José Enrique

[Jayson]

i think this entire forum needs to get a grip, as annoyed as i am at the carroll saga, can anyone honestly say that we came off badly in it? i wish he still played for us, but £35 million for him is crazy money and honestly i can see why they sold. Just because we've sold one of our best players it doesn't suddenly mean that we will lose enrique and tiote in the summer, if we spend the £35 million with the addition of other funds as well (because after this season surely we need to invest some money besides as well to try and push on) and buy like we have for the last few windows then we should have a very very good team next season.

 

Quite frankly the idea that a team that spent last season in the championship but is too good to sell their best players, when good established PL teams like villa have had to sell milner and barry in recent years (for considerably less), sounds like we think we are bigger than we are. I don't think that selling players is the way forward but sometimes you have to take the hit and as long as it doesn't become a habit i dont think we can have too many complaints. Selling one good player doesn't make us a selling club and with reinvestment in the squad we could be a force next season.

 

The Carroll sale is obviously debatable. But even those that disagree with it being the best option at that time can see the reasoning behind letting him go.

 

Its moreso the quotes that the managers coming out with for me, theyre quite defeatist. He could easily come out and say "We still do not want to lose our best players, the Carroll transfer was an exceptional circumstance because of the sum being offered". Hes atleast setting up a situation where the clubs believe they have to spend a bit once again to challenge our position. Instead he is saying "Its going to be very hard to keep Enrique/Tiote" etc which is more or less letting everyone know you've accepted they'll likely be off & is a great tactic to set up a bidding war.

 

Its a similar statement to "Ashleys trying very hard to resist offers" that came out on the transfer deadline day. Its pretty suspicious wording tbh As if you did want to set up a situation where you make other clubs aware of your players being ready to move & you being ready to sell, whilst still attempting to appear to fans as though you dont want to...saying it'll be "difficult" to keep hold of them is exactly how you'd word it.

[alpal78]

I think we came off badly in it.

 

only because we didn't get any good replacements in

[Punk77]

i think this entire forum needs to get a grip, as annoyed as i am at the carroll saga, can anyone honestly say that we came off badly in it? i wish he still played for us, but £35 million for him is crazy money and honestly i can see why they sold. Just because we've sold one of our best players it doesn't suddenly mean that we will lose enrique and tiote in the summer, if we spend the £35 million with the addition of other funds as well (because after this season surely we need to invest some money besides as well to try and push on) and buy like we have for the last few windows then we should have a very very good team next season.

 

Quite frankly the idea that a team that spent last season in the championship but is too good to sell their best players, when good established PL teams like villa have had to sell milner and barry in recent years (for considerably less), sounds like we think we are bigger than we are. I don't think that selling players is the way forward but sometimes you have to take the hit and as long as it doesn't become a habit i dont think we can have too many complaints. Selling one good player doesn't make us a selling club and with reinvestment in the squad we could be a force next season.

 

In this respect, Carroll's sale could be a necessity for us if we wish to tie Tiote, Enrique and Barton down to lengthy contracts..

[Wullie]

No we came off badly because we lost a Geordie striker with the potential to be the fulcrum of our side for the next ten years. We can't replace that because unfortunately the likes of Carroll come round once or twice in a generation, if you're lucky.

[Punk77]

No we came off badly because we lost a Geordie striker with the potential to be the fulcrum of our side for the next ten years. We can't replace that because unfortunately the likes of Carroll come round once or twice in a generation, if you're lucky.

 

Not necessarily. The club now has the antennas out for local players, unlike before. And it's often not about talent, it's about serious attitudes and bloody hard work. Most that succeed doesn't have a particular talent for the game, but they're willing to train hard. The real talents, they tend to give up when they reach the point where they cannot float on their god given ability, but must work just as hard as the others.  Ole Gunnar Solskjaer spent ours each day training his finishing skills on a wall, John Arne Riise stood up 6 am each day to train before school.

 

So it not necessarily about finding a player with an "internal" talent for football. It's about finding the persons with the right motivations and attitudes. The rest could be taught by the club if they're brought in early enough. If the club have that focus, the options increases significantly.

 

 

[alpal78]

No we came off badly because we lost a Geordie striker with the potential to be the fulcrum of our side for the next ten years. We can't replace that because unfortunately the likes of Carroll come round once or twice in a generation, if you're lucky.

 

if we use that 35M wisely including investing in a top striker (there are quite a few around who is actually better than Carroll), then I don't give a toss if the one banging in the goals for us is Geordie or not. Those are just emotional niceties which has no bearing on the club's performance.

[magorific]

No we came off badly because we lost a Geordie striker with the potential to be the fulcrum of our side for the next ten years. We can't replace that because unfortunately the likes of Carroll come round once or twice in a generation, if you're lucky.

 

This.

No we came off badly because we lost a Geordie striker with the potential to be the fulcrum of our side for the next ten years. We can't replace that because unfortunately the likes of Carroll come round once or twice in a generation, if you're lucky.

 

if we use that 35M wisely including investing in a top striker (there are quite a few around who is actually better than Carroll), then I don't give a tosh if the one banging in the goals for us is Geordie or not. Those are just emotional niceties which has no bearing on the club's performance.

No we came off badly because we lost a Geordie striker with the potential to be the fulcrum of our side for the next ten years. We can't replace that because unfortunately the likes of Carroll come round once or twice in a generation, if you're lucky.

 

if we use that 35M wisely including investing in a top striker (there are quite a few around who is actually better than Carroll), then I don't give a tosh if the one banging in the goals for us is Geordie or not. Those are just emotional niceties which has no bearing on the club's performance.

 

I agree the fact he is a Geordie is neither here nor there, but Carroll's potential value to us went way, way beyond what Liverpool paid for him.

I'm assuming you are suggesting we could attract one of these "better" strikers you mention. I'd be interested to know who you're talking about.

[Wullie]

I disagree, I think every consistently successful team in English and European football over the past 20 years has been built around a local superstar and built that way because they are the ones that should stay and should be clung to when others come and go so you can build around them and because they are the heart and soul of the club. Think Gerrard, Giggs, Carragher, Scholes, Terry, think Raul, Xavi, Puyol, Maldini, I could go on.

 

I really think it's far too easy to underestimate the value of hanging onto players like that and I think the managers of those clubs over the years would agree with me.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

I think the fact he's a Geordie is a big factor, in fact it's the only reason I was surprised that he left.

 

For any other player the move and the money would obviously be enough to shift him, but it was supposed to be about more than that for Carroll.

 

As for whether him being a Geordie makes any difference to Newcastle, probably more symbolically than anything tangible, and it'll soon be forgotten once he starts turning out for Liverpool.

[alpal78]

No we came off badly because we lost a Geordie striker with the potential to be the fulcrum of our side for the next ten years. We can't replace that because unfortunately the likes of Carroll come round once or twice in a generation, if you're lucky.

 

This.

No we came off badly because we lost a Geordie striker with the potential to be the fulcrum of our side for the next ten years. We can't replace that because unfortunately the likes of Carroll come round once or twice in a generation, if you're lucky.

 

if we use that 35M wisely including investing in a top striker (there are quite a few around who is actually better than Carroll), then I don't give a tosh if the one banging in the goals for us is Geordie or not. Those are just emotional niceties which has no bearing on the club's performance.

No we came off badly because we lost a Geordie striker with the potential to be the fulcrum of our side for the next ten years. We can't replace that because unfortunately the likes of Carroll come round once or twice in a generation, if you're lucky.

 

if we use that 35M wisely including investing in a top striker (there are quite a few around who is actually better than Carroll), then I don't give a tosh if the one banging in the goals for us is Geordie or not. Those are just emotional niceties which has no bearing on the club's performance.

 

I agree the fact he is a Geordie is neither here nor there, but Carroll's potential value to us went way, way beyond what Liverpool paid for him.

I'm assuming you are suggesting we could attract one of these "better" strikers you mention. I'd be interested to know who you're talking about.

 

On your second question, too many if you are willing to look outside the Premier league.

 

On your first question, I don't know whether or not we can attract these better players, if we don't get in someone at least as good as Carroll in the summer, then we would have done poorly but like I said that's because we didn't replace him not because we sold a striker whose had half a good season of premiership for 35M

[Jayson]

If we cannot improve our side it doesnt matter how long hes played for & how much we made on him. Thats the whole point of the deal, it needs to be beneficial to us or its a poor one.

[alpal78]

I disagree, I think every consistently successful team in English and European football over the past 20 years has been built around a local superstar and built that way because they are the ones that should stay and should be clung to when others come and go so you can build around them and because they are the heart and soul of the club. Think Gerrard, Giggs, Carragher, Scholes, Terry, think Raul, Xavi, Puyol, Maldini, I could go on.

 

I really think it's far too easy to underestimate the value of hanging onto players like that and I think the managers of those clubs over the years would agree with me.

 

Wullie you may have a point but I think you're confusing causation and correlation. It's also bit chicken and egg. It's equally possible that those home based players you mentioned stayed on because those clubs were successful instead of them being prerequisites for the success. I know it is impossible to prove, but logically I don't see why those clubs would not have been equally successful if they had replaced those home grown players with non local players who are of the same quality or better.

 

What about Inter in the Champions League last year? I think Madrid has also been successful without a key local player except for maybe Casillas (is he from Madrid?). At the end of the day, it's quality that wins you matches not where those players are from.

[Wullie]

I said consistently successful, Inter are a perfect example of a side built on sand, nothing holding them together, just a temporary collection of good players. And yes Casillas is from Madrid.

[Punk77]

I disagree, I think every consistently successful team in English and European football over the past 20 years has been built around a local superstar and built that way because they are the ones that should stay and should be clung to when others come and go so you can build around them and because they are the heart and soul of the club. Think Gerrard, Giggs, Carragher, Scholes, Terry, think Raul, Xavi, Puyol, Maldini, I could go on.

 

I really think it's far too easy to underestimate the value of hanging onto players like that and I think the managers of those clubs over the years would agree with me.

 

True enough. But we were not in a position to say no when that sizable offer came along. Had been quite another story if they sold Carroll, despite a sound economy. Carroll was sacrificed for the long term of the club. We  now have the possibility to acquire some squad depth and keep our best players. That will enhance our chances of Europe, and in the end we will able to say no when the next big money bid. Then it's up to the player if he wants to leave or not.  And Gerrard, Terry, Scholes and Giggs would have left their club in a heartbeat if it had been in half the amount of trouble as we've been in. It's easy to stay when you win minimum one trophy each year

[alpal78]

I disagree, I think every consistently successful team in English and European football over the past 20 years has been built around a local superstar and built that way because they are the ones that should stay and should be clung to when others come and go so you can build around them and because they are the heart and soul of the club. Think Gerrard, Giggs, Carragher, Scholes, Terry, think Raul, Xavi, Puyol, Maldini, I could go on.

 

I really think it's far too easy to underestimate the value of hanging onto players like that and I think the managers of those clubs over the years would agree with me.

 

True enough. But we were not in a position to say no when that sizable offer came along. Had been quite another story if they sold Carroll, despite a sound economy. Carroll was sacrificed for the long term of the club. We  now have the possibility to acquire some squad depth and keep our best players. That will enhance our chances of Europe, and in the end we will able to say no when the next big money bid. Then it's up to the player if he wants to leave or not.  And Gerrard, Terry, Scholes and Giggs would have left their club in a heartbeat if it had been in half the amount of trouble as we've been in. It's easy to stay when you win minimum one trophy each year

 

That's the point I was making though I think you explained it better. Those home grown players Wullie named, stayed on because those clubs were already successful. In modern times, it is almost impossible for a club that is just climbing its way up (what more just got promoted) to hold on when a big club comes knocking for their best players (let alone offer fucking 35M!). Look at Arsenal, a big club by most estimates and even they are having difficulty holding on to Fabregas (who I suspect will leave for Barca at the end of this season).

[Punk77]

The difference between Arsenal and many other clubs, is that they're not budging on ludicrous wage demands. It's a reason why that club, is one of few in the league that is actually earning money, and is not dependable on money from its owner. They could have kept Hleb and Flamini but then they had to be willing to pay the same salaries as Man U and Chelsea. And those clubs are loosing money each day.

[Wullie]

It's not even about great players though, often it's not even local players but those have come through the ranks at a club, they are the identity of that club. Why did Guti survive longer than every galactico?

 

Alex Ferguson is the master at it. He's not handing out contract after contract to Brown, Fletcher, O'Shea because they're the best he can get, he could find a better player than those three in a second but they are more important to him than any Ronaldo because that is how he has maintained a winning mentality at the same club for 20 years.

 

If the players are world class like Giggs then even better, two birds with one stone. That's why Ferguson is the best ever because of the culture he has maintained, far more than any tactics or transfers.

 

NUFC selling off not only good players but ones who we have produced makes me feel absolutely sick. It still cuts me up to see Michael Carrick playing elsewhere, Carroll will break me. Fastest track to achieving fuck all.

[Colocho]

No we came off badly because we lost a Geordie striker with the potential to be the fulcrum of our side for the next ten years. We can't replace that because unfortunately the likes of Carroll come round once or twice in a generation, if you're lucky.

 

Exactly. Which is why Carroll should have been considered priceless. Don't think I'll ever get over the sale of Carroll, or forgive the 'owners' of the club (because that is all they are, owners) for their lack of ambition when selling him. I do not for one moment believe we are in a position where we "had to sell him" and "could not turn the offer down."

 

The thought of him scoring 20+ goals a season for Liverpool and becoming the #9 for England for the next 10 years makes me feel quite ill tbh.

 

Those who think that we aren't now a selling club, are in denial.

[Pilko]

Some class posts in here, Wullie.

[Punk77]

It's not even about great players though, often it's not even local players but those have come through the ranks at a club, they are the identity of that club. Why did Guti survive longer than every galactico?

 

Alex Ferguson is the master at it. He's not handing out contract after contract to Brown, Fletcher, O'Shea because they're the best he can get, he could find a better player than those three in a second but they are more important to him than any Ronaldo because that is how he has maintained a winning mentality at the same club for 20 years.

 

If the players are world class like Giggs then even better, two birds with one stone. That's why Ferguson is the best ever because of the culture he has maintained, far more than any tactics or transfers.

 

 

I think you have to combine those factors you're mentioning. He brought the club to glory through a core of talents: Giggs, Scholes etc. The last seasons, he has however used a shitload of money. BUT (and this is a big but) the main difference between him and for example Chelsea and us, is that he's only interested in players got serious attitude and that FIT the type of football ManU is playing -few touches, fast balls in the longitudinal direction, and constantly distributing the ball to the side in which the opponent is unbalanced  In other words he's only  buying players that complements each other. That's why for example a limited player like Fletcher thrives in ManU: He's a box player that runs like he got the devil behind him and he's a skilled finisher. Due to the way ManU plays, he  will be in frequent finishing positions around the box. And because players are not using many touches, his inapt technique is not revealed. That's also why he played like s*** against Norway, since in the Scottish team he's "the big star" who should do the "great moves," which he in fact is not able to perform.

 

Chelsea and Castle on the other hand has been more important with bringing in big names, rather than contemplating if the player is good for the club, or fits the type of football the team is playing. Chelsea for example bought Ballack only because he at that time was regarded as one of the largest name in football. Never mind that he's a replica of Lampard in his style of football. In the same way, Chelsea went and bought Torres, when they in fact have good enough attackers. What's generally causing their problems is the fact that they have an IDENTICAL midfield.  What they actually needed was one or two better wingers, that could provide Anelka and Drogba with crossers and a faster cm that transformed a rather slow and less mobile midfield.  In the same way, Castle bought Owen, in a hope that this would signify to the world that the club had ambitions. Never mind all the baggage and economical frenzy he brought with him.

 

Alex doesn't make such blunders, that's why he's on top.

[biggs]

No we came off badly because we lost a Geordie striker with the potential to be the fulcrum of our side for the next ten years. We can't replace that because unfortunately the likes of Carroll come round once or twice in a generation, if you're lucky.

 

Exactly. Which is why Carroll should have been considered priceless. Don't think I'll ever get over the sale of Carroll, or forgive the 'owners' of the club (because that is all they are, owners) for their lack of ambition when selling him. I do not for one moment believe we are in a position where we "had to sell him" and "could not turn the offer down."

 

The thought of him scoring 20+ goals a season for Liverpool and becoming the #9 for England for the next 10 years makes me feel quite ill tbh.

 

Those who think that we aren't now a selling club, are in denial.

The summer will be a true reflection of our direction with  Barton,Tiote, and Enrique getting new contracts and some wise investments from that Carroll fee , i will be optimistic as i see this as a defining time for us and let us judge at the end of the summer transfer window .

[alpal78]

It's not even about great players though, often it's not even local players but those have come through the ranks at a club, they are the identity of that club. Why did Guti survive longer than every galactico?

 

Alex Ferguson is the master at it. He's not handing out contract after contract to Brown, Fletcher, O'Shea because they're the best he can get, he could find a better player than those three in a second but they are more important to him than any Ronaldo because that is how he has maintained a winning mentality at the same club for 20 years.

 

If the players are world class like Giggs then even better, two birds with one stone. That's why Ferguson is the best ever because of the culture he has maintained, far more than any tactics or transfers.

 

NUFC selling off not only good players but ones who we have produced makes me feel absolutely sick. It still cuts me up to see Michael Carrick playing elsewhere, Carroll will break me. Fastest track to achieving f*** all.

 

I get the emotional ties that local players have on fans, but I still don't logically see why you need local players to succeed. And so far all the clubs you mentioned who have managed to hold on to their best local players/youth players are clubs who have tasted success first and are able to compete against other big clubs (until a bigger one comes knocking...see Arsenal & Barca).

 

The difference between Guti and Casillas is illustrative. Guti was good for the fans but in reality contributed only sparingly in their successful years. When Madrid last won La Liga, he wasn't even a first team player. Casillas on the other hand, yes was instrumental but that is not because he is a local boy/Madrid youth player but because he is one of the best keepers in the world...back to my point that what matters is quality not where you were born or the youth team you played for. Substitute him for Buffon and I still think that Madrid would have won the title.

 

When I see Carrick play, I only wish he was still with us but that is because he is probably better than most of our midfielders (bar Tiote & Barton?), not because he is a local boy. I don't know how you feel, but I'm guessing it has more to do with a "he was ours and we let him go" mindset which is an emotion based sentiment (not that there is anything wrong with that, just that it is not a prerequisite for success).

 

 

[alpal78]

It's not even about great players though, often it's not even local players but those have come through the ranks at a club, they are the identity of that club. Why did Guti survive longer than every galactico?

 

Alex Ferguson is the master at it. He's not handing out contract after contract to Brown, Fletcher, O'Shea because they're the best he can get, he could find a better player than those three in a second but they are more important to him than any Ronaldo because that is how he has maintained a winning mentality at the same club for 20 years.

 

If the players are world class like Giggs then even better, two birds with one stone. That's why Ferguson is the best ever because of the culture he has maintained, far more than any tactics or transfers.

 

 

I think you have to combine those factors you're mentioning. He brought the club to glory through a core of talents: Giggs, Scholes etc. The last seasons, he has however used a shitload of money. BUT (and this is a big but) the main difference between him and for example Chelsea and us, is that he's only interested in players got serious attitude and that FIT the type of football ManU is playing -few touches, fast balls in the longitudinal direction, and constantly distributing the ball to the side in which the opponent is unbalanced  In other words he's only  buying players that complements each other. That's why for example a limited player like Fletcher thrives in ManU: He's a box player that runs like he got the devil behind him and he's a skilled finisher. Due to the way ManU plays, he  will be in frequent finishing positions around the box. And because players are not using many touches, his inapt technique is not revealed. That's also why he played like s*** against Norway, since in the Scottish team he's "the big star" who should do the "great moves," which he in fact is not able to perform.

 

Chelsea and Castle on the other hand has been more important with bringing in big names, rather than contemplating if the player is good for the club, or fits the type of football the team is playing. Chelsea for example bought Ballack only because he at that time was regarded as one of the largest name in football. Never mind that he's a replica of Lampard in his style of football. In the same way, Chelsea went and bought Torres, when they in fact have good enough attackers. What's generally causing their problems is the fact that they have an IDENTICAL midfield.  What they actually needed was one or two better wingers, that could provide Anelka and Drogba with crossers and a faster cm that transformed a rather slow and less mobile midfield.  In the same way, Castle bought Owen, in a hope that this would signify to the world that the club had ambitions. Never mind all the baggage and economical frenzy he brought with him.

 

Alex doesn't make such blunders, that's why he's on top.

 

Top post!  :clap:

[Colocho]

No we came off badly because we lost a Geordie striker with the potential to be the fulcrum of our side for the next ten years. We can't replace that because unfortunately the likes of Carroll come round once or twice in a generation, if you're lucky.

 

Exactly. Which is why Carroll should have been considered priceless. Don't think I'll ever get over the sale of Carroll, or forgive the 'owners' of the club (because that is all they are, owners) for their lack of ambition when selling him. I do not for one moment believe we are in a position where we "had to sell him" and "could not turn the offer down."

 

The thought of him scoring 20+ goals a season for Liverpool and becoming the #9 for England for the next 10 years makes me feel quite ill tbh.

 

Those who think that we aren't now a selling club, are in denial.

The summer will be a true reflection of our direction with  Barton,Tiote, and Enrique getting new contracts and some wise investments from that Carroll fee , i will be optimistic as i see this as a defining time for us and let us judge at the end of the summer transfer window .

 

Care to give a prediction of what will happen this summer?

[Benwell Lad]

No we came off badly because we lost a Geordie striker with the potential to be the fulcrum of our side for the next ten years. We can't replace that because unfortunately the likes of Carroll come round once or twice in a generation, if you're lucky.

 

Exactly. Which is why Carroll should have been considered priceless. Don't think I'll ever get over the sale of Carroll, or forgive the 'owners' of the club (because that is all they are, owners) for their lack of ambition when selling him. I do not for one moment believe we are in a position where we "had to sell him" and "could not turn the offer down."

 

The thought of him scoring 20+ goals a season for Liverpool and becoming the #9 for England for the next 10 years makes me feel quite ill tbh.

 

Those who think that we aren't now a selling club, are in denial.

The summer will be a true reflection of our direction with  Barton,Tiote, and Enrique getting new contracts and some wise investments from that Carroll fee , i will be optimistic as i see this as a defining time for us and let us judge at the end of the summer transfer window .

 

Although I don't really understand the expression as every club sells players, I have seen little evidence over the last couple of years to indicate that we are a "selling club" - quite the opposite as players brought in have generally been better than those who left.

That of course is based on an assumption that the Carroll transfer was somewhat extraordinary and therefore an exception.

If it is the begining of a trend then we are a selling club, but to date there is no hard evidence to suggest that, just a lot of conjecture and hot air.