Everything falling into place?

[Mick]

 

I am pleased you are saying what is absolutely true about those days, some of the others on here who deny it should take note.

 

I have said, a few times now, that what concerns me is losing Allardyce. You may not remember Gordon Lee, but he and Arthur Cox walked because the board let them down, and they were both showing their dissatisfaction in the same way that Allardyce has been doing.  He is the right manager for us, and I don't want this to happen again. You may be right that it is inexperience, and I hope you are, but at the end of the day, they have to get it right. Lets hope it is inexperience and they do learn quickly.

 

If they don't back him, he will walk and if he does well, other clubs will come sniffing and tempt him too.

 

 

 

Ring samaratins and seek help, I'm sure it's free advice.

[NE5]

 

I'm not old, I'm the same age as Allardyce and Roeder, and I'm not bitter, or if I am, the only thing I'm bitter about is the fact that for 30 years of supporting this club we sold our best players, and hunted around the free transfer market and bargain basements for the vast majority of our signings. It got us real mediocrity, the sort of mediocrity and disillusion that you would not believe.

 

For 15 years we had a board who aimed high, they made mistakes, but had ambition and came closest to winning stuff that nobody else did, tried to sign top players and consolidate high league positions, and now all of a sudden we have a board that is doing the same things as the arseholes who ran the club between 1964 and 1992 did.  It's an absolute joke that fans such as you and others like you can't see this to such an extent that you said when we signed a decent player, a "trophy" player. Pathetic. And - I don't give a flying f*** how much money they spent, the club generated money and filled the ground and attempted to capitalise on the support. It didn't quite succeed, but they didn't have to prove they had the ambition any more, they had already done that.

 

Smell the coffee. Face facts, and stop making excuses. To say that I don't want this club to be successful is absolutely ridiculous, I've waited a damn sight longer than most of you on here for success. And I can recognise a manager who isn't happy when I see it, unlike you. There are a few people who wanted Shepherd out who have actually read all these signals, instead of being completely blind because they don't want to see them, and credit to them.

 

If in 12 months time this board have proved their ambition, I will be happy, and if in the long run they match the Champions League finishes achieved under the last one, as a minimum, then this takeover has indeed been worth something, but if they don't, then its all worth bugger all.

 

I go by facts, league positions, not personalities, and hope. And right now, its anything but rosy. They have shown us nothing.

 

 

 

What are you on about with "For 15 years we had a board who aimed high, they made mistakes, but had ambition and came closest to winning stuff that nobody else did."  Are you trying to change history again or have we never won anything?

 

Are you going to change history and say that the Halls and Shepherd didn't give us the best results and performance of the last 50 years ?

 

How do you prove if this lot is more or less ambitious than the last lot?

 

Is getting on top of the spiralling debt left behind by the last lot a sign of ambition?

 

oh dear. You really don't get it do you.

 

Is this lot coming up with a short term, medium term and long term plan a sign of ambition?

 

"plan"  mackems.gif The mackems had "plans"  mackems.gif do you really think we could qualify for the Champions League and regularly for europe without "planning" better than most. What world do you inhabit  mackems.gif mackems.gif

 

If this lot qualify for the CL once will they be as good as Shepherd?

 

If they finish second once, are they better than Shepherd?

 

Now. YOU have said that the old board have held us back, blah blahblah, so if we don't at least match what the old board did, what exactly does this mean ? You tell me, I'm tired of going on at you, you;re totally clueless.

 

 

[NE5]

 

I am pleased you are saying what is absolutely true about those days, some of the others on here who deny it should take note.

 

I have said, a few times now, that what concerns me is losing Allardyce. You may not remember Gordon Lee, but he and Arthur Cox walked because the board let them down, and they were both showing their dissatisfaction in the same way that Allardyce has been doing.  He is the right manager for us, and I don't want this to happen again. You may be right that it is inexperience, and I hope you are, but at the end of the day, they have to get it right. Lets hope it is inexperience and they do learn quickly.

 

If they don't back him, he will walk and if he does well, other clubs will come sniffing and tempt him too.

 

 

 

Ring samaratins and seek help, I'm sure it's free advice.

 

Blimey, you're dumb lad.

[Mick]

 

I'm not old, I'm the same age as Allardyce and Roeder, and I'm not bitter, or if I am, the only thing I'm bitter about is the fact that for 30 years of supporting this club we sold our best players, and hunted around the free transfer market and bargain basements for the vast majority of our signings. It got us real mediocrity, the sort of mediocrity and disillusion that you would not believe.

 

For 15 years we had a board who aimed high, they made mistakes, but had ambition and came closest to winning stuff that nobody else did, tried to sign top players and consolidate high league positions, and now all of a sudden we have a board that is doing the same things as the arseholes who ran the club between 1964 and 1992 did.  It's an absolute joke that fans such as you and others like you can't see this to such an extent that you said when we signed a decent player, a "trophy" player. Pathetic. And - I don't give a flying f*** how much money they spent, the club generated money and filled the ground and attempted to capitalise on the support. It didn't quite succeed, but they didn't have to prove they had the ambition any more, they had already done that.

 

Smell the coffee. Face facts, and stop making excuses. To say that I don't want this club to be successful is absolutely ridiculous, I've waited a damn sight longer than most of you on here for success. And I can recognise a manager who isn't happy when I see it, unlike you. There are a few people who wanted Shepherd out who have actually read all these signals, instead of being completely blind because they don't want to see them, and credit to them.

 

If in 12 months time this board have proved their ambition, I will be happy, and if in the long run they match the Champions League finishes achieved under the last one, as a minimum, then this takeover has indeed been worth something, but if they don't, then its all worth bugger all.

 

I go by facts, league positions, not personalities, and hope. And right now, its anything but rosy. They have shown us nothing.

 

 

 

What are you on about with "For 15 years we had a board who aimed high, they made mistakes, but had ambition and came closest to winning stuff that nobody else did."  Are you trying to change history again or have we never won anything?

 

Are you going to change history and say that the Halls and Shepherd didn't give us the best results and performance of the last 50 years ?

 

How do you prove if this lot is more or less ambitious than the last lot?

 

Is getting on top of the spiralling debt left behind by the last lot a sign of ambition?

 

oh dear. You really don't get it do you.

 

Is this lot coming up with a short term, medium term and long term plan a sign of ambition?

 

 

"plan"  mackems.gif The mackems had "plans"  mackems.gif do you really think we could qualify for the Champions League and regularly for europe without "planning" better than most. What world do you inhabit  mackems.gif mackems.gif

 

If this lot qualify for the CL once will they be as good as Shepherd?

 

If they finish second once, are they better than Shepherd?

 

Now. YOU have said that the old board have held us back, blah blahblah, so if we don't at least match what the old board did, what exactly does this mean ? You tell me, I'm tired of going on at you, you;re totally clueless.

 

 

 

I eally can't be arsed trying to debate with a manic depressant.

[Guest Invicta_Toon]

you don't build a squad with over thirties FFS

 

and Sam admitted himself they are after 1st teamers, not fillers

[NE5]

 

I'm not old, I'm the same age as Allardyce and Roeder, and I'm not bitter, or if I am, the only thing I'm bitter about is the fact that for 30 years of supporting this club we sold our best players, and hunted around the free transfer market and bargain basements for the vast majority of our signings. It got us real mediocrity, the sort of mediocrity and disillusion that you would not believe.

 

For 15 years we had a board who aimed high, they made mistakes, but had ambition and came closest to winning stuff that nobody else did, tried to sign top players and consolidate high league positions, and now all of a sudden we have a board that is doing the same things as the arseholes who ran the club between 1964 and 1992 did.  It's an absolute joke that fans such as you and others like you can't see this to such an extent that you said when we signed a decent player, a "trophy" player. Pathetic. And - I don't give a flying f*** how much money they spent, the club generated money and filled the ground and attempted to capitalise on the support. It didn't quite succeed, but they didn't have to prove they had the ambition any more, they had already done that.

 

Smell the coffee. Face facts, and stop making excuses. To say that I don't want this club to be successful is absolutely ridiculous, I've waited a damn sight longer than most of you on here for success. And I can recognise a manager who isn't happy when I see it, unlike you. There are a few people who wanted Shepherd out who have actually read all these signals, instead of being completely blind because they don't want to see them, and credit to them.

 

If in 12 months time this board have proved their ambition, I will be happy, and if in the long run they match the Champions League finishes achieved under the last one, as a minimum, then this takeover has indeed been worth something, but if they don't, then its all worth bugger all.

 

I go by facts, league positions, not personalities, and hope. And right now, its anything but rosy. They have shown us nothing.

 

 

 

What are you on about with "For 15 years we had a board who aimed high, they made mistakes, but had ambition and came closest to winning stuff that nobody else did."  Are you trying to change history again or have we never won anything?

 

Are you going to change history and say that the Halls and Shepherd didn't give us the best results and performance of the last 50 years ?

 

How do you prove if this lot is more or less ambitious than the last lot?

 

Is getting on top of the spiralling debt left behind by the last lot a sign of ambition?

 

oh dear. You really don't get it do you.

 

Is this lot coming up with a short term, medium term and long term plan a sign of ambition?

 

 

"plan"  mackems.gif The mackems had "plans"  mackems.gif do you really think we could qualify for the Champions League and regularly for europe without "planning" better than most. What world do you inhabit  mackems.gif mackems.gif

 

If this lot qualify for the CL once will they be as good as Shepherd?

 

If they finish second once, are they better than Shepherd?

 

Now. YOU have said that the old board have held us back, blah blahblah, so if we don't at least match what the old board did, what exactly does this mean ? You tell me, I'm tired of going on at you, you;re totally clueless.

 

 

 

I eally can't be arsed trying to debate with a manic depressant.

 

and you haven't been moaning on for ages about NUFC playing in europe, buying top players, and filling a 50,000 ground every week.

 

The modern NUFC fan eh

 

Shame you don't address the replies I made you - again

 

What a loser

 

 

 

[Mick]

you don't build a squad with over thirties FFS

 

and Sam admitted himself they are after 1st teamers, not fillers

 

I don't suppose that it's dawned on you that he may think these players will get us to Europe then he can bring in the younger, more expensive players who will be more likely to come here with that extra incentive?

[Dave]

That kind of shit is what makes me lock threads. Keep personal insults to PMs please.

[Guest Invicta_Toon]

you don't build a squad with over thirties FFS

 

and Sam admitted himself they are after 1st teamers, not fillers

 

I don't suppose that it's dawned on you that he may think these players will get us to Europe then he can bring in the younger, more expensive players who will be more likely to come here with that extra incentive?

 

of course it has. underpins the whole bloody argument tbh

[Guest SeattleToon]

Invicta_Toon, that's utter shite!!

 

I wouldn't want my midfielders to be over thirty, but given that good defending is much more about positioning and timing than physical ability, I actually would prefer having some experienced over-30 defenders.

 

After all Bramble and Onyewu both demontrated that being young and strong means nothing if you are always getting caught out of position.

 

Paolo Maldini is still going strong at 39, Nesta is 31, Cannavarro and Materrazzi are 33, Thuram is 35, Gallas is just turning 30, Desailly started for Chelsea until he was 33, Laurent Blanc and Frank LeBoeuf both were effective into their 30s, Baresi played for Milan until he was 37, Costacurta until he was 40....anyway, you get my point.

 

When it comes to defenders, old is not necessarily bad, and arguably better than young and inexperienced.

[Dave]

Trap, fallen, into.

[TRon]

Invicta_Toon, that's utter s****!!

 

I wouldn't want my midfielders to be over thirty, but given that good defending is much more about positioning and timing than physical ability, I actually would prefer having some experienced over-30 defenders.

 

After all Bramble and Onyewu both demontrated that being young and strong means nothing if you are always getting caught out of position.

 

Paolo Maldini is still going strong at 39, Nesta is 31, Cannavarro and Materrazzi are 33, Thuram is 35, Gallas is just turning 30, Desailly started for Chelsea until he was 33, Laurent Blanc and Frank LeBoeuf both were effective into their 30s, Baresi played for Milan until he was 37, Costacurta until he was 40....anyway, you get my point.

 

When it comes to defenders, old is not necessarily bad, and arguably better than young and inexperienced.

 

This post rates close to 10/10.  I can guarantee no detractor will have the balls to debate or dispute it on it's own merits but may well hark back to the days before Shepherd and Hall as a crutch defence and attempt to divert the issues addressed.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[TRon]

I think Sam has worked his socks off and shown a comittment to success at this club which i really admire as it comes from his professional pride rather than an emotional attachment to the club.

 

I'm happy with Smith, i've seen him play badly (Man U lost to Boro 4-1 when he was CM) but i've seen him play very well too. He wont set the prem alight but he will give us lots of options, more options than Dyer gave us. 

 

I dont know whether the defenders he is signing are good enough but i have the feeling they will turn out alright and am certain they are an improvement on what we have already. Well done Sam for sorting through this difficult window, we've got very little to offer players apart from a fanatical support with a sizeable minority of idiots to go with it.

 

There are no argument over the previous 4 signings, all of them moved the squad forward significantly.

 

We're lucky to have a half-decent manager, the whingeing c***s on here dont deserve him, they got what they deserved in Roeder and Souness. 

 

 

 

another beauty

[Cronky]

With a couple of experienced defenders and Smith coming in, we're beginning to look a bit more solid, so yes, I'm happy with the way things are going. Solid comes before spectacular.

 

I don't think that Allardyce putting pressure on the Board to come up with money is a sign that they've fallen out and he's about to go. Quite the opposite, in fact. Allardyce knows that the very last thing the Board want to do is try and find a new manager, and so he can afford to be a bit challenging in his statements. Benitez is doing the same thing to the new people at Liverpool.

[Guest Invicta_Toon]

Invicta_Toon, that's utter shite!!

 

I wouldn't want my midfielders to be over thirty, but given that good defending is much more about positioning and timing than physical ability, I actually would prefer having some experienced over-30 defenders.

 

After all Bramble and Onyewu both demontrated that being young and strong means nothing if you are always getting caught out of position.

 

Paolo Maldini is still going strong at 39, Nesta is 31, Cannavarro and Materrazzi are 33, Thuram is 35, Gallas is just turning 30, Desailly started for Chelsea until he was 33, Laurent Blanc and Frank LeBoeuf both were effective into their 30s, Baresi played for Milan until he was 37, Costacurta until he was 40....anyway, you get my point.

 

When it comes to defenders, old is not necessarily bad, and arguably better than young and inexperienced.

 

no coincidence you only name premiership defenders from Chelsea, who play so deep you don't exactly need to be quick

 

 

evra 26

heinze 29

vidic 26

brown 27

ferdinand 28

ben haim 25

carvalho 29

terry 27

agger 23

aurelio 27

toure 26

eboue 24

chimbonda 27

king 27

meite 27

samuel 26

yobo 27

lescott 25

shorey 26

bouma 28

huth 23

pogatetz 24

woodgate 27

rozehnal 27

 

 

[Baggio]

Invicta_Toon, that's utter s****!!

 

I wouldn't want my midfielders to be over thirty, but given that good defending is much more about positioning and timing than physical ability, I actually would prefer having some experienced over-30 defenders.

 

After all Bramble and Onyewu both demontrated that being young and strong means nothing if you are always getting caught out of position.

 

Paolo Maldini is still going strong at 39, Nesta is 31, Cannavarro and Materrazzi are 33, Thuram is 35, Gallas is just turning 30, Desailly started for Chelsea until he was 33, Laurent Blanc and Frank LeBoeuf both were effective into their 30s, Baresi played for Milan until he was 37, Costacurta until he was 40....anyway, you get my point.

 

When it comes to defenders, old is not necessarily bad, and arguably better than young and inexperienced.

 

no coincidence you only name premiership defenders from Chelsea, who play so deep you don't exactly need to be quick

 

 

Who's to say we won't play deep? The fact is we've got a bright young lad at the club with potential and the manager thinks the best way of bringing him on is to have experienced defenders next to him, I really can't see your problem.

[TRon]

Invicta_Toon, that's utter s****!!

 

I wouldn't want my midfielders to be over thirty, but given that good defending is much more about positioning and timing than physical ability, I actually would prefer having some experienced over-30 defenders.

 

After all Bramble and Onyewu both demontrated that being young and strong means nothing if you are always getting caught out of position.

 

Paolo Maldini is still going strong at 39, Nesta is 31, Cannavarro and Materrazzi are 33, Thuram is 35, Gallas is just turning 30, Desailly started for Chelsea until he was 33, Laurent Blanc and Frank LeBoeuf both were effective into their 30s, Baresi played for Milan until he was 37, Costacurta until he was 40....anyway, you get my point.

 

When it comes to defenders, old is not necessarily bad, and arguably better than young and inexperienced.

 

no coincidence you only name premiership defenders from Chelsea, who play so deep you don't exactly need to be quick

 

 

evra 26

heinze 29

vidic 26

brown 27

ferdinand 28

ben haim 25

carvalho 29

terry 27

agger 23

aurelio 27

toure 26

eboue 24

chimbonda 27

king 27

meite 27

samuel 26

yobo 27

lescott 25

shorey 26

bouma 28

huth 23

pogatetz 24

woodgate 27

rozehnal 27

 

 

 

What is your point? That Chelsea are getting it wrong?

 

 

[ChezGiven]

I think Sam has worked his socks off and shown a comittment to success at this club which i really admire as it comes from his professional pride rather than an emotional attachment to the club.

 

I'm happy with Smith, i've seen him play badly (Man U lost to Boro 4-1 when he was CM) but i've seen him play very well too. He wont set the prem alight but he will give us lots of options, more options than Dyer gave us. 

 

I dont know whether the defenders he is signing are good enough but i have the feeling they will turn out alright and am certain they are an improvement on what we have already. Well done Sam for sorting through this difficult window, we've got very little to offer players apart from a fanatical support with a sizeable minority of idiots to go with it.

 

There are no argument over the previous 4 signings, all of them moved the squad forward significantly.

 

We're lucky to have a half-decent manager, the whingeing c***s on here dont deserve him, they got what they deserved in Roeder and Souness. 

 

Exactly right, we should all be looking forward to the season, not moaning our heads off.  Some people would moan if we won the league on goal difference because we hadn't done it on points, it doesn't make sense.

 

He doesn't specify who he thinks the whingers are.  mackems.gif

 

I remember when people would have been happy to play regularly in europe, buy good players rather than constantly moan about it

 

Maybe he means those who didn't want Allardyce, and there were plenty of those. In fact some people like you have hardly stopped moaning since this board started. FWIW, I think all those who booed Bobby Robson for finishing 5th deserved Souness.

I think Allardyce has done great, but if YOU don't think you expected more, now that the man who held us back so much has gone, then you are lying.

 

 

Exactly.

 

I just meant the people who doubted Allardyce's ability to bring in the best people that he can. They may not live up to unrealistic expectations but i am sure they will be an improvement on what we have. In the ideal world they would be world class but we cant expect that sort of player right now.

 

[NE5]

Invicta_Toon, that's utter s****!!

 

I wouldn't want my midfielders to be over thirty, but given that good defending is much more about positioning and timing than physical ability, I actually would prefer having some experienced over-30 defenders.

 

After all Bramble and Onyewu both demontrated that being young and strong means nothing if you are always getting caught out of position.

 

Paolo Maldini is still going strong at 39, Nesta is 31, Cannavarro and Materrazzi are 33, Thuram is 35, Gallas is just turning 30, Desailly started for Chelsea until he was 33, Laurent Blanc and Frank LeBoeuf both were effective into their 30s, Baresi played for Milan until he was 37, Costacurta until he was 40....anyway, you get my point.

 

When it comes to defenders, old is not necessarily bad, and arguably better than young and inexperienced.

 

This post rates close to 10/10.  I can guarantee no detractor will have the balls to debate or dispute it on it's own merits but may well hark back to the days before Shepherd and Hall as a crutch defence and attempt to divert the issues addressed.

 

 

You would be wrong then.

 

I can guarantee that no detractor, especially those who weren't around pre - 1992 and think that NUFC have always won trophies galore and the Halls and Shepherd are responsible for bringing an end to decades of glory, would have the balls to dispute that a young quality defender is just as good a buy as an older quality defender, as he can spend his career with you, but whether they are young or old, you have to be prepared to pay a fee if they are under contract. And the competition will be hot if they are good, and the competition will not be so hot if they are not so good.

 

And if they are good, they won't sign for clubs that they think are not going to be successful, or clubs that offer less money than someone else.

 

We did quite well to sign Woodgate. For big money. There was also unknown, or cheap foreigners over the years such as Dumas, Marcelino, Goma, Boumsong, Babayaro, Pistone, Charvet, and younger players such as Bramble, O'Brien, Griffin, as part of a "plan" for those who think everybody but us has a "plan". Lets hope these new defenders are better than most of that little lot, the vast majority of whom were celebrated when arrived because we needed defenders.

 

The bottom line, is that if you want quality, you invariably pay, either with a transfer fee or in wages. Woodgate is the absolute proof. Or rather, if you don't, then your chances of success - depending on your ambition for the club - is seriously diminished.

 

But - at least in terms of the ones who we paid money for, they tried, and backed the manager.

 

 

[ChezGiven]

Invicta_Toon, that's utter s****!!

 

I wouldn't want my midfielders to be over thirty, but given that good defending is much more about positioning and timing than physical ability, I actually would prefer having some experienced over-30 defenders.

 

After all Bramble and Onyewu both demontrated that being young and strong means nothing if you are always getting caught out of position.

 

Paolo Maldini is still going strong at 39, Nesta is 31, Cannavarro and Materrazzi are 33, Thuram is 35, Gallas is just turning 30, Desailly started for Chelsea until he was 33, Laurent Blanc and Frank LeBoeuf both were effective into their 30s, Baresi played for Milan until he was 37, Costacurta until he was 40....anyway, you get my point.

 

When it comes to defenders, old is not necessarily bad, and arguably better than young and inexperienced.

 

This post rates close to 10/10.  I can guarantee no detractor will have the balls to debate or dispute it on it's own merits but may well hark back to the days before Shepherd and Hall as a crutch defence and attempt to divert the issues addressed.

 

 

You would be wrong then.

 

I can guarantee that no detractor, especially those who weren't around pre - 1992 and think that NUFC have always won trophies galore and the Halls and Shepherd are responsible for bringing an end to decades of glory, would have the balls to dispute that a young quality defender is just as good a buy as an older quality defender, as he can spend his career with you, but whether they are young or old, you have to be prepared to pay a fee if they are under contract. And the competition will be hot if they are good, and the competition will not be so hot if they are not so good.

 

And if they are good, they won't sign for clubs that they think are not going to be successful, or clubs that offer less money than someone else.

 

We did quite well to sign Woodgate. For big money. There was also unknown, or cheap foreigners over the years such as Dumas, Marcelino, Goma, Boumsong, Babayaro, Pistone, Charvet, and younger players such as Bramble, O'Brien, Griffin, as part of a "plan" for those who think everybody but us has a "plan". Lets hope these new defenders are better than most of that little lot, the vast majority of whom were celebrated when arrived because we needed defenders.

 

The bottom line, is that if you want quality, you invariably pay, either with a transfer fee or in wages. Woodgate is the absolute proof. Or rather, if you don't, then your chances of success - depending on your ambition for the club - is seriously diminished.

 

But - at least in terms of the ones who we paid money for, they tried, and backed the manager.

 

 

 

I cant fault that. I do think there is evidence though that Allardyce can get good players for small amounts or on a free. We are lucky to have him and we both know who to thank.

[Baggio]

Invicta_Toon, that's utter s****!!

 

I wouldn't want my midfielders to be over thirty, but given that good defending is much more about positioning and timing than physical ability, I actually would prefer having some experienced over-30 defenders.

 

After all Bramble and Onyewu both demontrated that being young and strong means nothing if you are always getting caught out of position.

 

Paolo Maldini is still going strong at 39, Nesta is 31, Cannavarro and Materrazzi are 33, Thuram is 35, Gallas is just turning 30, Desailly started for Chelsea until he was 33, Laurent Blanc and Frank LeBoeuf both were effective into their 30s, Baresi played for Milan until he was 37, Costacurta until he was 40....anyway, you get my point.

 

When it comes to defenders, old is not necessarily bad, and arguably better than young and inexperienced.

 

This post rates close to 10/10.  I can guarantee no detractor will have the balls to debate or dispute it on it's own merits but may well hark back to the days before Shepherd and Hall as a crutch defence and attempt to divert the issues addressed.

 

 

You would be wrong then.

 

I can guarantee that no detractor, especially those who weren't around pre - 1992 and think that NUFC have always won trophies galore and the Halls and Shepherd are responsible for bringing an end to decades of glory, would have the balls to dispute that a young quality defender is just as good a buy as an older quality defender, as he can spend his career with you, but whether they are young or old, you have to be prepared to pay a fee if they are under contract. And the competition will be hot if they are good, and the competition will not be so hot if they are not so good.

 

And if they are good, they won't sign for clubs that they think are not going to be successful, or clubs that offer less money than someone else.

 

We did quite well to sign Woodgate. For big money. There was also unknown, or cheap foreigners over the years such as Dumas, Marcelino, Goma, Boumsong, Babayaro, Pistone, Charvet, and younger players such as Bramble, O'Brien, Griffin, as part of a "plan" for those who think everybody but us has a "plan". Lets hope these new defenders are better than most of that little lot, the vast majority of whom were celebrated when arrived because we needed defenders.

 

The bottom line, is that if you want quality, you invariably pay, either with a transfer fee or in wages. Woodgate is the absolute proof. Or rather, if you don't, then your chances of success - depending on your ambition for the club - is seriously diminished.

 

But - at least in terms of the ones who we paid money for, they tried, and backed the manager.

 

 

 

I cant fault that. I do think there is evidence though that Allardyce can get good players for small amounts or on a free. We are lucky to have him and we both know who to thank.

 

As I've said earlier, he's said he can't get the players he wants because we have no European football so it makes sense if he's looking to bring in players that can get us into Europe on short term contracts so he can try for the players he wants in January/next summer.

 

Dismissing people because they're free is stupid when nearly everyone would have taken Campbell and Distin under the same circumstances.

 

Spending money on players you don't want to keep numpties on messageboards happy is not the way forward either, both manager and chairman have said the money is there so I really can't see what your problem is, and before you start I couldn't care less about Shepherd or Hall now, they're history and Ashley will get my full support until I think things are going wrong, that's not 2 weeks after taking over either.

[tonygreen]

Rozenhal and cacapa are much higher quality than bramble/moore/gooch

Geremi is obviously a quality player

viduka is a helluva improvement on sibierski

barton will prove to be better than parker

Smith will offer a lot more than dyer ever delivered

Given the constraints of the strategic review and no european football i think bsa has done an amazing job of improving our squad dramatically without spending a fortune

 

[ChezGiven]

Invicta_Toon, that's utter s****!!

 

I wouldn't want my midfielders to be over thirty, but given that good defending is much more about positioning and timing than physical ability, I actually would prefer having some experienced over-30 defenders.

 

After all Bramble and Onyewu both demontrated that being young and strong means nothing if you are always getting caught out of position.

 

Paolo Maldini is still going strong at 39, Nesta is 31, Cannavarro and Materrazzi are 33, Thuram is 35, Gallas is just turning 30, Desailly started for Chelsea until he was 33, Laurent Blanc and Frank LeBoeuf both were effective into their 30s, Baresi played for Milan until he was 37, Costacurta until he was 40....anyway, you get my point.

 

When it comes to defenders, old is not necessarily bad, and arguably better than young and inexperienced.

 

This post rates close to 10/10.  I can guarantee no detractor will have the balls to debate or dispute it on it's own merits but may well hark back to the days before Shepherd and Hall as a crutch defence and attempt to divert the issues addressed.

 

 

You would be wrong then.

 

I can guarantee that no detractor, especially those who weren't around pre - 1992 and think that NUFC have always won trophies galore and the Halls and Shepherd are responsible for bringing an end to decades of glory, would have the balls to dispute that a young quality defender is just as good a buy as an older quality defender, as he can spend his career with you, but whether they are young or old, you have to be prepared to pay a fee if they are under contract. And the competition will be hot if they are good, and the competition will not be so hot if they are not so good.

 

And if they are good, they won't sign for clubs that they think are not going to be successful, or clubs that offer less money than someone else.

 

We did quite well to sign Woodgate. For big money. There was also unknown, or cheap foreigners over the years such as Dumas, Marcelino, Goma, Boumsong, Babayaro, Pistone, Charvet, and younger players such as Bramble, O'Brien, Griffin, as part of a "plan" for those who think everybody but us has a "plan". Lets hope these new defenders are better than most of that little lot, the vast majority of whom were celebrated when arrived because we needed defenders.

 

The bottom line, is that if you want quality, you invariably pay, either with a transfer fee or in wages. Woodgate is the absolute proof. Or rather, if you don't, then your chances of success - depending on your ambition for the club - is seriously diminished.

 

But - at least in terms of the ones who we paid money for, they tried, and backed the manager.

 

 

 

I cant fault that. I do think there is evidence though that Allardyce can get good players for small amounts or on a free. We are lucky to have him and we both know who to thank.

 

As I've said earlier, he's said he can't get the players he wants because we have no European football so it makes sense if he's looking to bring in players that can get us into Europe on short term contracts so he can try for the players he wants in January/next summer.

 

Dismissing people because they're free is stupid when nearly everyone would have taken Campbell and Distin under the same circumstances.

 

Spending money on players you don't want to keep numpties on messageboards happy is not the way forward either, both manager and chairman have said the money is there so I really can't see what your problem is, and before you start I couldn't care less about Shepherd or Hall now, they're history and Ashley will get my full support until I think things are going wrong, that's not 2 weeks after taking over either.

 

I presume you mean NE5 not me?

 

Its daft anyway, go back 3 months and we were all saying that we needed to build a better squad to get us into the top 5 or 6 and then invest when we have european football. All the press about £50m being available fucked with expectations but its ironic that those who shout and scream about the shite that Oliver comes out with cant apply the same logic to the national press.

[Mick]

Rozenhal and cacapa are much higher quality than bramble/moore/gooch

Geremi is obviously a quality player

viduka is a helluva improvement on sibierski

barton will prove to be better than parker

Smith will offer a lot more than dyer ever delivered

Given the constraints of the strategic review and no european football i think bsa has done an amazing job of improving our squad dramatically without spending a fortune

 

 

You're right, I can't understand people complaining because we've spent next to nothing, it's not what you spend, it's what you get and it looks like we've done a good job which isn't often said when talking about our club.

[Baggio]

Invicta_Toon, that's utter s****!!

 

I wouldn't want my midfielders to be over thirty, but given that good defending is much more about positioning and timing than physical ability, I actually would prefer having some experienced over-30 defenders.

 

After all Bramble and Onyewu both demontrated that being young and strong means nothing if you are always getting caught out of position.

 

Paolo Maldini is still going strong at 39, Nesta is 31, Cannavarro and Materrazzi are 33, Thuram is 35, Gallas is just turning 30, Desailly started for Chelsea until he was 33, Laurent Blanc and Frank LeBoeuf both were effective into their 30s, Baresi played for Milan until he was 37, Costacurta until he was 40....anyway, you get my point.

 

When it comes to defenders, old is not necessarily bad, and arguably better than young and inexperienced.

 

This post rates close to 10/10.  I can guarantee no detractor will have the balls to debate or dispute it on it's own merits but may well hark back to the days before Shepherd and Hall as a crutch defence and attempt to divert the issues addressed.

 

 

You would be wrong then.

 

I can guarantee that no detractor, especially those who weren't around pre - 1992 and think that NUFC have always won trophies galore and the Halls and Shepherd are responsible for bringing an end to decades of glory, would have the balls to dispute that a young quality defender is just as good a buy as an older quality defender, as he can spend his career with you, but whether they are young or old, you have to be prepared to pay a fee if they are under contract. And the competition will be hot if they are good, and the competition will not be so hot if they are not so good.

 

And if they are good, they won't sign for clubs that they think are not going to be successful, or clubs that offer less money than someone else.

 

We did quite well to sign Woodgate. For big money. There was also unknown, or cheap foreigners over the years such as Dumas, Marcelino, Goma, Boumsong, Babayaro, Pistone, Charvet, and younger players such as Bramble, O'Brien, Griffin, as part of a "plan" for those who think everybody but us has a "plan". Lets hope these new defenders are better than most of that little lot, the vast majority of whom were celebrated when arrived because we needed defenders.

 

The bottom line, is that if you want quality, you invariably pay, either with a transfer fee or in wages. Woodgate is the absolute proof. Or rather, if you don't, then your chances of success - depending on your ambition for the club - is seriously diminished.

 

But - at least in terms of the ones who we paid money for, they tried, and backed the manager.

 

 

 

I cant fault that. I do think there is evidence though that Allardyce can get good players for small amounts or on a free. We are lucky to have him and we both know who to thank.

 

As I've said earlier, he's said he can't get the players he wants because we have no European football so it makes sense if he's looking to bring in players that can get us into Europe on short term contracts so he can try for the players he wants in January/next summer.

 

Dismissing people because they're free is stupid when nearly everyone would have taken Campbell and Distin under the same circumstances.

 

Spending money on players you don't want to keep numpties on messageboards happy is not the way forward either, both manager and chairman have said the money is there so I really can't see what your problem is, and before you start I couldn't care less about Shepherd or Hall now, they're history and Ashley will get my full support until I think things are going wrong, that's not 2 weeks after taking over either.

 

I presume you mean NE5 not me?

 

Its daft anyway, go back 3 months and we were all saying that we needed to build a better squad to get us into the top 5 or 6 and then invest when we have european football. All the press about £50m being available f***** with expectations but its ironic that those who shout and scream about the s**** that Oliver comes out with cant apply the same logic to the national press.

 

Unless you've got a problem as well?

 

I agree with the rest of your post too fwiw.