Things are looking up!

[Barney 0]

Playing Devil's advocate, did Shephard have to run the club in a recession?

 

Slightly back on topic, Barton is ready for reserve games and should be back for the run in.

[Guest alex]

Playing Devil's advocate, did Shephard have to run the club in a recession?

 

Slightly back on topic, Barton is ready for reserve games and should be back for the run in.

Mind, financial genius Ashley was already in trouble due to catastrophic gambles made on the stock exchange a good six months before the recession kicked in. 'Planning'.

[Phil 6]

I doubt there are many players on high money. Delboy has played hard ball on every contract, which is what led to Milner leaving and us getting 12m.

 

The press make things up as they go along.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/t...uth/8519800.stm

Barton, Nolan, Smith, Jonas, Enrique and Coloccini. Not to mention Geremi who we've only just shifted and only then because he was nearly out of contract (wouldn't be surprised if we paid the rest of his contract off in order to get rid). All on Ashley's watch.

 

My estimates would be;

50k Smith

60k Barton

35k Nolan

50k Jonas

30k Enrique

40k Coloccini

 

total of 13.78m a year.

 

I doubt anyone else in the squad is on over 25k. Even if you over estimate the squad wages it's hard to get them over 30m.

 

This is a far cry from the £70m last year.

 

When you take into account our income of £100m last year. We are definately in a good position to rebuild.

[Craig 6700]

Playing Devil's advocate, did Shephard have to run the club in a recession?

 

Whilst his name wasn't the one above the door back then, we were definitely going through a recession in 1992 when the Halls and Shepherds were in charge.

[Christmas Tree 4827]

I have to say that I love the argument of "we'd be financially worse off under Shepherd", since when did Shepherd have to find £25m just to keep us alive for another few months?

 

He didnt have to because he knew that out of everything that happens at the club, competing at the top level had to come first otherwise your balance sheets would be fooked.

 

Shepherd never had to beg corporate box owners to renew,

Shepherd never had to worry about getting the next sponsorship deal,

More importantly Shepherd never ever had to find something to make up for Sky's payments.

 

no, shepherd just kept on borrowing and spending and getting us further into debt.

 

The halls probably saw were all this was heading hence their sharpe exit.

 

I would also love to think there is a third type of owner

out their who had the full package and is just waiting to buy us.

 

Events that are unfolding be it at Pompey, qpr or anfield will only deter future investment.

 

The best we can hope for is that Ashley can see the sense in getting a good football man in to replace llambias and slowly rebuild from the ashes

[Guest alex]

I doubt there are many players on high money. Delboy has played hard ball on every contract, which is what led to Milner leaving and us getting 12m.

 

The press make things up as they go along.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/t...uth/8519800.stm

Barton, Nolan, Smith, Jonas, Enrique and Coloccini. Not to mention Geremi who we've only just shifted and only then because he was nearly out of contract (wouldn't be surprised if we paid the rest of his contract off in order to get rid). All on Ashley's watch.

 

My estimates would be;

50k Smith

60k Barton

35k Nolan

50k Jonas

30k Enrique

40k Coloccini

 

total of 13.78m a year.

 

I doubt anyone else in the squad is on over 25k. Even if you over estimate the squad wages it's hard to get them over 30m.

 

This is a far cry from the £70m last year.

 

When you take into account our income of £100m last year. We are definately in a good position to rebuild.

I reckon they're conservatives estimates not even taking into account the likes of Nacho and Xisco. He's signed average players on average wages since we went down but that's hardly what I'd call 'playing hardball' on every contract. Obviously the wage bill is down now but that's just a necessity due to relegation. Also, Milner is brought up a lot and it was good money, but we got peanuts for Given even though the richest club in the whole fucking world were after him so I don't agree with you there.

[Guest alex]

I have to say that I love the argument of "we'd be financially worse off under Shepherd", since when did Shepherd have to find £25m just to keep us alive for another few months?

 

He didnt have to because he knew that out of everything that happens at the club, competing at the top level had to come first otherwise your balance sheets would be fooked.

 

Shepherd never had to beg corporate box owners to renew,

Shepherd never had to worry about getting the next sponsorship deal,

More importantly Shepherd never ever had to find something to make up for Sky's payments.

 

no, shepherd just kept on borrowing and spending and getting us further into debt.

 

The halls probably saw were all this was heading hence their sharpe exit.

 

I would also love to think there is a third type of owner

out their who had the full package and is just waiting to buy us.

 

Events that are unfolding be it at Pompey, qpr or anfield will only deter future investment.

 

The best we can hope for is that Ashley can see the sense in getting a good football man in to replace llambias and slowly rebuild from the ashes

The Halls between them owned more of the club than Shepherd so it seems a bit wrong to blame Shepherd when everything the club did would have required the tacit agreement of the Halls.

[LeazesMag 0]

I have to say that I love the argument of "we'd be financially worse off under Shepherd", since when did Shepherd have to find £25m just to keep us alive for another few months?

 

He didnt have to because he knew that out of everything that happens at the club, competing at the top level had to come first otherwise your balance sheets would be fooked.

 

Shepherd never had to beg corporate box owners to renew,

Shepherd never had to worry about getting the next sponsorship deal,

More importantly Shepherd never ever had to find something to make up for Sky's payments.

 

no, shepherd just kept on borrowing and spending and getting us further into debt.

 

The halls probably saw were all this was heading hence their sharpe exit.

 

I would also love to think there is a third type of owner

out their who had the full package and is just waiting to buy us.

 

Events that are unfolding be it at Pompey, qpr or anfield will only deter future investment.

 

The best we can hope for is that Ashley can see the sense in getting a good football man in to replace llambias and slowly rebuild from the ashes

The Halls between them owned more of the club than Shepherd so it seems a bit wrong to blame Shepherd when everything the club did would have required the tacit agreement of the Halls.

 

bingo.

 

Another point I've made on countless occasions.

 

Even coming from me, it would be nice if this sort of thing could now be put behind us, and people accepted that they were in fact good owners.

 

I'm pissed off with football just now to be honest, generally, and because of the demise of NUFC

[Phil 6]

I doubt there are many players on high money. Delboy has played hard ball on every contract, which is what led to Milner leaving and us getting 12m.

 

The press make things up as they go along.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/t...uth/8519800.stm

Barton, Nolan, Smith, Jonas, Enrique and Coloccini. Not to mention Geremi who we've only just shifted and only then because he was nearly out of contract (wouldn't be surprised if we paid the rest of his contract off in order to get rid). All on Ashley's watch.

 

My estimates would be;

50k Smith

60k Barton

35k Nolan

50k Jonas

30k Enrique

40k Coloccini

 

total of 13.78m a year.

 

I doubt anyone else in the squad is on over 25k. Even if you over estimate the squad wages it's hard to get them over 30m.

 

This is a far cry from the £70m last year.

 

When you take into account our income of £100m last year. We are definately in a good position to rebuild.

I reckon they're conservatives estimates not even taking into account the likes of Nacho and Xisco. He's signed average players on average wages since we went down but that's hardly what I'd call 'playing hardball' on every contract. Obviously the wage bill is down now but that's just a necessity due to relegation. Also, Milner is brought up a lot and it was good money, but we got peanuts for Given even though the richest club in the whole fucking world were after him so I don't agree with you there.

 

 

Guthrie is on 5k, Bassong was on 5k. S.Taylor contact talks dragged on for ages, as did Michael Owens. Sounds like he's shrewd. Also, if you look at the money we got in for the players, i think he did quite well given all the buying clubs knew we had to sell. 9m Martins, 9m for Bassong, 4m for Duff (i'd have let him go for free at the end of last season), 2m Beye.

 

As for Given, I didn't mind his sale and thought 8m was probably as much as we'd have gotten. The real issue for me was not including Michael Johnson as part of the deal, or spending the money, but thats a footballing debate not a financial one.

 

 

The point is the books are in a better shape, most of the deadwood is gone, and wages are low enough we can add to the squad without incurring debt.

 

 

 

Things are looking up.

[ChezGiven 0]

If we were 130m in debt last year, doubt we've paid much off whilst being in the championship. The only positives i can see at the moment is that the players who left last year were all massively overpaid for their ability, if we hadnt gone down, many would still be leeching the club of money.

 

The wage bill should be down to somewhere around 40m which if we get promoted means we have some room for manoeuvre in attracting new players. I have to say there is a lot to be said for stability and continuity, 2 new midfielders and a striker at a minimum and i'd be interested to see how we do under Hughton.

[LeazesMag 0]

I doubt there are many players on high money. Delboy has played hard ball on every contract, which is what led to Milner leaving and us getting 12m.

 

The press make things up as they go along.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/t...uth/8519800.stm

Barton, Nolan, Smith, Jonas, Enrique and Coloccini. Not to mention Geremi who we've only just shifted and only then because he was nearly out of contract (wouldn't be surprised if we paid the rest of his contract off in order to get rid). All on Ashley's watch.

 

My estimates would be;

50k Smith

60k Barton

35k Nolan

50k Jonas

30k Enrique

40k Coloccini

 

total of 13.78m a year.

 

I doubt anyone else in the squad is on over 25k. Even if you over estimate the squad wages it's hard to get them over 30m.

 

This is a far cry from the £70m last year.

 

When you take into account our income of £100m last year. We are definately in a good position to rebuild.

I reckon they're conservatives estimates not even taking into account the likes of Nacho and Xisco. He's signed average players on average wages since we went down but that's hardly what I'd call 'playing hardball' on every contract. Obviously the wage bill is down now but that's just a necessity due to relegation. Also, Milner is brought up a lot and it was good money, but we got peanuts for Given even though the richest club in the whole fucking world were after him so I don't agree with you there.

 

 

Guthrie is on 5k, Bassong was on 5k. S.Taylor contact talks dragged on for ages, as did Michael Owens. Sounds like he's shrewd. Also, if you look at the money we got in for the players, i think he did quite well given all the buying clubs knew we had to sell. 9m Martins, 9m for Bassong, 4m for Duff (i'd have let him go for free at the end of last season), 2m Beye.

 

As for Given, I didn't mind his sale and thought 8m was probably as much as we'd have gotten. The real issue for me was not including Michael Johnson as part of the deal, or spending the money, but thats a footballing debate not a financial one.

 

 

The point is the books are in a better shape, most of the deadwood is gone, and wages are low enough we can add to the squad without incurring debt.

 

 

 

Things are looking up.

 

 

What aims do you think Newcastle United should have, as the 3rd biggest supported club in the country ?

[Phil 6]

What aims do you think Newcastle United should have, as the 3rd biggest supported club in the country ?

 

Our 'aim' should always be europe as it's the only way to attract top players.

[Renton 22001]

I have to say that I love the argument of "we'd be financially worse off under Shepherd", since when did Shepherd have to find £25m just to keep us alive for another few months?

 

He didnt have to because he knew that out of everything that happens at the club, competing at the top level had to come first otherwise your balance sheets would be fooked.

 

Shepherd never had to beg corporate box owners to renew,

Shepherd never had to worry about getting the next sponsorship deal,

More importantly Shepherd never ever had to find something to make up for Sky's payments.

 

Shepherd employed Souness (simply unforgiveable) and we came perilously close to relegation under Roeder in his full year imo. That would have been entirely self inflicted. And hadn't the sponsorship money etc already been spent?

 

I'm really not sure what your point is here, it's pretty hard to guess at what state we would have been in now (financial and on the pitch) if the Halls and Shepherds had kept control, but the slide we experienced predates Ashley, that's for sure.

 

None of this is a defence of Ashley's appalling tenure of course.

[JawD 99]

I doubt there are many players on high money. Delboy has played hard ball on every contract, which is what led to Milner leaving and us getting 12m.

 

The press make things up as they go along.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/t...uth/8519800.stm

Barton, Nolan, Smith, Jonas, Enrique and Coloccini. Not to mention Geremi who we've only just shifted and only then because he was nearly out of contract (wouldn't be surprised if we paid the rest of his contract off in order to get rid). All on Ashley's watch.

 

My estimates would be;

50k Smith

60k Barton

35k Nolan

50k Jonas

30k Enrique

40k Coloccini

 

total of 13.78m a year.

 

I doubt anyone else in the squad is on over 25k. Even if you over estimate the squad wages it's hard to get them over 30m.

 

This is a far cry from the £70m last year.

 

When you take into account our income of £100m last year. We are definately in a good position to rebuild.

I reckon they're conservatives estimates not even taking into account the likes of Nacho and Xisco. He's signed average players on average wages since we went down but that's hardly what I'd call 'playing hardball' on every contract. Obviously the wage bill is down now but that's just a necessity due to relegation. Also, Milner is brought up a lot and it was good money, but we got peanuts for Given even though the richest club in the whole fucking world were after him so I don't agree with you there.

 

 

Guthrie is on 5k, Bassong was on 5k. S.Taylor contact talks dragged on for ages, as did Michael Owens. Sounds like he's shrewd. Also, if you look at the money we got in for the players, i think he did quite well given all the buying clubs knew we had to sell. 9m Martins, 9m for Bassong, 4m for Duff (i'd have let him go for free at the end of last season), 2m Beye.

 

As for Given, I didn't mind his sale and thought 8m was probably as much as we'd have gotten. The real issue for me was not including Michael Johnson as part of the deal, or spending the money, but thats a footballing debate not a financial one.

 

 

The point is the books are in a better shape, most of the deadwood is gone, and wages are low enough we can add to the squad without incurring debt.

 

 

 

Things are looking up.

 

 

What aims do you think Newcastle United should have, as the 3rd biggest supported club in the country ?

 

I'll answer that, top 6 in the Prem. I think that should always be our minimum aim.

 

On the players, Given going for under £7M when gordon was bought for what, £9M? Given might not be the best keeper but he is the most consistent I reckon. They got him for a steal. I do actually agree that we got rid of many players that we should have, the high earners. I also agree that in the past we have maybe punched above our weight in wages. But we had to. Without that investment we would never (or rather unlikely) have made the Champions League. It think that dreams gone now and we need to be aiming for Europe / Uefa Cup (oh ok Europa league).

 

But now lets be realistic.

 

Where should we aim as NUFC and where should we aim with Ashley at the helm are two very different questions imo. Next season though is all about staying up.

 

Ashley has spent the money before, but I cant see him doing it now. He will want to keep the high earners off the books to make the club more attractive to sell.

 

Yes, he does still want to sell.

[Giraffidae 0]

I have to say that I love the argument of "we'd be financially worse off under Shepherd", since when did Shepherd have to find £25m just to keep us alive for another few months?

 

He didnt have to because he knew that out of everything that happens at the club, competing at the top level had to come first otherwise your balance sheets would be fooked.

 

Shepherd never had to beg corporate box owners to renew,

Shepherd never had to worry about getting the next sponsorship deal,

More importantly Shepherd never ever had to find something to make up for Sky's payments.

 

no, shepherd just kept on borrowing and spending and getting us further into debt.

 

The halls probably saw were all this was heading hence their sharpe exit.

 

I would also love to think there is a third type of owner

out their who had the full package and is just waiting to buy us.

 

Events that are unfolding be it at Pompey, qpr or anfield will only deter future investment.

 

The best we can hope for is that Ashley can see the sense in getting a good football man in to replace llambias and slowly rebuild from the ashes

The Halls between them owned more of the club than Shepherd so it seems a bit wrong to blame Shepherd when everything the club did would have required the tacit agreement of the Halls.

 

bingo.

 

Another point I've made on countless occasions.

 

Even coming from me, it would be nice if this sort of thing could now be put behind us, and people accepted that they were in fact good owners.

 

I'm pissed off with football just now to be honest, generally, and because of the demise of NUFC

 

The years you refer to are clearly the best we’ve ever had, but good owners full stop? You have to admit that they spent/blew/invested all the future earnings they possibly could and took a huge chunks of it out of the club and in the process into their own pockets. There was no more money that could be ticked, no more money to bled out of the club, no way of servicing the debt they’d accrued — so they cut and run.

 

I reckon that when Ashley took over, all earnings that could of been made over his first 5 years had already been ticked and spent, or as ever, siphoned out of the club. As it turns out it’s difficult to sympathise with Ashley — but worship the Shepherds and Halls, hmmmm, it’s not as clear cut as you are stating.

Edited February 22, 2010 by Giraffidae

[acrossthepond 878]

I also agree that in the long term our top priority should be to finish top six and play in the Europa League. It's a nice dream to make top four but I doubt it will ever happen again unless something very fundamental changes in the EPL and in football in general.

 

Obviously, that won't be happening for a while and we face a period of substantial rebuilding ahead of us, and if Ashley is in charge of that period - and for all CT's insistence that he wasn't responsible for bringing in Smith and his ilk on their high wages because he didn't sign their contracts, he has told us that he will be responsible for buying and selling players in one statement of his or another (Happy Face will know) - then we are probably going to face a struggle to survive year after year.

 

Let's look at Fulham. They haven't spent mega money - I think we can all agree on that - and have been transformed over time from Second/Third division also-rans to PL strugglers and finally to European competitors and a high-midtable side, and they have accomplished that not by going for trophy signings (sorry Leazes) but by signing solid PL performers and by maintaining stability in the club, hiring a decent manager and giving him authority over his team, both in selection and transfers. Look at players like Aaron Hughes, who we once derided as not good enough for us and who's an absolute rock for Fulham. Players like Hughes, Abdoulaye Faye, Matty Taylor, James McFadden (or even, dare I say it, Damien Duff) who have been PL players for some time and have proven themselves at that level without costing mega money would be the kind of players we should try to target to help keep us up and to build on something for the future.

 

Shite players like Best who are under 25 and could provide a sell-on value are not the kind of players who will keep us up, even if we are paying fees for them, and even if we do stay up for the first season on that sort of a transfer scheme, the long-term prospects for the club are extremely bleak under Ashley, and he is the only one who can be held responsible for that.

[Barney 0]

I'd love for us to aim to become an Everton over the next 5 years, and use our better resources to push on from there.

[LeazesMag 0]

What aims do you think Newcastle United should have, as the 3rd biggest supported club in the country ?

 

Our 'aim' should always be europe as it's the only way to attract top players.

 

please tell us how it is possible to do this without paying the going rate ie top dollar, and how many clubs are doing it without being in debt

[LeazesMag 0]

I doubt there are many players on high money. Delboy has played hard ball on every contract, which is what led to Milner leaving and us getting 12m.

 

The press make things up as they go along.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/t...uth/8519800.stm

Barton, Nolan, Smith, Jonas, Enrique and Coloccini. Not to mention Geremi who we've only just shifted and only then because he was nearly out of contract (wouldn't be surprised if we paid the rest of his contract off in order to get rid). All on Ashley's watch.

 

My estimates would be;

50k Smith

60k Barton

35k Nolan

50k Jonas

30k Enrique

40k Coloccini

 

total of 13.78m a year.

 

I doubt anyone else in the squad is on over 25k. Even if you over estimate the squad wages it's hard to get them over 30m.

 

This is a far cry from the £70m last year.

 

When you take into account our income of £100m last year. We are definately in a good position to rebuild.

I reckon they're conservatives estimates not even taking into account the likes of Nacho and Xisco. He's signed average players on average wages since we went down but that's hardly what I'd call 'playing hardball' on every contract. Obviously the wage bill is down now but that's just a necessity due to relegation. Also, Milner is brought up a lot and it was good money, but we got peanuts for Given even though the richest club in the whole fucking world were after him so I don't agree with you there.

 

 

Guthrie is on 5k, Bassong was on 5k. S.Taylor contact talks dragged on for ages, as did Michael Owens. Sounds like he's shrewd. Also, if you look at the money we got in for the players, i think he did quite well given all the buying clubs knew we had to sell. 9m Martins, 9m for Bassong, 4m for Duff (i'd have let him go for free at the end of last season), 2m Beye.

 

As for Given, I didn't mind his sale and thought 8m was probably as much as we'd have gotten. The real issue for me was not including Michael Johnson as part of the deal, or spending the money, but thats a footballing debate not a financial one.

 

 

The point is the books are in a better shape, most of the deadwood is gone, and wages are low enough we can add to the squad without incurring debt.

 

 

 

Things are looking up.

 

 

What aims do you think Newcastle United should have, as the 3rd biggest supported club in the country ?

 

I'll answer that, top 6 in the Prem. I think that should always be our minimum aim.

 

On the players, Given going for under £7M when gordon was bought for what, £9M? Given might not be the best keeper but he is the most consistent I reckon. They got him for a steal. I do actually agree that we got rid of many players that we should have, the high earners. I also agree that in the past we have maybe punched above our weight in wages. But we had to. Without that investment we would never (or rather unlikely) have made the Champions League. It think that dreams gone now and we need to be aiming for Europe / Uefa Cup (oh ok Europa league).

 

But now lets be realistic.

 

Where should we aim as NUFC and where should we aim with Ashley at the helm are two very different questions imo. Next season though is all about staying up.

 

Ashley has spent the money before, but I cant see him doing it now. He will want to keep the high earners off the books to make the club more attractive to sell.

 

Yes, he does still want to sell.

 

I know the club has been "rebuilt" as it were.

 

Was it necessary ? I don't think so, personally. It only needed a good manager, a period of cut backs cerainly, but a manager who knew what he was doing and succeeded to a degree. Easier said than done, this is the problem, all clubs want a manager who can do well without breaking the bank and for me there is only one manager currently in the premiership who can do this.

 

Ashley does want to sell. Who knows who we will get next.

[LeazesMag 0]

I have to say that I love the argument of "we'd be financially worse off under Shepherd", since when did Shepherd have to find £25m just to keep us alive for another few months?

 

He didnt have to because he knew that out of everything that happens at the club, competing at the top level had to come first otherwise your balance sheets would be fooked.

 

Shepherd never had to beg corporate box owners to renew,

Shepherd never had to worry about getting the next sponsorship deal,

More importantly Shepherd never ever had to find something to make up for Sky's payments.

 

no, shepherd just kept on borrowing and spending and getting us further into debt.

 

The halls probably saw were all this was heading hence their sharpe exit.

 

I would also love to think there is a third type of owner

out their who had the full package and is just waiting to buy us.

 

Events that are unfolding be it at Pompey, qpr or anfield will only deter future investment.

 

The best we can hope for is that Ashley can see the sense in getting a good football man in to replace llambias and slowly rebuild from the ashes

The Halls between them owned more of the club than Shepherd so it seems a bit wrong to blame Shepherd when everything the club did would have required the tacit agreement of the Halls.

 

bingo.

 

Another point I've made on countless occasions.

 

Even coming from me, it would be nice if this sort of thing could now be put behind us, and people accepted that they were in fact good owners.

 

I'm pissed off with football just now to be honest, generally, and because of the demise of NUFC

 

The years you refer to are clearly the best we’ve ever had, but good owners full stop? You have to admit that they spent/blew/invested all the future earnings they possibly could and took a huge chunks of it out of the club and in the process into their own pockets. There was no more money that could be ticked, no more money to bled out of the club, no way of servicing the debt they’d accrued — so they cut and run.

 

I reckon that when Ashley took over, all earnings that could of been made over his first 5 years had already been ticked and spent, or as ever, siphoned out of the club. As it turns out it’s difficult to sympathise with Ashley — but worship the Shepherds and Halls, hmmmm, it’s not as clear cut as you are stating.

 

Good owners because they seriously aimed for success. Do you think they set out to "bleed money", I don't think so. They wanted to make money who doesn't but they wanted it on the back of a successful football club.

 

Nobody is "worshipping" anybody here, it isn't as clear cut as you think either. Success costs money, big money. If you have somebody who doesn't accept that and live with it, you are nowhere.

[LeazesMag 0]

I'd love for us to aim to become an Everton over the next 5 years, and use our better resources to push on from there.

 

5 years of what Everton have had and our gates will be down to their levels too Barney. Any 5 year period we had under the last regime beats the shit out of the last 5 years Everton have had.

[Andrew 4857]

all clubs want a manager who can do well without breaking the bank and for me there is only one manager currently in the premiership who can do this.

dare I ask?

[Craig 6700]

all clubs want a manager who can do well without breaking the bank and for me there is only one manager currently in the premiership who can do this.

dare I ask?

 

Wenger no doubt...

[LeazesMag 0]

all clubs want a manager who can do well without breaking the bank and for me there is only one manager currently in the premiership who can do this.

dare I ask?

 

Wenger no doubt...

 

correct

 

And even now, he has put together his [very good] side but they are realising they are not going to win the league [and haven't won the FA Cup for a few years either] without going into debt/buying big.

 

If he can't do it, who can.

 

Its all well and good criticising for going into debt because you want to push for success but the simple fact is that unless unless you have a sugar daddy then its the only way to do it.

 

People who are saying that we have swept the boards and can "rebuild" don't get it, when the time comes to go for success again, IF it comes, they are just going to have to go into debt again and just like last time no guarantee whatsoever that it will succeed. Relatively speaking, we actually did very well ie we had regular european football, 2 FA Cup Finals, lots of top quality players, but didn't even win the League Cup.

 

Personally, I blame the players for not performing in certain games, and the manager for picking wrong teams and tactics in certain games, but in no way whatsoever can I blame the board who fulfilled their part completeley by backing all their managers to the hilt and having teams good enough to have won something.

[Phil 6]

What aims do you think Newcastle United should have, as the 3rd biggest supported club in the country ?

 

Our 'aim' should always be europe as it's the only way to attract top players.

 

please tell us how it is possible to do this without paying the going rate ie top dollar, and how many clubs are doing it without being in debt

 

There's a massive difference in paying the rate and paying massively over the odd. Doing the latter you end up with one of the largest wage bills in the league and fighting relegation.

 

Freddy was a big fan of buy a teams best player and in doing so we ended up paying massively over the odd. Until we hit europe we should be looking for teams that need/want to sell or players that can't make the first team as they have better ahead of them. There are plenty of players out their that fit this bill.