Guest Invicta_Toon Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 Luckily the Sky money leaps next year. The sad thing is that that money has aleady been spent. The extra income will only take us to the point we should be at. For other clubs the money will be a bonus, for us is it is a life-raft. Aye because NUFC are the ONLY club to have used that money in future accounts get over yourself FFS Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 get over yourself FFS Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Lol Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 As much as you think the squad players may be getting a sizeabe wedge, it surely still can't compare with the Spanners. It was said on KUMB and generally agreed that Lucas Neill opted for them ahead of Liverpool because Rafa had no wish to spend £64k pw. Also Davenport celebrated his move by buying himself a new Hummer. As he was with new employers, he had to produce confirmation of his declared income. £33k pw. At Spurs he was on £8k!!! And it's said there is no clause to reduce that if they do fall into the Championship (which is like Sunday morning following Saturday night tbh). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
macbeth Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 Wages for all clubs rose in those 4 years I would guess. Nevertheless those wage costs were meant to create success for the club, which unfortunately hasn't happened. I trust the board of NUFC to keep the club in good financial help whilst providing as much resources as they can to the team. Sadly no. As some one else noted in a previous post the wage rises for players has started to flatten out. In 2005 I believe the overall PL total rise was 3% (sorry I haven't got the source). At that time Deloittes suggestion was that at the very top, so the Owen's, Terry's etc would always command bumoer wages, and that they coudl see no change happenign in that. What they did see changign was the wages that the next level down of players could command. These were the good squad players that teams wished to retain. They saw a shift in emphasis away from clubs having to pay over the top, to players perhaps having lower wage demands but looking for the security of longer term contracts. At the lowest level of journeymen/Bosmans the clubs were suddenly in very strong bargaining positions. The players were out of contract, without an income and had to take what they offered. We would likely have doen well out of someone like Sibs. Not wanted by City, desperate for a new chance, would take what he was given. At the higher level we woudl look to have not doen so well. We have goen for the good players, and these good players have asked for good wages, but have also asked for longer contracts. There should have been some negotiatting gone on at this point. Lower wages = longer contract, higher wages = shorter (or standard) contract. That Parker, Emre, Luque, Duff and Martins were all given 5 year contracts means we have a huge fixed outlay for a numebr of years. It wouldn't be unreasonable to suggest that these 5 are each on £2m per year, so a £10m hit that nothing can be done about. At the top end we have to pay what is required to get someone like Michael Owen, not much that can be down if we wish to have that level of player. If Dyer is on similarly high wages then that is a nonsensefor a fringe international player, other may disagree. The board used to be in control of wages. Their record was fantastic. Good basic, huge bonuses for success. The huge leap in wages from 32m in 2002 to 45m 2003 was stated to be purely down to bonuses paid for reaching the 2nd phase of the Champions League. Last year, so only three years on, the wages were 56m, while we didn't even get thro the Intertoto Cup. So that 56m was the "basic", presumably still with a huge potential upside if we ever do well in Europe. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 Luckily the Sky money leaps next year. The sad thing is that that money has aleady been spent. The extra income will only take us to the point we should be at. For other clubs the money will be a bonus, for us is it is a life-raft. Aye because NUFC are the ONLY club to have used that money in future accounts get over yourself FFS It's like the comment that if £30m hadn't gone in dividends over a decade (or whatever it was) that this exact £30m would have been available to Roeder last summer to buy players. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
macbeth Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 Exactly. However, that's a football reason and it happened as an attempt was made to rid the club of the reported bad influence of certain players who had to be replaced otherwise we'd be looking at relegation and even less revenue. It's been discussed before but people don't understand it. The poor appoointment of Souness is what can be seen in that chart and that is all. You keep suggesting that. Souness joined September 2004, so had no impact on wages until the subsequent January, 2005. The bringing in of Boumsong, Baba and Faye for 6 months will have made the tiniest difference to the wage bil for the year. So Souness's full influence can only be seen in the 2006 accounts. He brought the expensive playersin for that season. That looked to be responsible for the £6m leap from 2005. He cannot be blamed for the rises up to 2005. Also it was quite clearly stated in the accoutns thsi year, for the first time, that all decisions regarding player wages were made purely at the board level. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parky Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 As much as you think the squad players may be getting a sizeabe wedge, it surely still can't compare with the Spanners. It was said on KUMB and generally agreed that Lucas Neill opted for them ahead of Liverpool because Rafa had no wish to spend £64k pw. Also Davenport celebrated his move by buying himself a new Hummer. As he was with new employers, he had to produce confirmation of his declared income. £33k pw. At Spurs he was on £8k!!! And it's said there is no clause to reduce that if they do fall into the Championship (which is like Sunday morning following Saturday night tbh). They are in panic mode tbf. Interesting about Davenport any ideas on Hudd? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
macbeth Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 Luckily the Sky money leaps next year. The sad thing is that that money has aleady been spent. The extra income will only take us to the point we should be at. For other clubs the money will be a bonus, for us is it is a life-raft. Aye because NUFC are the ONLY club to have used that money in future accounts get over yourself FFS It's like the comment that if £30m hadn't gone in dividends over a decade (or whatever it was) that this exact £30m would have been available to Roeder last summer to buy players. I'm understand why you say this, but where would it have gone? In the summer 2003 £8.5m was given away at the same time as no money was given to the team manager to strengthen his squad. For me that was a key turning point. It is far better to invest while things are going well, than to try and spend your way out of a mess. The moment has gone though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parky Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 Luckily the Sky money leaps next year. The sad thing is that that money has aleady been spent. The extra income will only take us to the point we should be at. For other clubs the money will be a bonus, for us is it is a life-raft. Aye because NUFC are the ONLY club to have used that money in future accounts get over yourself FFS It's like the comment that if £30m hadn't gone in dividends over a decade (or whatever it was) that this exact £30m would have been available to Roeder last summer to buy players. I'm understand why you say this, but where would it have gone? In the summer 2003 £8.5m was given away at the same time as no money was given to the team manager to strengthen his squad. For me that was a key turning point. It is far better to invest while things are going well, then to try and spend your way out of a mess. The moment has gone though. Agreed we didn't build and this was the key moment. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
macbeth Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 Someone at the club has just not been in control of things. High wages on falling income is why the club has been losing over £1m per month for the last reported 18 months. The hope has to be that the new CEO will bring in sound financial knowledge that has clearly been missing for the last few years. Luckily the Sky money leaps next year. The sad thing is that that money has aleady been spent. The extra income will only take us to the point we should be at. For other clubs the money will be a bonus, for us is it is a life-raft. Agenda again. You just can't stop and it spoils almost every post you make. I'm sorry if it comes across as some sort of agenda. But isn't the bit you've highlighted just a statement? I don't know who was supposed to be responsible for finance within the club as there was no one on the board with those skills. But somebody must have been supposedly looking at these things. The new guy definitely has expertise in this area, and it is encouraging to see his arrival. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Lol Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 As much as you think the squad players may be getting a sizeabe wedge, it surely still can't compare with the Spanners. It was said on KUMB and generally agreed that Lucas Neill opted for them ahead of Liverpool because Rafa had no wish to spend £64k pw. Also Davenport celebrated his move by buying himself a new Hummer. As he was with new employers, he had to produce confirmation of his declared income. £33k pw. At Spurs he was on £8k!!! And it's said there is no clause to reduce that if they do fall into the Championship (which is like Sunday morning following Saturday night tbh). They are in panic mode tbf. Interesting about Davenport any ideas on Hudd? How much he's on? Someone did say £9k, I don't know how accurate that is but I would guess that is fairly close. Hudd's problem is that we haven't got the perfect midfielder for him to play alongside so for the forseeable future I see him as Zokora's backup. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parky Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 As much as you think the squad players may be getting a sizeabe wedge, it surely still can't compare with the Spanners. It was said on KUMB and generally agreed that Lucas Neill opted for them ahead of Liverpool because Rafa had no wish to spend £64k pw. Also Davenport celebrated his move by buying himself a new Hummer. As he was with new employers, he had to produce confirmation of his declared income. £33k pw. At Spurs he was on £8k!!! And it's said there is no clause to reduce that if they do fall into the Championship (which is like Sunday morning following Saturday night tbh). They are in panic mode tbf. Interesting about Davenport any ideas on Hudd? How much he's on? Someone did say £9k, I don't know how accurate that is but I would guess that is fairly close. Hudd's problem is that we haven't got the perfect midfielder for him to play alongside so for the forseeable future I see him as Zokora's backup. See that's sensible money. What is he 19 - 20? I rate him quite highly, seems to have concentration problems and loves playing to the crowd, but he'll grow out of that. Btw Imo Eboue is the big Wenger find as people will discover. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Lol Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 Luckily the Sky money leaps next year. The sad thing is that that money has aleady been spent. The extra income will only take us to the point we should be at. For other clubs the money will be a bonus, for us is it is a life-raft. Aye because NUFC are the ONLY club to have used that money in future accounts get over yourself FFS It's like the comment that if £30m hadn't gone in dividends over a decade (or whatever it was) that this exact £30m would have been available to Roeder last summer to buy players. I'm understand why you say this, but where would it have gone? In the summer 2003 £8.5m was given away at the same time as no money was given to the team manager to strengthen his squad. For me that was a key turning point. It is far better to invest while things are going well, then to try and spend your way out of a mess. The moment has gone though. Agreed we didn't build and this was the key moment. There's always those times when you can look back in hindsight and say 'if only'............ If Newcastle had retained that money, if Manchester Utd had decided to sack SAF 2 matches sooner, if SAF hadn't signed Cantona............the premiership might have looked a whole lot different to what it does now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Lol Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 As much as you think the squad players may be getting a sizeabe wedge, it surely still can't compare with the Spanners. It was said on KUMB and generally agreed that Lucas Neill opted for them ahead of Liverpool because Rafa had no wish to spend £64k pw. Also Davenport celebrated his move by buying himself a new Hummer. As he was with new employers, he had to produce confirmation of his declared income. £33k pw. At Spurs he was on £8k!!! And it's said there is no clause to reduce that if they do fall into the Championship (which is like Sunday morning following Saturday night tbh). They are in panic mode tbf. Interesting about Davenport any ideas on Hudd? How much he's on? Someone did say £9k, I don't know how accurate that is but I would guess that is fairly close. Hudd's problem is that we haven't got the perfect midfielder for him to play alongside so for the forseeable future I see him as Zokora's backup. See that's sensible money. What is he 19 - 20? I rate him quite highly, seems to have concentration problems and loves playing to the crowd, but he'll grow out of that. Btw Imo Eboue is the big Wenger find as people will discover. No, you're wrong, he was another Comolli find. That's why Spurs fans are getting more and more confident (perhaps too confident) about the future. Comolli did it once for them, he's started to do the same again for us, creating partnerships with clubs in South Africa, Nigeria and maybe one again in Ivory Coast, but not ASEC Abidjan. Perhaps even more satisfying is at least 3 of the kids he's signed for Spurs have been in direct competition with Wenger. It may all end in tears but I'm more optimistic now than I have been for years, even when Arnesen came in he offered hope but also recruited some God awful youngsters! Comolli is already delivering more. Most Spurs fans on the forums are agreed that Berbatov and Zokora would't have looked twice at Spurs if it hadn't been for Comolli's efforts. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 As much as you think the squad players may be getting a sizeabe wedge, it surely still can't compare with the Spanners. It was said on KUMB and generally agreed that Lucas Neill opted for them ahead of Liverpool because Rafa had no wish to spend £64k pw. Also Davenport celebrated his move by buying himself a new Hummer. As he was with new employers, he had to produce confirmation of his declared income. £33k pw. At Spurs he was on £8k!!! And it's said there is no clause to reduce that if they do fall into the Championship (which is like Sunday morning following Saturday night tbh). They are in panic mode tbf. Interesting about Davenport any ideas on Hudd? How much he's on? Someone did say £9k, I don't know how accurate that is but I would guess that is fairly close. Hudd's problem is that we haven't got the perfect midfielder for him to play alongside so for the forseeable future I see him as Zokora's backup. See that's sensible money. What is he 19 - 20? I rate him quite highly, seems to have concentration problems and loves playing to the crowd, but he'll grow out of that. Btw Imo Eboue is the big Wenger find as people will discover. No, you're wrong, he was another Comolli find. That's why Spurs fans are getting more and more confident (perhaps too confident) about the future. Comolli did it once for them, he's started to do the same again for us, creating partnerships with clubs in South Africa, Nigeria and maybe one again in Ivory Coast, but not ASEC Abidjan. Perhaps even more satisfying is at least 3 of the kids he's signed for Spurs have been in direct competition with Wenger. It may all end in tears but I'm more optimistic now than I have been for years, even when Arnesen came in he offered hope but also recruited some God awful youngsters! Comolli is already delivering more. Most Spurs fans on the forums are agreed that Berbatov and Zokora would't have looked twice at Spurs if it hadn't been for Comolli's efforts. be warned ,we have bought some of the best youngsters on the planet...it's what you do with them that matters,that's what marks wenger out from the rest. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northern Monkey Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 Our overall wage bill for 2006 was £52.6m, that against a turnover of £83.1m. Surely this is fresh madness, we can't carry on sustaining these kind of wage levels, especially without CL football. In 2002 the wage bill was £32m....Who the fuck did we hire Jacko?! Employing the likes of Luque, Shambles, Dyer, Babayaro, Moore, Ameobi etc, on the wages they are on, regardless of them being not good enough, was never going to be a clever idea. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northern Monkey Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 As much as you think the squad players may be getting a sizeabe wedge, it surely still can't compare with the Spanners. It was said on KUMB and generally agreed that Lucas Neill opted for them ahead of Liverpool because Rafa had no wish to spend £64k pw. Also Davenport celebrated his move by buying himself a new Hummer. As he was with new employers, he had to produce confirmation of his declared income. £33k pw. At Spurs he was on £8k!!! And it's said there is no clause to reduce that if they do fall into the Championship (which is like Sunday morning following Saturday night tbh). They are in panic mode tbf. Interesting about Davenport any ideas on Hudd? How much he's on? Someone did say £9k, I don't know how accurate that is but I would guess that is fairly close. Hudd's problem is that we haven't got the perfect midfielder for him to play alongside so for the forseeable future I see him as Zokora's backup. See that's sensible money. What is he 19 - 20? I rate him quite highly, seems to have concentration problems and loves playing to the crowd, but he'll grow out of that. Btw Imo Eboue is the big Wenger find as people will discover. No, you're wrong, he was another Comolli find. That's why Spurs fans are getting more and more confident (perhaps too confident) about the future. Comolli did it once for them, he's started to do the same again for us, creating partnerships with clubs in South Africa, Nigeria and maybe one again in Ivory Coast, but not ASEC Abidjan. Perhaps even more satisfying is at least 3 of the kids he's signed for Spurs have been in direct competition with Wenger. It may all end in tears but I'm more optimistic now than I have been for years, even when Arnesen came in he offered hope but also recruited some God awful youngsters! Comolli is already delivering more. Most Spurs fans on the forums are agreed that Berbatov and Zokora would't have looked twice at Spurs if it hadn't been for Comolli's efforts. be warned ,we have bought some of the best youngsters on the planet...it's what you do with them that matters,that's what marks wenger out from the rest. Ooh, ooh, did we?? I'm looking forward to seeing them play for us one day. Who are they? Brazilians? Italians? a couple of Frenchs? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted March 21, 2007 Share Posted March 21, 2007 As much as you think the squad players may be getting a sizeabe wedge, it surely still can't compare with the Spanners. It was said on KUMB and generally agreed that Lucas Neill opted for them ahead of Liverpool because Rafa had no wish to spend £64k pw. Also Davenport celebrated his move by buying himself a new Hummer. As he was with new employers, he had to produce confirmation of his declared income. £33k pw. At Spurs he was on £8k!!! And it's said there is no clause to reduce that if they do fall into the Championship (which is like Sunday morning following Saturday night tbh). They are in panic mode tbf. Interesting about Davenport any ideas on Hudd? How much he's on? Someone did say £9k, I don't know how accurate that is but I would guess that is fairly close. Hudd's problem is that we haven't got the perfect midfielder for him to play alongside so for the forseeable future I see him as Zokora's backup. See that's sensible money. What is he 19 - 20? I rate him quite highly, seems to have concentration problems and loves playing to the crowd, but he'll grow out of that. Btw Imo Eboue is the big Wenger find as people will discover. No, you're wrong, he was another Comolli find. That's why Spurs fans are getting more and more confident (perhaps too confident) about the future. Comolli did it once for them, he's started to do the same again for us, creating partnerships with clubs in South Africa, Nigeria and maybe one again in Ivory Coast, but not ASEC Abidjan. Perhaps even more satisfying is at least 3 of the kids he's signed for Spurs have been in direct competition with Wenger. It may all end in tears but I'm more optimistic now than I have been for years, even when Arnesen came in he offered hope but also recruited some God awful youngsters! Comolli is already delivering more. Most Spurs fans on the forums are agreed that Berbatov and Zokora would't have looked twice at Spurs if it hadn't been for Comolli's efforts. be warned ,we have bought some of the best youngsters on the planet...it's what you do with them that matters,that's what marks wenger out from the rest. Ooh, ooh, did we?? I'm looking forward to seeing them play for us one day. Who are they? Brazilians? Italians? a couple of Frenchs? portuguese and paraguayan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northern Monkey Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 As much as you think the squad players may be getting a sizeabe wedge, it surely still can't compare with the Spanners. It was said on KUMB and generally agreed that Lucas Neill opted for them ahead of Liverpool because Rafa had no wish to spend £64k pw. Also Davenport celebrated his move by buying himself a new Hummer. As he was with new employers, he had to produce confirmation of his declared income. £33k pw. At Spurs he was on £8k!!! And it's said there is no clause to reduce that if they do fall into the Championship (which is like Sunday morning following Saturday night tbh). They are in panic mode tbf. Interesting about Davenport any ideas on Hudd? How much he's on? Someone did say £9k, I don't know how accurate that is but I would guess that is fairly close. Hudd's problem is that we haven't got the perfect midfielder for him to play alongside so for the forseeable future I see him as Zokora's backup. See that's sensible money. What is he 19 - 20? I rate him quite highly, seems to have concentration problems and loves playing to the crowd, but he'll grow out of that. Btw Imo Eboue is the big Wenger find as people will discover. No, you're wrong, he was another Comolli find. That's why Spurs fans are getting more and more confident (perhaps too confident) about the future. Comolli did it once for them, he's started to do the same again for us, creating partnerships with clubs in South Africa, Nigeria and maybe one again in Ivory Coast, but not ASEC Abidjan. Perhaps even more satisfying is at least 3 of the kids he's signed for Spurs have been in direct competition with Wenger. It may all end in tears but I'm more optimistic now than I have been for years, even when Arnesen came in he offered hope but also recruited some God awful youngsters! Comolli is already delivering more. Most Spurs fans on the forums are agreed that Berbatov and Zokora would't have looked twice at Spurs if it hadn't been for Comolli's efforts. be warned ,we have bought some of the best youngsters on the planet...it's what you do with them that matters,that's what marks wenger out from the rest. Ooh, ooh, did we?? I'm looking forward to seeing them play for us one day. Who are they? Brazilians? Italians? a couple of Frenchs? portuguese and paraguayan I can't wait to see them play, then. Cos all i can remember us buying in the past is not-that-good kids about whom people fell for the hype. You know: best young kids in Europe/the world, top England players like Dyer, defenders full of potential like Shambles, yadda, yadda. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 too late we sold them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parky Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 too late we sold them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 Exactly. However, that's a football reason and it happened as an attempt was made to rid the club of the reported bad influence of certain players who had to be replaced otherwise we'd be looking at relegation and even less revenue. It's been discussed before but people don't understand it. The poor appoointment of Souness is what can be seen in that chart and that is all. You keep suggesting that. Souness joined September 2004, so had no impact on wages until the subsequent January, 2005. The bringing in of Boumsong, Baba and Faye for 6 months will have made the tiniest difference to the wage bil for the year. So Souness's full influence can only be seen in the 2006 accounts. He brought the expensive playersin for that season. That looked to be responsible for the £6m leap from 2005. He cannot be blamed for the rises up to 2005. Also it was quite clearly stated in the accoutns thsi year, for the first time, that all decisions regarding player wages were made purely at the board level. Why do you seem surprised? Why would anyone think anything different? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 Luckily the Sky money leaps next year. The sad thing is that that money has aleady been spent. The extra income will only take us to the point we should be at. For other clubs the money will be a bonus, for us is it is a life-raft. Aye because NUFC are the ONLY club to have used that money in future accounts get over yourself FFS It's like the comment that if £30m hadn't gone in dividends over a decade (or whatever it was) that this exact £30m would have been available to Roeder last summer to buy players. I'm understand why you say this, but where would it have gone? In the summer 2003 £8.5m was given away at the same time as no money was given to the team manager to strengthen his squad. For me that was a key turning point. It is far better to invest while things are going well, than to try and spend your way out of a mess. The moment has gone though. The summer of 2003 has been discussed many, many times and every single time it is I make this post but the content is largely ignored. Maybe you'll comment properly on it this time. <copy and paste> For 32 months from March 2001 through to Jan 2004 the only players who left the club were fringe players, many new players were brought in to boost the team and also to boost the squad. In fact, the players who departed weren’t even fringe players imo. There was an incoming transfer fee in March 2001 of £3.5m for Goma, the next significant incoming transfer fee was £2m for Cort in Jan 2004. The only other fees I can find a record of was £150,000 for Stuart Green and £150,000 for David Beharall when they left the club. Nobody else left for a fee during that time. During that same time period ~£45m was spent on the following players: O’Brien, Bellamy, Robert, Distin (loan fee), Jenas, Viana, Bramble, Woodgate and Ambrose. Bowyer also joined the club a few months later for nowt. These 10 players all draw wages, of course, changing the wages/turnover ratio etc. I make that a deficit of £43.7 million in 32 months, but this propelled the club into achieving those 3 top 5 finishes. I think this expenditure was well controlled, proven by the consolidation period of summer 2003. Don't forget that Woodgate, Ambrose and Bowyer all signed earlier in 2003, it's not as though we didn't sign any players during 2003, those signings could all have been left to the summer but they were brought in sooner for the greater benefit of the team, rather than later to satisfy the desire of some to sign a big name every summer. http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php/topic,21421.msg400941.html#msg400941 <end of copy and paste> So here you are in March 2007 yet again banging on about the size of the wage bill while at the same time advocating the club should have increased it during the summer of 2003, this despite the huge deficit at that point in time combined with an already huge increase in playing staff over the previous 32 months. Of course, you're saying this in hindsight but it's extremely unlikely you would have been saying this at the time. The club is a PLC, they give dividends, live with it. £8.5m would have bought one player, who could have been good but could have been a Boumsong, a Jenas or a Luque as easily as a Bellamy or a Robert. We'd signed 3 players already that year, two of them in the England squad at that time. In simple terms, the team and squad was improved during 2003 it just didn't happen during the summer, it happened sooner which was better. I'm sorry at how this might come across, but there's no other way of saying it. I find your position to be massively fuelled by your agenda, which has consumed you so much you're unable to see it. This post from you and my reply should highlight this for everybody imo. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 I wish we could keep this thread about Newcastle and cut out this boring shit about spurs. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
macbeth Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 The summer of 2003 has been discussed many, many times and every single time it is I make this post but the content is largely ignored. Maybe you'll comment properly on it this time. <copy and paste> For 32 months from March 2001 through to Jan 2004 the only players who left the club were fringe players, many new players were brought in to boost the team and also to boost the squad. In fact, the players who departed weren’t even fringe players imo. There was an incoming transfer fee in March 2001 of £3.5m for Goma, the next significant incoming transfer fee was £2m for Cort in Jan 2004. The only other fees I can find a record of was £150,000 for Stuart Green and £150,000 for David Beharall when they left the club. Nobody else left for a fee during that time. During that same time period ~£45m was spent on the following players: O’Brien, Bellamy, Robert, Distin (loan fee), Jenas, Viana, Bramble, Woodgate and Ambrose. Bowyer also joined the club a few months later for nowt. These 10 players all draw wages, of course, changing the wages/turnover ratio etc. I make that a deficit of £43.7 million in 32 months, but this propelled the club into achieving those 3 top 5 finishes. I think this expenditure was well controlled, proven by the consolidation period of summer 2003. Don't forget that Woodgate, Ambrose and Bowyer all signed earlier in 2003, it's not as though we didn't sign any players during 2003, those signings could all have been left to the summer but they were brought in sooner for the greater benefit of the team, rather than later to satisfy the desire of some to sign a big name every summer. http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php/topic,21421.msg400941.html#msg400941 <end of copy and paste> So here you are in March 2007 yet again banging on about the size of the wage bill while at the same time advocating the club should have increased it during the summer of 2003, this despite the huge deficit at that point in time combined with an already huge increase in playing staff over the previous 32 months. Of course, you're saying this in hindsight but it's extremely unlikely you would have been saying this at the time. The club is a PLC, they give dividends, live with it. £8.5m would have bought one player, who could have been good but could have been a Boumsong, a Jenas or a Luque as easily as a Bellamy or a Robert. We'd signed 3 players already that year, two of them in the England squad at that time. In simple terms, the team and squad was improved during 2003 it just didn't happen during the summer, it happened sooner which was better. I'm sorry at how this might come across, but there's no other way of saying it. I find your position to be massively fuelled by your agenda, which has consumed you so much you're unable to see it. This post from you and my reply should hightlight this for everybody imo. Okay. All those things you correctly mention, with players coming in, and them probaly being on increased wages to entice them to us, should have created a huge wage bill leap in 2003. They didn't. Or they may have done, but we were told it was down to the CL bonuses. In 2004 the wages were exactly the same as 2003. This either meant the wage jump the previous year had not been from CL bonuses, or that there had been a huge leap in basic pay. Something must have happened. And it all happened before Souness was even thougth about. The board sanctioned huge wage increases at that time. The decisions taken then are the ones we're still having to live with now. Those erros have been compounded by the policy of givign 5 year contracts to anyone who asked. This agenda of mine that you keep mentioning, could you remind me what it is, as you say I seem to have become so consumed by it I can't see it any more. Preciousssss Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now