Park Life

Everything you've said is obvious though. The whole lot. It's obvious there's a ven diagram out there somewhere, where you could gauge a financial benefit that would meet public acceptance for the bastardisation of 130 years of history and culture. Only an idiot could see there isn't but to me and I respect you a lot, clearly a very bright astute intelligent lad, but the vast majority of your posts on this thread are like when someones in sixth form in the common room hoping to be voted debater of the month. Beginning to talk about the Arsenal example is a ridiculous tangent and at this moment in time, there's little or strong evidence (based on past history) there's a willingness to generate additional income for the football club by "show casing" the naming rights. They aren't that stupid, they will have calculated what the reaction would be, they are aware that the adverse reaction will short term and long term put big business off. Why??? To show case his scabby company. It's that simple, going off at tangents about the heritage of the city I find almost antagonistic when the basic subject hits you in the face. Chez IS clever (and it's one of the reasons I like him) but he's gone straight to the zero sum game... I'd kill him at chess like.

Not really, my argument (not that it's even an argument, more of a premise) is that renaming the Stadium is just another potential revenue stream being exploited (very potentially in this case) and that in terms of cocking a snook at history, it is less violent than a bulldozer. But no different in it's intention. He may not be paying for it (contributing to revenue) but he owns the place lock stock and barrel, he can and will do whatever he wants and to open the can of worms, the club owes him a huge wedge and he aint (yet) charging interest. The bit I don't get, is that SD will have a significant marketing budget (well they should have, but their TV adds maybe suggest they're in Mr Rhaman zips territory) why doesn't he get SD to "really" sponsor the Club/Shirt he could use that cash to reduce his exposure. Club would be debt free quicker and thus a more saleable proposition at no cost to him personally. A sub point is that, for the freebie vehicle to really work, NUFC have to be better than your run of the mill prem team. So the question is, if that is the case, what's the problem if it's a freebie, if the team is doing OK/well. He's done the UK like a kipper, he's after foreign expansion, run of the mill isn't going to get that much exposure. So do you accept that the talk of bringing in £8m/£10 a year and it paying for a new player is a complete lie then? Not sure what you're driving at tbh. If it brought in £8Mill/£10 Mill a year I would expect it to contribute to the club thus and it's transfer dealings Do you think that's likely to happen btw? Howay man. Well you're the one who asked IF 8-10 Mill came in, what did I think it would be used for, I simply answered The changing rooms will be upgraded surely?

Do you think that hasn't been mentioned several times already and that you're the only one clever enough to realise it? STFU.

The name change will actually negatively effect the brand and make it less likely to attract a sponsor. Wake up peoples. This is a scam pure and simple.

Top darts.

Couldn't disagree more. Fair enough if it was at Highbury it was a new ground called Ashburton Grove, sounded like a road off Stanhope Street. Aye, really respectful of tradition. The point isnt a complex one, moving a stadium for naked commercial reasons is more of an affront to the traditon and history of a club than a reversible name change. The relevance is that the media and you have argued that it's ok to move a stadium for clear commercial reasons but not to rename. As I said, I thought that was unfair and probably deliberate on the part of the media. But you can say the tradition of the club is striving for excellence on the pitch. So doing it for those reasons is consistent with the traditions of the club. That was undoubtedly the reason Arsenal did it. The main reason was the season ticket backlog and the massive revenue stream from the new apartments. Absolutely no comparison to our scenario apart from the scant name change element.. Satisfying demand Arsenal previously had 20,000 season ticket holders at Highbury, and with an allocation of several thousand tickets for visiting supporters, club members as well as corporate hospitality to be taken care of, many other Arsenal fans were frustrated on match days as home games were always sold out. There was also the matter of another 20,000 desperate fans on Arsenal’s season ticket waiting list, but as season ticket holders rarely gave up the ownership of a season ticket, there was never a realistic chance that Arsenal would be able to satisfy the demand from it’s huge worldwide fan base. The answer to the dilemma was a new home, which has now been built just five hundred yards away from Highbury. Much of the initial backlog of the season ticket waiting list was cleared with the move to the Emirates Stadium; however further demand for season tickets now sees 40,000 on a new waiting list They could literally have filled Highbury 3 times over...

I believe so.

The heritage of SJP will cause what is know as 'Brand Friction'. It's a massive risk being associated with an unpopular name change. No blue chip brand will go near it.

Obama creates indefinite detention system for prisoners at Guantanamo Bay Video Guantanamo Bay trials to resume President Barack Obama has ordered a resumption of military trials for terror suspects at Guantanamo Bay, in an acknowledgement the prison camp for terror suspect in Cuba is unlikely to close any time soon. (March 7) » Washington Post Staff Writers Tuesday, March 8, 2011; 12:44 AM President Obama signed an executive order Monday that will create a formal system of indefinite detention for those held at the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, who continue to pose a significant threat to national security. The administration also said it will start new military commission trials for detainees there.

Not exactly football matters though are they. Wooosh!

It was purely the Daily Mail on the windup, the sad thing is that so many idiots have been sucked in by it. Indeed more fool fifa for caving to this nonsense , what an utter waste of energy this has been and if it hadn't have been such a slow news week it'd never have surfaced., and ironically i'd be amazed if half the people going nuts about it (the general sky sports mob) have the slightest clue about it's meaning or the history involved with it. Just something to whinge about and a bandwagan to jump on to do the "but we're english!!!" bit. Slow news week?? The euro is about to collapse and unemployment in the UK is closing in on 3m.....Oh wait...

Says you'll have to elaborate.

I've Pm'd him.

Liking the thread HF. I still have the Classic Vertigo poster.

Baggio getting bogged down in a Stalingradesque debate as winter moves in... "I think he's a very talented player that can have a big role for us, you may be surprised to hear that with the strawman arguments his fans have attempted to build up but if you read back through at no time have I ever said he isn't any good. The doubts I have are as follows... He will improve the current team: People seem to think all we have to do is select him over Best and we will become an even better side which I don't see as being the case. One of the main reasons we are where we are in the league is down to the amount of work our players put in when we don't have the ball, we're not playing teams off the park by any stretch of the imagination but we are putting a ridiculous amount of effort in closing down and tracking back when we don't have the ball, a good example of this is when I posted on Saturday about Ba not having the best of games but he still put the work in and that is the same for all of our midfield and attack recently, we've seen with Cabaye that he hasn't been up to his high standards lately that he set at the beginning of the season but he's still putting plenty of work in covering the pitch and the same goes for Ba, Best, Tiote and Jonas. Ben Arfa is different in that he's not going to graft but he's technically more gifted than anyone else in our attack, that's great when he's up to speed and if he settles into the team but at the moment he isn't which makes me think he could end up being a passenger which we can't afford to have, this opinion is backed up by people who watched the Blackburn game that he started and was anonymous for large parts of it apparently. People bring up how long Coloccini and Enrique took to settle in before finding their best form but the difference now is that we have a very good alternative in Best and Ba that have formed a good partnership, back then if we didn't play Colo we had Taylor who was equally poor and N'Zogbia to cover Enrique, I would hate to throw away our current position by attempting to get a player that isn't up to speed and might not be any time soon. Partnership with Ba: The second problem I have is the potential partnership with Ba, I think people presume that Ba is a target man type but I don't see this as being the case and at West Ham and before coming to England he's played in more a withdrawn role, a role he continues to play here with great success (15 goals in 22 Premiership games) so how do him and Ben Arfa play in a withdrawn position unless we're going with 3 up top? People have suggested that Ba could play more of a target man role but when he's been as successful as all but a few in front of goal playing this role why should he change to accommodate someone? So not only do I think he lacks the work ethic for this current team but I think him playing in a number 10 role with Ba could leave the whole attack imbalanced, all this while he' clearly not up to speed anyway. Team player?: In the 10 appearances he's made since he's been here for me he's looked anything but a team player which I think is important for anyone playing in the number 10 role, we've heard people compliment him on his dribbling skills and such but how many occasions can you say he was an important factor in making something happen for someone else since he's been here? That's not having a go at the lad but it's a pretty obvious thing to notice and something that he can get away with more out wide than when he's relied on to be the heartbeat of the team. People have said that it's because of a lack of options in front of him but if he is going to play that role then it's only going to be Ba there the majority of the time anyway, he's going to find himself in plenty of similar situations like he did against Everton but is he going to continue to play for himself instead of others like a VDV would? I know people think I'm being harsh on the lad as he's been out injured so long but I don't think I am, if people were not demanding him being in the starting line up up top now then I'd happily give him his cameo's to get up to speed like I am with Gosling, however if he is going to have a starting place for us then I expect better than what we've seen so far and I don't care how long he's been out either, like I said if he's not performing he's a luxury that I don't think we can carry and maintain our current form at the same time. Long term I think he's going to struggle to get in up top, not because of Best as I don't think Pardew rates him that highly but I see whichever striker he buys if it's Maiga or whoever I see it with a view of linking up with Ba, our biggest goal threat by some distance, so what I'd like to see is HBA played out on the right which will give him his chance to get his fitness back and then for us to buy a solid right back (OMG Santon is a right back etc) that is happy to sit and cover leaving HBA to have a more free role out wide, someone like Onuoha would be great for the role. So to summarise I don't think Ben Arfa is s****, I also don't think him having one good game, scoring a great goal like he did against Everton or getting an assist would have proven me wrong which some are building their straw men to mean, it's about looking at the bigger picture and seeing if the form of the team improves or drops off over a longer period than that."

Better than any of their CM's.

He's not, though. He's a box-to-box midfielder. A rare bird in the modern game and worth his weight in gold.

Only the Wall Street Journal is Murdoch's. The New York Times owns itself and also owns the International Herald Tribune. (The NYT is one of the last reputable papers in this country. The phone-tapping Aussie scum hasn't cornered the market entirely...yet.) Why are we being featured more in American media? The Premier League's profile has never been higher and it continues to soar. I see high-schoolers walking around in EPL strips all the time - sure, mostly Man U, Chelsea and Arsenal, but a handful of Tottenham, Everton, and yes, even NUFC. Kids talk Champions League with their American football coaches. The game is on the rise at the grassroots level here - it seems to have fully shaken off its tag of "girls' sport." So while I wouldn't rule out these recent mentions being part of some Ashley spin, I think it's more likely that we are a big story in the Premier League so far this year, and the Premier League is becoming a relatively big story in America. Interesting.

Christmas Face

I knew he wouldn't be able to resist. The art of fly fishing aptly demonstrated.

Nice bit of ammo that for my various stealth projects.

Fixed your typo. Is THAT still on here somewhere?

Will do.