OTF

NUFC.com reporting that's it's almost completed.

To be fair Coloccini started the most games for us last season - 37. Most appearances was Jonas with 39 (35 starting). Erique started 36, Barton played in 35, Nolan 32, Simpson 31, Williamson 29, Tiote 28.. so if he can manage high 20's it's not too bad.

According to some on here it doesn't matter how long players have to run on their contracts.. if they want to leave they will go and there's nothing the club can do to stop them. I think letting him go would be a mistake, for the wages and fee we paid for him (less than a million) he was good business. At times look liked a quality right back, but is not without his problems.

Sounds like Ba heard the offer from us, decided he'd need an extra 35K to compensate if he played for Everton and tried it on with them in a way that wouldn't offend.

It's funny seeing that sort of attitude from other clubs fans. Part of it is obviously a bitterness, the rest is outdated from previous times. The wage strategy has changed vastly since our relegation. Our fans and stadium are our biggest draw cards IMO.

4M!! article lost any credibility at that point. I don't think anyone will be too upset if he goes. Seemed to have defied his own ability in scoring those goals this season. Could do without seeing him flagged over and over for being offside.

The things people believe to make themselves feel better.

What are Joey and Jose on? Sol doesn't count unfortunately as he was only a 1 year contract.

Ba would be on at least that if the signing goes through as well. Unlikely to be signed on as long a deal, so if you say 3 years for him at 30K there's another £4.6M to take away, in total then you're looking at £18.1M remaining. That's also assuming that the creative accountancy crew don't include the £4M odd from Nolan's sale as well as his 40K a week salary saving over the next 2 years (£8.1m total).

That's all you needed to say.

That wasn't the case with Nolan. How would you know? It is documented by the club, Nolan's agent and the press that he was offered a new contract. That basically is the uncontrevertible truth. Of course a decision has been made to accept the 4.5m offer because Nolan and his agent made a decison (documented everywhere) not to accept the contract. Baffling how people dont understand this process, its not that complicated. What exactly is it that I don't understand. Nolan was/is contracted to us until 2013? He can get in a strop and demand to be sold until he's blue in the face whilst the club sit there doing nothing and keep him until the contract runs up. It's absurb that you can post the below in another thread when it's virtually the same in reverse.

It might happen all the time but the salient point is that regardless of how much behind the scenes talk takes place the player absolutely cannot leave without the selling club first agreeing terms with the buying one. If that doesn't happen the player stays. Is the suggestion now that Nolan engineered this move for himself after Newcastle wouldn't offer him a 5 year contract?

If he signs hopefully he can stay fit and buck our normal trend in terms of injury prone players.

That wasn't the case with Nolan. Regardless of the contract offered to him and his reluctance to sign it the club decided to sell him. Just like with Carroll, Nolan can't have talked to any clubs (more accurately other clubs can't have talked to him) prior to getting permission from Newcastle United. The club decided that they wanted to sell him. I don't know about you but if I was getting that sort of message from my employer I wouldn't be too keen to hang around.

T'was simply a "point of order", Alex and I snipe quite a lot, all in good fun, it was far from being a defence of CT per se and pedantry is fun. Since I have ignored LM I haven't quite completely recalibrated down the sensitivity of my "making things up" radar/defences. Good Answer. CT, you really haven't said a lot in that post. Do you think the sale of Nolan is a good one? Do you honestly think that Cabaye was signed to replace Nolan... or was Nolan's sale opportunistic because the club was able to force West Ham to offer what they felt was an acceptable figure? If Nolan had signed the contract that Simon Bird talks about would you have seen it as a good thing? Do you think the three players you have idnetified (Jonas, Shola & Lovenkrands) should be sold to facilitate their replacements, or do you think the 35M for Carroll shuold be enough to replace them whilst keeping them for depth? I think it was a pretty clear answer. In an ideal world you would just add to the squad should answer your questions on Nolan but in the real world NUFC are not going to pay him big bucks to as Chez puts it, possible not even make the bench. Would have been excellent if Barton (my player of the season ) and Nolan had signed in January. They chose not to. Re your last paragraph, unless you have your head in the sand its pretty obvious there is a hell of lot going on at St James with regard to replacing these three. Replace them in the squad or in the first team? - Lovenkrands was only in the first team firstly through the sale of Carroll and secondly through injury. Do you think the sale of Nolan is a good one? Do you honestly think that Cabaye was signed to replace Nolan?

To an extent in most cases, but often clubs would have a very good idea of who could be purchased from within a team without having to make excessive offers. Never a dull moment.

Brainwashed madness mate. The club did show loyalty by offering them both improved longer term deals which THEY turned down. Bit of perspective wouldnt go amiss. My statement holds true.

T'was simply a "point of order", Alex and I snipe quite a lot, all in good fun, it was far from being a defence of CT per se and pedantry is fun. Since I have ignored LM I haven't quite completely recalibrated down the sensitivity of my "making things up" radar/defences. Good Answer. CT, you really haven't said a lot in that post. Do you think the sale of Nolan is a good one? Do you honestly think that Cabaye was signed to replace Nolan... or was Nolan's sale opportunistic because the club was able to force West Ham to offer what they felt was an acceptable figure? If Nolan had signed the contract that Simon Bird talks about would you have seen it as a good thing? Do you think the three players you have idnetified (Jonas, Shola & Lovenkrands) should be sold to facilitate their replacements, or do you think the 35M for Carroll shuold be enough to replace them whilst keeping them for depth?

Exactly. And the Barton one that he knocked back in January. I agree about the Nolan contract if that is true (big if of course). Though you could understand his reluctance to sign a deal where a significant bonus is based off the results of the entire team, regardless of who that team consists of. I'm still of the opinion that we should not have even been talking contracts with Nolan at this stage. It was the perfect opportunity - we bring in new players and see how they settle and how Nolan performs up to January. If the new players settle well and if Nolan's influence is faltering then there's no need to offer the contract extension. We could have negotiated his sale at that stage with 18 months to run on his contract. As it is the club rarely says no to offers to buy our players regardless of how influential they are. Case in point our two top scorers (one the club captain the other a local kid) have been sold. From Nolan's perspective though I don't think it's realistic to expect to sign a contacrt that carries you to the age of 33+. Barton is another story altogether. He was right to question the sale of Carroll and the way in which that business was conducted. No question though if the club doesn't show any loyalty to our players you can't expect the players to show loyalty in return.

CT out of interest from the current side who would you sell and who would you keep if it was entirely up to you? Would be great if you could include a little blurb explaining your reasoning. Eg. Ferguson - Keep - Exciting young player with attacking flair and skill on the ball.

Not sure why Toonpack was trying to defend CT when the point was clear. Typical of the fickle nature of this board of late that everyone's trying to get the one up on someone else over even the most trivial of thing.

We did well to cover over the fact that his legs were gone this season. The perfect crime. Will be surprised if anyone even notices that Nolan's not here next season. Business as usual, chalk up another win for Ashley.

But you'd have to be making a profit on every game, particularly home matches. No need to pay the players any/much more (pending appearance bonuses) and at the very least you get a chance to give your young players a chance to step up - that's assuming you don't care about having a shot at winning it. If you go for it and it stretches a small squad at the expense of the league then it could be negative but with careful planning and good use of young players there's no reason why it can't help to develop the squad and enhance the European profile all whilst making the club money. No brainer - you'd have to be excessively arrogant or poorly managed as a club to knock it back IMO.

Probably speaks at least a little French as well on account of being Swiss. That seems to help.

Pointless thread until the transfer window is over. We've already got more than enough with transfer speculation within...