Post in here if you like me

[JawD 99]

The Transfer League Tables are a record of the amount of money spent in transfer fees by English Premier League Football Clubs since 1992.

 

The table also shows new investment which club owners have made available to their club managers. The new investment can be seen season by season on the Club page from the Teams Transfer Menu.

 

The "Purchased" column in this table shows the money spent on players in transfer fees by all the English Premier League clubs since the Premiership was formed in 1992.

 

 

The "Sold" column shows the money received by the football club from the sale of players in the same period.

 

In the Nett" column the total of transfer fees received from the sale of Players is subtracted from the total money spent in transfer fees on purchasing players since 1992. This Nett figure is the "new investment" made available each season to the manager to buy players.

 

 

The "per season" column is the "Nett" total divided by the number of years that have passed since 1992 giving an average of the money spent in transfer fees by each premiership club each season since 1992.

 

# Net Spend 92 - 2010 -- Purchased Gross -- Sold -- Nett -- Per Season

 

1 Manchester City -- £546,180,000 -- £117,803,000 -- £428,377,000 -- £22,546,158

2 Chelsea -- £585,640,000 -- £203,875,000 -- £381,765,000 -- £20,092,895

3 Tottenham -- £394,550,000 -- £201,717,500 -- £192,832,500 -- £10,149,079

4 Liverpool -- £437,355,000 -- £249,120,000 -- £188,235,000 -- £9,907,105

5 Manchester United -- £426,750,000 -- £290,790,000 -- £135,960,000 -- £7,155,789

6 Aston Villa -- £261,240,000 -- £138,725,000 -- £122,515,000 -- £6,448,158

7 Newcastle -- £316,195,000 --£198,225,000 -- £117,970,000 -- £6,208,947

8 Sunderland -- £193,465,000 -- £88,530,000 -- £104,935,000 -- £5,522,895

9 Birmingham City -- £139,345,000 -- £58,575,000 -- £80,770,000 -- £4,251,053

10 Fulham -- £129,281,000 -- £52,895,000 -- £76,386,000 -- £4,020,316

11 Everton -- £218,245,500 -- £162,270,000 -- £55,975,500 -- £2,946,079

12 Wolves -- £84,919,000 -- £39,045,000 -- £45,874,000 -- £2,414,421

13 West Bromwich Albion -- £93,880,000 -- £52,367,501 -- £41,512,499 -- £2,184,868

14 Arsenal -- £273,440,000 -- £237,574,000 -- £35,866,000 -- £1,887,684

15 Stoke City -- £59,890,000 -- £24,030,000 -- £35,860,000 -- £1,887,368

16 Bolton -- £85,070,000 -- £65,270,000 -- £19,800,000 -- £1,042,105

17 Blackburn Rovers -- £186,162,000 -- £176,135,000 -- £10,027,000 -- £527,737

18 Wigan -- £82,365,000 -- £77,142,500 -- £5,222,500 -- £274,868

19 Blackpool -- £6,002,500 -- £4,785,000 -- £1,217,500 -- £64,079

20 West Ham -- £183,082,000 -- £184,782,000-- -£1,700,000 -- -£89,474

 

Middlesbrough -- £193,985,000 -- £120,670,000 -- £73,315,000 -- £3,858,684

Hull -- £25,170,000 -- £11,980,000 -- £13,190,000 -- £694,211

Burnley -- £22,900,000 -- £18,170,000 -- £4,730,000 -- £248,947

Leeds United -- £145,780,000 -- £141,945,000 -- £3,835,000 -- £201,842

Portsmouth -- £115,100,000 -- £136,445,000 -- -£21,345,000-- -£1,123,421

[Kevin 1]

My six year old nephew (supervised) posts on a forum for "Ben Ten", and "Peppa Pig".

 

I know.

 

 

[Ayatollah Hermione 13762]

Sweatheart?

[peasepud 59]

40,000 seats sold and paying hard working players a fair wage is better than 50,000 seats sold and giving high wages to average piss taking players.

 

is this confirmation by you that you prefer a relegation struggle to playing in europe

 

Playing in Europe is worth hundreds of millions in transfer fees? You're still discarding the level of investment. Take Man City, for example, if they win nothing in the next 5 years but qualify for europe in each of them, do you think that would constitute a successful 5 years for them?

 

Its way more preferable to finishing 17th and toasting the great relegation dogfight that is our future.

 

We are over £100m (and rising) more in debt now than the day fat cunt took over. Id sure as fuck have prefered to see that £100m be spent on "trophy signings" who flopped in the pursuit of Europe than pissed up a wall as it has been.

 

 

Source?

 

What do you suggest Ashley does then? Spend money that the club doesn't have?

 

Of all those pointing the finger for lack of spending, none of them seem to be able to answer the question about where the money would come from

Nope, I suggest he maximises revenue streams instead of the current tactic of pissing off everyone who currently pays money into the club, its all about revenue dear boy. Man U do it, Liverpool do it and now Spurs would appear to be doing it.

 

The more successful you are the bigger the sponsorship deals and the more people want to buy your products.

 

The better a team you are the more people want to watch you which results in increased TV revenue which in turn increases point 1 above.

 

Shepherd knew that, he knew that the only way to become a global brand was to have a successful team on the pitch, at risk of sounding like LM here, you can rightly call Shepherd for a lot of things but backing his managers was not a fault.

 

You talked earlier about a 20% drop in customers being fine because we had a 50% drop in wages, where does that logic end? We're Newcastle United, I and no doubt a thousand others would turn up to watch 11 dogs in black and white stripes hammer it out in a Sunday League.

Is it better to have a gate of 1001 paying a fiver each to watch us get beat in the Unibond Shower Screen League division 4 with a wage bill of £70 and all the beer they can drink or 52,000 packed in to watch a team who take home £500k p/w turn over Barcelona in the Champions League?

 

I know which I prefer.

[Guest]

40,000 seats sold and paying hard working players a fair wage is better than 50,000 seats sold and giving high wages to average piss taking players.

 

is this confirmation by you that you prefer a relegation struggle to playing in europe

 

Playing in Europe is worth hundreds of millions in transfer fees? You're still discarding the level of investment. Take Man City, for example, if they win nothing in the next 5 years but qualify for europe in each of them, do you think that would constitute a successful 5 years for them?

 

Its way more preferable to finishing 17th and toasting the great relegation dogfight that is our future.

 

We are over £100m (and rising) more in debt now than the day fat cunt took over. Id sure as fuck have prefered to see that £100m be spent on "trophy signings" who flopped in the pursuit of Europe than pissed up a wall as it has been.

 

 

Source?

 

What do you suggest Ashley does then? Spend money that the club doesn't have?

 

Of all those pointing the finger for lack of spending, none of them seem to be able to answer the question about where the money would come from

Nope, I suggest he maximises revenue streams instead of the current tactic of pissing off everyone who currently pays money into the club, its all about revenue dear boy. Man U do it, Liverpool do it and now Spurs would appear to be doing it.

 

The more successful you are the bigger the sponsorship deals and the more people want to buy your products.

 

The better a team you are the more people want to watch you which results in increased TV revenue which in turn increases point 1 above.

 

Shepherd knew that, he knew that the only way to become a global brand was to have a successful team on the pitch, at risk of sounding like LM here, you can rightly call Shepherd for a lot of things but backing his managers was not a fault.

 

You talked earlier about a 20% drop in customers being fine because we had a 50% drop in wages, where does that logic end? We're Newcastle United, I and no doubt a thousand others would turn up to watch 11 dogs in black and white stripes hammer it out in a Sunday League.

Is it better to have a gate of 1001 paying a fiver each to watch us get beat in the Unibond Shower Screen League division 4 with a wage bill of £70 and all the beer they can drink or 52,000 packed in to watch a team who take home £500k p/w turn over Barcelona in the Champions League?

 

I know which I prefer.

 

 

So buying big name declining players to keep thick cunts buying tickets to the detriment of the team is important for revenue. Have you ever heard of taking a step backwards to take a step forwards?

 

Before Ashley even arrived, why do you suppose many, including those who worked at the club, use terms such as 'rotten to the core' and 'cancer in the club' etc? Or does that not matter as long as there's 50,000 every game?

 

Shepherd's game plan proved unsuccessful, tired and predictable. I feel more confident going into games now than I did under his last 3 seasons, because I knew that the shower of shit he signed was capable of turning up and simply not giving a fuck.

 

Ashley has came in and changed to a game plan that's healthier for the club long term. There's been some monumental fuck ups along the way, but getting rid of a 'cancer' isn't always a smooth road.

 

I don't think we're doomed to relegation battles every season. I think we've been going through a period of change, and I do think we'll try to improve each season. If we stay up this year, I don't think we'll spend £50m, but then I don't think we'll spend nothing either. I think we'll try do it slowly and within our means, and providing I get to see us improving on the pitch, it suits me fine.

[peasepud 59]

So you're happy to see us sink into more and more debt as long as its not through buying players who turn out to be crap?

 

The current "game plan" is not healthier for the club though. Its healthier for Ashelys bank balance but as far as NUFC are concerned we're merely treading water, sitting in limbo waiting on the hope that someone comes along and buys us.

 

I repeat again, this club is in a far worse state financially than when Shepherd left, how is that better for the club?

[Guest]

So you're happy to see us sink into more and more debt as long as its not through buying players who turn out to be crap?

 

The current "game plan" is not healthier for the club though. Its healthier for Ashelys bank balance but as far as NUFC are concerned we're merely treading water, sitting in limbo waiting on the hope that someone comes along and buys us.

 

I repeat again, this club is in a far worse state financially than when Shepherd left, how is that better for the club?

 

Bollocks. The bigger sponsorship deals will return as 'we' rebuild. A culture of overpaying players was crippling. If we were in such good shape under shepherd, why the signings of le sib, Rossi, Bernard etc towards the end?

[JawD 99]

I think largely the Shepherd ere was as good as the manager in place at that time. Robson brought us some of the best years we've had and made some excellent signings. I dont think anyone could look at that ere and say it was completely mis managed by Shepherd. However, after that it went to rat shit while still under shepherd. He backed his managers and they let him down badly. Crap signing after crap signing and we sunk like a stone. the club was built on the success of Robson and couldnt afford to maintain that under the lows of the likes of souness.

 

Its not as simple as pointing and saying he was right the other was wrong.

[Kitman 2204]

40,000 seats sold and paying hard working players a fair wage is better than 50,000 seats sold and giving high wages to average piss taking players.

 

is this confirmation by you that you prefer a relegation struggle to playing in europe

 

Playing in Europe is worth hundreds of millions in transfer fees? You're still discarding the level of investment. Take Man City, for example, if they win nothing in the next 5 years but qualify for europe in each of them, do you think that would constitute a successful 5 years for them?

 

Its way more preferable to finishing 17th and toasting the great relegation dogfight that is our future.

 

We are over £100m (and rising) more in debt now than the day fat cunt took over. Id sure as fuck have prefered to see that £100m be spent on "trophy signings" who flopped in the pursuit of Europe than pissed up a wall as it has been.

 

 

Source?

 

What do you suggest Ashley does then? Spend money that the club doesn't have?

 

Of all those pointing the finger for lack of spending, none of them seem to be able to answer the question about where the money would come from

Nope, I suggest he maximises revenue streams instead of the current tactic of pissing off everyone who currently pays money into the club, its all about revenue dear boy. Man U do it, Liverpool do it and now Spurs would appear to be doing it.

 

The more successful you are the bigger the sponsorship deals and the more people want to buy your products.

 

The better a team you are the more people want to watch you which results in increased TV revenue which in turn increases point 1 above.

 

Shepherd knew that, he knew that the only way to become a global brand was to have a successful team on the pitch, at risk of sounding like LM here, you can rightly call Shepherd for a lot of things but backing his managers was not a fault.

 

You talked earlier about a 20% drop in customers being fine because we had a 50% drop in wages, where does that logic end? We're Newcastle United, I and no doubt a thousand others would turn up to watch 11 dogs in black and white stripes hammer it out in a Sunday League.

Is it better to have a gate of 1001 paying a fiver each to watch us get beat in the Unibond Shower Screen League division 4 with a wage bill of £70 and all the beer they can drink or 52,000 packed in to watch a team who take home £500k p/w turn over Barcelona in the Champions League?

 

I know which I prefer.

 

 

So buying big name declining players to keep thick cunts buying tickets to the detriment of the team is important for revenue. Have you ever heard of taking a step backwards to take a step forwards?

 

Before Ashley even arrived, why do you suppose many, including those who worked at the club, use terms such as 'rotten to the core' and 'cancer in the club' etc? Or does that not matter as long as there's 50,000 every game?

 

Shepherd's game plan proved unsuccessful, tired and predictable. I feel more confident going into games now than I did under his last 3 seasons, because I knew that the shower of shit he signed was capable of turning up and simply not giving a fuck.

 

Ashley has came in and changed to a game plan that's healthier for the club long term. There's been some monumental fuck ups along the way, but getting rid of a 'cancer' isn't always a smooth road.

 

I don't think we're doomed to relegation battles every season. I think we've been going through a period of change, and I do think we'll try to improve each season. If we stay up this year, I don't think we'll spend £50m, but then I don't think we'll spend nothing either. I think we'll try do it slowly and within our means, and providing I get to see us improving on the pitch, it suits me fine.

 

Whose fault was it the players didn't give a fuck, though? Was Shepherd (and the old Board) picking the team? Did they choose the players to sign or were they the manager's targets (or players they were happy to have)?

 

I'm not defending everything the old Board did by the way, in fact I'm not particularly interested in going on about it as it's ancient history. There was a lot they presided over that I didn't agree with at the time. But it's only with a huge dollop of hindsight, and in the context of what other clubs have done, that you realise some of the mistakes that were made. Also, with some luck, things could have been very different under the old Board. Hey ho.

 

I don't think there's any 'plan' around what Ashley is doing. I don't think there's a strategy of gradual improvement going on. I think he tried his big plan with Wise/Vitere etc and fucked it up royally, wasting a truck load of money in the process and getting us relegated. imo he doesn't mean he plans to invest in the team in any meaningful way, he's going to run us on a shoe string until he's got his money back one way or another. I'm also dubious that we won't be a selling club if we do survive in the PL. I'm also dubious about whether our academy is any better than other clubs.

 

In reality he's been HUGELY lucky in finding a manager in Hughton who's come good effectively on a shoestring budget. And he probably appointed him because no other bugger wanted the job. Hughton seems to know what he's doing, unlike Kinnear. Any improvement is coming from him, not Ashley. All Ashley has done is stopped meddling in the football side and left Hughton to do his job. The frustrating thing is you wonder what he could achieve with a bit more backing, but that would require ambition to do more than repaying your loans.

[LeazesMag 0]

My six year old nephew (supervised) posts on a forum for "Ben Ten", and "Peppa Pig", and I bet it's more interesting and more mature than this thread.

 

I know.

 

I will stop. There comes a point where you realise it is just no use trying to tell a person anything.

 

 

Arse crawling Stevie to get him on side doesn't make you any more credible you sad bastard

 

I don't need to arse crawl anybody lad, least of all Stevie. He knows it too, and vice versa

[LeazesMag 0]

So you're happy to see us sink into more and more debt as long as its not through buying players who turn out to be crap?

 

The current "game plan" is not healthier for the club though. Its healthier for Ashelys bank balance but as far as NUFC are concerned we're merely treading water, sitting in limbo waiting on the hope that someone comes along and buys us.

 

I repeat again, this club is in a far worse state financially than when Shepherd left, how is that better for the club?

 

Bollocks. The bigger sponsorship deals will return as 'we' rebuild. A culture of overpaying players was crippling. If we were in such good shape under shepherd, why the signings of le sib, Rossi, Bernard etc towards the end?

 

poor little deluded soul you are.

 

You think Mikey is going to "rebuild" and show the ambition the Halls and Shepherd did ?

 

Just like they "rebuilt" a club that couldn't sell for 1.25m quid and had one foot in the 3rd division, into a club that played in europe regularly and signed top quality footballers, BECAUSE they built up the revenue streams?

 

You're mad as a box of frogs.

[wykikitoon 19807]

Happy Birthday!

 

[Guest]

So you're happy to see us sink into more and more debt as long as its not through buying players who turn out to be crap?

 

The current "game plan" is not healthier for the club though. Its healthier for Ashelys bank balance but as far as NUFC are concerned we're merely treading water, sitting in limbo waiting on the hope that someone comes along and buys us.

 

I repeat again, this club is in a far worse state financially than when Shepherd left, how is that better for the club?

 

Bollocks. The bigger sponsorship deals will return as 'we' rebuild. A culture of overpaying players was crippling. If we were in such good shape under shepherd, why the signings of le sib, Rossi, Bernard etc towards the end?

 

poor little deluded soul you are.

 

You think Mikey is going to "rebuild" and show the ambition the Halls and Shepherd did ?

 

Just like they "rebuilt" a club that couldn't sell for 1.25m quid and had one foot in the 3rd division, into a club that played in europe regularly and signed top quality footballers, BECAUSE they built up the revenue streams?

 

You're mad as a box of frogs.

 

So what did you think of the report that Ashley was ready to personally finance the keen deal? How many times was Freddy ambitious enough to personally finance anything for the club? Oh wait, wasn't he taking money from it?

[Guest]

Keane deal** fucking phone

[LeazesMag 0]

So you're happy to see us sink into more and more debt as long as its not through buying players who turn out to be crap?

 

The current "game plan" is not healthier for the club though. Its healthier for Ashelys bank balance but as far as NUFC are concerned we're merely treading water, sitting in limbo waiting on the hope that someone comes along and buys us.

 

I repeat again, this club is in a far worse state financially than when Shepherd left, how is that better for the club?

 

Bollocks. The bigger sponsorship deals will return as 'we' rebuild. A culture of overpaying players was crippling. If we were in such good shape under shepherd, why the signings of le sib, Rossi, Bernard etc towards the end?

 

poor little deluded soul you are.

 

You think Mikey is going to "rebuild" and show the ambition the Halls and Shepherd did ?

 

Just like they "rebuilt" a club that couldn't sell for 1.25m quid and had one foot in the 3rd division, into a club that played in europe regularly and signed top quality footballers, BECAUSE they built up the revenue streams?

 

You're mad as a box of frogs.

 

So what did you think of the report that Ashley was ready to personally finance the keen deal? How many times was Freddy ambitious enough to personally finance anything for the club? Oh wait, wasn't he taking money from it?

 

haha. Never seen it. Do you have a link, or proof. Or are you reading an article by his mate that writes for the News of the World.

 

Anyway - what's your opinion of the post by PP, I see you don't respond.

 

When is your Mikey going to put us into the top 6 of the league. He's had 3 years of his "arsenal plan" already.

[LeazesMag 0]

So you're happy to see us sink into more and more debt as long as its not through buying players who turn out to be crap?

 

The current "game plan" is not healthier for the club though. Its healthier for Ashelys bank balance but as far as NUFC are concerned we're merely treading water, sitting in limbo waiting on the hope that someone comes along and buys us.

 

I repeat again, this club is in a far worse state financially than when Shepherd left, how is that better for the club?

 

Bollocks. The bigger sponsorship deals will return as 'we' rebuild. A culture of overpaying players was crippling. If we were in such good shape under shepherd, why the signings of le sib, Rossi, Bernard etc towards the end?

 

don't Martins and Duff count

[JawD 99]

I thought about selling everything I own and taking out a £50Billion pound loan. then ploughing it all into the club.

 

I didnt do it like, but does considering it make me the bestestest fan ever?

 

Edited September 7, 2010 by JawD

[Guest]

So you're happy to see us sink into more and more debt as long as its not through buying players who turn out to be crap?

 

The current "game plan" is not healthier for the club though. Its healthier for Ashelys bank balance but as far as NUFC are concerned we're merely treading water, sitting in limbo waiting on the hope that someone comes along and buys us.

 

I repeat again, this club is in a far worse state financially than when Shepherd left, how is that better for the club?

 

Bollocks. The bigger sponsorship deals will return as 'we' rebuild. A culture of overpaying players was crippling. If we were in such good shape under shepherd, why the signings of le sib, Rossi, Bernard etc towards the end?

 

poor little deluded soul you are.

 

You think Mikey is going to "rebuild" and show the ambition the Halls and Shepherd did ?

 

Just like they "rebuilt" a club that couldn't sell for 1.25m quid and had one foot in the 3rd division, into a club that played in europe regularly and signed top quality footballers, BECAUSE they built up the revenue streams?

 

You're mad as a box of frogs.

 

So what did you think of the report that Ashley was ready to personally finance the keen deal? How many times was Freddy ambitious enough to personally finance anything for the club? Oh wait, wasn't he taking money from it?

 

haha. Never seen it. Do you have a link, or proof. Or are you reading an article by his mate that writes for the News of the World.

 

Anyway - what's your opinion of the post by PP, I see you don't respond.

 

When is your Mikey going to put us into the top 6 of the league. He's had 3 years of his "arsenal plan" already.

 

When was Shepherd going to put us back into it like?

 

Something else you choose to ignore is that we were nowhere near top 6 when he left

[Guest]

http://www.tribalfootball.com/ashley-was-w...e-keane-1096761?

 

 

And before the source bashing, ask what the point in making it up would be, there aren't many that are too disappointed with how the window went.

[LeazesMag 0]

So you're happy to see us sink into more and more debt as long as its not through buying players who turn out to be crap?

 

The current "game plan" is not healthier for the club though. Its healthier for Ashelys bank balance but as far as NUFC are concerned we're merely treading water, sitting in limbo waiting on the hope that someone comes along and buys us.

 

I repeat again, this club is in a far worse state financially than when Shepherd left, how is that better for the club?

 

Bollocks. The bigger sponsorship deals will return as 'we' rebuild. A culture of overpaying players was crippling. If we were in such good shape under shepherd, why the signings of le sib, Rossi, Bernard etc towards the end?

 

poor little deluded soul you are.

 

You think Mikey is going to "rebuild" and show the ambition the Halls and Shepherd did ?

 

Just like they "rebuilt" a club that couldn't sell for 1.25m quid and had one foot in the 3rd division, into a club that played in europe regularly and signed top quality footballers, BECAUSE they built up the revenue streams?

 

You're mad as a box of frogs.

 

So what did you think of the report that Ashley was ready to personally finance the keen deal? How many times was Freddy ambitious enough to personally finance anything for the club? Oh wait, wasn't he taking money from it?

 

haha. Never seen it. Do you have a link, or proof. Or are you reading an article by his mate that writes for the News of the World.

 

Anyway - what's your opinion of the post by PP, I see you don't respond.

 

When is your Mikey going to put us into the top 6 of the league. He's had 3 years of his "arsenal plan" already.

 

When was Shepherd going to put us back into it like?

 

Something else you choose to ignore is that we were nowhere near top 6 when he left

 

We were a damn sight nearer than we have been since Mikey baby took over........

 

When do you think he will match the european qualifications of his predecessors then ? C'mon, don't be shy

[LeazesMag 0]

http://www.tribalfootball.com/ashley-was-w...e-keane-1096761?

 

 

And before the source bashing, ask what the point in making it up would be, there aren't many that are too disappointed with how the window went.

 

tribal football

[JawD 99]

Yeah, I'd not be stating Tribal Football as a source like

 

And aye, they would make it up, its all about hits to them.

[Guest]

So you're happy to see us sink into more and more debt as long as its not through buying players who turn out to be crap?

 

The current "game plan" is not healthier for the club though. Its healthier for Ashelys bank balance but as far as NUFC are concerned we're merely treading water, sitting in limbo waiting on the hope that someone comes along and buys us.

 

I repeat again, this club is in a far worse state financially than when Shepherd left, how is that better for the club?

 

Bollocks. The bigger sponsorship deals will return as 'we' rebuild. A culture of overpaying players was crippling. If we were in such good shape under shepherd, why the signings of le sib, Rossi, Bernard etc towards the end?

 

poor little deluded soul you are.

 

You think Mikey is going to "rebuild" and show the ambition the Halls and Shepherd did ?

 

Just like they "rebuilt" a club that couldn't sell for 1.25m quid and had one foot in the 3rd division, into a club that played in europe regularly and signed top quality footballers, BECAUSE they built up the revenue streams?

 

You're mad as a box of frogs.

 

So what did you think of the report that Ashley was ready to personally finance the keen deal? How many times was Freddy ambitious enough to personally finance anything for the club? Oh wait, wasn't he taking money from it?

 

haha. Never seen it. Do you have a link, or proof. Or are you reading an article by his mate that writes for the News of the World.

 

Anyway - what's your opinion of the post by PP, I see you don't respond.

 

When is your Mikey going to put us into the top 6 of the league. He's had 3 years of his "arsenal plan" already.

 

When was Shepherd going to put us back into it like?

 

Something else you choose to ignore is that we were nowhere near top 6 when he left

 

We were a damn sight nearer than we have been since Mikey baby took over........

 

When do you think he will match the european qualifications of his predecessors then ? C'mon, don't be shy

 

Incorrect actually, we finished higher in Mike's first season than we did in Shepherd's last season Credibility... GONE

 

As stated, when the club is profitable and we have money to invest in players, then we can start looking towards Europe again. Or was he meant to come in and clear up the mess instantly, taking a club that Shepherd had to steered to 13th and 14th in 2 of his last 3 seasons straight back into the champions league, otherwise be deemed inferior?

Edited September 7, 2010 by AshleysSkidMark

[Guest]

Yeah, I'd not be stating Tribal Football as a source like

 

And aye, they would make it up, its all about hits to them.

 

 

They state their source though, so if you'd bothered to read it then you'd know if it is made it up, it isn't by them

[Guest]

http://www.tribalfootball.com/ashley-was-w...e-keane-1096761?

 

 

And before the source bashing, ask what the point in making it up would be, there aren't many that are too disappointed with how the window went.

 

tribal football

 

 

See above

 

Edit: Thick cunt

Edited September 7, 2010 by AshleysSkidMark