Things are looking up!

[Guest Insider]

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.

 

I think you're spot on tbh leazes

 

 

I don't. I remember that summer. We felt like we were closing in on something special. A couple of big players and we're challengers.

 

We signed Lee Bowyer.

 

From there... downhill.

 

 

We signed Woodgate in the January 2003 for 9m quid, instead of the summer when we may have had serious competition and the price would have gone up accordingly. Out of the budget, or forward planning, or whatever you want to call it.

 

I hope you aren't going to criticise them for not spending money they didn't have during that summer, instead of trying to continue to build while exercising sensible financial constraints ?

 

So you're saying it's sensible to not spend money we don't have after a season when we've just qualified for the Champions League, but acceptable to do so when not in the Champions League and Souness is our manager?

 

 

Sigh.

 

They back their chosen appointment. Understand ? Why would you appoint a manager then choose not to back him...errrmm....we have an owner now who does that very thing, unfortunately. In any walk of life, you appoint someone to a job and back him. Don't you ?

 

Get it ? Probably not.

 

 

So why didn't they get into debt and back Robson that summer instead of getting into debt and backing Souness? Is that a good decision?

 

 

in the summer of 2003 ? They spend the budget in the January on Woodgate ie forward planning and all of that....

 

Did they have the money at that time, that they later gave to Souness ?

 

You can't have it both ways ie slate them for not spending money they didn't have, then slate them for doing it

 

In hindsight [great thing this] maybe the booing of Sir Bob for only finishing 5th by the mongs sums up a lot of the expectation [and lack of appreciation] at that time ....

 

 

But they could have got into debt for Robson in the summer (buying a player in the prior January doesn't justify not strengthening in the summer) but instead chose to do so for Souness. Was this a good decision?

 

Yes or no.

 

Forget the personalities.

 

Is it a good idea to go into debt and aim for the Champions League ? My opinion is that if you want to compete at the highest levels like this you have to be prepared to go into debt or lose some money.

 

The personalities don't come into it, and I would not criticise them for trying it either in the event of it going wrong.

 

Are you going to answer your own question, without the personalities, this is a principle here, because you either back your chosen appointment or you do not.

 

 

Is it not more sensible to get into debt whilst in the Champions League in order to maintain Champions League status (and push for honours) instead of spending little, then subsequently finishing 5th, sacking the manager and throwing money at a new manager in order to try and claw back into the Champions League?

 

 

Personalities is important when considering that the manager that we threw these large borrowed sums at was Souness.

[LeazesMag 0]

This has turned into one of the best threads on here in a LONG time!

 

all bow down to me

 

You and many others with very good points.

 

Iv not contributed even though i do have an opinion as i feel i may not know as much as some of you lot.

 

Very good read though!

 

you're one of the best posters IMHO

 

Stevie would be welcome back too.

[Guest Insider]

This has turned into one of the best threads on here in a LONG time!

 

all bow down to me

 

You and many others with very good points.

 

Iv not contributed even though i do have an opinion as i feel i may not know as much as some of you lot.

 

Very good read though!

 

you're one of the best posters IMHO

 

Stevie would be welcome back too.

 

[LeazesMag 0]

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.

 

I think you're spot on tbh leazes

 

 

I don't. I remember that summer. We felt like we were closing in on something special. A couple of big players and we're challengers.

 

We signed Lee Bowyer.

 

From there... downhill.

 

 

We signed Woodgate in the January 2003 for 9m quid, instead of the summer when we may have had serious competition and the price would have gone up accordingly. Out of the budget, or forward planning, or whatever you want to call it.

 

I hope you aren't going to criticise them for not spending money they didn't have during that summer, instead of trying to continue to build while exercising sensible financial constraints ?

 

So you're saying it's sensible to not spend money we don't have after a season when we've just qualified for the Champions League, but acceptable to do so when not in the Champions League and Souness is our manager?

 

 

Sigh.

 

They back their chosen appointment. Understand ? Why would you appoint a manager then choose not to back him...errrmm....we have an owner now who does that very thing, unfortunately. In any walk of life, you appoint someone to a job and back him. Don't you ?

 

Get it ? Probably not.

 

 

So why didn't they get into debt and back Robson that summer instead of getting into debt and backing Souness? Is that a good decision?

 

 

in the summer of 2003 ? They spend the budget in the January on Woodgate ie forward planning and all of that....

 

Did they have the money at that time, that they later gave to Souness ?

 

You can't have it both ways ie slate them for not spending money they didn't have, then slate them for doing it

 

In hindsight [great thing this] maybe the booing of Sir Bob for only finishing 5th by the mongs sums up a lot of the expectation [and lack of appreciation] at that time ....

 

 

But they could have got into debt for Robson in the summer (buying a player in the prior January doesn't justify not strengthening in the summer) but instead chose to do so for Souness. Was this a good decision?

 

Yes or no.

 

Forget the personalities.

 

Is it a good idea to go into debt and aim for the Champions League ? My opinion is that if you want to compete at the highest levels like this you have to be prepared to go into debt or lose some money.

 

The personalities don't come into it, and I would not criticise them for trying it either in the event of it going wrong.

 

Are you going to answer your own question, without the personalities, this is a principle here, because you either back your chosen appointment or you do not.

 

 

Is it not more sensible to get into debt whilst in the Champions League in order to maintain Champions League status (and push for honours) instead of spending little, then subsequently finishing 5th, sacking the manager and throwing money at a new manager in order to try and claw back into the Champions League?

 

 

Personalities is important when considering that the manager that we threw these large borrowed sums at was Souness.

 

Possibly. They bought Woodgate while in the Champs League, they bought a top player because they intended to stay there.

 

IF we hadn't lost to Partizan, IF we had beaten Liverpool at Anfield and finished 4th instead of 5th. Such is the margins. Howay man, its not so easy as you are painting it out to be. They tried to do it sensibly, dropped out, then looked at how to get back again. Anyone could be excused this. Wait and see how Liverpool and Arsenal handle it.

 

You can't keep quoting Souness, it wasn't you who appointed him. In any walk of life, people make their own decisions and have to back them or sack them.

[Dr Gloom 22149]

This has turned into one of the best threads on here in a LONG time!

 

all bow down to me

 

You and many others with very good points.

 

Iv not contributed even though i do have an opinion as i feel i may not know as much as some of you lot.

 

Very good read though!

 

you're one of the best posters IMHO

 

Stevie would be welcome back too.

 

let's not start sucking each others' dicks just yet

[LeazesMag 0]

This has turned into one of the best threads on here in a LONG time!

 

all bow down to me

 

You and many others with very good points.

 

Iv not contributed even though i do have an opinion as i feel i may not know as much as some of you lot.

 

Very good read though!

 

you're one of the best posters IMHO

 

Stevie would be welcome back too.

 

let's not start sucking each others' dicks just yet

 

thats manc mags department

[Guest Insider]

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.

 

I think you're spot on tbh leazes

 

 

I don't. I remember that summer. We felt like we were closing in on something special. A couple of big players and we're challengers.

 

We signed Lee Bowyer.

 

From there... downhill.

 

 

We signed Woodgate in the January 2003 for 9m quid, instead of the summer when we may have had serious competition and the price would have gone up accordingly. Out of the budget, or forward planning, or whatever you want to call it.

 

I hope you aren't going to criticise them for not spending money they didn't have during that summer, instead of trying to continue to build while exercising sensible financial constraints ?

 

So you're saying it's sensible to not spend money we don't have after a season when we've just qualified for the Champions League, but acceptable to do so when not in the Champions League and Souness is our manager?

 

 

Sigh.

 

They back their chosen appointment. Understand ? Why would you appoint a manager then choose not to back him...errrmm....we have an owner now who does that very thing, unfortunately. In any walk of life, you appoint someone to a job and back him. Don't you ?

 

Get it ? Probably not.

 

 

So why didn't they get into debt and back Robson that summer instead of getting into debt and backing Souness? Is that a good decision?

 

 

in the summer of 2003 ? They spend the budget in the January on Woodgate ie forward planning and all of that....

 

Did they have the money at that time, that they later gave to Souness ?

 

You can't have it both ways ie slate them for not spending money they didn't have, then slate them for doing it

 

In hindsight [great thing this] maybe the booing of Sir Bob for only finishing 5th by the mongs sums up a lot of the expectation [and lack of appreciation] at that time ....

 

 

But they could have got into debt for Robson in the summer (buying a player in the prior January doesn't justify not strengthening in the summer) but instead chose to do so for Souness. Was this a good decision?

 

Yes or no.

 

Forget the personalities.

 

Is it a good idea to go into debt and aim for the Champions League ? My opinion is that if you want to compete at the highest levels like this you have to be prepared to go into debt or lose some money.

 

The personalities don't come into it, and I would not criticise them for trying it either in the event of it going wrong.

 

Are you going to answer your own question, without the personalities, this is a principle here, because you either back your chosen appointment or you do not.

 

 

Is it not more sensible to get into debt whilst in the Champions League in order to maintain Champions League status (and push for honours) instead of spending little, then subsequently finishing 5th, sacking the manager and throwing money at a new manager in order to try and claw back into the Champions League?

 

 

Personalities is important when considering that the manager that we threw these large borrowed sums at was Souness.

 

Possibly. They bought Woodgate while in the Champs League, they bought a top player because they intended to stay there.

 

IF we hadn't lost to Partizan, IF we had beaten Liverpool at Anfield and finished 4th instead of 5th. Such is the margins. Howay man, its not so easy as you are painting it out to be. They tried to do it sensibly, dropped out, then looked at how to get back again. Anyone could be excused this. Wait and see how Liverpool and Arsenal handle it.

 

You can't keep quoting Souness, it wasn't you who appointed him. In any walk of life, people make their own decisions and have to back them or sack them.

 

 

Yes so their intentions were good and their decisions bad, is what you're saying?

[LeazesMag 0]

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.

 

I think you're spot on tbh leazes

 

 

I don't. I remember that summer. We felt like we were closing in on something special. A couple of big players and we're challengers.

 

We signed Lee Bowyer.

 

From there... downhill.

 

 

We signed Woodgate in the January 2003 for 9m quid, instead of the summer when we may have had serious competition and the price would have gone up accordingly. Out of the budget, or forward planning, or whatever you want to call it.

 

I hope you aren't going to criticise them for not spending money they didn't have during that summer, instead of trying to continue to build while exercising sensible financial constraints ?

 

So you're saying it's sensible to not spend money we don't have after a season when we've just qualified for the Champions League, but acceptable to do so when not in the Champions League and Souness is our manager?

 

 

Sigh.

 

They back their chosen appointment. Understand ? Why would you appoint a manager then choose not to back him...errrmm....we have an owner now who does that very thing, unfortunately. In any walk of life, you appoint someone to a job and back him. Don't you ?

 

Get it ? Probably not.

 

 

So why didn't they get into debt and back Robson that summer instead of getting into debt and backing Souness? Is that a good decision?

 

 

in the summer of 2003 ? They spend the budget in the January on Woodgate ie forward planning and all of that....

 

Did they have the money at that time, that they later gave to Souness ?

 

You can't have it both ways ie slate them for not spending money they didn't have, then slate them for doing it

 

In hindsight [great thing this] maybe the booing of Sir Bob for only finishing 5th by the mongs sums up a lot of the expectation [and lack of appreciation] at that time ....

 

 

But they could have got into debt for Robson in the summer (buying a player in the prior January doesn't justify not strengthening in the summer) but instead chose to do so for Souness. Was this a good decision?

 

Yes or no.

 

Forget the personalities.

 

Is it a good idea to go into debt and aim for the Champions League ? My opinion is that if you want to compete at the highest levels like this you have to be prepared to go into debt or lose some money.

 

The personalities don't come into it, and I would not criticise them for trying it either in the event of it going wrong.

 

Are you going to answer your own question, without the personalities, this is a principle here, because you either back your chosen appointment or you do not.

 

 

Is it not more sensible to get into debt whilst in the Champions League in order to maintain Champions League status (and push for honours) instead of spending little, then subsequently finishing 5th, sacking the manager and throwing money at a new manager in order to try and claw back into the Champions League?

 

 

Personalities is important when considering that the manager that we threw these large borrowed sums at was Souness.

 

Possibly. They bought Woodgate while in the Champs League, they bought a top player because they intended to stay there.

 

IF we hadn't lost to Partizan, IF we had beaten Liverpool at Anfield and finished 4th instead of 5th. Such is the margins. Howay man, its not so easy as you are painting it out to be. They tried to do it sensibly, dropped out, then looked at how to get back again. Anyone could be excused this. Wait and see how Liverpool and Arsenal handle it.

 

You can't keep quoting Souness, it wasn't you who appointed him. In any walk of life, people make their own decisions and have to back them or sack them.

 

 

Yes so their intentions were good and their decisions bad, is what you're saying?

 

 

Everybody makes some poor decisions. The poorest of all is to lower your standards and not back your chosen appointments. Like our current owner has inflicted on us. And all the 87 clubs who didn't qualify for europe as often as we did during the era of the Halls and Shepherd........not too bad that is it

[Deano 0]

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.

 

I think you're spot on tbh leazes

 

 

I don't. I remember that summer. We felt like we were closing in on something special. A couple of big players and we're challengers.

 

We signed Lee Bowyer.

 

From there... downhill.

 

 

We signed Woodgate in the January 2003 for 9m quid, instead of the summer when we may have had serious competition and the price would have gone up accordingly. Out of the budget, or forward planning, or whatever you want to call it.

 

I hope you aren't going to criticise them for not spending money they didn't have during that summer, instead of trying to continue to build while exercising sensible financial constraints ?

 

So you're saying it's sensible to not spend money we don't have after a season when we've just qualified for the Champions League, but acceptable to do so when not in the Champions League and Souness is our manager?

 

 

Sigh.

 

They back their chosen appointment. Understand ? Why would you appoint a manager then choose not to back him...errrmm....we have an owner now who does that very thing, unfortunately. In any walk of life, you appoint someone to a job and back him. Don't you ?

 

Get it ? Probably not.

 

 

So why didn't they get into debt and back Robson that summer instead of getting into debt and backing Souness? Is that a good decision?

 

 

in the summer of 2003 ? They spend the budget in the January on Woodgate ie forward planning and all of that....

 

Did they have the money at that time, that they later gave to Souness ?

 

You can't have it both ways ie slate them for not spending money they didn't have, then slate them for doing it

 

In hindsight [great thing this] maybe the booing of Sir Bob for only finishing 5th by the mongs sums up a lot of the expectation [and lack of appreciation] at that time ....

 

 

But they could have got into debt for Robson in the summer (buying a player in the prior January doesn't justify not strengthening in the summer) but instead chose to do so for Souness. Was this a good decision?

 

Yes or no.

 

Forget the personalities.

 

Is it a good idea to go into debt and aim for the Champions League ? My opinion is that if you want to compete at the highest levels like this you have to be prepared to go into debt or lose some money.

 

The personalities don't come into it, and I would not criticise them for trying it either in the event of it going wrong.

 

Are you going to answer your own question, without the personalities, this is a principle here, because you either back your chosen appointment or you do not.

 

 

Is it not more sensible to get into debt whilst in the Champions League in order to maintain Champions League status (and push for honours) instead of spending little, then subsequently finishing 5th, sacking the manager and throwing money at a new manager in order to try and claw back into the Champions League?

 

 

Personalities is important when considering that the manager that we threw these large borrowed sums at was Souness.

 

Of course personalities are important...No Fergie no ManU...No Wenger...No Arsenal.

 

We had our chance with KK and BR and for all i agree FS and JH were ambitious and wanted the club to do well, at the same time they were also thinking about how much more they were going to pay themselves when in the CL.

 

Your point about not spending more while in the CL is paramount...of course that should of been the case, spend more to maintain what we had.

 

When we finished 5th FS realised he has fucked up and inturn threw borrowed money at Sounness hoping and praying that the gamble would pay off, which i agree with LM in saying that is what he should of done. Thing is FS and us fans didnt know Sounness was going to be an unmitigated disaster....FS gambled and lost and that is why we were in the state MA found us in.

 

In hindsight if we hadnt got rid of SBR and gave him that money to spend or even just a different manager to Souness things coulda, woulda, shoulda been different.

 

In a nutshell...FS and JH did have the clubs best interests at heart but not at the expence of their own.

 

They realised there mistakes and tried to speculate to accumilate but unfortunatly for us it didnt pay off.

 

Thats all history now though and is irrelevant to where we are now...all we can do is hope that the guy who takes us off FMA hands is the kinda chairman with moolah and nouse that we have long deserved and waited for.

Edited February 23, 2010 by Geordie Lad...

[Guest Insider]

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.

 

I think you're spot on tbh leazes

 

 

I don't. I remember that summer. We felt like we were closing in on something special. A couple of big players and we're challengers.

 

We signed Lee Bowyer.

 

From there... downhill.

 

 

We signed Woodgate in the January 2003 for 9m quid, instead of the summer when we may have had serious competition and the price would have gone up accordingly. Out of the budget, or forward planning, or whatever you want to call it.

 

I hope you aren't going to criticise them for not spending money they didn't have during that summer, instead of trying to continue to build while exercising sensible financial constraints ?

 

So you're saying it's sensible to not spend money we don't have after a season when we've just qualified for the Champions League, but acceptable to do so when not in the Champions League and Souness is our manager?

 

 

Sigh.

 

They back their chosen appointment. Understand ? Why would you appoint a manager then choose not to back him...errrmm....we have an owner now who does that very thing, unfortunately. In any walk of life, you appoint someone to a job and back him. Don't you ?

 

Get it ? Probably not.

 

 

So why didn't they get into debt and back Robson that summer instead of getting into debt and backing Souness? Is that a good decision?

 

 

in the summer of 2003 ? They spend the budget in the January on Woodgate ie forward planning and all of that....

 

Did they have the money at that time, that they later gave to Souness ?

 

You can't have it both ways ie slate them for not spending money they didn't have, then slate them for doing it

 

In hindsight [great thing this] maybe the booing of Sir Bob for only finishing 5th by the mongs sums up a lot of the expectation [and lack of appreciation] at that time ....

 

 

But they could have got into debt for Robson in the summer (buying a player in the prior January doesn't justify not strengthening in the summer) but instead chose to do so for Souness. Was this a good decision?

 

Yes or no.

 

Forget the personalities.

 

Is it a good idea to go into debt and aim for the Champions League ? My opinion is that if you want to compete at the highest levels like this you have to be prepared to go into debt or lose some money.

 

The personalities don't come into it, and I would not criticise them for trying it either in the event of it going wrong.

 

Are you going to answer your own question, without the personalities, this is a principle here, because you either back your chosen appointment or you do not.

 

 

Is it not more sensible to get into debt whilst in the Champions League in order to maintain Champions League status (and push for honours) instead of spending little, then subsequently finishing 5th, sacking the manager and throwing money at a new manager in order to try and claw back into the Champions League?

 

 

Personalities is important when considering that the manager that we threw these large borrowed sums at was Souness.

 

Possibly. They bought Woodgate while in the Champs League, they bought a top player because they intended to stay there.

 

IF we hadn't lost to Partizan, IF we had beaten Liverpool at Anfield and finished 4th instead of 5th. Such is the margins. Howay man, its not so easy as you are painting it out to be. They tried to do it sensibly, dropped out, then looked at how to get back again. Anyone could be excused this. Wait and see how Liverpool and Arsenal handle it.

 

You can't keep quoting Souness, it wasn't you who appointed him. In any walk of life, people make their own decisions and have to back them or sack them.

 

 

Yes so their intentions were good and their decisions bad, is what you're saying?

 

 

Everybody makes some poor decisions. The poorest of all is to lower your standards and not back your chosen appointments. Like our current owner has inflicted on us. And all the 87 clubs who didn't qualify for europe as often as we did during the era of the Halls and Shepherd........not too bad that is it

 

None of those 87 clubs had the resources we had though so that argument holds no weight with me. Everybody makes poor decisions, but does this make them acceptable? Is what Shepherd did to us, taking us to europe then screwing up enough to turn us into debt ridden relegation candidates, made more acceptable because Leeds had a chairman who fucked up too?

[LeazesMag 0]

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.

 

I think you're spot on tbh leazes

 

 

I don't. I remember that summer. We felt like we were closing in on something special. A couple of big players and we're challengers.

 

We signed Lee Bowyer.

 

From there... downhill.

 

 

We signed Woodgate in the January 2003 for 9m quid, instead of the summer when we may have had serious competition and the price would have gone up accordingly. Out of the budget, or forward planning, or whatever you want to call it.

 

I hope you aren't going to criticise them for not spending money they didn't have during that summer, instead of trying to continue to build while exercising sensible financial constraints ?

 

So you're saying it's sensible to not spend money we don't have after a season when we've just qualified for the Champions League, but acceptable to do so when not in the Champions League and Souness is our manager?

 

 

Sigh.

 

They back their chosen appointment. Understand ? Why would you appoint a manager then choose not to back him...errrmm....we have an owner now who does that very thing, unfortunately. In any walk of life, you appoint someone to a job and back him. Don't you ?

 

Get it ? Probably not.

 

 

So why didn't they get into debt and back Robson that summer instead of getting into debt and backing Souness? Is that a good decision?

 

 

in the summer of 2003 ? They spend the budget in the January on Woodgate ie forward planning and all of that....

 

Did they have the money at that time, that they later gave to Souness ?

 

You can't have it both ways ie slate them for not spending money they didn't have, then slate them for doing it

 

In hindsight [great thing this] maybe the booing of Sir Bob for only finishing 5th by the mongs sums up a lot of the expectation [and lack of appreciation] at that time ....

 

 

But they could have got into debt for Robson in the summer (buying a player in the prior January doesn't justify not strengthening in the summer) but instead chose to do so for Souness. Was this a good decision?

 

Yes or no.

 

Forget the personalities.

 

Is it a good idea to go into debt and aim for the Champions League ? My opinion is that if you want to compete at the highest levels like this you have to be prepared to go into debt or lose some money.

 

The personalities don't come into it, and I would not criticise them for trying it either in the event of it going wrong.

 

Are you going to answer your own question, without the personalities, this is a principle here, because you either back your chosen appointment or you do not.

 

 

Is it not more sensible to get into debt whilst in the Champions League in order to maintain Champions League status (and push for honours) instead of spending little, then subsequently finishing 5th, sacking the manager and throwing money at a new manager in order to try and claw back into the Champions League?

 

 

Personalities is important when considering that the manager that we threw these large borrowed sums at was Souness.

 

Of course personalities are important...No Fergie no ManU...No Wenger...No Arsenal.

 

I mean, its the principle that counts. People say this and mean because it was Souness, but lots of people promote and back shit managers in all walks of life. The principle is that once appointed, you either back them or sack them.

 

We had our chance with KK and BR and for all i agree FS and JH were ambitious and wanted the club to do well, at the same time they were also thinking about how much more they were going to pay themselves when in the CL.

 

Your point about not spending more while in the CL is paramount...of course that should of been the case, spend more to maintain what we had.

 

When we finished 5th FS realised he has fucked up and inturn threw borrowed money at Sounness hoping and praying that the gamble would pay off, which i agree with LM in saying that is what he should of done. Thing is FS no the fans knew Sounness was going to be an unmitigated disaster....FS gambled and lost and that is why we were in the state MA found us in.

 

In hindsight if we hadnt got rid of SBR and gave him that money to spend or even just a different manager to Souness things coulda, woulda, shoulda been different.

 

In a nutshell...FS and JH did have the clubs best interests at heart but not at the expence of their own.

 

They realised there mistakes and tried to speculate to accumilate but unfortunatly for us it didnt pay off.

 

Thats all history now though and is irrelevant to where we are now...all we can do is hope that the guy who takes us off FMA hands is the kinda chairman with moolah and nouse that we have long deserved and waited for.

 

They spent their budget on Woodgate, somebody either decided that the team was good enough to stay where it was and/or the players who WOULD improve were not available, or someone decided that no more money could be made available.

 

I would never knock anybody for showing ambition in football. Never, that is what it is all about and why you are football supporters.

[Guest Insider]

By your logic, I'd be a great NUFC chairman if tomorrow I appointed Joe Pasquale as manager and spend the next 10 years worth of season ticket revenue backing him?

[LeazesMag 0]

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.

 

I think you're spot on tbh leazes

 

 

I don't. I remember that summer. We felt like we were closing in on something special. A couple of big players and we're challengers.

 

We signed Lee Bowyer.

 

From there... downhill.

 

 

We signed Woodgate in the January 2003 for 9m quid, instead of the summer when we may have had serious competition and the price would have gone up accordingly. Out of the budget, or forward planning, or whatever you want to call it.

 

I hope you aren't going to criticise them for not spending money they didn't have during that summer, instead of trying to continue to build while exercising sensible financial constraints ?

 

So you're saying it's sensible to not spend money we don't have after a season when we've just qualified for the Champions League, but acceptable to do so when not in the Champions League and Souness is our manager?

 

 

Sigh.

 

They back their chosen appointment. Understand ? Why would you appoint a manager then choose not to back him...errrmm....we have an owner now who does that very thing, unfortunately. In any walk of life, you appoint someone to a job and back him. Don't you ?

 

Get it ? Probably not.

 

 

So why didn't they get into debt and back Robson that summer instead of getting into debt and backing Souness? Is that a good decision?

 

 

in the summer of 2003 ? They spend the budget in the January on Woodgate ie forward planning and all of that....

 

Did they have the money at that time, that they later gave to Souness ?

 

You can't have it both ways ie slate them for not spending money they didn't have, then slate them for doing it

 

In hindsight [great thing this] maybe the booing of Sir Bob for only finishing 5th by the mongs sums up a lot of the expectation [and lack of appreciation] at that time ....

 

 

But they could have got into debt for Robson in the summer (buying a player in the prior January doesn't justify not strengthening in the summer) but instead chose to do so for Souness. Was this a good decision?

 

Yes or no.

 

Forget the personalities.

 

Is it a good idea to go into debt and aim for the Champions League ? My opinion is that if you want to compete at the highest levels like this you have to be prepared to go into debt or lose some money.

 

The personalities don't come into it, and I would not criticise them for trying it either in the event of it going wrong.

 

Are you going to answer your own question, without the personalities, this is a principle here, because you either back your chosen appointment or you do not.

 

 

Is it not more sensible to get into debt whilst in the Champions League in order to maintain Champions League status (and push for honours) instead of spending little, then subsequently finishing 5th, sacking the manager and throwing money at a new manager in order to try and claw back into the Champions League?

 

 

Personalities is important when considering that the manager that we threw these large borrowed sums at was Souness.

 

Possibly. They bought Woodgate while in the Champs League, they bought a top player because they intended to stay there.

 

IF we hadn't lost to Partizan, IF we had beaten Liverpool at Anfield and finished 4th instead of 5th. Such is the margins. Howay man, its not so easy as you are painting it out to be. They tried to do it sensibly, dropped out, then looked at how to get back again. Anyone could be excused this. Wait and see how Liverpool and Arsenal handle it.

 

You can't keep quoting Souness, it wasn't you who appointed him. In any walk of life, people make their own decisions and have to back them or sack them.

 

 

Yes so their intentions were good and their decisions bad, is what you're saying?

 

 

Everybody makes some poor decisions. The poorest of all is to lower your standards and not back your chosen appointments. Like our current owner has inflicted on us. And all the 87 clubs who didn't qualify for europe as often as we did during the era of the Halls and Shepherd........not too bad that is it

 

None of those 87 clubs had the resources we had though so that argument holds no weight with me. Everybody makes poor decisions, but does this make them acceptable? Is what Shepherd did to us, taking us to europe then screwing up enough to turn us into debt ridden relegation candidates, made more acceptable because Leeds had a chairman who fucked up too?

 

Before the Halls and Shepherd, we did not have the resources. The Halls and Shepherd created the situation whereby the resources were made ie became available.

 

A few more years of Mike Ashley style prudency and this situation will be needed again ie maybe in 18 months time when the 3 year season ticket deals have run out.

 

People knock Ridsdale, but they enjoyed it at the time. Beats the fuck out of years of nothing like the Boltons, Stokes, mackems etc over the years. If you prefer permanent "nothingness", then I;m sorry but I can't agree. I don't like supporting a big football club that settles for selling their best players to the likes of Wigan, Villa, Spurs etc

[LeazesMag 0]

By your logic, I'd be a great NUFC chairman if tomorrow I appointed Joe Pasquale as manager and spend the next 10 years worth of season ticket revenue backing him?

 

you could however, appoint me.

 

Edit. Its a matter of having bricks in place. A good manager with a shit board will move on. A good board, when they find a good manager, will have success.

Edited February 23, 2010 by LeazesMag

[Deano 0]

We had our chance with KK and BR and for all i agree FS and JH were ambitious and wanted the club to do well, at the same time they were also thinking about how much more they were going to pay themselves when in the CL.

 

Your point about not spending more while in the CL is paramount...of course that should of been the case, spend more to maintain what we had.

 

When we finished 5th FS realised he has fucked up and inturn threw borrowed money at Sounness hoping and praying that the gamble would pay off, which i agree with LM in saying that is what he should of done. Thing is FS no the fans knew Sounness was going to be an unmitigated disaster....FS gambled and lost and that is why we were in the state MA found us in.

 

In hindsight if we hadnt got rid of SBR and gave him that money to spend or even just a different manager to Souness things coulda, woulda, shoulda been different.

 

In a nutshell...FS and JH did have the clubs best interests at heart but not at the expence of their own.

 

They realised there mistakes and tried to speculate to accumilate but unfortunatly for us it didnt pay off.

 

Thats all history now though and is irrelevant to where we are now...all we can do is hope that the guy who takes us off FMA hands is the kinda chairman with moolah and nouse that we have long deserved and waited for.

 

They spent their budget on Woodgate, somebody either decided that the team was good enough to stay where it was and/or the players who WOULD improve were not available, or someone decided that no more money could be made available.

 

I would never knock anybody for showing ambition in football. Never, that is what it is all about and why you are football supporters.

 

9mil is a seasons budget for a CL team...come on mate!?

 

That team DID need improving.

 

It was more likely the case that SJH and FFS wanted to TRY and get away with a season of spending less and more in their pockets.

 

Like i said it backfired and they tried to redeem themselves with Souness who royally fucked up and would explain why FFS went over his head with some signings...trying to fix the problem he caused himself.

[Guest Insider]

By your logic, I'd be a great NUFC chairman if tomorrow I appointed Joe Pasquale as manager and spend the next 10 years worth of season ticket revenue backing him?

 

you could however, appoint me.

 

Edit. Its a matter of having bricks in place. A good manager with a shit board will move on. A good board, when they find a good manager, will have success.

 

 

A good board doesn't appoint the likes of Souness and Roeder in their quest for a good manager.

[LeazesMag 0]

We had our chance with KK and BR and for all i agree FS and JH were ambitious and wanted the club to do well, at the same time they were also thinking about how much more they were going to pay themselves when in the CL.

 

Your point about not spending more while in the CL is paramount...of course that should of been the case, spend more to maintain what we had.

 

When we finished 5th FS realised he has fucked up and inturn threw borrowed money at Sounness hoping and praying that the gamble would pay off, which i agree with LM in saying that is what he should of done. Thing is FS no the fans knew Sounness was going to be an unmitigated disaster....FS gambled and lost and that is why we were in the state MA found us in.

 

In hindsight if we hadnt got rid of SBR and gave him that money to spend or even just a different manager to Souness things coulda, woulda, shoulda been different.

 

In a nutshell...FS and JH did have the clubs best interests at heart but not at the expence of their own.

 

They realised there mistakes and tried to speculate to accumilate but unfortunatly for us it didnt pay off.

 

Thats all history now though and is irrelevant to where we are now...all we can do is hope that the guy who takes us off FMA hands is the kinda chairman with moolah and nouse that we have long deserved and waited for.

 

They spent their budget on Woodgate, somebody either decided that the team was good enough to stay where it was and/or the players who WOULD improve were not available, or someone decided that no more money could be made available.

 

I would never knock anybody for showing ambition in football. Never, that is what it is all about and why you are football supporters.

 

9mil is a seasons budget for a CL team...come on mate!?

 

That team DID need improving.

 

It was more likely the case that SJH and FFS wanted to TRY and get away with a season of spending less and more in their pockets.

 

Like i said it backfired and they tried to redeem themselves with Souness who royally fucked up and would explain why FFS went over his head with some signings...trying to fix the problem he caused himself.

 

 

All I can say, therefore, is don't criticise them for spending money they didn't have, when you are also advocating it.

 

The club had spent a lot of money to get into the Champs League ? The previous season they bought Bellamy and Robert. We had been big spenders for almost a decade, at that time.

[LeazesMag 0]

By your logic, I'd be a great NUFC chairman if tomorrow I appointed Joe Pasquale as manager and spend the next 10 years worth of season ticket revenue backing him?

 

you could however, appoint me.

 

Edit. Its a matter of having bricks in place. A good manager with a shit board will move on. A good board, when they find a good manager, will have success.

 

 

A good board doesn't appoint the likes of Souness and Roeder in their quest for a good manager.

 

Liverpool appointed Souness. They also promoted Fagan, and Roy Evans, and a double act with Houillier

 

Chelsea promoted Vialli. Arsenal appointed Rioch.

[Tooj 17]

My eyes can't take so much quoting.

[Guest Insider]

By your logic, I'd be a great NUFC chairman if tomorrow I appointed Joe Pasquale as manager and spend the next 10 years worth of season ticket revenue backing him?

 

you could however, appoint me.

 

Edit. Its a matter of having bricks in place. A good manager with a shit board will move on. A good board, when they find a good manager, will have success.

 

 

A good board doesn't appoint the likes of Souness and Roeder in their quest for a good manager.

 

Liverpool appointed Souness. They also promoted Fagan, and Roy Evans, and a double act with Houillier

 

Chelsea promoted Vialli. Arsenal appointed Rioch.

 

 

Liverpool appointing Souness was completely different to us appointing him. He was young, fresh, and a legend of their glory years. Vialli won trophies with Chelsea. Houillier did with Liverpool. Fagan won a european cup.

[LeazesMag 0]

By your logic, I'd be a great NUFC chairman if tomorrow I appointed Joe Pasquale as manager and spend the next 10 years worth of season ticket revenue backing him?

 

you could however, appoint me.

 

Edit. Its a matter of having bricks in place. A good manager with a shit board will move on. A good board, when they find a good manager, will have success.

 

 

A good board doesn't appoint the likes of Souness and Roeder in their quest for a good manager.

 

Liverpool appointed Souness. They also promoted Fagan, and Roy Evans, and a double act with Houillier

 

Chelsea promoted Vialli. Arsenal appointed Rioch.

 

 

Liverpool appointing Souness was completely different to us appointing him. He was young, fresh, and a legend of their glory years. Vialli won trophies with Chelsea. Houillier did with Liverpool. Fagan won a european cup.

 

they also all took over clubs in the habit of winning trophies. The principle was that they were ALL a similar risk. Would you care to stop and think about how many clubs have appointed managers that have had the sack from other clubs or promoted someone from within ?

 

It is when people like you make out we are the only ones to do this, which makes me smile.

 

Because - at the end of the day, we were the 5th most qualified club for europe over the period of the Halls and Shepherd, and they saved a club from going bust and with one foot into the 3rd division into what that.

[Guest Insider]

By your logic, I'd be a great NUFC chairman if tomorrow I appointed Joe Pasquale as manager and spend the next 10 years worth of season ticket revenue backing him?

 

you could however, appoint me.

 

Edit. Its a matter of having bricks in place. A good manager with a shit board will move on. A good board, when they find a good manager, will have success.

 

 

A good board doesn't appoint the likes of Souness and Roeder in their quest for a good manager.

 

Liverpool appointed Souness. They also promoted Fagan, and Roy Evans, and a double act with Houillier

 

Chelsea promoted Vialli. Arsenal appointed Rioch.

 

 

Liverpool appointing Souness was completely different to us appointing him. He was young, fresh, and a legend of their glory years. Vialli won trophies with Chelsea. Houillier did with Liverpool. Fagan won a european cup.

 

they also all took over clubs in the habit of winning trophies. The principle was that they were ALL a similar risk. Would you care to stop and think about how many clubs have appointed managers that have had the sack from other clubs or promoted someone from within ?

 

It is when people like you make out we are the only ones to do this, which makes me smile.

 

Because - at the end of the day, we were the 5th most qualified club for europe over the period of the Halls and Shepherd, and they saved a club from going bust and with one foot into the 3rd division into what that.

 

 

Don't put words into my mouth.

 

You seem to think it makes it okay if others did the same.

 

Why don't you go to a Portsmouth forum and assure them that they've been ran by good chairmen because other clubs have also had financial difficulty in the past?

[LeazesMag 0]

By your logic, I'd be a great NUFC chairman if tomorrow I appointed Joe Pasquale as manager and spend the next 10 years worth of season ticket revenue backing him?

 

you could however, appoint me.

 

Edit. Its a matter of having bricks in place. A good manager with a shit board will move on. A good board, when they find a good manager, will have success.

 

 

A good board doesn't appoint the likes of Souness and Roeder in their quest for a good manager.

 

Liverpool appointed Souness. They also promoted Fagan, and Roy Evans, and a double act with Houillier

 

Chelsea promoted Vialli. Arsenal appointed Rioch.

 

 

Liverpool appointing Souness was completely different to us appointing him. He was young, fresh, and a legend of their glory years. Vialli won trophies with Chelsea. Houillier did with Liverpool. Fagan won a european cup.

 

they also all took over clubs in the habit of winning trophies. The principle was that they were ALL a similar risk. Would you care to stop and think about how many clubs have appointed managers that have had the sack from other clubs or promoted someone from within ?

 

It is when people like you make out we are the only ones to do this, which makes me smile.

 

Because - at the end of the day, we were the 5th most qualified club for europe over the period of the Halls and Shepherd, and they saved a club from going bust and with one foot into the 3rd division into what that.

 

 

Don't put words into my mouth.

 

You seem to think it makes it okay if others did the same.

 

Why don't you go to a Portsmouth forum and assure them that they've been ran by good chairmen because other clubs have also had financial difficulty in the past?

 

why don't you ask them if, on the day they won the FA Cup, they should have been worrying about being taken over by someone who would fuck them up in a few years time.

[Guest Insider]

By your logic, I'd be a great NUFC chairman if tomorrow I appointed Joe Pasquale as manager and spend the next 10 years worth of season ticket revenue backing him?

 

you could however, appoint me.

 

Edit. Its a matter of having bricks in place. A good manager with a shit board will move on. A good board, when they find a good manager, will have success.

 

 

A good board doesn't appoint the likes of Souness and Roeder in their quest for a good manager.

 

Liverpool appointed Souness. They also promoted Fagan, and Roy Evans, and a double act with Houillier

 

Chelsea promoted Vialli. Arsenal appointed Rioch.

 

 

Liverpool appointing Souness was completely different to us appointing him. He was young, fresh, and a legend of their glory years. Vialli won trophies with Chelsea. Houillier did with Liverpool. Fagan won a european cup.

 

they also all took over clubs in the habit of winning trophies. The principle was that they were ALL a similar risk. Would you care to stop and think about how many clubs have appointed managers that have had the sack from other clubs or promoted someone from within ?

 

It is when people like you make out we are the only ones to do this, which makes me smile.

 

Because - at the end of the day, we were the 5th most qualified club for europe over the period of the Halls and Shepherd, and they saved a club from going bust and with one foot into the 3rd division into what that.

 

 

Don't put words into my mouth.

 

You seem to think it makes it okay if others did the same.

 

Why don't you go to a Portsmouth forum and assure them that they've been ran by good chairmen because other clubs have also had financial difficulty in the past?

 

why don't you ask them if, on the day they won the FA Cup, they should have been worrying about being taken over by someone who would fuck them up in a few years time.

 

 

Fuck them up? There's nothing wrong with them though. What about all the other clubs that aren't in the premiership Portsmouth has been ran superbly They've averaged more F.A cups in the last 10 years than Shepherd!

[LeazesMag 0]

By your logic, I'd be a great NUFC chairman if tomorrow I appointed Joe Pasquale as manager and spend the next 10 years worth of season ticket revenue backing him?

 

you could however, appoint me.

 

Edit. Its a matter of having bricks in place. A good manager with a shit board will move on. A good board, when they find a good manager, will have success.

 

 

A good board doesn't appoint the likes of Souness and Roeder in their quest for a good manager.

 

Liverpool appointed Souness. They also promoted Fagan, and Roy Evans, and a double act with Houillier

 

Chelsea promoted Vialli. Arsenal appointed Rioch.

 

 

Liverpool appointing Souness was completely different to us appointing him. He was young, fresh, and a legend of their glory years. Vialli won trophies with Chelsea. Houillier did with Liverpool. Fagan won a european cup.

 

they also all took over clubs in the habit of winning trophies. The principle was that they were ALL a similar risk. Would you care to stop and think about how many clubs have appointed managers that have had the sack from other clubs or promoted someone from within ?

 

It is when people like you make out we are the only ones to do this, which makes me smile.

 

Because - at the end of the day, we were the 5th most qualified club for europe over the period of the Halls and Shepherd, and they saved a club from going bust and with one foot into the 3rd division into what that.

 

 

Don't put words into my mouth.

 

You seem to think it makes it okay if others did the same.

 

Why don't you go to a Portsmouth forum and assure them that they've been ran by good chairmen because other clubs have also had financial difficulty in the past?

 

why don't you ask them if, on the day they won the FA Cup, they should have been worrying about being taken over by someone who would fuck them up in a few years time.

 

 

Fuck them up? There's nothing wrong with them though. What about all the other clubs that aren't in the premiership Portsmouth has been ran superbly They've averaged more F.A cups in the last 10 years than Shepherd!

 

 

You're losing it now.

 

What has happened at Pompey has no relevance whatsoever to Newcastle United. You may like painting a doomsday scenario, but we are twice the club Pompey are.