Gemmill 44102 Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 You can't fool me with your clever word games, Frenchy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trophyshy 7066 Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 'Newcastle's crowds have dropped throughout the recession despite a bevy of starlets been acquired by Derek Llambias.' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven 0 Posted September 30, 2011 Author Share Posted September 30, 2011 'Newcastle's crowds have dropped throughout the recession despite a bevy of starlets been acquired by Derek Llambias.' Subtle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AgentAxeman 169 Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 Voted no, but I wouldnt say we've progressed as a club either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trophyshy 7066 Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 'Newcastle's crowds have dropped throughout the recession despite a bevy of starlets been acquired by Derek Llambias.' Subtle. Just keeping his memory alive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OTF 7214 Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 What's more important than where the gross position of the team is, in my opinion, is an analysis into decisions made at the club since that time. There has been a lot of at best questionable decisions, in addition to the complete and utter fuck up that was Wise and the treatment of Keegan. The subsequent relegation cost the club a huge amount of money and caused massive damage to the club's profile. Elsewhere in the world nobody cares about Newcastle United, with the exception possibly being France where we somehow seem to still have a strong profile (a more likely explanation is that France is one of the few remaining decent European leagues where wages are much lower than those at Newcastle). Otherwise we've slipped completely off the European radar spare the odd trip into Wales. There's some factors where we're currently ahead, but reasonably just as many where we're behind. There is definitely an underlying feeling that the current good run against admittedly moderate opponents could be papering over some deficiencies. Certainly in terms of injuries we're travelling well at the moment, but should that change we'd quickly be relying upon unknown entities. The key is that with decent ownership and decisions from the board we'd be well ahead of where we are now, and considering the circumstances involved that is unforgivable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toonpack 9108 Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 (edited) What's more important than where the gross position of the team is, in my opinion, is an analysis into decisions made at the club since that time. There has been a lot of at best questionable decisions, in addition to the complete and utter fuck up that was Wise and the treatment of Keegan. The subsequent relegation cost the club a huge amount of money and caused massive damage to the club's profile. Elsewhere in the world nobody cares about Newcastle United, with the exception possibly being France where we somehow seem to still have a strong profile (a more likely explanation is that France is one of the few remaining decent European leagues where wages are much lower than those at Newcastle). Otherwise we've slipped completely off the European radar spare the odd trip into Wales. There's some factors where we're currently ahead, but reasonably just as many where we're behind. There is definitely an underlying feeling that the current good run against admittedly moderate opponents could be papering over some deficiencies. Certainly in terms of injuries we're travelling well at the moment, but should that change we'd quickly be relying upon unknown entities. The key is that with decent ownership and decisions from the board we'd be well ahead of where we are now, and considering the circumstances involved that is unforgivable. Even with better decisions, let's say decisions that didn't see us relegated, I doubt we'd actually be much better off than we are at this point in time. This squad/injuries thing. We loose a key player or two then yes we're likely screwed until they're back, but that is true of any team. Look at Man U, started incredibly, looked unbeatable, Rooney goes down (along with the Mexican) and they look nothing like they did even though Man U can afford a Berbatov (as an example) as a squad player. Our "small squad" (it's not actually, it's the same size as all Prem Clubs) is another thing. We need better quality, I agree in some positions, but how, without European football do we have the number of fixtures to play a "quality" squad player enough to keep him happy ?? As an example: Williamson > Perch, he'll be back soon, what centre back of better than Williamson quality could we realistically expect to have as a squad player ?? Saylor is playing up to his potential just now, part of that is Colo, also another part of that may be, just may be, down to training method, scheme and coaching. Lose Colo, no matter who we had "in reserve" I reckon we'd struggle or at least be more vulnerable. Edited September 30, 2011 by Toonpack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lake Bells tits 1 Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 what centre back of better than Williamson quality could we realistically expect to have as a squad player ?? Williamson is more often than not a walking penalty waiting to happen though.. Im not sure what the solution is, but Im quite sure there are backup players out there better than him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toonpack 9108 Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 what centre back of better than Williamson quality could we realistically expect to have as a squad player ?? Williamson is more often than not a walking penalty waiting to happen though.. Im not sure what the solution is, but Im quite sure there are backup players out there better than him. Who would be happy to sit on the bench in case of injury ?? I'm not convinced. Let's face it Colo gets crocked and replacement comes in and say does well, no way Colo doesn't come straight back in, at the earliest opportunity, when fit. Maybe the solution is what we've got. You're not going to get a first teamer from elsewhere as a bench warmer, and your not going to get a decent bench warmer (Huth for example) to come to continue to be a bench warmer. You may get a decent "prospect" from a lower league team, but that's not much different to where we are now. Any team loses a key player there's a natural detrimental effect, some teams (the usual suspects) can afford very good replacements, but they nonetheless are "not as good". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sammynb 3342 Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 Two words: Joe "fucking" Kinear Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toonpack 9108 Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 Two words: Joe "fucking" Kinear That's three words Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anorthernsoul 1221 Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 Honestly, who gives a fuck? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knackers 0 Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 My view is that the current hierachy have stumbled upon what we have now,they have tried their hardest to fuck it up They have been very lucky with the start to the current season,but hey ho, long may it continue Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monroe Transfer 0 Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 Honestly, who gives a fuck? People who value being able to count properly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monroe Transfer 0 Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 They have been very lucky with the start to the current season Again, that's nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sammynb 3342 Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 Honestly, who gives a fuck? People who value being able to count properly. Seriously it has got to the point where if you include the safety wink, it would be counted as 4! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toonpack 9108 Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 Honestly, who gives a fuck? People who value being able to count properly. Seriously it has got to the point where if you include the safety wink, it would be counted as 4! If you included "safety wink" it would actually be five Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McFaul 35 Posted October 2, 2011 Share Posted October 2, 2011 Of course we have gone backwards - we are one of the also rans now, and we have lost 25,000 fans in the process - the potential of the club will never be realised under Ashley - a massive lost opportunity from an owner who has no ambition whatsoever. And we were then. Seriously, who other than Man U, City, Chelsea aren't these days (and maybe Arsenal, although there are signs they're heading to also-ran-ville as they are losing their best players to their "rivals", in the "approaching last year of contract" scenario, sounds awfully familiar). As for then 25,000 can you quantify/back that up ??? In another thread, I can't recall exactly which one, I believe our realistic "benchmark" appeared widely accepted as being Spurs (notwithstanding their bright-lights London advantage). Given our operating model (that can never work long term, so I keep reading) has been their operating model for years and years, what over and above competing with Spurs is our "realistic" ambition in your opinion? I understand we used to have a waiting list with 15,000 people on it so basically I would say there are more than 20,000 fans who have lost interest in going to games. Also despite the good start to the season we had loads of empty seats at the villa game - ive not known that for many many years, it was very sad to see and its another indication the club is decline. As for spurs, much as dislike them, I would say they have demonstrated far more ambition than us in recent years - they fight to keep hold of their best players for a start Guess how much the capacity went up by... I think this was after the capacity had increased to 52,000 That figure was always quoted when we were at 36,000 tbh. I'm sure someone will have the right answer with regard to that, but even if I'm wrong our home crowds are showing a year by year reduction and there were hundreds of empty seats in our end at Villa the other week which really surprised me. I can't remember the last time we didnt sell our allocation at Villa! How do you explain that if you don't think the club is in decline under Ashley? I think he's alienated a lot of people and I wouldn't be so daft to dispute the fact of falling attendances. At the same time I know 'fulfilling our potential' (meaning the natural potential of NUFC given it's fanbase), doesn't get you within competing distance of Chelsea Man U Man C etc these days because they're having money chucked at them due to either their a) bigger natural resources or private funding. 'Chuck more money at us please' is a perfectly valid thing to say, but people should have the honesty to acknowledge that that's just a statement of desire and not try to link it to NUFC's natural potential, because the facts there suggest we fall way behind the aforementioned clubs resources even with a full 52,000 stadium. Say you want more money spent by all means, but don't say it's warranted because we're NUFC and our natural potential because their's an inherent contradiction in that. City are having a whale of a time, but you won't find one fan trying to pass it off as being sustainable on the back of their natural potential. They know they're a rich mans play thing but theyre honest about it. Their stadium is only 4,000 less than ours and they've spent close to £300 million on transfers alone. Before 2003 we were by and large the second largest club in terms of turn over though. That's a fact, all clubs like Arsenal, Liverpool and Chelsea have done is maximise their branding, while ours has detoriated to dunlop dodgem levels. Why was our turnover bigger than theirs then, and why can't it be again? I think with Arsenal who are the 4th biggest club in the world on a few levels we won't compete because we cant charge £1000 for the cheapest season tickets in the NE, but Man City, our natural size is MUCH bigger than theirs. Us and Tottenham should be about the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manc-mag 1 Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 Of course we have gone backwards - we are one of the also rans now, and we have lost 25,000 fans in the process - the potential of the club will never be realised under Ashley - a massive lost opportunity from an owner who has no ambition whatsoever. And we were then. Seriously, who other than Man U, City, Chelsea aren't these days (and maybe Arsenal, although there are signs they're heading to also-ran-ville as they are losing their best players to their "rivals", in the "approaching last year of contract" scenario, sounds awfully familiar). As for then 25,000 can you quantify/back that up ??? In another thread, I can't recall exactly which one, I believe our realistic "benchmark" appeared widely accepted as being Spurs (notwithstanding their bright-lights London advantage). Given our operating model (that can never work long term, so I keep reading) has been their operating model for years and years, what over and above competing with Spurs is our "realistic" ambition in your opinion? I understand we used to have a waiting list with 15,000 people on it so basically I would say there are more than 20,000 fans who have lost interest in going to games. Also despite the good start to the season we had loads of empty seats at the villa game - ive not known that for many many years, it was very sad to see and its another indication the club is decline. As for spurs, much as dislike them, I would say they have demonstrated far more ambition than us in recent years - they fight to keep hold of their best players for a start Guess how much the capacity went up by... I think this was after the capacity had increased to 52,000 That figure was always quoted when we were at 36,000 tbh. I'm sure someone will have the right answer with regard to that, but even if I'm wrong our home crowds are showing a year by year reduction and there were hundreds of empty seats in our end at Villa the other week which really surprised me. I can't remember the last time we didnt sell our allocation at Villa! How do you explain that if you don't think the club is in decline under Ashley? I think he's alienated a lot of people and I wouldn't be so daft to dispute the fact of falling attendances. At the same time I know 'fulfilling our potential' (meaning the natural potential of NUFC given it's fanbase), doesn't get you within competing distance of Chelsea Man U Man C etc these days because they're having money chucked at them due to either their a) bigger natural resources or private funding. 'Chuck more money at us please' is a perfectly valid thing to say, but people should have the honesty to acknowledge that that's just a statement of desire and not try to link it to NUFC's natural potential, because the facts there suggest we fall way behind the aforementioned clubs resources even with a full 52,000 stadium. Say you want more money spent by all means, but don't say it's warranted because we're NUFC and our natural potential because their's an inherent contradiction in that. City are having a whale of a time, but you won't find one fan trying to pass it off as being sustainable on the back of their natural potential. They know they're a rich mans play thing but theyre honest about it. Their stadium is only 4,000 less than ours and they've spent close to £300 million on transfers alone. Before 2003 we were by and large the second largest club in terms of turn over though. That's a fact, all clubs like Arsenal, Liverpool and Chelsea have done is maximise their branding, while ours has detoriated to dunlop dodgem levels. Why was our turnover bigger than theirs then, and why can't it be again? I think with Arsenal who are the 4th biggest club in the world on a few levels we won't compete because we cant charge £1000 for the cheapest season tickets in the NE, but Man City, our natural size is MUCH bigger than theirs. Us and Tottenham should be about the same. We can get turnover up if you throw hundreds of millions at us. I'm not saying it's impossible. What I am saying is that it's a private individual's cash that's needed in order to achieve that now and that's what needs to be acknowledged. Ashley doesn't want to do that because he doesn't think he'll make it back (on balance). I can say I'm miffed about that in one sense, but I can hardly turn round and say we've a divine right to it because we're NUFC. It's his money at the end of the day. The best you can say if you're wanting that is you want him to sell so someone else can come in and bankroll us for a tilt in the crazy money league. A totally valid standpoint, but be honest about it. Arsenal have moved to a 60,000 stadium since 2003 and the ticket price is higher than SJP to start with. And it doesn't matter what Man City's 'natural' size is, they don't pay their players 'natural' money, it's petrochemical dividends. Theres a balance and I personally think more should be spent-the refusal to buy a striker being the most acutely prejudicial evidence of that-but beyond that I think a lot of what's said basically boils down to "I want to spend as much as Man City". I think the Tottenham parallel is a reasonably sensible one. They sell their best players (they don't want to sell them but they've got no choice when one of the top payers comes in) and then they improve with the money recouped. I think that's largely down to who they've currently got in as manager and that's likely to be Pardew's biggest challenge. I don't think he'll be given the same sort of cash however-which is obviously the point you're making-so I'd be inclined to agree with you on that level. That's where I think the balance is currently wrong though, not saying we could compete with Man C just because our natural size is bigger than their's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 30162 Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 Before 2003 we were by and large the second largest club in terms of turn over though. That's a fact, all clubs like Arsenal, Liverpool and Chelsea have done is maximise their branding, while ours has detoriated to dunlop dodgem levels. Why was our turnover bigger than theirs then, and why can't it be again? I think with Arsenal who are the 4th biggest club in the world on a few levels we won't compete because we cant charge £1000 for the cheapest season tickets in the NE, but Man City, our natural size is MUCH bigger than theirs. Us and Tottenham should be about the same. Were we indeed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven 0 Posted November 3, 2011 Author Share Posted November 3, 2011 I was a month early with this really and perhaps didnt phrase the question correctly. Its undoubted we are moving in the right direction and i think we are better off than we were at the end of 06/07. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 I've voted Don't know. We've gone 10 games and pulled in 22 points which is superb. We went on a very similar run in 06/07 though where we pulled in 19 points from 10 games. Newcastle United 1-0 Portsmouth Newcastle United 3-2 Reading Chelsea 1-0 Newcastle United Blackburn Rovers 1-3 Newcastle United Newcastle United 2-1 Watford Newcastle United 3-1 Tottenham Hotspur Bolton Wanderers 2-1 Newcastle United Everton 3-0 Newcastle United Newcastle United 2-2 Manchester United Tottenham Hotspur 2-3 Newcastle United In fact, take it up to a 12 game run and we pulled in 24 points... Newcastle United 2-2 West Ham United Newcastle United 3-1 Aston Villa ...which will be an excellent achievement if we manage it over the first 12 games of this year. The fact this run followed a shitty start that had left us in the relegation places means there was little of the good cheer surrounding it that there is over our current run, coming as it does from the outset. Last season we looked about on a level par with 06/07 overall. So far this season we look better and hopefully it'll breed confidence to maintain the run. But the question is how we cope with a few losses, injuries, sales etc. when it inevitibly happens. Fingers crossed though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven 0 Posted November 3, 2011 Author Share Posted November 3, 2011 I said to my dad yesterday, despite seeing the positives and believing in us for a while now, i cant blame anyone for thinking the worse as even i am concerned we'll sign Maiga and Ridgwell but sell Colo for twice their cost in January. If we sign Maiga and a defender in January without selling anyone, we'll be back to 02/03 levels imo. I dont think an absolute comparison to Robson's CL team is that helpful, i just think we've nearly got what it takes to challenge and compete with Spurs and Liverpool. We'll see about Arsenal as time goes by. This for me is why Saturday is the biggest game of the season and if we take the points, moves the next game to the biggest. As .com says, we're riding the crest of a wave that is getting bigger and bigger, if we can keep this momentum going there is no reason why we cant take 7th and look for higher, given the right strengthening in January. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 Like manc-mag said recently, it would be good if the run got Ashley excited enough to flash a bit of cash in January. Colocinni, in the context of the club's strategy, is a difficult one. You can see the logic in selling him (his age, weekly wage, 18 months left on his contract, probably suitors) but centre-halves like him really are worth their weight in gold. His ability to play from the back starts off so many of our moves. He's now suited and fully adjusted to the premier league as well. He's a superb defender and, by that I mean he defends first and foremost rather than going missing by attacking in the wrong situations etc. I think he'd be a grievous loss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonTheMag 4 Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 Like manc-mag said recently, it would be good if the run got Ashley excited enough to flash a bit of cash in January. Colocinni, in the context of the club's strategy, is a difficult one. You can see the logic in selling him (his age, weekly wage, 18 months left on his contract, probably suitors) but centre-halves like him really are worth their weight in gold. His ability to play from the back starts off so many of our moves. He's now suited and fully adjusted to the premier league as well. He's a superb defender and, by that I mean he defends first and foremost rather than going missing by attacking in the wrong situations etc. I think he'd be a grievous loss. His chipped pass started the move for Ba's 2nd goal against Stoke I believe. It really is a necessity to keep Colo, we won't find much better than him 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