Sunderland

[Cajun]

Whilst all that is true, they have a chairman who is willing to invest, so all they need is to find the right formula for scouting and management. They may have stumbled on that now, as much as I hope they haven't.

 

Which is a bloody hard thing to do in football it seems.

 

Granted, but it's clear to see their owner is miles ahead of ours. Not sure how it can even be debated.

 

Because if he was they would be miles ahead

 

We got relegated, spend practically f*** all, came back up, a season later finished 5th making the Europa League and finished above them again last season. If Short was that great a chairman maybe he would have taken advantage of our slump where as they have stood still at best.

 

He's their owner, not the chairman AFAIK. He may not have appointed the best men for the job (yet), but Ashley's record is not exactly great in that respect either. In every other department he pisses all over Ashley.

 

Backing of the managers yes. I don't really see what else and given the managers have been poor (his appointments) and wasted the majority of that money I really don't see how he is light years ahead.

 

At least Ashley brought in Carr so when we do spend practically fuck all at least we get good players out of it which is why we have finished above them the last 2 seasons (including battling it out for 4th on the last day of the season) and they failed to make any real ground ahead of us even when we were relegated.

 

 

[Elliottman]

Whilst all that is true, they have a chairman who is willing to invest, so all they need is to find the right formula for scouting and management. They may have stumbled on that now, as much as I hope they haven't.

 

Which is a bloody hard thing to do in football it seems.

 

 

 

Granted, but it's clear to see their owner is miles ahead of ours. Not sure how it can even be debated.

 

Because if he was they would be miles ahead

 

We got relegated, spend practically f*** all, came back up, a season later finished 5th making the Europa League and finished above them again last season. If Short was that great a chairman maybe he would have taken advantage of our slump where as they have stood still at best.

 

He's their owner, not the chairman AFAIK. He may not have appointed the best men for the job (yet), but Ashley's record is not exactly great in that respect either. In every other department he pisses all over Ashley.

 

Backing of the managers yes. I don't really see what else and given the managers have been poor (his appointments) and wasted the majority of that money I really don't see how he is light years ahead.

 

At least Ashley brought in Carr so when we do spend practically f*** all at least we get good players out of it which is why we have finished above them the last 2 seasons (including battling it out for 4th on the last day of the season) and they failed to make any real ground ahead of us even when we were relegated.

 

 

Whilst all that is true, they have a chairman who is willing to invest, so all they need is to find the right formula for scouting and management. They may have stumbled on that now, as much as I hope they haven't.

 

Which is a bloody hard thing to do in football it seems.

 

Granted, but it's clear to see their owner is miles ahead of ours. Not sure how it can even be debated.

 

Because if he was they would be miles ahead

 

We got relegated, spend practically f*** all, came back up, a season later finished 5th making the Europa League and finished above them again last season. If Short was that great a chairman maybe he would have taken advantage of our slump where as they have stood still at best.

 

He's their owner, not the chairman AFAIK. He may not have appointed the best men for the job (yet), but Ashley's record is not exactly great in that respect either. In every other department he pisses all over Ashley.

 

Backing of the managers yes. I don't really see what else and given the managers have been poor (his appointments) and wasted the majority of that money I really don't see how he is light years ahead.

 

At least Ashley brought in Carr so when we do spend practically f*** all at least we get good players out of it which is why we have finished above them the last 2 seasons (including battling it out for 4th on the last day of the season) and they failed to make any real ground ahead of us even when we were relegated.

 

 

 

Our finances are in better shape too. Not sure what this short love is about.

[Sima]

Haven't Sunderland posted a ~£30m loss for the last three years?

 

EDIT - £27.9m in 2011, £7.8m in 2012 and £26.9m this year.

 

So they've lost £62.6m in three years.  Not exactly the best.

 

[midds]

Haven't Sunderland posted a ~£30m loss for the last three years?

 

Think they're just talking purely transfers in and out.

[Unbelievable]

Whilst all that is true, they have a chairman who is willing to invest, so all they need is to find the right formula for scouting and management. They may have stumbled on that now, as much as I hope they haven't.

 

Which is a bloody hard thing to do in football it seems.

 

Granted, but it's clear to see their owner is miles ahead of ours. Not sure how it can even be debated.

 

Because if he was they would be miles ahead

 

We got relegated, spend practically f*** all, came back up, a season later finished 5th making the Europa League and finished above them again last season. If Short was that great a chairman maybe he would have taken advantage of our slump where as they have stood still at best.

 

He's their owner, not the chairman AFAIK. He may not have appointed the best men for the job (yet), but Ashley's record is not exactly great in that respect either. In every other department he pisses all over Ashley.

 

Backing of the managers yes. I don't really see what else and given the managers have been poor (his appointments) and wasted the majority of that money I really don't see how he is light years ahead.

 

At least Ashley brought in Carr so when we do spend practically f*** all at least we get good players out of it which is why we have finished above them the last 2 seasons (including battling it out for 4th on the last day of the season) and they failed to make any real ground ahead of us even when we were relegated.

 

 

 

Looking back to where the clubs were before they took over, Short has made a perennial yoyo club into a fairly stable Premiership team, and is willing to invest to take them even further (7th highest nett spending since he took over). Ashley took over a club that regularly qualified for Europe and took us down a division within a matter of years. We are currently about at the same point, midtable at best, but they moved up to get here, and we've plunged down. Our "stability" and frugality has us dropping further and further afield, whereas their chopping and changing to find the right formula might at least work one day, because when they do, they have an owner who is ambitious and will back their manager.

[Disco]

IIRC despite Short putting in a fair whack of money SAFC owe him £0.

 

Might not be the best decision maker but his ST intentions have been in the right place.

[Unbelievable]

Haven't Sunderland posted a ~£30m loss for the last three years?

 

EDIT - £27.9m in 2011, £7.8m in 2012 and £26.9m this year.

 

So they've lost £62.6m in three years.  Not exactly the best.

 

 

Man City's and Chelsea's are even worse. We better tell them that next year's Premiership table will be based on accounts posted, not points gained on the football pitch.

[Sima]

 

 

Man City's and Chelsea's are even worse. We better tell them that next year's Premiership table will be based on accounts posted, not points gained on the football pitch.

 

You would expect that though, not many clubs outside them two will post worse financial results than the mackems.

[madras]

Haven't Sunderland posted a ~£30m loss for the last three years?

 

EDIT - £27.9m in 2011, £7.8m in 2012 and £26.9m this year.

 

So they've lost £62.6m in three years.  Not exactly the best.

 

 

Man City's and Chelsea's are even worse. We better tell them that next year's Premiership table will be based on accounts posted, not points gained on the football pitch.

depends if you think short is prepared to make those debts year on year like abramovic or if he's going to draw a line at some point.

[Cajun]

Haven't Sunderland posted a ~£30m loss for the last three years?

 

EDIT - £27.9m in 2011, £7.8m in 2012 and £26.9m this year.

 

So they've lost £62.6m in three years.  Not exactly the best.

 

 

Man City's and Chelsea's are even worse. We better tell them that next year's Premiership table will be based on accounts posted, not points gained on the football pitch.

 

Probably why Sunderland have fallen just short of those two.

 

When was the last time Sunderland finished above Chelsea btw? I can vaguely remember us doing it.

[Unbelievable]

 

 

Man City's and Chelsea's are even worse. We better tell them that next year's Premiership table will be based on accounts posted, not points gained on the football pitch.

 

You would expect that though, not many clubs outside them two will post worse financial results than the mackems.

 

What is your point? They have a billionaire owner who is willing to take the club forward by putting his own money in, without taking loans out on the club or anything like that which may cripple the club long term. I wish we had him, and not Ashley, we'd be a lot closer to challenging the top 4, with Carr's eye for talent and Short's financial backing.

[Unbelievable]

Haven't Sunderland posted a ~£30m loss for the last three years?

 

EDIT - £27.9m in 2011, £7.8m in 2012 and £26.9m this year.

 

So they've lost £62.6m in three years.  Not exactly the best.

 

 

Man City's and Chelsea's are even worse. We better tell them that next year's Premiership table will be based on accounts posted, not points gained on the football pitch.

 

Probably why Sunderland have fallen just short of those two.

 

Way to miss the point.. I haven't said their entire setup is better than ours, just that as an owner, he is pulling his weight and not afraid to go in a different direction if things don't work out.

 

Simple question: would you prefer Ashley or Short as our owner?

[Cajun]

Haven't Sunderland posted a ~£30m loss for the last three years?

 

EDIT - £27.9m in 2011, £7.8m in 2012 and £26.9m this year.

 

So they've lost £62.6m in three years.  Not exactly the best.

 

 

Man City's and Chelsea's are even worse. We better tell them that next year's Premiership table will be based on accounts posted, not points gained on the football pitch.

 

Probably why Sunderland have fallen just short of those two.

 

Way to miss the point.. I haven't said their entire setup is better than ours, just that as an owner, he is pulling his weight and not afraid to go in a different direction if things don't work out.

 

Simple question: would you prefer Ashley or Short as our owner?

 

Can I say neither? You can throw all the money in the world at managers but if the managers you appoint are constantly shit it isn't going to do much (see Souness, G).

 

As I said before, at least Ashley has got one important thing right with Graham Carr. If Short came here, appointed poor managers and gave them lots of money so spend on average players would you be happy?

 

You mentioned earlier 'Imagine Short giving money to Carr' but ignored the fact that Short could have appointed his own chief scout who has those contacts/ability and Sunderland would be flying. He hasn't which is why despite making a lot of money available they are no further forward than us despite us gifting them our relegation to move out of our shadows and be well ahead of us.

 

Short like Ashley has consistently made poor decisions which is why neither club are where they should be.

[Unbelievable]

Haven't Sunderland posted a ~£30m loss for the last three years?

 

EDIT - £27.9m in 2011, £7.8m in 2012 and £26.9m this year.

 

So they've lost £62.6m in three years.  Not exactly the best.

 

 

Man City's and Chelsea's are even worse. We better tell them that next year's Premiership table will be based on accounts posted, not points gained on the football pitch.

 

Probably why Sunderland have fallen just short of those two.

 

Way to miss the point.. I haven't said their entire setup is better than ours, just that as an owner, he is pulling his weight and not afraid to go in a different direction if things don't work out.

 

Simple question: would you prefer Ashley or Short as our owner?

 

Can I say neither? You can throw all the money in the world at managers but if the managers you appoint are constantly s*** it isn't going to do much (see Souness, G).

 

As I said before, at least Ashley has got one important thing right with Graham Carr. If Short came here, appointed poor managers and gave them lots of money so spend on average players would you be happy?

 

You mentioned earlier 'Imagine Short giving money to Carr' but ignored the fact that Short could have appointed his own chief scout who has those contacts/ability and Sunderland would be flying. He hasn't which is why despite making a lot of money available they are no further forward than us despite us gifting them our relegation to move out of our shadows and be well ahead of us.

 

Short like Ashley has consistently made poor decisions which is why neither club are where they should be.

 

Short has just appointed a new chief scout and a new manager. Let's see how it goes before blowing our own trumpet. I would say as a proposition we are far more interesting than Sunderland too, although the gap is fast being bridged. What top class managers would have come to Sunderland five years ago, or even now? The bottom line is they are moving in the right direction slowly but surely, whereas we are moving in the opposite direction.

 

And no, you can't say neither as that would mean we would have no owner, and therefore wouldn't probably exist..

[Skeletor]

Haven't Sunderland posted a ~£30m loss for the last three years?

 

EDIT - £27.9m in 2011, £7.8m in 2012 and £26.9m this year.

 

So they've lost £62.6m in three years.  Not exactly the best.

 

 

Man City's and Chelsea's are even worse. We better tell them that next year's Premiership table will be based on accounts posted, not points gained on the football pitch.

 

Probably why Sunderland have fallen just short of those two.

 

Way to miss the point.. I haven't said their entire setup is better than ours, just that as an owner, he is pulling his weight and not afraid to go in a different direction if things don't work out.

 

Simple question: would you prefer Ashley or Short as our owner?

 

Can I say neither? You can throw all the money in the world at managers but if the managers you appoint are constantly s*** it isn't going to do much (see Souness, G).

 

As I said before, at least Ashley has got one important thing right with Graham Carr. If Short came here, appointed poor managers and gave them lots of money so spend on average players would you be happy?

 

You mentioned earlier 'Imagine Short giving money to Carr' but ignored the fact that Short could have appointed his own chief scout who has those contacts/ability and Sunderland would be flying. He hasn't which is why despite making a lot of money available they are no further forward than us despite us gifting them our relegation to move out of our shadows and be well ahead of us.

 

Short like Ashley has consistently made poor decisions which is why neither club are where they should be.

 

Short has just appointed a new chief scout and a new manager. Let's see how it goes before blowing our own trumpet. I would say as a proposition we are far more interesting than Sunderland too, although the gap is fast being bridged. What top class managers would have come to Sunderland five years ago, or even now? The bottom line is they are moving in the right direction slowly but surely, whereas we are moving in the opposite direction.

 

And no, you can't say neither as that would mean we would have no owner, and therefore wouldn't probably exist..

 

There's no evidence of this at all yet. All you can say is that they're trying something different after the last two attempts failed badly.

[Dokko]

Got to think if this heavy PDC and Italian investment doesn't come off Short wont go through another manager & remodel, I think he will sell up.

[madras]

Got to think if this heavy PDC and Italian investment doesn't come off Short wont go through another manager & remodel, I think he will sell up.

think he'll be like ashley, he'll get nowhere near what he's put in so willtry to run the club on what it brings in in the hope the price picks up.

[Cajun]

Haven't Sunderland posted a ~£30m loss for the last three years?

 

EDIT - £27.9m in 2011, £7.8m in 2012 and £26.9m this year.

 

So they've lost £62.6m in three years.  Not exactly the best.

 

 

Man City's and Chelsea's are even worse. We better tell them that next year's Premiership table will be based on accounts posted, not points gained on the football pitch.

 

Probably why Sunderland have fallen just short of those two.

 

Way to miss the point.. I haven't said their entire setup is better than ours, just that as an owner, he is pulling his weight and not afraid to go in a different direction if things don't work out.

 

Simple question: would you prefer Ashley or Short as our owner?

 

Can I say neither? You can throw all the money in the world at managers but if the managers you appoint are constantly s*** it isn't going to do much (see Souness, G).

 

As I said before, at least Ashley has got one important thing right with Graham Carr. If Short came here, appointed poor managers and gave them lots of money so spend on average players would you be happy?

 

You mentioned earlier 'Imagine Short giving money to Carr' but ignored the fact that Short could have appointed his own chief scout who has those contacts/ability and Sunderland would be flying. He hasn't which is why despite making a lot of money available they are no further forward than us despite us gifting them our relegation to move out of our shadows and be well ahead of us.

 

Short like Ashley has consistently made poor decisions which is why neither club are where they should be.

 

Short has just appointed a new chief scout and a new manager. Let's see how it goes before blowing our own trumpet. I would say as a proposition we are far more interesting than Sunderland too, although the gap is fast being bridged. What top class managers would have come to Sunderland five years ago, or even now? The bottom line is they are moving in the right direction slowly but surely, whereas we are moving in the opposite direction.

 

And no, you can't say neither as that would mean we would have no owner, and therefore wouldn't probably exist..

 

Well I wouldn't want either

 

Short has money he throws at poor managers.

 

Ashley has pennies he throws at a top scout.

 

Actually I go with Ashley as I believe we have the better squad despite no real money being available, a clearout of deadwood and a complete rebuilding.

 

Sunderland MIGHT go on to do well with their new set up but that is all guess work. Over the last few years I would say we have done better and are better placed to move on.

 

The whole sticking point seems to be "if the chairman/owner appoints the right manager", well I really believe if we appointed a quality manager we would be in a MUCH better position than them. We are a couple of players off a really good squad and about 4 players off a brilliant squad. Too early to say what Sunderland's latest overhaul of players will do but I would have really struggled to have 1-2 of their players in ours last season.

[Unbelievable]

Haven't Sunderland posted a ~£30m loss for the last three years?

 

EDIT - £27.9m in 2011, £7.8m in 2012 and £26.9m this year.

 

So they've lost £62.6m in three years.  Not exactly the best.

 

 

Man City's and Chelsea's are even worse. We better tell them that next year's Premiership table will be based on accounts posted, not points gained on the football pitch.

 

Probably why Sunderland have fallen just short of those two.

 

Way to miss the point.. I haven't said their entire setup is better than ours, just that as an owner, he is pulling his weight and not afraid to go in a different direction if things don't work out.

 

Simple question: would you prefer Ashley or Short as our owner?

 

Can I say neither? You can throw all the money in the world at managers but if the managers you appoint are constantly s*** it isn't going to do much (see Souness, G).

 

As I said before, at least Ashley has got one important thing right with Graham Carr. If Short came here, appointed poor managers and gave them lots of money so spend on average players would you be happy?

 

You mentioned earlier 'Imagine Short giving money to Carr' but ignored the fact that Short could have appointed his own chief scout who has those contacts/ability and Sunderland would be flying. He hasn't which is why despite making a lot of money available they are no further forward than us despite us gifting them our relegation to move out of our shadows and be well ahead of us.

 

Short like Ashley has consistently made poor decisions which is why neither club are where they should be.

 

Short has just appointed a new chief scout and a new manager. Let's see how it goes before blowing our own trumpet. I would say as a proposition we are far more interesting than Sunderland too, although the gap is fast being bridged. What top class managers would have come to Sunderland five years ago, or even now? The bottom line is they are moving in the right direction slowly but surely, whereas we are moving in the opposite direction.

 

And no, you can't say neither as that would mean we would have no owner, and therefore wouldn't probably exist..

 

Well I wouldn't want either

 

Short has money he throws at poor managers.

 

Ashley has pennies he throws at a top scout.

 

Actually I go with Ashley as I believe we have the better squad despite no real money being available, a clearout of deadwood and a complete rebuilding.

 

Sunderland MIGHT go on to do well with their new set up but that is all guess work. Over the last few years I would say we have done better and are better placed to move on.

 

The whole sticking point seems to be "if the chairman/owner appoints the right manager", well I really believe if we appointed a quality manager we would be in a MUCH better position than them. We are a couple of players off a really good squad and about 4 players off a brilliant squad. Too early to say what Sunderland's latest overhaul of players will do but I would have really struggled to have 1-2 of their players in ours last season.

 

Funny how you mention their poor managers vs our good scout. What about Ashley's managerial appointments, including the one already lined up to replace the mediocre current one?

[Unbelievable]

Haven't Sunderland posted a ~£30m loss for the last three years?

 

EDIT - £27.9m in 2011, £7.8m in 2012 and £26.9m this year.

 

So they've lost £62.6m in three years.  Not exactly the best.

 

 

Man City's and Chelsea's are even worse. We better tell them that next year's Premiership table will be based on accounts posted, not points gained on the football pitch.

 

Probably why Sunderland have fallen just short of those two.

 

Way to miss the point.. I haven't said their entire setup is better than ours, just that as an owner, he is pulling his weight and not afraid to go in a different direction if things don't work out.

 

Simple question: would you prefer Ashley or Short as our owner?

 

Can I say neither? You can throw all the money in the world at managers but if the managers you appoint are constantly s*** it isn't going to do much (see Souness, G).

 

As I said before, at least Ashley has got one important thing right with Graham Carr. If Short came here, appointed poor managers and gave them lots of money so spend on average players would you be happy?

 

You mentioned earlier 'Imagine Short giving money to Carr' but ignored the fact that Short could have appointed his own chief scout who has those contacts/ability and Sunderland would be flying. He hasn't which is why despite making a lot of money available they are no further forward than us despite us gifting them our relegation to move out of our shadows and be well ahead of us.

 

Short like Ashley has consistently made poor decisions which is why neither club are where they should be.

 

Short has just appointed a new chief scout and a new manager. Let's see how it goes before blowing our own trumpet. I would say as a proposition we are far more interesting than Sunderland too, although the gap is fast being bridged. What top class managers would have come to Sunderland five years ago, or even now? The bottom line is they are moving in the right direction slowly but surely, whereas we are moving in the opposite direction.

 

And no, you can't say neither as that would mean we would have no owner, and therefore wouldn't probably exist..

 

There's no evidence of this at all yet. All you can say is that they're trying something different after the last two attempts failed badly.

 

There isn't? Have a look at their average league position in the years before Short took them over vs ours before Ashley took over, than have a look at recent league final positions.

[Skeletor]

Haven't Sunderland posted a ~£30m loss for the last three years?

 

EDIT - £27.9m in 2011, £7.8m in 2012 and £26.9m this year.

 

So they've lost £62.6m in three years.  Not exactly the best.

 

 

Man City's and Chelsea's are even worse. We better tell them that next year's Premiership table will be based on accounts posted, not points gained on the football pitch.

 

Probably why Sunderland have fallen just short of those two.

 

Way to miss the point.. I haven't said their entire setup is better than ours, just that as an owner, he is pulling his weight and not afraid to go in a different direction if things don't work out.

 

Simple question: would you prefer Ashley or Short as our owner?

 

Can I say neither? You can throw all the money in the world at managers but if the managers you appoint are constantly s*** it isn't going to do much (see Souness, G).

 

As I said before, at least Ashley has got one important thing right with Graham Carr. If Short came here, appointed poor managers and gave them lots of money so spend on average players would you be happy?

 

You mentioned earlier 'Imagine Short giving money to Carr' but ignored the fact that Short could have appointed his own chief scout who has those contacts/ability and Sunderland would be flying. He hasn't which is why despite making a lot of money available they are no further forward than us despite us gifting them our relegation to move out of our shadows and be well ahead of us.

 

Short like Ashley has consistently made poor decisions which is why neither club are where they should be.

 

Short has just appointed a new chief scout and a new manager. Let's see how it goes before blowing our own trumpet. I would say as a proposition we are far more interesting than Sunderland too, although the gap is fast being bridged. What top class managers would have come to Sunderland five years ago, or even now? The bottom line is they are moving in the right direction slowly but surely, whereas we are moving in the opposite direction.

 

And no, you can't say neither as that would mean we would have no owner, and therefore wouldn't probably exist..

 

There's no evidence of this at all yet. All you can say is that they're trying something different after the last two attempts failed badly.

 

There isn't? Have a look at their average league position in the years before Short took them over vs ours before Ashley took over, than have a look at recent league final positions.

 

17th?

 

If any thing they were doing better under Bruce than they have recently. Definitely gone backwards.

[Unbelievable]

Haven't Sunderland posted a ~£30m loss for the last three years?

 

EDIT - £27.9m in 2011, £7.8m in 2012 and £26.9m this year.

 

So they've lost £62.6m in three years.  Not exactly the best.

 

 

Man City's and Chelsea's are even worse. We better tell them that next year's Premiership table will be based on accounts posted, not points gained on the football pitch.

 

Probably why Sunderland have fallen just short of those two.

 

Way to miss the point.. I haven't said their entire setup is better than ours, just that as an owner, he is pulling his weight and not afraid to go in a different direction if things don't work out.

 

Simple question: would you prefer Ashley or Short as our owner?

 

Can I say neither? You can throw all the money in the world at managers but if the managers you appoint are constantly s*** it isn't going to do much (see Souness, G).

 

As I said before, at least Ashley has got one important thing right with Graham Carr. If Short came here, appointed poor managers and gave them lots of money so spend on average players would you be happy?

 

You mentioned earlier 'Imagine Short giving money to Carr' but ignored the fact that Short could have appointed his own chief scout who has those contacts/ability and Sunderland would be flying. He hasn't which is why despite making a lot of money available they are no further forward than us despite us gifting them our relegation to move out of our shadows and be well ahead of us.

 

Short like Ashley has consistently made poor decisions which is why neither club are where they should be.

 

Short has just appointed a new chief scout and a new manager. Let's see how it goes before blowing our own trumpet. I would say as a proposition we are far more interesting than Sunderland too, although the gap is fast being bridged. What top class managers would have come to Sunderland five years ago, or even now? The bottom line is they are moving in the right direction slowly but surely, whereas we are moving in the opposite direction.

 

And no, you can't say neither as that would mean we would have no owner, and therefore wouldn't probably exist..

 

There's no evidence of this at all yet. All you can say is that they're trying something different after the last two attempts failed badly.

 

There isn't? Have a look at their average league position in the years before Short took them over vs ours before Ashley took over, than have a look at recent league final positions.

 

17th?

 

Recent <> last

[Skeletor]

10th > 13th > 17th

 

Not going in the right direction in my book.

[Cajun]

Haven't Sunderland posted a ~£30m loss for the last three years?

 

EDIT - £27.9m in 2011, £7.8m in 2012 and £26.9m this year.

 

So they've lost £62.6m in three years.  Not exactly the best.

 

 

Man City's and Chelsea's are even worse. We better tell them that next year's Premiership table will be based on accounts posted, not points gained on the football pitch.

 

Probably why Sunderland have fallen just short of those two.

 

Way to miss the point.. I haven't said their entire setup is better than ours, just that as an owner, he is pulling his weight and not afraid to go in a different direction if things don't work out.

 

Simple question: would you prefer Ashley or Short as our owner?

 

Can I say neither? You can throw all the money in the world at managers but if the managers you appoint are constantly s*** it isn't going to do much (see Souness, G).

 

As I said before, at least Ashley has got one important thing right with Graham Carr. If Short came here, appointed poor managers and gave them lots of money so spend on average players would you be happy?

 

You mentioned earlier 'Imagine Short giving money to Carr' but ignored the fact that Short could have appointed his own chief scout who has those contacts/ability and Sunderland would be flying. He hasn't which is why despite making a lot of money available they are no further forward than us despite us gifting them our relegation to move out of our shadows and be well ahead of us.

 

Short like Ashley has consistently made poor decisions which is why neither club are where they should be.

 

Short has just appointed a new chief scout and a new manager. Let's see how it goes before blowing our own trumpet. I would say as a proposition we are far more interesting than Sunderland too, although the gap is fast being bridged. What top class managers would have come to Sunderland five years ago, or even now? The bottom line is they are moving in the right direction slowly but surely, whereas we are moving in the opposite direction.

 

And no, you can't say neither as that would mean we would have no owner, and therefore wouldn't probably exist..

 

Well I wouldn't want either

 

Short has money he throws at poor managers.

 

Ashley has pennies he throws at a top scout.

 

Actually I go with Ashley as I believe we have the better squad despite no real money being available, a clearout of deadwood and a complete rebuilding.

 

Sunderland MIGHT go on to do well with their new set up but that is all guess work. Over the last few years I would say we have done better and are better placed to move on.

 

The whole sticking point seems to be "if the chairman/owner appoints the right manager", well I really believe if we appointed a quality manager we would be in a MUCH better position than them. We are a couple of players off a really good squad and about 4 players off a brilliant squad. Too early to say what Sunderland's latest overhaul of players will do but I would have really struggled to have 1-2 of their players in ours last season.

 

Funny how you mention their poor managers vs our good scout. What about Ashley's managerial appointments, including the one already lined up to replace the mediocre current one?

 

You're the one claiming Short is light years ahead of Ashley ffs!

[Unbelievable]

10th > 13th > 17th

 

Not going in the right direction in my book.

 

You're half way in understanding my argument. It's progress I guess, so I shall cheer you on. Now compare those to the ones from before he took over. Then, do the same to ours and consider which club has improved under their new owner, and which has regressed. There's a good boy.