forzajuve_27 0 Posted May 11, 2010 Share Posted May 11, 2010 Despite the board stating that there will be no money for transfers next season I think that given the ability of Newcastle's sqaud that will still be fine in the Premiership. http://www.footballfancast.com/football-bl...erned-by-stance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 11021 Posted May 11, 2010 Share Posted May 11, 2010 Appreciate the thought, but you're wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin 1 Posted May 11, 2010 Share Posted May 11, 2010 Despite the board stating that there will be no money for transfers next season I think that given the ability of Newcastle's sqaud that will still be fine in the Premiership. http://www.footballfancast.com/football-bl...erned-by-stance Okay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timnufc 0 Posted May 11, 2010 Share Posted May 11, 2010 I can understand making sure the club dont financially cripple themselves with over-spending this summer, I do think the team spirit/togtherness we have does make some difference compared to 08/09, I do trust Hughton to get the best from the squad and think its good if players like Vuckic get a chance to do well and develop. But to say the 5 year plan is to break even by 2015 is as un-ambitious as it is over-ambitious to spend 50m every window until 2015. Theres a middle ground somewhere, and a moderate, sensible budget given to Hughton (12-15m) would help most of the current players to play to their best next season, not shove them to one side, and at the same time would not put the club at risk of financial meltdown (be that by numbers or the fact our survival chances would be boosted). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noelie 103 Posted May 11, 2010 Share Posted May 11, 2010 (edited) Appreciate the thought, but you're wrong. I agree, I think he is very wrong. The nucleus of players we have are the ones who contributed to our downfall. The influx of new players are not the same quality of the ones who left the sunken ship. Simpson is nowhere near tha standard of Beye. Williamson is questionable in regards to Bassong. Best hasn't come even close to Martins. Routledge might be a winner in regards to Duff or Milner. Without additional quality players I honestly can't see us staying up with what we have.......but I'd like to think so. Edited May 11, 2010 by Noelie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonTheMag 4 Posted May 11, 2010 Share Posted May 11, 2010 Appreciate the thought, but you're wrong. I agree, I think he is very wrong. The nucleus of players we have are the ones who contributed to our downfall. The influx of new players are not the same quality of the ones who left the sunken ship. Simpson is nowhere near tha standard of Beye. Williamson is questionable in regards to Bassong. Best hasn't come even close to Martins. Routledge might be a winner in regards to Duff or Milner. Without additional quality players I honestly can't see us staying up with what we have.......but I'd like to think so. Seriously? Duff is attempting to get fit for a Europa Cup Final tomorrow and Milner was included in Capello's 30 man squad. You could make a case for Routledge being as good as or slightly better than Duff, but definitely not for Milner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kitman 2207 Posted May 12, 2010 Share Posted May 12, 2010 Despite the board stating that there will be no money for transfers next season I think that given the ability of Newcastle's sqaud that will still be fine in the Premiership. http://www.footballfancast.com/football-bl...erned-by-stance Noted, thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sammynb 3608 Posted May 12, 2010 Share Posted May 12, 2010 Despite the board stating that there will be no money for transfers next season I think that given the ability of Newcastle's sqaud that will still be fine in the Premiership. http://www.footballfancast.com/football-bl...erned-by-stance Noted, thanks Don't you mean filed under B? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kitman 2207 Posted May 12, 2010 Share Posted May 12, 2010 Despite the board stating that there will be no money for transfers next season I think that given the ability of Newcastle's sqaud that will still be fine in the Premiership. http://www.footballfancast.com/football-bl...erned-by-stance Noted, thanks Don't you mean filed under B? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donaldstott 0 Posted May 12, 2010 Share Posted May 12, 2010 Appreciate the thought, but you're wrong. I agree, I think he is very wrong. The nucleus of players we have are the ones who contributed to our downfall. The influx of new players are not the same quality of the ones who left the sunken ship. Simpson is nowhere near tha standard of Beye. Williamson is questionable in regards to Bassong. Best hasn't come even close to Martins. Routledge might be a winner in regards to Duff or Milner. Without additional quality players I honestly can't see us staying up with what we have.......but I'd like to think so. I personally think Habib's good first season has clouded a few peoples judgement of him. He was average in the relegation season, when we saw him on the pitch (which wasn't very often) he looked distinctly off the pace. Whilst undoubtedly a better player than Simpson, at the very least Simpson plays a lot of games and has helped keep a settled back four this season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loonyTOON 10 Posted May 12, 2010 Share Posted May 12, 2010 Shit topic! WHERE does it state theres no money for transfers??!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted May 12, 2010 Share Posted May 12, 2010 Shit topic! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted May 12, 2010 Share Posted May 12, 2010 Despite the board stating that there will be no money for transfers next season I think that given the ability of Newcastle's sqaud that will still be fine in the Premiership. http://www.footballfancast.com/football-bl...erned-by-stance "fine" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Gloom 22345 Posted May 12, 2010 Share Posted May 12, 2010 not spending silly money is wise not spending any money is scary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted May 12, 2010 Share Posted May 12, 2010 not spending silly money is wise not spending any money is scary how do you define "silly money". With hindsight ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tooner 243 Posted May 12, 2010 Share Posted May 12, 2010 not spending silly money is wise not spending any money is scary how do you define "silly money". With hindsight ? smith, vidulka, and for his contributions to the circus, barton....for a start Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted May 12, 2010 Share Posted May 12, 2010 not spending silly money is wise not spending any money is scary how do you define "silly money". With hindsight ? smith, vidulka, and for his contributions to the circus, barton....for a start so its with hindsight then ? We could have overruled the manager though ....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Gloom 22345 Posted May 12, 2010 Share Posted May 12, 2010 not spending silly money is wise not spending any money is scary how do you define "silly money". With hindsight ? smith, vidulka, and for his contributions to the circus, barton....for a start so its with hindsight then ? We could have overruled the manager though ....... money that would threaten the club's future. obviously clubs don't survive without debt but it has to debt that is sustainable. if we'd carried on the way we were we could have imploded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew 4937 Posted May 12, 2010 Share Posted May 12, 2010 oh lets not get into this AGAIN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted May 12, 2010 Share Posted May 12, 2010 not spending silly money is wise not spending any money is scary how do you define "silly money". With hindsight ? smith, vidulka, and for his contributions to the circus, barton....for a start so its with hindsight then ? We could have overruled the manager though ....... money that would threaten the club's future. obviously clubs don't survive without debt but it has to debt that is sustainable. if we'd carried on the way we were we could have imploded. We imploded anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sniffer 0 Posted May 12, 2010 Share Posted May 12, 2010 Appreciate the thought, but you're wrong. I agree, I think he is very wrong. The nucleus of players we have are the ones who contributed to our downfall. The influx of new players are not the same quality of the ones who left the sunken ship. Simpson is nowhere near tha standard of Beye. Williamson is questionable in regards to Bassong. Best hasn't come even close to Martins. Routledge might be a winner in regards to Duff or Milner. Without additional quality players I honestly can't see us staying up with what we have.......but I'd like to think so. Seriously? Duff is attempting to get fit for a Europa Cup Final tomorrow and Milner was included in Capello's 30 man squad. You could make a case for Routledge being as good as or slightly better than Duff, but definitely not for Milner. Routledge has already shown that he can't cut it in the premier league. He's still in the group of players that are championship quality until he shows otherwise IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Gloom 22345 Posted May 12, 2010 Share Posted May 12, 2010 not spending silly money is wise not spending any money is scary how do you define "silly money". With hindsight ? smith, vidulka, and for his contributions to the circus, barton....for a start so its with hindsight then ? We could have overruled the manager though ....... money that would threaten the club's future. obviously clubs don't survive without debt but it has to debt that is sustainable. if we'd carried on the way we were we could have imploded. We imploded anyway. i meant financially, a la pompey or leeds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted May 12, 2010 Share Posted May 12, 2010 not spending silly money is wise not spending any money is scary how do you define "silly money". With hindsight ? smith, vidulka, and for his contributions to the circus, barton....for a start so its with hindsight then ? We could have overruled the manager though ....... money that would threaten the club's future. obviously clubs don't survive without debt but it has to debt that is sustainable. if we'd carried on the way we were we could have imploded. and if your signings are a success ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted May 12, 2010 Share Posted May 12, 2010 not spending silly money is wise not spending any money is scary how do you define "silly money". With hindsight ? smith, vidulka, and for his contributions to the circus, barton....for a start so its with hindsight then ? We could have overruled the manager though ....... money that would threaten the club's future. obviously clubs don't survive without debt but it has to debt that is sustainable. if we'd carried on the way we were we could have imploded. We imploded anyway. i meant financially, a la pompey or leeds We're financially worse off though with a shitter squad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peasepud 59 Posted May 12, 2010 Share Posted May 12, 2010 not spending silly money is wise not spending any money is scary how do you define "silly money". With hindsight ? smith, vidulka, and for his contributions to the circus, barton....for a start so its with hindsight then ? We could have overruled the manager though ....... money that would threaten the club's future. obviously clubs don't survive without debt but it has to debt that is sustainable. if we'd carried on the way we were we could have imploded. We imploded anyway. i meant financially, a la pompey or leeds If we'd carried on the way we were then turnover wouldnt have dropped dramatically, sponsorship deals would have been higher and most importantly we wouldnt have spent a year in the football equivalent of room 101. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now