***Official Mike Ashley Euro express thread***

[LeazesMag 0]

 

 

list

 

you, for starters

 

Thinking you're a headcase and supporting Ashley don't go hand in hand leazes.

 

the feeling is mutual. Unfortunately, I have supported the club for nearly 50 years and the 15 years of the previous regime is the best by a million miles. And that is not "opinion", the league positions and european qualifications are in the record books.

[Andrew 4748]

Have I argued that with you somewhere? Or said different?

[ChezGiven 0]

We are a selling club, why do all these people keep defending Ashley. Its getting nearly as bad as some of the twats on newcastle online on here!

 

We will acheive nothing with Ashley, its about survival in the top division and make as much money as possible. He has got lucky so far, he will not build on that luck by keeping his best players and investing in further quality players to make the next step and challenge for a top 4 place. He is a still a cunt as far as im concerned. How can people still defend a person who lied to the fans, lied to kevin keegan, a living legend of this club and changed the name of our ground for tacky advertising. Disgraceful

We're a selling club because ashley lied to the fans, lied to Keegan and changed the name of the ground? That's what you have basically just argued.

 

I do agree that Ashley could be more ambitious but as that is limited to about £10 to £15m of spending thats no guarantee of moving us even one position up the league.

 

People like you are not able to look at things objectively so you accuse people of 'defending ashley' when the reality is just that people think the club has made progress on the pitch. That's a hard nose impartial 'analysis' that can be made without an opinion on the owner. When people are arguing this maybe it comes over to you as defending ashley but I don't think that is the case for most people, I think it's just accepting the evidence of their eyes so far. I respect your view that the outlook is negative but in the interests of fairness it should be accepted by you and others that it's just a prediction for now with evidence running against it currently.

[LeazesMag 0]

Are you seriously thinking that in the long term, our transfer policy will pay bigger dividends in terms of league positions than Liverpools ?

 

 

We don't have the resources Liverpool have, when financial fair play kicks in we can perhaps catch up in the long run but their transfer policy is a disgrace at the moment and it's looking like it.

 

Nearly a hundred million pound on Andy Carroll, Jordan Henderson & Stewart Downing.

 

Would you rather we spent say £0 on Ba, £4m on Cabaye & £5m on Ben Arfa or the above?

 

Given that it would plunge the club into unmanageable debt?

 

but you can't say that, they have backed their manager, and they will achieve higher league positions over the long term than us. Therefore their policy is best, and is the very reason why they are bigger than us now, they have been behaving like this for over 40 years. You can't point to 3 players as evidence of a bad strategy when faced with such long term success of an overall strategy.

[brummiemag1 0]

And how is it that in two posts side by side I can be asked my opinion on the man (which I keep to myself because of nonsense like this and will continue to do so) and then accused of being on the list of his supporters?

 

Why keep your opinion to yourself? Ive made my opinion clear. Do you think the billionairre Ashley has the ambition to realise the true potential of the club and challenge for a top 4 place? What do you think about the way he treated Keegan and renamed the ground? The man to take us forward?

[TicTacWoe 0]

We are a selling club, why do all these people keep defending Ashley. Its getting nearly as bad as some of the twats on newcastle online on here!

 

We will acheive nothing with Ashley, its about survival in the top division and make as much money as possible. He has got lucky so far, he will not build on that luck by keeping his best players and investing in further quality players to make the next step and challenge for a top 4 place. He is a still a cunt as far as im concerned. How can people still defend a person who lied to the fans, lied to kevin keegan, a living legend of this club and changed the name of our ground for tacky advertising. Disgraceful

We're a selling club because ashley lied to the fans, lied to Keegan and changed the name of the ground? That's what you have basically just argued.

 

I do agree that Ashley could be more ambitious but as that is limited to about £10 to £15m of spending thats no guarantee of moving us even one position up the league.

 

People like you are not able to look at things objectively so you accuse people of 'defending ashley' when the reality is just that people think the club has made progress on the pitch. That's a hard nose impartial 'analysis' that can be made without an opinion on the owner. When people are arguing this maybe it comes over to you as defending ashley but I don't think that is the case for most people, I think it's just accepting the evidence of their eyes so far. I respect your view that the outlook is negative but in the interests of fairness it should be accepted by you and others that it's just a prediction for now with evidence running against it currently.

 

 

 

For some reason, the likes of Leazes and Brummiemag assume that even the slightest praise of the Ashley regime means we all love Mike and think the club is looking forward to decades of champions league football.

 

Truth is, most are just applauding that for a change, we've bought wisely, sold players at the right time and replaced them with equal, or better quality whilst enjoying the improved fortunes on the pitch.

[LeazesMag 0]

We are a selling club, why do all these people keep defending Ashley. Its getting nearly as bad as some of the twats on newcastle online on here!

 

We will acheive nothing with Ashley, its about survival in the top division and make as much money as possible. He has got lucky so far, he will not build on that luck by keeping his best players and investing in further quality players to make the next step and challenge for a top 4 place. He is a still a cunt as far as im concerned. How can people still defend a person who lied to the fans, lied to kevin keegan, a living legend of this club and changed the name of our ground for tacky advertising. Disgraceful

We're a selling club because ashley lied to the fans, lied to Keegan and changed the name of the ground? That's what you have basically just argued.

 

I do agree that Ashley could be more ambitious but as that is limited to about £10 to £15m of spending thats no guarantee of moving us even one position up the league.

 

People like you are not able to look at things objectively so you accuse people of 'defending ashley' when the reality is just that people think the club has made progress on the pitch. That's a hard nose impartial 'analysis' that can be made without an opinion on the owner. When people are arguing this maybe it comes over to you as defending ashley but I don't think that is the case for most people, I think it's just accepting the evidence of their eyes so far. I respect your view that the outlook is negative but in the interests of fairness it should be accepted by you and others that it's just a prediction for now with evidence running against it currently.

 

any progress on the pitch will not be sustained, because the strategy [or "plan", ironically as people said that we played so often in europe despite not having a "plan" ] is not the correct way to sustain it. It's the bigger picture. You are being completely taken in by a few results, they are nothing more than an upper blip, and down to a manager making good from a shit set of cards.

[Baggio 0]

Talking about when we were in the Champions League as a benchmark to match what the previous lot done is absolutely pointless, we're in a completely different era of football now.

 

Back then it was the era of local businessmen owning clubs, it was an era when most clubs attempted to live within their means and the one's that didn't either went under like Leeds or came close to it like Chelsea, football was so much simpler then for us as it was a case of employ a different manager and the chance of getting into the top 4 was back on since it was a small pool of teams at the top and apart from Man Utd and Arsenal the rest of the teams were nothing special.

 

Then Abramovich came and bought Chelsea and everything changed, I honestly think we would have qualified for the CL the year we came 5th if he hadn't bought them and the more big investors that came in looking to throw money about the more we struggled, to be fair to Shepherd he did take the gamble but it was with the wrong managed and it failed spectacularly and it was a position I didn't see him ever recovering from, the financial hole was too deep.

 

Now look at the league compared to back then, we've got a team like Liverpool spending £100 million and they can't get top 4, I think Man City spent over £300 million before getting there and for a club without outside investment it's practically impossible.

 

Does anyone really think we would have got back into the CL in this current era with Hall and Shepherd still owning the club? Not a fucking chance is what I think.

 

We are superior now on and off the pitch compared to how the club was when Ashley took charge, I don't think there is anyone that can doubt that and while it has taken time to turn the club around I don't think people can have any complaints about the direction we're going in.

 

I've answered this in the other thread. There is ManU and 2 bankrolled clubs. That is all. The old regime has ManU and one bankrolled club. They challenged them because they were football men and knew the club, your man isn't and won't challenge ManU and the 2 bankrolled clubs. This is no excuse for NUFC behaving like West Brom, Blackburn, Bolton etc. The club is not progressing, it will NEVER match the league positions, in the same league, against the same competitors, with the same club as the previous regime, because your man will NOT rise to the challenge and attempt it, with one of the biggest clubs in europe, courtesy of the previous regime, who took over a club with one foot in the 3rd division, light years inferior in every way to the club that your man Ashley found.

 

Who was the bankrolled club the last time we were in the Champions League?

 

We had Arsenal and Man Utd who were far better than us and financed their teams by spending the profits the club made, now we've got those 2 + Spurs who operate the same as well as Man City, Chelsea and Liverpool who have all been bankrolled recently, even clubs like Villa and Sunderland have been bankrolled in recent years spending more money in a season than we ever have.

 

I don't think there's much difference in the quality of players we've got now to the Newcastle, Liverpool and Chelsea teams of 2004, it's just everyone else up there has improved far more in that time.

Edited January 24, 2012 by Baggio

[LeazesMag 0]

We are a selling club, why do all these people keep defending Ashley. Its getting nearly as bad as some of the twats on newcastle online on here!

 

We will acheive nothing with Ashley, its about survival in the top division and make as much money as possible. He has got lucky so far, he will not build on that luck by keeping his best players and investing in further quality players to make the next step and challenge for a top 4 place. He is a still a cunt as far as im concerned. How can people still defend a person who lied to the fans, lied to kevin keegan, a living legend of this club and changed the name of our ground for tacky advertising. Disgraceful

We're a selling club because ashley lied to the fans, lied to Keegan and changed the name of the ground? That's what you have basically just argued.

 

I do agree that Ashley could be more ambitious but as that is limited to about £10 to £15m of spending thats no guarantee of moving us even one position up the league.

 

People like you are not able to look at things objectively so you accuse people of 'defending ashley' when the reality is just that people think the club has made progress on the pitch. That's a hard nose impartial 'analysis' that can be made without an opinion on the owner. When people are arguing this maybe it comes over to you as defending ashley but I don't think that is the case for most people, I think it's just accepting the evidence of their eyes so far. I respect your view that the outlook is negative but in the interests of fairness it should be accepted by you and others that it's just a prediction for now with evidence running against it currently.

 

 

 

For some reason, the likes of Leazes and Brummiemag assume that even the slightest praise of the Ashley regime means we all love Mike and think the club is looking forward to decades of champions league football.

 

Truth is, most are just applauding that for a change, we've bought wisely, sold players at the right time and replaced them with equal, or better quality whilst enjoying the improved fortunes on the pitch.

 

better quality than who ? Shearer, Bellamy, Rob Lee, Solano, Robert, Venison, Beresford, Speed [RIP].......etc etc, you know, players who achieved Champions league football and european qualification over 15 years more than everybody but 4 other clubs ? When have the current players did this, to prove your claims ? Have I blinked and missed it ?

[LeazesMag 0]

Talking about when we were in the Champions League as a benchmark to match what the previous lot done is absolutely pointless, we're in a completely different era of football now.

 

Back then it was the era of local businessmen owning clubs, it was an era when most clubs attempted to live within their means and the one's that didn't either went under like Leeds or came close to it like Chelsea, football was so much simpler then for us as it was a case of employ a different manager and the chance of getting into the top 4 was back on since it was a small pool of teams at the top and apart from Man Utd and Arsenal the rest of the teams were nothing special.

 

Then Abramovich came and bought Chelsea and everything changed, I honestly think we would have qualified for the CL the year we came 5th if he hadn't bought them and the more big investors that came in looking to throw money about the more we struggled, to be fair to Shepherd he did take the gamble but it was with the wrong managed and it failed spectacularly and it was a position I didn't see him ever recovering from, the financial hole was too deep.

 

Now look at the league compared to back then, we've got a team like Liverpool spending £100 million and they can't get top 4, I think Man City spent over £300 million before getting there and for a club without outside investment it's practically impossible.

 

Does anyone really think we would have got back into the CL in this current era with Hall and Shepherd still owning the club? Not a fucking chance is what I think.

 

We are superior now on and off the pitch compared to how the club was when Ashley took charge, I don't think there is anyone that can doubt that and while it has taken time to turn the club around I don't think people can have any complaints about the direction we're going in.

 

I've answered this in the other thread. There is ManU and 2 bankrolled clubs. That is all. The old regime has ManU and one bankrolled club. They challenged them because they were football men and knew the club, your man isn't and won't challenge ManU and the 2 bankrolled clubs. This is no excuse for NUFC behaving like West Brom, Blackburn, Bolton etc. The club is not progressing, it will NEVER match the league positions, in the same league, against the same competitors, with the same club as the previous regime, because your man will NOT rise to the challenge and attempt it, with one of the biggest clubs in europe, courtesy of the previous regime, who took over a club with one foot in the 3rd division, light years inferior in every way to the club that your man Ashley found.

 

Who was the bankrolled club the last time we were in the Champions League?

 

We had Arsenal and Man Utd who were far better than us and financed their teams by spending the profits the club made, now we've got those 2 + Spurs who make operate the same as well as Man City, Chelsea and Liverpool who have all been bankrolled recently, even clubs like Villa and Sunderland have been bankrolled in recent years spending more money in a season than we ever have.

 

I don't think there's much difference in the quality of players we've got now to the Newcastle, Liverpool and Chelsea teams of 2004, it's just everyone else up there has improved far more in that time.

 

in that case, fasten your belt and look forward to the Nou camp and San Siro again. i think not.

[Baggio 0]

We are a selling club, why do all these people keep defending Ashley. Its getting nearly as bad as some of the twats on newcastle online on here!

 

We will acheive nothing with Ashley, its about survival in the top division and make as much money as possible. He has got lucky so far, he will not build on that luck by keeping his best players and investing in further quality players to make the next step and challenge for a top 4 place. He is a still a cunt as far as im concerned. How can people still defend a person who lied to the fans, lied to kevin keegan, a living legend of this club and changed the name of our ground for tacky advertising. Disgraceful

We're a selling club because ashley lied to the fans, lied to Keegan and changed the name of the ground? That's what you have basically just argued.

 

I do agree that Ashley could be more ambitious but as that is limited to about £10 to £15m of spending thats no guarantee of moving us even one position up the league.

 

People like you are not able to look at things objectively so you accuse people of 'defending ashley' when the reality is just that people think the club has made progress on the pitch. That's a hard nose impartial 'analysis' that can be made without an opinion on the owner. When people are arguing this maybe it comes over to you as defending ashley but I don't think that is the case for most people, I think it's just accepting the evidence of their eyes so far. I respect your view that the outlook is negative but in the interests of fairness it should be accepted by you and others that it's just a prediction for now with evidence running against it currently.

 

any progress on the pitch will not be sustained, because the strategy [or "plan", ironically as people said that we played so often in europe despite not having a "plan" ] is not the correct way to sustain it. It's the bigger picture. You are being completely taken in by a few results, they are nothing more than an upper blip, and down to a manager making good from a shit set of cards.

 

It's the way Man Utd and Arsenal have been doing it for years and the way Spurs are doing it too.

[LeazesMag 0]

 

We're a selling club because ashley lied to the fans, lied to Keegan and changed the name of the ground? That's what you have basically just argued.

 

I do agree that Ashley could be more ambitious but as that is limited to about £10 to £15m of spending thats no guarantee of moving us even one position up the league.

 

People like you are not able to look at things objectively so you accuse people of 'defending ashley' when the reality is just that people think the club has made progress on the pitch. That's a hard nose impartial 'analysis' that can be made without an opinion on the owner. When people are arguing this maybe it comes over to you as defending ashley but I don't think that is the case for most people, I think it's just accepting the evidence of their eyes so far. I respect your view that the outlook is negative but in the interests of fairness it should be accepted by you and others that it's just a prediction for now with evidence running against it currently.

 

any progress on the pitch will not be sustained, because the strategy [or "plan", ironically as people said that we played so often in europe despite not having a "plan" ] is not the correct way to sustain it. It's the bigger picture. You are being completely taken in by a few results, they are nothing more than an upper blip, and down to a manager making good from a shit set of cards.

 

It's the way Man Utd and Arsenal have been doing it for years and the way Spurs are doing it too.

 

and its how we did it [ie keep our best players, and back our managers] when we were also in the Champions League. Correct?

[Baggio 0]

Who was the bankrolled club the last time we were in the Champions League?

 

We had Arsenal and Man Utd who were far better than us and financed their teams by spending the profits the club made, now we've got those 2 + Spurs who make operate the same as well as Man City, Chelsea and Liverpool who have all been bankrolled recently, even clubs like Villa and Sunderland have been bankrolled in recent years spending more money in a season than we ever have.

 

I don't think there's much difference in the quality of players we've got now to the Newcastle, Liverpool and Chelsea teams of 2004, it's just everyone else up there has improved far more in that time.

 

in that case, fasten your belt and look forward to the Nou camp and San Siro again. i think not.

 

That doesn't even make any sense.

 

We can't compete with the likes of Chelsea, Man City and Liverpool who have been bankrolled with large amounts recently and we can't compete with Man Utd, Arsenal and Spurs who make good profits that they use to push forward.

 

If you think differently then please tell us how to do it.

[Baggio 0]

It's the way Man Utd and Arsenal have been doing it for years and the way Spurs are doing it too.

 

and its how we did it [ie keep our best players, and back our managers] when we were also in the Champions League. Correct?

 

It's the way we're doing it now too, we're living within our means and pushing forward that way.

 

Yes we've sold a few of our better players in but so have the clubs above, yet we're still moving forward despite this.

[Dr Gloom 21923]

Here's a thought: why don't the mods create a new forum within toontastic entitled "the great Leazesmag debate".

 

Then anyone that wants to do battle with him can do so without cluttering up every thread with the same old nonsense, Leazesmag will have a designated area where can harp on about finishing in the top 3 and having the 14th biggest revenues in football or whatever as much as he likes without irritating the rest of the board and hopefully the main board can get back to threads that don't always end up with an argument about whether Shepherd is a better chairman than Ashley. Honestly, it's killing this place. Something's got to be done.

 

Just a suggestion like.

[ChezGiven 0]

Is it that successful clubs back their managers or that successful managers get backed? Bankrolled clubs back all their managers, sacking unsuccessful ones until the combination of acquired talent and management brings success. Owners and chairman of normal clubs who spend money maybe spend that money because the manager is good enough. Clubs that acquire new managers then throw money at them tend not to be successful, o'neil at villa and dalglish at the wp's being good examples.

 

I say all that because our success was never really about money it was about having decent managers. I think we've got one again and it's interesting that once he proved himself as decent he got some recent backing. We'll see if it nets out by Feb 1st. The point being that finding the right manager is more important than spending money per se.

Edited January 24, 2012 by ChezGiven

[LeazesMag 0]

Who was the bankrolled club the last time we were in the Champions League?

 

We had Arsenal and Man Utd who were far better than us and financed their teams by spending the profits the club made, now we've got those 2 + Spurs who make operate the same as well as Man City, Chelsea and Liverpool who have all been bankrolled recently, even clubs like Villa and Sunderland have been bankrolled in recent years spending more money in a season than we ever have.

 

I don't think there's much difference in the quality of players we've got now to the Newcastle, Liverpool and Chelsea teams of 2004, it's just everyone else up there has improved far more in that time.

 

in that case, fasten your belt and look forward to the Nou camp and San Siro again. i think not.

 

That doesn't even make any sense.

 

We can't compete with the likes of Chelsea, Man City and Liverpool who have been bankrolled with large amounts recently and we can't compete with Man Utd, Arsenal and Spurs who make good profits that they use to push forward.

 

If you think differently then please tell us how to do it.

 

eh ? Where is the Carroll cash ? How have Spurs overtaken us ? We finished above Arsenal and Liverpool on occasions during the past regime ? We also beat one of the bankrolled clubs ? How did they do all this, by sellng their best players and not backing their manager, or keeping their best players and backing their managers ?

[Guest CabayeAye]

If the club had carried on spending like we were in Shepherd's tenure we'd be like Leeds.

 

The team that went down included £17m Owen, £10m Colo, £7m Enrique, £7m Barton, and many other very expensive players.

 

The bottom line is we have been improving steadily for the last three years, and it will only take 4-5 good signing in the Tiote/Ba/Santon mould to make us into a permanent European club.

 

Contrast that with Liverpool who have spent an utter fortune on shit.

 

Oh, and over halfway through the season and we're above them too.

 

Net transfer profit/expenditure means absolutely fuck all. A goal scored by a free transfer counts just as much as one scored by a £35m man. It's where you finish in the league/cups that counts.

 

But hey, you keep peddling out the same unsubstantiated argument with zero facts to back it up, Leazes, if you say it enough, someone might believe you!

[LeazesMag 0]

Here's a thought: why don't the mods create a new forum within toontastic entitled "the great Leazesmag debate".

 

Then anyone that wants to do battle with him can do so without cluttering up every thread with the same old nonsense, Leazesmag will have a designated area where can harp on about finishing in the top 3 and having the 14th biggest revenues in football or whatever as much as he likes without irritating the rest of the board and hopefully the main board can get back to threads that don't always end up with an argument about whether Shepherd is a better chairman than Ashley. Honestly, it's killing this place. Something's got to be done.

 

Just a suggestion like.

 

are you still moaning on and repeating what I told you years ago, despite disagreeing with me massively at the time ?

[Christmas Tree 4725]

 

copyright HF

[LeazesMag 0]

If the club had carried on spending like we were in Shepherd's tenure we'd be like Leeds.

 

The team that went down included £17m Owen, £10m Colo, £7m Enrique, £7m Barton, and many other very expensive players.

 

The bottom line is we have been improving steadily for the last three years, and it will only take 4-5 good signing in the Tiote/Ba/Santon mould to make us into a permanent European club.

 

Contrast that with Liverpool who have spent an utter fortune on shit.

 

Oh, and over halfway through the season and we're above them too.

 

Net transfer profit/expenditure means absolutely fuck all. A goal scored by a free transfer counts just as much as one scored by a £35m man. It's where you finish in the league/cups that counts.

 

But hey, you keep peddling out the same unsubstantiated argument with zero facts to back it up, Leazes, if you say it enough, someone might believe you!

 

 

Priceless.

 

Please tell me how often we finished above Liverpool in the last 50 years and who ran the club when we did it ?

 

Please tell me when you next expect this to happen ?

 

Please tell me how everybody who spends money is "like Leeds" [the biggest laugh of all]

 

Oh, by the way chum, Shepherd never owned the club. Just thought I'd mention it, as you appear to think he did.

Edited January 24, 2012 by LeazesMag

[LeazesMag 0]

Is it that successful clubs back their managers or that successful managers get backed? Bankrolled clubs back all their managers, sacking unsuccessful ones until the combination of acquired talent and management brings success. Owners and chairman of normal clubs who spend money maybe spend that money because the manager is good enough. Clubs that acquire new managers then throw money at them tend not to be successful, o'neil at villa and dalglish at the wp's being good examples.

 

I say all that because our success was never really about money it was about having decent managers. I think we've got one again and it's interesting that once he proved himself as decent he got some recent backing. We'll see if it nets out by Feb 1st. The point being that finding the right manager is more important than spending money per se.

 

successful clubs back their managers.

 

If you don't do that, then you have NO chance ie if you don't take a shot, you don't score a goal, that sort of approach......

[Baggio 0]

So you can't tell us how to do it.

 

As far as I'm aware the majority of the cash from Carroll is still in the club, we were never going to rush out and spend it all in the summer and the club said as much at the time, it's why we've got money to go out and buy Cisse and attempt to sign another defender now.

 

We were miles off Liverpool and Arsenal when Ashley bought the club, a lot further than we are now in fact and as for Spurs, they've been ran fantastically well as a business over recent years to get to where they are now.

[LeazesMag 0]

It's the way Man Utd and Arsenal have been doing it for years and the way Spurs are doing it too.

 

and its how we did it [ie keep our best players, and back our managers] when we were also in the Champions League. Correct?

 

It's the way we're doing it now too, we're living within our means and pushing forward that way.

 

Yes we've sold a few of our better players in but so have the clubs above, yet we're still moving forward despite this.

 

why don't you answer brummiemag, he asks if you think Mike Ashley will reach out for the final players ie the "trophy players" or sit back looking upwards at them when we start to go downwards again ?

 

I know the answer to that one, so how come you don't ?

[LeazesMag 0]

So you can't tell us how to do it.

 

As far as I'm aware the majority of the cash from Carroll is still in the club, we were never going to rush out and spend it all in the summer and the club said as much at the time, it's why we've got money to go out and buy Cisse and attempt to sign another defender now.

 

We were miles off Liverpool and Arsenal when Ashley bought the club, a lot further than we are now in fact and as for Spurs, they've been ran fantastically well as a business over recent years to get to where they are now.

 

how were we run when we jumped from one foot in the 3rd division, with a cow shed of a stadium, half full, and not able to float for 1.25m quid and ended up one of the biggest clubs in europe with one of the best grounds, full every game, and the 14th biggest revenues in football ?