This (new?) Transfer Policy

[Minhosa]

Strikes me as throwing money at people in the hope that one of them hits the ground running to the extent that they 'save' us this season but it doesn't look sustainable at all to me.

 

There appears a massive disjoint between the old approach (Carr, France etc etc) and the new one (McClaren, PL experience etc) and the imminent departure of Thauvin compounds that.

 

The result is a massively lopsided squad with too many midfielders, not enough decent defenders nor strikers and a head coach who seemingly can't get performances out of obviously talented sportsmen (De Jong, Thauvin, Marveaux etc) nor consistent performances out of others (Gini, Sissoko, Anita, Perez, Mitro).

 

The purchase of Townsend is like a typical Mackem signing imho. Overrated, overpaid and the good old english premium to boot.

 

This whole thing smacks of 'English Grit' and I don't think it will take long for people to see the limitations in this new approach.

 

On the bright side, we'll have the most expensive squad in championship history next season.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

I agree we needed a different aspect to the team, so varying the policy slightly is positive. Not necessarily British, but a bit more presence and experience. We also needed a couple of risk-free signings to keep us up in the short-term.

 

Problem is we haven't gone and signed proven players, we've gambled on two lads who haven't been playing much and may not make the impact we want.

[Altamullan]

Old policy: buy them young cheap and (usually) from abroad.

Old aim: business model comes first, offset ridiculous 'staffing costs' with potential increased value post premiership experience.

Old consequences:one-armed bandit variable reinforcement- every now and then hit the jackpot, never know when so temptation is  to keep slotting your dosh until your wages are gone. Erode experience, spirit and cohesiveness of your squad; felt-sense of being part of a group of mercenaries/legionnaires rather than the Toon Army. Inevitable losing streak on the bandits = p*ss poor performances, alienation of well-informed fan base and risks of relegation.

 

New policy: buy established but young (unsettled/down on their luck) proven premiership players.

New aim: don't abandon business model, but for f***'s sake don't get relegated....

New consequences: duplication of roles we have already inadequately recruited to, add (youthful) experience and grit to the squad, risk of exhausting limited transfer kitty without securing key roles (as already filled by 'staff' we can't move on).

[Minhosa]

New Consequence: Having a squad filled with players other premiership clubs don't want nor rate, on big wages, hard to shift who bring very little surprise.

 

I have to say, probably an unpopular view, but I always liked the idea of signing a Thauvin (unknown, lots of potential, new to the league etc) over a Townsend (known, limitations also known, fairly poor record in the prem etc) because of the mystery. When you're never going to win anything, don't particularly entertain and are going nowhere, the only hopes are new signings turning out well and potentially seeing decent football.

 

If we wanted a new 'english grit' approach, I'd have happily seen them spank money on Shawcross or somebody but not midfielders/attackers that have never stood out in the league already.

[Guest dabe]

I'd be more inclined to believe the English Grit thing if we weren't trying to sign Townsend and have already signed Shelvey. Neither are Cattermole-like cloggers.

 

It does look like McClaren is trying to institute his buying philosophy on the old model though, both Townsend and Shelvey seem well suited to auld Island heed.

[Gallowgate Toon]

Shelvey and Townsend have shown decent glimpses of talent, tbf, the former especially. There's signs they can be moulded into something at this level, and both have attributes we really need.

[Minhosa]

I'd be more inclined to believe the English Grit thing if we weren't trying to sign Townsend and have already signed Shelvey. Neither are Cattermole-like cloggers.

 

It does look like McClaren is trying to institute his buying philosophy on the old model though, both Townsend and Shelvey seem well suited to auld Island heed.

 

Shelvey is a proper cunt so there are close similarities with Cattermole there. If the mackems had signed him, ask yourself, what you would think of the bloke.

 

That's not to say I don't rate him per say, but he is very much in the 'get stuck in' English grit mould. In his very interview he says he'll 'never shirk a tackle' ffs .

 

Townsend is them buying someone used to the league i.e: taking less of a risk which strikes me as, to some extent, disregarding the old model. I'd rather see an unknown than an out of form/favour 'known' all day long personally.

 

[Guest dabe]

I'd be more inclined to believe the English Grit thing if we weren't trying to sign Townsend and have already signed Shelvey. Neither are Cattermole-like cloggers.

 

It does look like McClaren is trying to institute his buying philosophy on the old model though, both Townsend and Shelvey seem well suited to auld Island heed.

 

Shelvey is a proper c*** so there are close similarities with Cattermole there. If the mackems had signed him, ask yourself, what you would think of the bloke.

 

That's not to say I don't rate him per say, but he is very much in the 'get stuck in' English grit mould. In his very interview he says he'll 'never shirk a tackle' ffs .

 

Townsend is them buying someone used to the league i.e: taking less of a risk which strikes me as, to some extent, disregarding the old model. I'd rather see an unknown than an out of form/favour 'known' all day long personally.

 

I'd imagine you would get that type of commitment to a tackle from most combative midfielders, whether English or not, but in general I'd say Shelvey isn't a "typical" English midfielder. Even if Sunderland signed him I'd still rate him decently, liked him as a player since he was at Charlton, but he is clearly a bit of an arse and has to find the right situation to excel.

 

Certainly agree with the last part, that's where good scouting comes in, which we can be hit or miss on (for every Thauvin, there's a Perez).

 

[Beren]

It's kowtowing to the prehistoric gospel of Sky tbh. You need English, proven players who will graft for you. That's how you compete in this league. Not really thrive or progress, but remain in the league. Good for a club like Newcastle who should aim to survive.

 

It dovetails nicely with Ashley's ambition to buy players at their monetary nadir in the hope they get poached for more, too.

[Incognito]

He's just trying to stay up . He did this in the Debuchy window. Nowt different.

[bowlingcrofty]

I guess it would be ridiculous to have a transfer policy of just signing better players than you currently have, irrespective of nationality.

[NG32]

New Transfer Policy - Shit we look like we are going down buy buy buy buy

[Minhosa]

He's just trying to stay up . He did this in the Debuchy window. Nowt different.

 

I'd say it is different this time in that he's approving the purchase of 'established' english players rather than punting on the likes of those we bought in that window. There's clearly a shift in policy.

 

[Minhosa]

I guess it would be ridiculous to have a transfer policy of just signing better players than you currently have, irrespective of nationality.

 

Is Townsend better than Obertan? Yes. Is he better than HBA? No. Does he have potential to be? No.

 

My point is, if we're never going to compete at any notable level, the best we can hope for is unearthing a gem we can call our own and pray for some decent football.

 

I reckon I love Perez more because we picked him up for peanuts and he's taken to the league brilliantly well. That's a back story I can warm to. Andros pissing Townsend flying down the wing, cutting inside on his only foot, and skying one over the Gallowgate is harder to accept when we've had our pants pulled down on the fee and we all knew all of this already.

 

[steve_69]

There's no pleasing people on here. We're splashing the cash, showing we're prepared to alter the transfer policy and giving the manager more of a say in who we sign.

Surely these are positive things?

 

 

[Minhosa]

There's no pleasing people on here. We're splashing the cash, showing we're prepared to alter the transfer policy and giving the manager more of a say in who we sign.

Surely these are positive things?

 

 

It is if you place any value on the opinion of the manager.

 

I really like Pochettino as a manager. He's currently driving Andros up with a big fuck off smile on his face. Is that a positive thing?

 

[relámpago blanco]

New Transfer Policy - Shit we look like we are going down buy buy buy buy

Not even a need to do that tbh, our squad is decent enough so most morons could keep us up.  We'll have spent 80 or 90 million quid including the summer and for some reason our hierarchy would rather do that than sack the useless cunt.

[steve_69]

There's no pleasing people on here. We're splashing the cash, showing we're prepared to alter the transfer policy and giving the manager more of a say in who we sign.

Surely these are positive things?

 

 

It is if you place any value on the opinion of the manager.

 

I really like Pochettino as a manager. He's currently driving Andros up with a big f*** off smile on his face. Is that a positive thing?

 

 

Depends on the way you play tbh. Townsend is very direct and that might not suit how Pochettino wants to play. There are loads of reasons a manager might let a player leave, it doesn't automatically mean the player is shit.

I'm pretty sure Towsend had a big falling out with some of the backroom staff so that might have something to do with it? The other thing to bear in mind is that we're battling relegation and Spurs are fighting for the Champions League. Maybe Townsend is good enough for a mid-table team but not a top 4-5 team.

[Teasy]

I agree we needed a different aspect to the team, so varying the policy slightly is positive. Not necessarily British, but a bit more presence and experience. We also needed a couple of risk-free signings to keep us up in the short-term.

 

Problem is we haven't gone and signed proven players, we've gambled on two lads who haven't been playing much and may not make the impact we want.

 

Think Shelvey has at least proven he can be very effective in this league.  Townsend on the other hand hasn't, and he's been in this league for years, total gamble there IMO.

[Minhosa]

There's no pleasing people on here. We're splashing the cash, showing we're prepared to alter the transfer policy and giving the manager more of a say in who we sign.

Surely these are positive things?

 

 

It is if you place any value on the opinion of the manager.

 

I really like Pochettino as a manager. He's currently driving Andros up with a big f*** off smile on his face. Is that a positive thing?

 

 

Depends on the way you play tbh. Townsend is very direct and that might not suit how Pochettino wants to play. There are loads of reasons a manager might let a player leave, it doesn't automatically mean the player is shit.

I'm pretty sure Towsend had a big falling out with some of the backroom staff so that might have something to do with it? The other thing to bear in mind is that we're battling relegation and Spurs are fighting for the Champions League. Maybe Townsend is good enough for a mid-table team but not a top 4-5 team.

 

So, we've signed two huffy cunts who fall out with backroom staff then.

 

I fully understand managers can flog players for various reasons but Townsend's not had a look in, in a side that plays with two wide advanced players and breaks at speed. Surely, he'd get some time off the bench for them?

 

Poch signed Son in place of Andros in a deal, the likes of which, we should be considering i.e: taking a punt on someone who might be better than you expected in a league they've not played in.

 

We're probably going around in circles, all I'm saying is, I don't like the new approach and predict the judgement for these 'known' guys to perform will be made over a much shorter period and, if we're not careful, we'll be left with a load of guff we can't shift because they're either 'trouble' or, more likely 'overpaid, overrated'.

 

Basically, like the mackems.

[Minhosa]

I agree we needed a different aspect to the team, so varying the policy slightly is positive. Not necessarily British, but a bit more presence and experience. We also needed a couple of risk-free signings to keep us up in the short-term.

 

Problem is we haven't gone and signed proven players, we've gambled on two lads who haven't been playing much and may not make the impact we want.

 

Think Shelvey has at least proven he can be very effective in this league.  Townsend on the other hand hasn't, and he's been in this league for years, total gamble there IMO.

 

I can see the logic in the punt on Shelvey. Townsend, not so much.

 

All I would say though is that you've got a team that has plummeted down the league, needing their best players to stay up and he's been flogged as soon as they could find a buyer. He was quickly binned at Liverpool and he's known for having a questionable attitude.

 

It's not without it's risks.

[ponsaelius]

I do agree a bit tbh. These signings are very much Sunderland or QPR in a dogfight type signings. Improving what you have with safe, overpriced but better players. Might keep you up like the mackems, might have you going down anyway like QPR. They're not gonna lift us to fighting for CL places next year the way Cabaye, Ben Arfa, Ba and Cisse did.

 

But its desperation and we need improvement I guess.

[Minhosa]

I do agree a bit tbh. These signings are very much Sunderland or QPR in a dogfight type signings. Improving what you have with safe, overpriced but better players. Might keep you up like the mackems, might have you going down anyway like QPR. They're not gonna lift us to fighting for CL places next year the way Cabaye, Ben Arfa, Ba and Cisse did.

 

But its desperation and we need improvement I guess.

 

The biggest problem though, and clearly the elephant in the fucking boardroom, is that owld 'Island Heed' has not shown he's capable of improving talented players nor finding a system to at least entertain the idea of giving a Thauvin, De Jong, Marveaux etc a run.

 

They might very well be shite or too flimsy/not suited to our league but at least give them a run of 12-15 games to show something.

[r0cafella]

I do agree a bit tbh. These signings are very much Sunderland or QPR in a dogfight type signings. Improving what you have with safe, overpriced but better players. Might keep you up like the mackems, might have you going down anyway like QPR. They're not gonna lift us to fighting for CL places next year the way Cabaye, Ben Arfa, Ba and Cisse did.

 

But its desperation and we need improvement I guess.

 

The biggest problem though, and clearly the elephant in the fucking boardroom, is that owld 'Island Heed' has not shown he's capable of improving talented players nor finding a system to at least entertain the idea of giving a Thauvin, De Jong, Marveaux etc a run.

 

They might very well be shite or too flimsy/not suited to our league but at least give them a run of 12-15 games to show something.

Cracking posts from you two lads, this is exactly what is at play here.

[merlin]

The 'NEW' policy is all about desperation - nothing more, nothing less.

Its not new either, we saw this a few years ago when there was a desperate rush - against declared policy earlier - to sign Sissoko, Gouffran etc in order to keep the club in the PL - it only JUST succeeded, with a fortunate result against QPR on the last day.

This is just a repeat of that  and if we had been around 12th position, it wouldn't be happening - and as yet, NO proven striker which is, in my view, now the most urgent position to fill. Compared to that, Townsend is a luxury.

Ashley is DESPERATE to keep us in the PL because of the money available next season and that is the sole reason all this is happening.