Magpies in lead for defenders signature

[Gejon 2]

This argument always makes me laugh, its like saying we should settle for Bramble because 30 years ago we had a much worse centre back!

[LeazesMag 0]

That said, if everyone was fit as you say, we'd also have Owen and Shola. In which case, Id still want a new LB and new RB. We do need a new forward as well though. For me, Id grab what was available. I certainly wouldnt "not2 buy a LB just because a forward wasnt available or visa versa. Im saying that as you know what happens. We sign a LB and those wanting a Fwd scream why isnt he buying a Fwd? Or the other way around. Get whats there that will improve the team now and going forward, get one or two in and do the same in the summer (at least there is no WC to scour for talent )

 

realistically, in a nutshell.

 

Any money - decent money - should be targetted on a forward as priority though. However, I expect there will be people saying the club "lack planning" if the other clubs don't want to release their quality forwards

Rubbish. "Planning" means to find a club that releases its forward . You only can plan your own actions, not those from other people. But if we end up without the necessary improvements to the squad then it means that some people weren't doing their jobs.

 

will any old forward do

 

or are you just going to slate the club off whatever they do or if they buy a player they [or you] don't

want

 

As you think so many people "will not be doing their jobs" you could maybe tell us how many people at all the clubs who are doing their jobs better ?

 

More mirth to pass the time .........

 

 

 

All of the ones in the 13 clubs above us?

 

Before 1992 there were consistently anything between 23 and 33 clubs above us. As you should know.

 

That is horrendously incorrect. Before 1992 there were anything between 0-33 clubs above us as before 1992 we won the top league spot.

 

 

Is it now ?

 

Here are our league positions for the first 10 years after we got promoted in 1965

 

15th, 20th, 10th, 9th, 7th, 12th, 11th, 9th, 15th, 15th [nr of teams ahead of us 14, 19, 9, 8, 6, 11, 8, 14, 14]

 

the next 10 read

 

15th, 5th, 21st, Div2, Div2, Div2, Div2, Div2,Div2, 14th [nr of teams ahead of us 14, 4, 20, 29, 30, 32, 30, 26, 24, 13]

 

The next years, up to 1992

 

11th, 17th, 8th, 20th, Div2, Div2, Div2, [nr of teams ahead of us 10, 16, 7, 19, 22, 31, 40]

 

FACTS.

 

 

It's 2007. FACT

 

I don't give a shit how bad were were 20 years ago, I care about now. FACT.

 

You're stuck in the past. FACT

 

if you are unable to see how far forward we have came overall since the current board took over the club, and are blind to the fact that it is possible to have a board that really is shit, which is what these facts should make plain to you, then it is your problem.

[LeazesMag 0]

This argument always makes me laugh, its like saying we should settle for Bramble because 30 years ago we had a much worse centre back!

 

We did ........

 

It really makes me laugh the amount of people who think that NUFC for some reason have a divine right to always play in europe.....take a look 12 miles down the road and there you will see what a shit board of directors really is, because they could quite easily be where we are and vice versa

[The Fish 10674]

Did you know that lilies are on average the 5th most beautiful flowers?

 

full backs are priority because as Leazes 2nd track on his broken record states, this board doesn't have a bottomless pit of money.

 

I'd rather we got a £5m full back that was worth it... instead of paying £5m and sign a striker who is no better than what we've got.

 

I guess thats a bad example but basically, the caliber of fullback you can get with £5m is comparatively superior to the calibre of striker for the same cash.

 

I'd rathe have a good fullback than an average striker.

 

but of course Leazes will tell us all how 35million years ago we had a terrible leftback (he was a gelatinous ooze) so we should be content with Babayaro

[Gejon 2]

This argument always makes me laugh, its like saying we should settle for Bramble because 30 years ago we had a much worse centre back!

 

We did ........

 

It really makes me laugh the amount of people who think that NUFC for some reason have a divine right to always play in europe.....take a look 12 miles down the road and there you will see what a shit board of directors really is, because they could quite easily be where we are and vice versa

 

 

The amount of money we have spent suggests we should be doing better than we are tbh!

[LeazesMag 0]

This argument always makes me laugh, its like saying we should settle for Bramble because 30 years ago we had a much worse centre back!

 

We did ........

 

It really makes me laugh the amount of people who think that NUFC for some reason have a divine right to always play in europe.....take a look 12 miles down the road and there you will see what a shit board of directors really is, because they could quite easily be where we are and vice versa

 

 

The amount of money we have spent suggests we should be doing better than we are tbh!

 

and your foolproof method of selecting one of the 2 managers who will win the FA Cup or the title is what exactly ?

 

EDIT. While you are at it, you can tell us why we didn't spend big money prior to 1992, and sold our best players instead ?

Edited January 13, 2007 by LeazesMag

[Gejon 2]

This argument always makes me laugh, its like saying we should settle for Bramble because 30 years ago we had a much worse centre back!

 

We did ........

 

It really makes me laugh the amount of people who think that NUFC for some reason have a divine right to always play in europe.....take a look 12 miles down the road and there you will see what a shit board of directors really is, because they could quite easily be where we are and vice versa

 

 

The amount of money we have spent suggests we should be doing better than we are tbh!

 

and your foolproof method of selecting one of the 2 managers who will win the FA Cup or the title is what exactly ?

 

EDIT. While you are at it, you can tell us why we didn't spend big money prior to 1992, and sold our best players instead ?

 

Didn't say we should win either tbh but I WOULDN'T have appointed Souness and I doubt many would!

[LeazesMag 0]

Did you know that lilies are on average the 5th most beautiful flowers?

 

full backs are priority because as Leazes 2nd track on his broken record states, this board doesn't have a bottomless pit of money.

 

I'd rather we got a £5m full back that was worth it... instead of paying £5m and sign a striker who is no better than what we've got.

 

I guess thats a bad example but basically, the caliber of fullback you can get with £5m is comparatively superior to the calibre of striker for the same cash.

 

I'd rathe have a good fullback than an average striker.

 

but of course Leazes will tell us all how 35million years ago we had a terrible leftback (he was a gelatinous ooze) so we should be content with Babayaro

 

I disagree. If Martins is injured the 5m full back won't score the goals needed to stay where we currently are in the league or go higher, nor will he prevent the defenders being put under pressure by the [poor] front men conceding possession and giving the ball away too easily.

 

Fairly basic, really.

[LeazesMag 0]

This argument always makes me laugh, its like saying we should settle for Bramble because 30 years ago we had a much worse centre back!

 

We did ........

 

It really makes me laugh the amount of people who think that NUFC for some reason have a divine right to always play in europe.....take a look 12 miles down the road and there you will see what a shit board of directors really is, because they could quite easily be where we are and vice versa

 

 

The amount of money we have spent suggests we should be doing better than we are tbh!

 

and your foolproof method of selecting one of the 2 managers who will win the FA Cup or the title is what exactly ?

 

EDIT. While you are at it, you can tell us why we didn't spend big money prior to 1992, and sold our best players instead ?

 

Didn't say we should win either tbh but I WOULDN'T have appointed Souness and I doubt many would!

 

 

Well, Rangers, Liverpool, Southampton, Blackburn and a couple of foreign shit clubs have done. Likewise plenty of other clubs have appointed shit managers, because there are plenty around. 88 or so to be precise, as this is the number of clubs who have not matched the amount of times we have qualified for europe in the last decade, under different managers.

Edited January 13, 2007 by LeazesMag

[Gejon 2]

This argument always makes me laugh, its like saying we should settle for Bramble because 30 years ago we had a much worse centre back!

 

We did ........

 

It really makes me laugh the amount of people who think that NUFC for some reason have a divine right to always play in europe.....take a look 12 miles down the road and there you will see what a shit board of directors really is, because they could quite easily be where we are and vice versa

 

 

The amount of money we have spent suggests we should be doing better than we are tbh!

 

and your foolproof method of selecting one of the 2 managers who will win the FA Cup or the title is what exactly ?

 

EDIT. While you are at it, you can tell us why we didn't spend big money prior to 1992, and sold our best players instead ?

 

Didn't say we should win either tbh but I WOULDN'T have appointed Souness and I doubt many would!

 

 

Well, Rangers, Liverpool, Southampton, Blackburn and a couple of foreign shit clubs have done. Likewise plenty of other clubs have appointed shit managers, because there are plenty around. 88 or so to be precise, as this is the number of clubs who have not matched the amount of times we have qualified for europe in the last decade, under different managers.

 

 

Because Souness clearly looked the man to take over and no-one thought it was destined to be a stupid appointment? aye

[The Fish 10674]

Did you know that lilies are on average the 5th most beautiful flowers?

 

full backs are priority because as Leazes 2nd track on his broken record states, this board doesn't have a bottomless pit of money.

 

I'd rather we got a £5m full back that was worth it... instead of paying £5m and sign a striker who is no better than what we've got.

 

I guess thats a bad example but basically, the caliber of fullback you can get with £5m is comparatively superior to the calibre of striker for the same cash.

 

I'd rathe have a good fullback than an average striker.

 

but of course Leazes will tell us all how 35million years ago we had a terrible leftback (he was a gelatinous ooze) so we should be content with Babayaro

 

I disagree. If Martins is injured the 5m full back won't score the goals needed to stay where we currently are in the league or go higher, nor will he prevent the defenders being put under pressure by the [poor] front men conceding possession and giving the ball away too easily.

 

Fairly basic, really.

 

 

the problem is leazes that we clearly come from two entirely different schools of football thinking. I say that you build a team from the back, you say fro the front.

 

I see that if you have a strong defence you will not get relegated, if you have a strong midfield and a strong defence you'll secure a top half finish, if you have a strong strike force, a strong midfield and a strong defence you'll secure (top flight) European football, if you have a strong strikeforce, a strong midfield, a strong defence and a strong keeper you'll challenege for the title.

 

now that's simplified and a black and white view, but it's how I would structure a team; build from the back with experienced, physical center halves and mobile, tactically aware full backs.

 

Now I look at this newcastle United side and I see a "decent" midfield, an excellent 'keeper, an inexperienced defence and a injury ravaged frontline.

 

I would say that if we bought defenders it would permit a more attacking mentality to be taken on by the midfield. Maybe we would score more goals if the wingers were (more) free to attack?

 

You believe the opposite however, you believe that if we had a striker out defence would have to face less pressure and while that is also true I'd wager it's easier to find a full back that would improve us than it would to find a striker. It would certainly be cheaper.

 

surely you MUST concede those points?

[ChezGiven 0]

If Martins gets injured we're fucked. Big time.

 

We need both and its a case of seeing what the market offers before you can say spend big on either. The likelihood is that a striker will cost more as they are the ones who score the goals and win you games. Sib and Dyer are makeshift attackers meaning we only have one fit proper striker on the books.

[@yourservice 67]

are we still in the lead?

[Gejon 2]

If Martins gets injured we're fucked. Big time.

 

We need both and its a case of seeing what the market offers before you can say spend big on either. The likelihood is that a striker will cost more as they are the ones who score the goals and win you games. Sib and Dyer are makeshift attackers meaning we only have one fit proper striker on the books.

 

 

People say Dyer is a midfielder playing in an attacking role but to me he has looked better as an attacker than a midfielder. We do need and attacker and defenders but we currently have no-one at the club (imo) who can do a good job at left back (we have youngsters who can defend but offer little going in the other half). With a good attacking full back on either side we would create more.

[LeazesMag 0]

This argument always makes me laugh, its like saying we should settle for Bramble because 30 years ago we had a much worse centre back!

 

We did ........

 

It really makes me laugh the amount of people who think that NUFC for some reason have a divine right to always play in europe.....take a look 12 miles down the road and there you will see what a shit board of directors really is, because they could quite easily be where we are and vice versa

 

 

The amount of money we have spent suggests we should be doing better than we are tbh!

 

and your foolproof method of selecting one of the 2 managers who will win the FA Cup or the title is what exactly ?

 

EDIT. While you are at it, you can tell us why we didn't spend big money prior to 1992, and sold our best players instead ?

 

Didn't say we should win either tbh but I WOULDN'T have appointed Souness and I doubt many would!

 

 

Well, Rangers, Liverpool, Southampton, Blackburn and a couple of foreign shit clubs have done. Likewise plenty of other clubs have appointed shit managers, because there are plenty around. 88 or so to be precise, as this is the number of clubs who have not matched the amount of times we have qualified for europe in the last decade, under different managers.

 

 

Because Souness clearly looked the man to take over and no-one thought it was destined to be a stupid appointment? aye

 

nobody is defending the appointment of Souness, however what about the other 8.5 years ????

 

Anyway, you still don't tell us your foolproof method of making sure you get one of those 2 managers who win a cup ?

 

And plenty of people backed Souness to build his team, and some of his signings big style, notably Luque and Boumsong, and his sales ie Bellamy and Robert.

Edited January 13, 2007 by LeazesMag

[Gejon 2]

This argument always makes me laugh, its like saying we should settle for Bramble because 30 years ago we had a much worse centre back!

 

We did ........

 

It really makes me laugh the amount of people who think that NUFC for some reason have a divine right to always play in europe.....take a look 12 miles down the road and there you will see what a shit board of directors really is, because they could quite easily be where we are and vice versa

 

 

The amount of money we have spent suggests we should be doing better than we are tbh!

 

and your foolproof method of selecting one of the 2 managers who will win the FA Cup or the title is what exactly ?

 

EDIT. While you are at it, you can tell us why we didn't spend big money prior to 1992, and sold our best players instead ?

 

Didn't say we should win either tbh but I WOULDN'T have appointed Souness and I doubt many would!

 

 

Well, Rangers, Liverpool, Southampton, Blackburn and a couple of foreign shit clubs have done. Likewise plenty of other clubs have appointed shit managers, because there are plenty around. 88 or so to be precise, as this is the number of clubs who have not matched the amount of times we have qualified for europe in the last decade, under different managers.

 

 

Because Souness clearly looked the man to take over and no-one thought it was destined to be a stupid appointment? aye

 

nobody is defending the appointment of Souness, however what about the other 8.5 years ????

 

Anyway, you still don't tell us your foolproof method of making sure you get one of those 2 managers who win a cup ?

 

And plenty of people backed Souness to build his team, and some of his signings big style, notably Luque and Boumsong, and his sales ie Bellamy and Robert.

 

People got behind the signing because he was here now and there was not much else you could do. He was still a shocking appointment that set us back massively! People (including fans of other clubs) were amazed we appointed him and the board have to take the blame for a fuck up of huge proportions that has left us where we are today!

[LeazesMag 0]

Did you know that lilies are on average the 5th most beautiful flowers?

 

full backs are priority because as Leazes 2nd track on his broken record states, this board doesn't have a bottomless pit of money.

 

I'd rather we got a £5m full back that was worth it... instead of paying £5m and sign a striker who is no better than what we've got.

 

I guess thats a bad example but basically, the caliber of fullback you can get with £5m is comparatively superior to the calibre of striker for the same cash.

 

I'd rathe have a good fullback than an average striker.

 

but of course Leazes will tell us all how 35million years ago we had a terrible leftback (he was a gelatinous ooze) so we should be content with Babayaro

 

I disagree. If Martins is injured the 5m full back won't score the goals needed to stay where we currently are in the league or go higher, nor will he prevent the defenders being put under pressure by the [poor] front men conceding possession and giving the ball away too easily.

 

Fairly basic, really.

 

 

the problem is leazes that we clearly come from two entirely different schools of football thinking. I say that you build a team from the back, you say fro the front.

 

I see that if you have a strong defence you will not get relegated, if you have a strong midfield and a strong defence you'll secure a top half finish, if you have a strong strike force, a strong midfield and a strong defence you'll secure (top flight) European football, if you have a strong strikeforce, a strong midfield, a strong defence and a strong keeper you'll challenege for the title.

 

now that's simplified and a black and white view, but it's how I would structure a team; build from the back with experienced, physical center halves and mobile, tactically aware full backs.

 

Now I look at this newcastle United side and I see a "decent" midfield, an excellent 'keeper, an inexperienced defence and a injury ravaged frontline.

 

I would say that if we bought defenders it would permit a more attacking mentality to be taken on by the midfield. Maybe we would score more goals if the wingers were (more) free to attack?

 

You believe the opposite however, you believe that if we had a striker out defence would have to face less pressure and while that is also true I'd wager it's easier to find a full back that would improve us than it would to find a striker. It would certainly be cheaper.

 

surely you MUST concede those points?

 

there are cases in history where teams built a good defence then added forwards, this was mainly pioneered [in this country anyway] by Don Revie who when he got Leeds promoted in 1964, basically set about intimidating and kicking their way forward and defending in depth. Then he added Allan Clarke and Mick Jones. It paid off and they won the league, as Revie was a top manager and he got it right. However, this doesn't work all the time.

 

I used to think that this Leeds example was a sort of role model but other teams have done it differently, Keegan nearly won the league with an attacking team. Clough built the team at Derby as he saw it, Ferguson ditto at manu, to name others. I don't agree we lost that lead because of a "bad defence", I think we lost the lead because he changed the shape of the team to accomodate Arsprilla and also lost his leader and captain who had been there before, Venison. Good shape, discipline and communication will take you a long way defensively, of course you need a good defence but you need a good attack too, its a matter of getting the balance right. And the first key to good defending is to keep the ball and dictate the pace of the game as much as possible.

 

So I think now that there is no set way to build a team. Plenty of managers have assessed what they have and built up accordingly. It might not even be using priorities too, generally, if a quality player comes available at a good price and he has a future with you then you should get him. This policy is OK for Newcastle United because we have as a matter of course a big fanbase and can or should be able to find extra money if need be. At the moment the position is not really a normal one, so we have to look at the attackers, we don't have a balanced squad of quality. In the last 2 years we have lost 3 top quality attackers in Bellamy, Shearer and Owen with a long term injury. Only Martins has came in, so that position is obviously very under strength in terms of quality AND numbers. This area is both a short and long term necessity, whereas it is easier to defend so I wouldn't pay money for a defender that I want to spend on an attacker. As I said, this situation is different to a normal one that you should be in, and I think Roeder did absolutely the right thing in the summer bringing in 3 forward players and 1 on loan, albeit 2 of them are forward midfield players rather than out and ot strikers, but we have to accept that Duff is for the future and Sibierski has done a really good job standing in while the club look around for hopefully the right man at the right price rather than waste it again on someone who is not right for us.

[LeazesMag 0]

This argument always makes me laugh, its like saying we should settle for Bramble because 30 years ago we had a much worse centre back!

 

We did ........

 

It really makes me laugh the amount of people who think that NUFC for some reason have a divine right to always play in europe.....take a look 12 miles down the road and there you will see what a shit board of directors really is, because they could quite easily be where we are and vice versa

 

 

The amount of money we have spent suggests we should be doing better than we are tbh!

 

and your foolproof method of selecting one of the 2 managers who will win the FA Cup or the title is what exactly ?

 

EDIT. While you are at it, you can tell us why we didn't spend big money prior to 1992, and sold our best players instead ?

 

Didn't say we should win either tbh but I WOULDN'T have appointed Souness and I doubt many would!

 

 

Well, Rangers, Liverpool, Southampton, Blackburn and a couple of foreign shit clubs have done. Likewise plenty of other clubs have appointed shit managers, because there are plenty around. 88 or so to be precise, as this is the number of clubs who have not matched the amount of times we have qualified for europe in the last decade, under different managers.

 

 

Because Souness clearly looked the man to take over and no-one thought it was destined to be a stupid appointment? aye

 

nobody is defending the appointment of Souness, however what about the other 8.5 years ????

 

Anyway, you still don't tell us your foolproof method of making sure you get one of those 2 managers who win a cup ?

 

And plenty of people backed Souness to build his team, and some of his signings big style, notably Luque and Boumsong, and his sales ie Bellamy and Robert.

 

People got behind the signing because he was here now and there was not much else you could do. He was still a shocking appointment that set us back massively! People (including fans of other clubs) were amazed we appointed him and the board have to take the blame for a fuck up of huge proportions that has left us where we are today!

 

and the other 8 and a half years ?

 

And your criteria for appointing managers is ?

 

Plenty of people didn't back him "just because he was here". I didn't for one. However, we were told that he WOULD get it right, not that it was HOPED he would get it right. Plenty of people also told us how great Boumsong and Luque were. And how much better off we would be without Bellamy. The amazing thing is people backed a shitbag who didn't give a toss about anyone but himself and his ego, never mind his job, yet they slag off the board who despite their faults have been very good for this football club during the time they have been in charge. I have said this before, their time may be up, they may have gone as far as they can, but they have done a good job, and there is absolutely no guarantee any replacments would be better, in fact as there are only 4 clubs that have done better than us its a pretty tall order to go higher and the odds would be very much the other way.

[Gejon 2]

This argument always makes me laugh, its like saying we should settle for Bramble because 30 years ago we had a much worse centre back!

 

We did ........

 

It really makes me laugh the amount of people who think that NUFC for some reason have a divine right to always play in europe.....take a look 12 miles down the road and there you will see what a shit board of directors really is, because they could quite easily be where we are and vice versa

 

 

The amount of money we have spent suggests we should be doing better than we are tbh!

 

and your foolproof method of selecting one of the 2 managers who will win the FA Cup or the title is what exactly ?

 

EDIT. While you are at it, you can tell us why we didn't spend big money prior to 1992, and sold our best players instead ?

 

Didn't say we should win either tbh but I WOULDN'T have appointed Souness and I doubt many would!

 

 

Well, Rangers, Liverpool, Southampton, Blackburn and a couple of foreign shit clubs have done. Likewise plenty of other clubs have appointed shit managers, because there are plenty around. 88 or so to be precise, as this is the number of clubs who have not matched the amount of times we have qualified for europe in the last decade, under different managers.

 

 

Because Souness clearly looked the man to take over and no-one thought it was destined to be a stupid appointment? aye

 

nobody is defending the appointment of Souness, however what about the other 8.5 years ????

 

Anyway, you still don't tell us your foolproof method of making sure you get one of those 2 managers who win a cup ?

 

And plenty of people backed Souness to build his team, and some of his signings big style, notably Luque and Boumsong, and his sales ie Bellamy and Robert.

 

People got behind the signing because he was here now and there was not much else you could do. He was still a shocking appointment that set us back massively! People (including fans of other clubs) were amazed we appointed him and the board have to take the blame for a fuck up of huge proportions that has left us where we are today!

 

and the other 8 and a half years ?

 

And your criteria for appointing managers is ?

 

Plenty of people didn't back him "just because he was here". I didn't for one. However, we were told that he WOULD get it right, not that it was HOPED he would get it right. Plenty of people also told us how great Boumsong and Luque were. And how much better off we would be without Bellamy. The amazing thing is people backed a shitbag who didn't give a toss about anyone but himself and his ego, never mind his job, yet they slag off the board who despite their faults have been very good for this football club during the time they have been in charge. I have said this before, their time may be up, they may have gone as far as they can, but they have done a good job, and there is absolutely no guarantee any replacments would be better, in fact as there are only 4 clubs that have done better than us its a pretty tall order to go higher and the odds would be very much the other way.

 

Don't appoint a manager currently taking his club down and is strongly rumoured to be getting the boot.

[LeazesMag 0]

This argument always makes me laugh, its like saying we should settle for Bramble because 30 years ago we had a much worse centre back!

 

We did ........

 

It really makes me laugh the amount of people who think that NUFC for some reason have a divine right to always play in europe.....take a look 12 miles down the road and there you will see what a shit board of directors really is, because they could quite easily be where we are and vice versa

 

 

The amount of money we have spent suggests we should be doing better than we are tbh!

 

and your foolproof method of selecting one of the 2 managers who will win the FA Cup or the title is what exactly ?

 

EDIT. While you are at it, you can tell us why we didn't spend big money prior to 1992, and sold our best players instead ?

 

Didn't say we should win either tbh but I WOULDN'T have appointed Souness and I doubt many would!

 

 

Well, Rangers, Liverpool, Southampton, Blackburn and a couple of foreign shit clubs have done. Likewise plenty of other clubs have appointed shit managers, because there are plenty around. 88 or so to be precise, as this is the number of clubs who have not matched the amount of times we have qualified for europe in the last decade, under different managers.

 

 

Because Souness clearly looked the man to take over and no-one thought it was destined to be a stupid appointment? aye

 

nobody is defending the appointment of Souness, however what about the other 8.5 years ????

 

Anyway, you still don't tell us your foolproof method of making sure you get one of those 2 managers who win a cup ?

 

And plenty of people backed Souness to build his team, and some of his signings big style, notably Luque and Boumsong, and his sales ie Bellamy and Robert.

 

People got behind the signing because he was here now and there was not much else you could do. He was still a shocking appointment that set us back massively! People (including fans of other clubs) were amazed we appointed him and the board have to take the blame for a fuck up of huge proportions that has left us where we are today!

 

and the other 8 and a half years ?

 

And your criteria for appointing managers is ?

 

Plenty of people didn't back him "just because he was here". I didn't for one. However, we were told that he WOULD get it right, not that it was HOPED he would get it right. Plenty of people also told us how great Boumsong and Luque were. And how much better off we would be without Bellamy. The amazing thing is people backed a shitbag who didn't give a toss about anyone but himself and his ego, never mind his job, yet they slag off the board who despite their faults have been very good for this football club during the time they have been in charge. I have said this before, their time may be up, they may have gone as far as they can, but they have done a good job, and there is absolutely no guarantee any replacments would be better, in fact as there are only 4 clubs that have done better than us its a pretty tall order to go higher and the odds would be very much the other way.

 

Don't appoint a manager currently taking his club down and is strongly rumoured to be getting the boot.

 

there are plenty of those, and they won't guarantee you trophies. What about the other 8 and a half years ?

And what is your criteria FOR appointing, you are only saying who you WOULDN'T appoint.

[Gejon 2]

I would appoint a manager who knows who to plan, build a team and get results against big teams. Someone like Big Sam would be on my list.

 

There is no-one who would definitely get us a trophy (although I never said there was but as usual you are claiming someone said something they clearly didn't) but there are managers who we really should avoid (like Souness).

[LeazesMag 0]

I would appoint a manager who knows who to plan, build a team and get results against big teams. Someone like Big Sam would be on my list.

 

There is no-one who would definitely get us a trophy (although I never said there was but as usual you are claiming someone said something they clearly didn't) but there are managers who we really should avoid (like Souness).

 

Believe it or not - they all have "plans". Dalglish had a plan, Gullit had a plan, Robson had a plan, even Souness had a plan. Every manager at every club has a "plan". Its just that only 2 of them have plans that result in trophies. So what is your criteria for appointing a manager who has a "plan" that will guarantee one of those 2 trophies ?

 

Or get into europe ? Wait a moment, we have had managers who had this "plan".

 

Dalglish, Gullit, Robson all had good results [and trophies] at other clubs, beating big teams, as a result of a "plan". In fact, so did Souness.

[Shearergol 0]

This argument always makes me laugh, its like saying we should settle for Bramble because 30 years ago we had a much worse centre back!

 

We did ........

 

It really makes me laugh the amount of people who think that NUFC for some reason have a divine right to always play in europe.....take a look 12 miles down the road and there you will see what a shit board of directors really is, because they could quite easily be where we are and vice versa

 

 

The amount of money we have spent suggests we should be doing better than we are tbh!

 

and your foolproof method of selecting one of the 2 managers who will win the FA Cup or the title is what exactly ?

 

EDIT. While you are at it, you can tell us why we didn't spend big money prior to 1992, and sold our best players instead ?

 

Didn't say we should win either tbh but I WOULDN'T have appointed Souness and I doubt many would!

 

 

Well, Rangers, Liverpool, Southampton, Blackburn and a couple of foreign shit clubs have done. Likewise plenty of other clubs have appointed shit managers, because there are plenty around. 88 or so to be precise, as this is the number of clubs who have not matched the amount of times we have qualified for europe in the last decade, under different managers.

 

 

Because Souness clearly looked the man to take over and no-one thought it was destined to be a stupid appointment? aye

 

nobody is defending the appointment of Souness, however what about the other 8.5 years ????

 

Anyway, you still don't tell us your foolproof method of making sure you get one of those 2 managers who win a cup ?

 

And plenty of people backed Souness to build his team, and some of his signings big style, notably Luque and Boumsong, and his sales ie Bellamy and Robert.

 

Namely, the NUFC board of directors. That momentous mistake itself should have seen heads roll. Although I sense you're blaming Gemmill, who incidentally isn't paid to run the football club.

[Gejon 2]

I would appoint a manager who knows who to plan, build a team and get results against big teams. Someone like Big Sam would be on my list.

 

There is no-one who would definitely get us a trophy (although I never said there was but as usual you are claiming someone said something they clearly didn't) but there are managers who we really should avoid (like Souness).

 

Believe it or not - they all have "plans". Dalglish had a plan, Gullit had a plan, Robson had a plan, even Souness had a plan. Every manager at every club has a "plan". Its just that only 2 of them have plans that result in trophies. So what is your criteria for appointing a manager who has a "plan" that will guarantee one of those 2 trophies ?

 

Or get into europe ? Wait a moment, we have had managers who had this "plan".

 

Dalglish, Gullit, Robson all had good results [and trophies] at other clubs, beating big teams, as a result of a "plan". In fact, so did Souness.

 

Jesus wept tbh!

[LeazesMag 0]

This argument always makes me laugh, its like saying we should settle for Bramble because 30 years ago we had a much worse centre back!

 

We did ........

 

It really makes me laugh the amount of people who think that NUFC for some reason have a divine right to always play in europe.....take a look 12 miles down the road and there you will see what a shit board of directors really is, because they could quite easily be where we are and vice versa

 

 

The amount of money we have spent suggests we should be doing better than we are tbh!

 

and your foolproof method of selecting one of the 2 managers who will win the FA Cup or the title is what exactly ?

 

EDIT. While you are at it, you can tell us why we didn't spend big money prior to 1992, and sold our best players instead ?

 

Didn't say we should win either tbh but I WOULDN'T have appointed Souness and I doubt many would!

 

 

Well, Rangers, Liverpool, Southampton, Blackburn and a couple of foreign shit clubs have done. Likewise plenty of other clubs have appointed shit managers, because there are plenty around. 88 or so to be precise, as this is the number of clubs who have not matched the amount of times we have qualified for europe in the last decade, under different managers.

 

 

Because Souness clearly looked the man to take over and no-one thought it was destined to be a stupid appointment? aye

 

nobody is defending the appointment of Souness, however what about the other 8.5 years ????

 

Anyway, you still don't tell us your foolproof method of making sure you get one of those 2 managers who win a cup ?

 

And plenty of people backed Souness to build his team, and some of his signings big style, notably Luque and Boumsong, and his sales ie Bellamy and Robert.

 

Namely, the NUFC board of directors. That momentous mistake itself should have seen heads roll. Although I sense you're blaming Gemmill, who incidentally isn't paid to run the football club.

 

 

No, I'm not blaming Gem. I don't think you are listening Jon. Nobody is defending the appointment of Souness, but you are turning a blind eye on the other appointments and the criteria by which they were made. What is your criteria for appointing managers, accepting that Souness was a fuckpig and there is no defence of it. If every club were accountable for every bad decision in football, there would hardly be any directors anywhere. It is a fact however that ours have done better than most overall. The fact that the board are paid to make decisions are irrelevant, just because they had the money to buy into the football club doesn't mean they are better judges than some fans, because they are not, and that goes for all directors of every club everywhere.