JawD 99 Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 The fact is that Leazes is spot on about Ashleys motives, his lack of ambition and the fact that his policy of sell and replace with cheaper will not be sustainable in the longer term, other than maintaining our place in the Premier League, which for a club with our support and potential is a fucking disgrace Explain how he has carried out that policy in the last two years. Also explain why he spent £10m in the last transfer window if he is only interested in maintaining our place in the PL. Something like a £30 million net profit on transfers, I think its the highest in the Premier League, it says it all really. Explain how this could possibly be seen as ambition? Since 2006 our spend on transfers is (£20M) while Arsenal is (£31M). Since MA took over the club in 2007 we are (£30M) and since Arsenal moved stadium ni 2006 they are (£49M) In the 10/11 period we paid £6.3M to agents which was the 5th highest in the league (for comparison Man city spent £9M and Arsenal in 6th in £4.5M If you look at the 10/11 when AC left, since then our figures are £33.7M spent and £44.8M recouped. A net of (£11.1M) on fees (not agents) alone. If you take the AC sale as a start point then there is £1.3M left (excluding agent fees) but further sales came after (Nolan & Enrique) that lead to the over net above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggio 0 Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 (edited) Out of interest, how much longer does Carroll get with this kind of form before fans think he's not very good? I think the knives were out for Stephen Ireland and David Bentley after 18 months or so so if Carroll doesn't have a sharp upturn in form before the end of the season will he fall into that category? Edited March 13, 2012 by Baggio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig 6670 Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 Never mind the fact we're protecting our assets (Ben Arfa, Tiote, Coloccini, Krul & R.Taylor) by tying them down to long contracts. Still, so long as we're not blowing £10m+ on utter garbage, we're not showing ambition are we? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JawD 99 Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 Never mind the fact we're protecting our assets (Ben Arfa, Tiote, Coloccini, Krul & R.Taylor) by tying them down to long contracts. Still, so long as we're not blowing £10m+ on utter garbage, we're not showing ambition are we? Hey, dont muddy a point with fact man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 Not sure if Carroll would consider his time at Liverpool a success. Yeah he's won a Carling cup medal but spends 70% of his time warming the bench and when he does play the team don't play to his strengths. In hindsight would he swap that for being our number one striker? also would we swap Ba and Cisse for Carroll 43% of his time. He's played 1376 minutes out of 2430 I stand corrected, matter if interest how many PL minutes and %? That is PL only Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brock Manson 0 Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 I don't really want to reply to you, or move away from the thread, but I'll just say that brummiemag shouldn't need to tell anybody that there is 25m quid still missing from the Carroll money and we need a central defender and other positions if we want to go higher, attempt to keep that 7th place or build further. If that doesn't explain the situation for you, you're a lost cause. WRONG. If you're going to use the Carroll money example, at least get the figures right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 30176 Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 Aye, it's £27m. You fool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Dynamite 6973 Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 Watched the 5-1 again this morning to cheer myself up. Forgot how good Andy Carrol can be when he's in form. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 (edited) Rather the negative pisstaking than parroting the resident mental case. your lowering the tone of the message board again, you silly boy. And you still haven't replied intelligently either. Edited March 13, 2012 by LeazesMag Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 I don't really want to reply to you, or move away from the thread, but I'll just say that brummiemag shouldn't need to tell anybody that there is 25m quid still missing from the Carroll money and we need a central defender and other positions if we want to go higher, attempt to keep that 7th place or build further. If that doesn't explain the situation for you, you're a lost cause. WRONG. If you're going to use the Carroll money example, at least get the figures right. I'm not using anything as an "example", I'm saying the club is withholding money from the manager from sales, that could be used to further strengthen the team. I just know you won't understand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 Never mind the fact we're protecting our assets (Ben Arfa, Tiote, Coloccini, Krul & R.Taylor) by tying them down to long contracts. Still, so long as we're not blowing £10m+ on utter garbage, we're not showing ambition are we? has a few decent results converted you to the Ashley arselicking camp Craig ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 Not sure if Carroll would consider his time at Liverpool a success. Yeah he's won a Carling cup medal but spends 70% of his time warming the bench and when he does play the team don't play to his strengths. In hindsight would he swap that for being our number one striker? also would we swap Ba and Cisse for Carroll do you work with Liverpool supporters ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 Watched the 5-1 again this morning to cheer myself up. Forgot how good Andy Carrol can be when he's in form. He should watch it, like Rocky watches his old fights in that film about the life of Rocky after "Rocky" happened. Can't remember the name. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brock Manson 0 Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 I don't really want to reply to you, or move away from the thread, but I'll just say that brummiemag shouldn't need to tell anybody that there is 25m quid still missing from the Carroll money and we need a central defender and other positions if we want to go higher, attempt to keep that 7th place or build further. If that doesn't explain the situation for you, you're a lost cause. WRONG. If you're going to use the Carroll money example, at least get the figures right. I'm not using anything as an "example", I'm saying the club is withholding money from the manager from sales, that could be used to further strengthen the team. I just know you won't understand. Recent transfer windows would imply that we are in fact letting Pardew sign players. Hell, we brought in Cisse to bolster our striking options in January, one of few English clubs to do significant business in the window. Just because we're not being held to ransom for targets doesn't meat the club isn't looking to sign players. We didn't sign Mariappa because he was only a stop gap, which is what Willo is. Why gamble on a championship CB when there's a better signing to come? Ultimately you can't say either way if Pardew is being completely backed financially or is having to make do with more financially viable targets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig 6670 Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 Never mind the fact we're protecting our assets (Ben Arfa, Tiote, Coloccini, Krul & R.Taylor) by tying them down to long contracts. Still, so long as we're not blowing £10m+ on utter garbage, we're not showing ambition are we? has a few decent results converted you to the Ashley arselicking camp Craig ? You've obviously not bothered to read any of my posts on SD branding and the renaming of the ground. Also your line of "a few decent results" proves you've taken no notice of the positive comments I've made regarding the footballing side of things for the past 12 months. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 (edited) WRONG. If you're going to use the Carroll money example, at least get the figures right. I'm not using anything as an "example", I'm saying the club is withholding money from the manager from sales, that could be used to further strengthen the team. I just know you won't understand. Recent transfer windows would imply that we are in fact letting Pardew sign players. Hell, we brought in Cisse to bolster our striking options in January, one of few English clubs to do significant business in the window. Just because we're not being held to ransom for targets doesn't meat the club isn't looking to sign players. We didn't sign Mariappa because he was only a stop gap, which is what Willo is. Why gamble on a championship CB when there's a better signing to come? Ultimately you can't say either way if Pardew is being completely backed financially or is having to make do with more financially viable targets. another person joined the "I'm not explaining this again" list. Last time. There has been a lot of money for over 12 months now to improve that team, 25m quid has not been given to the manager, meanwhile we could have nailed a Europa League spot by now if it had been and could even be looking higher. What is it about this that you don't understand ? I realise that the likes of Gemmill, Renton and the grey man [who seems to have disappeared again when he's up against it] think such comments are the sign of a "madman", but what a shame they can't reply intelligently and with substance rather than drag the message board down and blame someone else. So you're not alone. Edited March 13, 2012 by LeazesMag Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 Never mind the fact we're protecting our assets (Ben Arfa, Tiote, Coloccini, Krul & R.Taylor) by tying them down to long contracts. Still, so long as we're not blowing £10m+ on utter garbage, we're not showing ambition are we? has a few decent results converted you to the Ashley arselicking camp Craig ? You've obviously not bothered to read any of my posts on SD branding and the renaming of the ground. Also your line of "a few decent results" proves you've taken no notice of the positive comments I've made regarding the footballing side of things for the past 12 months. oh, I have noticed alright. Lately though, I've wondered....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig 6670 Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 So are you suggesting we haven't turned things around as a football club in the last 3 years? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 So are you suggesting we haven't turned things around as a football club in the last 3 years? not particularly. I've said my view, and backed it up with comparisons through history etc. Its a flash in the pan, the same as clubs like Blackburn, Bolton etc have flirted with these positions, the overall strategy is 2nd rate like those clubs and unless it changes we will go the same way, when Pardew leaves for a club that backs him properly maybe. You can't sustain any sort of success by selling your best players and withholding the cash from your manager and not backing him. These are the actions of 2nd rate clubs. NUFC are bigger than that and should be acting bigger than that. You know what I've posted over the years, about the limitations of the ambition, the use of the club as an advertisement vehicle for Sports Direct so long as they stay in the premiership. I stand by it. Some such as Gemmill, the grey man etc may think its "rubbish" but how long have they been saying this now ? Nothing stops them from debating it rather than hurling childish posts and dragging the board down while blaming someone else. I'm 100% correct and time will prove it, although I think it should be obvious by now to everybody. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig 6670 Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 So in short, unless we're spunking all the cash we can on players, we're not being ambitious enough? With regards 'witholding cash from the manager and not backing him', we made the biggest single purchase in January so that comment is a load of cobblers too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brummiemag1 0 Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 You need to look at the bigger picture - a net inflow of funds from transfers of £29 million since 2007 - what does that tell you about the sort of ambition Ashely has for the club If the net inflow was zero it would still show a lack of ambition If we had not sold Carroll I would have still expected us, if we had any ambition, to strenghten the team, but as it is he has not even used all that money to back the manager. It cannot be sustained in the longer term. If it was so easy to sell your best players and replace with cheaper then everyone would be doing it. I cannot understand the amount of people who appear to be backing Ashley over this approach - he must be delighted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 30176 Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 Explain how he has carried out that policy in the last two years. Also explain why he spent £10m in the last transfer window if he is only interested in maintaining our place in the PL. Something like a £30 million net profit on transfers, I think its the highest in the Premier League, it says it all really. Explain how this could possibly be seen as ambition? Over the last two years your £30m is more like £10m. When you add on the £6m in agent fees and the loan fees we've paid you're left with very little. Now explain what I asked you to rather than dodge the issue. Come on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JawD 99 Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 I still dont get this arguement. We sell Carroll for £35M. We bring in Ba & Cisse with plenty of change and some see that as a bad thing, weakening our position? The team will never be "finished". Now we want a centre half and a full back (at least). Fact is, the team is stronger today than it was 24 months ago. The next thing is whether we think it is stronger again in 12 months time. Finally, the thing that always gets my goat (this to you LM). Why must you insist that people are either in the Ashley camp firmly and unequivocally, or not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brock Manson 0 Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 I still dont get this arguement. We sell Carroll for £35M. We bring in Ba & Cisse with plenty of change and some see that as a bad thing, weakening our position? The team will never be "finished". Now we want a centre half and a full back (at least). Fact is, the team is stronger today than it was 24 months ago. The next thing is whether we think it is stronger again in 12 months time. Finally, the thing that always gets my goat (this to you LM). Why must you insist that people are either in the Ashley camp firmly and unequivocally, or not? It's all black and white with Leazes, and he doesn't like the blacks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig 6670 Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 You need to look at the bigger picture - a net inflow of funds from transfers of £29 million since 2007 - what does that tell you about the sort of ambition Ashely has for the club If the net inflow was zero it would still show a lack of ambition If we had not sold Carroll I would have still expected us, if we had any ambition, to strenghten the team, but as it is he has not even used all that money to back the manager. It cannot be sustained in the longer term. If it was so easy to sell your best players and replace with cheaper then everyone would be doing it. I cannot understand the amount of people who appear to be backing Ashley over this approach - he must be delighted Again you seem to be peddling the idea that if we have cash in our pockets, we must spend it. In the past 24 months we've signifcantly reduced our overheads and significantly improved from a footballing perspective. I cannot understand how a fan of Newcastle United cannot be delighted by those facts. So we've recouped more than we've spent... So long as the team is more successful (which it undeniably is), does that have to be a bad thing? 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