozil post, I have no problems with our recruitment policy to a degree.

 

The problems I do have with it are:

 

- When it doesn't work it leaves us short.  We sometimes have to pay something approaching a player's market value, especially when our initial approach consists of finding a player who is unhappy at their club, unsettling the player and pissing the selling club off.  These stand-offs often happen and it's obvious why.

- The scouting is not aligned to the manager.  Either sack the manager or buy the cloggers he needs to make his system work.

- We often buy players just because they're cheap rather than plugging the positional gap we need.  When Robson needed something extra he got Bellamy and Robert and we went from 11th to 4th.

 

The prevailing theme is we end up spending the same or less than we bring in.  I think that's why we wanted to shift Cabaye. 

 

TV money might bring us a bit more Mike generosity eventually, and again it'll be spun like we should be grateful.  We shouldn't.

 

We're half the club we were when he took over in terms of the perceptions of the rest of the world IMO, and that's why you see unprecedented numbers of NUFC fans completely fed up, as the hope is disappearing.  When you see NUFC aspiring to something you buy into it right or wrong, but at the minute there's nowt happening that inspires any confidence whatsoever that we're even much of a better club than Southampton.  And we are a better club than Southampton.

you talk like anything would change transfer wise if Pardew left.

 

Erm, are you missing the point entirely?  I'm saying that the scouting needs to be aligned with what the manager wants to work with.

and it won't ever be or to any football philosophy only to sell on value. By itself thats not the worst since even clubs like Man Utd prefer to buy players who they could at least make their money back most of the time (RVP is an exception to the norm) so long as its also being used as part of a plan which the manager agrees with on the type of footballer the club buys, this is not the case here and the squad shows this ridiculous imbalance.

 

We sign technically good players, Graham Carr seems to like them.  Pardew can't work with them.  We need to change the manager or change the chief scout, not sure why this is such a difficult concept for you to comprehend.

I'm not as convinced about the quality of the players.

[Interpolic]

Actually more to the point with LucaAlteri's Ozil post, I have no problems with our recruitment policy to a degree.

 

The problems I do have with it are:

 

- When it doesn't work it leaves us short.  We sometimes have to pay something approaching a player's market value, especially when our initial approach consists of finding a player who is unhappy at their club, unsettling the player and pissing the selling club off.  These stand-offs often happen and it's obvious why.

- The scouting is not aligned to the manager.  Either sack the manager or buy the cloggers he needs to make his system work.

- We often buy players just because they're cheap rather than plugging the positional gap we need.  When Robson needed something extra he got Bellamy and Robert and we went from 11th to 4th.

 

The prevailing theme is we end up spending the same or less than we bring in.  I think that's why we wanted to shift Cabaye. 

 

TV money might bring us a bit more Mike generosity eventually, and again it'll be spun like we should be grateful.  We shouldn't.

 

We're half the club we were when he took over in terms of the perceptions of the rest of the world IMO, and that's why you see unprecedented numbers of NUFC fans completely fed up, as the hope is disappearing.  When you see NUFC aspiring to something you buy into it right or wrong, but at the minute there's nowt happening that inspires any confidence whatsoever that we're even much of a better club than Southampton.  And we are a better club than Southampton.

you talk like anything would change transfer wise if Pardew left.

 

Erm, are you missing the point entirely?  I'm saying that the scouting needs to be aligned with what the manager wants to work with.

and it won't ever be or to any football philosophy only to sell on value. By itself thats not the worst since even clubs like Man Utd prefer to buy players who they could at least make their money back most of the time (RVP is an exception to the norm) so long as its also being used as part of a plan which the manager agrees with on the type of footballer the club buys, this is not the case here and the squad shows this ridiculous imbalance.

 

We sign technically good players, Graham Carr seems to like them.  Pardew can't work with them.  We need to change the manager or change the chief scout, not sure why this is such a difficult concept for you to comprehend.

I'm not as convinced about the quality of the players.

 

I was going to respond with a big post but since neither of us can be bothered then just get to the point man, because it's getting boring.

 

We're signing shit players that are being managed by a shit manager, is that it?

[Disco]

How! They're fucking internationals you're talking about there.

[LucaAltieri]

I'm with you entirely. I just don't think any owner would agree with us. Since we need to make do with someone owning us, I feel like I understand and somewhat agree with Ashley's outlook.

 

Might as well have not bothered with those first two sentences there.

 

It's unreal.  Ashley's taking money out of the club that could be spent on improving the team and you get the odd sap loving his work.  Can't believe what I'm reading.

 

If it were your 200m (or whatever the club cost him to date) I'm sure you'd not worry too much about recouping some of that cash.

 

If I had £200m or over a billion or whatever it is then I'd be dead in a gutter after snorting 10 grams of coke from a stripper's arsehole.  It's not comparable.

 

He's in fact a very rich man, you still seem to be stuck on the idea that he'd have to spend fortunes of his own money to make us competitive when I'm saying we should have spent a bit of the club's own money to get our squad where it needs to be, but instead we might see ourselves falling even further behind the likes of Swansea and Norwich.

 

I can see where you're coming from both with spending and with the stripper's arsehole.

 

But I think Mike thinks he's going to see a return on the investment he made in January and he's going to want to see that return before investing further.

 

If it gets dire and we need rescuing again in January he'll reluctantly do it.

 

But I can see why he'd wait it out.

[Interpolic]

I'm with you entirely. I just don't think any owner would agree with us. Since we need to make do with someone owning us, I feel like I understand and somewhat agree with Ashley's outlook.

 

Might as well have not bothered with those first two sentences there.

 

It's unreal.  Ashley's taking money out of the club that could be spent on improving the team and you get the odd sap loving his work.  Can't believe what I'm reading.

 

If it were your 200m (or whatever the club cost him to date) I'm sure you'd not worry too much about recouping some of that cash.

 

If I had £200m or over a billion or whatever it is then I'd be dead in a gutter after snorting 10 grams of coke from a stripper's arsehole.  It's not comparable.

 

He's in fact a very rich man, you still seem to be stuck on the idea that he'd have to spend fortunes of his own money to make us competitive when I'm saying we should have spent a bit of the club's own money to get our squad where it needs to be, but instead we might see ourselves falling even further behind the likes of Swansea and Norwich.

 

I can see where you're coming from both with spending and with the stripper's arsehole.

 

But I think Mike thinks he's going to see a return on the investment he made in January and he's going to want to see that return before investing further.

 

If it gets dire and we need rescuing again in January he'll reluctantly do it.

 

But I can see why he'd wait it out.

 

I think he's an idiot then mate - if we were relatively successful we'd draw more prize money, more merchandising revenue, etc.  He's running us on a shoestring when moderate investment might/would see us bring loads more money in.  He's just not willing to go for that relatively short leap and that's what we're seeing.

[Super Duper Branko Strupar]

This is mint. Ultimately the fact is the owner and the fans want different things entirely. We want what's best for our club, he wants his money back. The two don't fit together. He's always controlled supply, kept costs down, and sold for profit. It's what he'll do with us until he gets his asking price. That won't be met until either we're competitive enough to be attractive to people willing to invest or running cheaply enough to increase margins to bump up the price. The former is too expensive for our owner.

[LucaAltieri]

I don't think that a top half finish, pushing Europe, is out of the question for this squad.

 

I think Ashley sees the same thing.

 

Either I'm giving him too much credit or you lot aren't giving him enough. Time will tell.

[Super Duper Branko Strupar]

It's possible with this squad, yes. But not with this manager and coaching set up.