Newcastle may delay striker signing until summer

[Howay 12496]

A striker and a Centre Back are a must in this window, could do with a full back and a winger (to replace Obertan seeing as Ben Arfa wont be playing there).

If the forward and CB aren't signed it's just yet another confirmation of what we already expect MA to be.

 

we are missing Steven Taylor. Unfortunately, a lot of people don't rate him.

Agreed, I like Taylor particularly alongside Colocinni but Williamson/Perch are both poor back up and who knows when Taylor will be back with the injury he has.

[The Fish 10674]

I hope we can win a trophy [even the League Cup, and I am inside the stadium at the time] before I can't go to games anymore or even worse kick the bucket, but I see progress as a longer term thing than a short blip lasting a year or two. Which is what I think the current run is, which is down to a good manager doing a good job with his hands tied. Under the McKeags, Seymours etc we had the same. Gordon Lee and Arthur Cox did a good job under the same restrictions, and of course Joe Harvey who in the end just couldn't go any more. Anything that happens is short term, and won't last. So I see progress in terms of the setup of the club, and the ability to sustain and build.

 

Sorry if that is not "succinctly" but that's how I see it. The club is in decline, simply because it isn't aiming for the heights befitting it anymore, that we had came to expect, and if it doesn't aim for them it won't reach them, which is why I use the term "decline".

 

Fair enough, taking a longer view, but surely you have to adjust your view of progress given the current situation in football and the current situation of the club? You cannot measure progress against what you'd expect from the club in the 90s?

 

So say, for example, we were to get into the top 7 consistently, is that not progress? Because I truly believe that even with Ashley's modest expenditure and asset selling model, this is something we can achieve.

 

Now, obviously I'd want us to return to the title challenging periods we saw with Keegan and Robson (under H&S), but I just cannot see how that is possible without Bill Gates throwing £250m at us (as Shinawatra and Mansour have thrown at City before they challenged). So while you bemoan the lack of ambition, you must surely see that even if we'd kept Carroll and Enrique, we'd be no closer to Man City or Man U as we are now.

 

To be competitive in League Football (as it stands) needs your club to be bankrolled by billionaires, or your league to be without them. So what exactly do you expect? we unfortunately have to adjust our ambitions as those we held in the 90s simply aren't realistic any more. That's as much a fault of the FA, the Premier League, the Previous ownership as it is the current ownership.

[LeazesMag 0]

I hope we can win a trophy [even the League Cup, and I am inside the stadium at the time] before I can't go to games anymore or even worse kick the bucket, but I see progress as a longer term thing than a short blip lasting a year or two. Which is what I think the current run is, which is down to a good manager doing a good job with his hands tied. Under the McKeags, Seymours etc we had the same. Gordon Lee and Arthur Cox did a good job under the same restrictions, and of course Joe Harvey who in the end just couldn't go any more. Anything that happens is short term, and won't last. So I see progress in terms of the setup of the club, and the ability to sustain and build.

 

Sorry if that is not "succinctly" but that's how I see it. The club is in decline, simply because it isn't aiming for the heights befitting it anymore, that we had came to expect, and if it doesn't aim for them it won't reach them, which is why I use the term "decline".

 

Fair enough, taking a longer view, but surely you have to adjust your view of progress given the current situation in football and the current situation of the club? You cannot measure progress against what you'd expect from the club in the 90s?

 

So say, for example, we were to get into the top 7 consistently, is that not progress? Because I truly believe that even with Ashley's modest expenditure and asset selling model, this is something we can achieve.

 

Now, obviously I'd want us to return to the title challenging periods we saw with Keegan and Robson (under H&S), but I just cannot see how that is possible without Bill Gates throwing £250m at us (as Shinawatra and Mansour have thrown at City before they challenged). So while you bemoan the lack of ambition, you must surely see that even if we'd kept Carroll and Enrique, we'd be no closer to Man City or Man U as we are now.

 

To be competitive in League Football (as it stands) needs your club to be bankrolled by billionaires, or your league to be without them. So what exactly do you expect? we unfortunately have to adjust our ambitions as those we held in the 90s simply aren't realistic any more. That's as much a fault of the FA, the Premier League, the Previous ownership as it is the current ownership.

 

your first 2 paragraphs is exactly the point I make and have been making all this time.

 

Why should you not compare it to the 90's ? Why not ? We are the same club, up against the same opposition, we have the same crowd, the same potential. The only difference is the approach of the different owners, EXACTLY the point I am making. Its the different approach they have CHOSEN.

 

Mike Ashley has CHOSEN to make Newcastle United a selling club, nobody is forcing him to do it, its his choice to sell our best players and pocket the cash.

 

When you say "progress", what are we progressing towards ? My point is there is no goal, we are just treading water, content with survival. Do you call this progress ?

Edited December 22, 2011 by LeazesMag

[The Fish 10674]

I hope we can win a trophy [even the League Cup, and I am inside the stadium at the time] before I can't go to games anymore or even worse kick the bucket, but I see progress as a longer term thing than a short blip lasting a year or two. Which is what I think the current run is, which is down to a good manager doing a good job with his hands tied. Under the McKeags, Seymours etc we had the same. Gordon Lee and Arthur Cox did a good job under the same restrictions, and of course Joe Harvey who in the end just couldn't go any more. Anything that happens is short term, and won't last. So I see progress in terms of the setup of the club, and the ability to sustain and build.

 

Sorry if that is not "succinctly" but that's how I see it. The club is in decline, simply because it isn't aiming for the heights befitting it anymore, that we had came to expect, and if it doesn't aim for them it won't reach them, which is why I use the term "decline".

 

Fair enough, taking a longer view, but surely you have to adjust your view of progress given the current situation in football and the current situation of the club? You cannot measure progress against what you'd expect from the club in the 90s?

 

So say, for example, we were to get into the top 7 consistently, is that not progress? Because I truly believe that even with Ashley's modest expenditure and asset selling model, this is something we can achieve.

 

Now, obviously I'd want us to return to the title challenging periods we saw with Keegan and Robson (under H&S), but I just cannot see how that is possible without Bill Gates throwing £250m at us (as Shinawatra and Mansour have thrown at City before they challenged). So while you bemoan the lack of ambition, you must surely see that even if we'd kept Carroll and Enrique, we'd be no closer to Man City or Man U as we are now.

 

To be competitive in League Football (as it stands) needs your club to be bankrolled by billionaires, or your league to be without them. So what exactly do you expect? we unfortunately have to adjust our ambitions as those we held in the 90s simply aren't realistic any more. That's as much a fault of the FA, the Premier League, the Previous ownership as it is the current ownership.

 

your first 2 paragraphs is exactly the point I make and have been making all this time.

 

Why should you not compare it to the 90's ? Why not ? We are the same club, up against the same opposition, we have the same crowd, the same potential. The only difference is the approach of the different owners, EXACTLY the point I am making. Its the different approach they have CHOSEN.

 

Mike Ashley has CHOSEN to make Newcastle United a selling club, nobody is forcing him to do it, its his choice to sell our best players and pocket the cash.

 

When you say "progress", what are we progressing towards ? My point is there is no goal, we are just treading water, content with survival. Do you call this progress ?

 

We're not the same club and we're not up against the same opposition.

 

Rather than 1 financial behemoth we have three, Man U, City and Chelsea all have insurmountable funds to improve on their already superior squads. We simply cannot compete. While we do have the same crowds, we don't have the same possible outcome. We just don't. To say that we do is madness.

 

Like I said, unless we're bankrolled to the tune of £250m on players over 3 years we cannot compete with Man U, Man City or Chelsea. And unless the landscape of global football changes dramatically even a H&S style speculate to accumulate won't change a damned thing. Spurs and Liverpool are both gambling on Champions League football, whichever team fails (liverpool) will not be making the same investment next season.

 

I want us to be fighting for CL spot, I want us to sign marquee players that dazzle the crowd, I'm just not so naive as to think it's going to happen.

 

Until Ashley fucks off to be replaced by Bill Gates or World Football stops being about money, we're not going to challenge for the title.

[trophyshy 7066]

How about a Zuckerberg For The Toon campaign? He stands to get about $40 bill next year when FB floats.

[Aeris 0]

Wonder if Pardew ever has had his eyes on Berbatov, he's about as unwanted as it can be at Manure, and his contract goes out next summer. His favorite club is Newcastle aswell

Edited December 22, 2011 by Aeris

[TicTacWoe 0]

Doesn't fit with the sort of player we're after these days at all though, ie he's getting old and is on massive money. Also, I reckon Ferguson probably still wants him at least til the end of the season in case of injury to Rooney/Hernandez.

[Aeris 0]

Doesn't fit with the sort of player we're after these days at all though, ie he's getting old and is on massive money. Also, I reckon Ferguson probably still wants him at least til the end of the season in case of injury to Rooney/Hernandez.

 

to be frank aren't they pretty well covered anyhow??? The likes of Owen, Macheda, Diouf, Wellbeck, Young, Bebe isn't enough? I would love to see Berbatov in the team, I don't see how he wouldn't fit, he's pretty all-round - is it because he's creative?... he might be 31 at the end of January, but what a player. Since he's out of contract next summer and really wanting to move on, I'm sure he would take some of his wage cut...his wage is probably not more than co£occini's.

Edited December 22, 2011 by Aeris

[ewerk 30167]

Mike Ashley has CHOSEN to make Newcastle United a selling club, nobody is forcing him to do it, its his choice to sell our best players and pocket the cash.

 

 

Where does the money come from? It's a very simple question.

[Happy Face 29]

Mike Ashley has CHOSEN to make Newcastle United a selling club, nobody is forcing him to do it, its his choice to sell our best players and pocket the cash.

 

 

Where does the money come from? It's a very simple question.

 

It shouldn't be forgotten that Ashley is the 7th wealthiest owner in the league. We're certainly not the 7th biggest spenders though. If he doesn't want to play with the big boys, it's his choice...and we can criticise him for that.

[ewerk 30167]

Mike Ashley has CHOSEN to make Newcastle United a selling club, nobody is forcing him to do it, its his choice to sell our best players and pocket the cash.

 

 

Where does the money come from? It's a very simple question.

 

It shouldn't be forgotten that Ashley is the 7th wealthiest owner in the league. We're certainly not the 7th biggest spenders though. If he doesn't want to play with the big boys, it's his choice...and we can criticise him for that.

 

If the figures are to be believed then the club has cost him over a quarter of his fortune. That's a lot for anyone.

 

But I agree with what you say, no one forced him into buying us.

[Dr Gloom 21760]

A striker and a Centre Back are a must in this window, could do with a full back and a winger (to replace Obertan seeing as Ben Arfa wont be playing there).

If the forward and CB aren't signed it's just yet another confirmation of what we already expect MA to be.

 

we are missing Steven Taylor. Unfortunately, a lot of people don't rate him.

Agreed, I like Taylor particularly alongside Colocinni but Williamson/Perch are both poor back up and who knows when Taylor will be back with the injury he has.

 

Williamson could do a job I reckon. He's not the quickest but he looked decent alongside colo last season and kept Taylor out of the side for long periods. I think Taylor's been brilliant for us this season but the problem isn't a fit Williamson offering cover - its James perch being anywhere near the side.

[Dr Gloom 21760]

Mike Ashley has CHOSEN to make Newcastle United a selling club, nobody is forcing him to do it, its his choice to sell our best players and pocket the cash.

 

 

Where does the money come from? It's a very simple question.

 

 

It shouldn't be forgotten that Ashley is the 7th wealthiest owner in the league. We're certainly not the 7th biggest spenders though. If he doesn't want to play with the big boys, it's his choice...and we can criticise him for that.

 

If the figures are to be believed then the club has cost him over a quarter of his fortune. That's a lot for anyone.

 

But I agree with what you say, no one forced him into buying us.

 

He's definitely got the resources to invest more in the playing staff. Regrettably his heart isn't in it anymore. As tedious as Leazesmag is, he's right when we says Ashley has turned us back into a selling club. He doesn't care enough about the club succeeding now to reverse the transfer policy of recent years.

[ewerk 30167]

Did he ever put huge amounts of money into transfers? I don't think it's a recent change of heart.

 

Though he was happy to hand out big contracts in the early days.

Edited December 22, 2011 by ewerk

[Dr Gloom 21760]

Did he ever put huge amounts of money into transfers? I don't think it's a recent change of heart.

 

Though he was happy to hand out big contracts in the early days.

 

First season in he forked out 10m on Colo. I don't think we've spent more than half that in the last couple of years, despite the 35m profit floating around the club account. Who is our most expensive signing since coming back up - 4m on Cabaye was it? The rest have mainly been freebies or bargains.

 

Not saying there's anything wrong with bargain hunting when it works. But we're still woefully short in most areas of the squad. It would only have taken moderate investment by Ashley to make all areas of the squad competitive. He's not arsed though is he? He'd rather not lose more of his own money.

 

 

[jaythesouthernmag 0]

How many clubs are owned by individuals who bankroll them with their own cash?? Genuine question

[ewerk 30167]

Did he ever put huge amounts of money into transfers? I don't think it's a recent change of heart.

 

Though he was happy to hand out big contracts in the early days.

 

First season in he forked out 10m on Colo. I don't think we've spent more than half that in the last couple of years, despite the 35m profit floating around the club account. Who is our most expensive signing since coming back up - 4m on Cabaye was it? The rest have mainly been freebies or bargains.

 

Not saying there's anything wrong with bargain hunting when it works. But we're still woefully short in most areas of the squad. It would only have taken moderate investment by Ashley to make all areas of the squad competitive. He's not arsed though is he? He'd rather not lose more of his own money.

 

I know we had a net spend in that window but we also took in decent fees for Parker and Dyer that summer.

 

My initial point to Leazes was that he is not pocketing the money himself, the club is not currently sitting on a mountain of cash. If we spend money then it is going to have to come from Ashley and at the moment there are very few PL owners putting in huge amounts of their own money at the moment.

[Guest alex]

Doesn't this just come back to the same old point I've been making for what seems like ages. We don't expect Chelsea / Man City levels of investment, we just want a happy medium between that and what we're getting. I say 'we' because I'm fairly certain that fits in with how most fans feel.

[LeazesMag 0]

Mike Ashley has CHOSEN to make Newcastle United a selling club, nobody is forcing him to do it, its his choice to sell our best players and pocket the cash.

 

 

Where does the money come from? It's a very simple question.

 

what happened to the 14th biggest revenues in football ? Thats a very simple question, isn't it ?

 

I've got to say, again, that as you appear to have little perception of the size and potential of NUFC, answering these sort of questions is becoming very tedious, if you continue to believe we should behave like clubs such as Bolton and Blackburn do, and compete at their levels and using their rules.

[LeazesMag 0]

Doesn't this just come back to the same old point I've been making for what seems like ages. We don't expect Chelsea / Man City levels of investment, we just want a happy medium between that and what we're getting. I say 'we' because I'm fairly certain that fits in with how most fans feel.

 

Exactly, and I've lost count of the number of posters, who have little understand and comprehension of the size of NUFC, throwing this very question at me. I'll say for the hundredth time, YOU WILL NEVER FIND A POST FROM ME ANYWHERE, ANYTIME, SAYING WE SHOULD BE COMPETING AT THE LEVELS OF CHELSEA AND MAN CITY, but you WILL find hundreds of posts saying we should be keeping our best players and attempting to get as close as possible, unlike selling them and pocketing the cash such as 2nd rate clubs that are half our size.

[ewerk 30167]

Mike Ashley has CHOSEN to make Newcastle United a selling club, nobody is forcing him to do it, its his choice to sell our best players and pocket the cash.

 

 

Where does the money come from? It's a very simple question.

 

what happened to the 14th biggest revenues in football ? Thats a very simple question, isn't it ?

 

I've got to say, again, that as you appear to have little perception of the size and potential of NUFC, answering these sort of questions is becoming very tedious, if you continue to believe we should behave like clubs such as Bolton and Blackburn do, and compete at their levels and using their rules.

 

You can't use revenue as an argument without looking at costs. We have been losing money for a long time now and cash has been put into the club to make up that shortfall.

 

The word coming out of the club is that we should be coming close to breaking even. Ashley has previously spoken of his willingness to put in £25 million per year, he has been doing that and more in the past. If he continues to do that while the club's operations are running at break even then that could make a big difference to the team.

 

So he may chose to continue investing in the club and growing the team or he may decide to reduce his input and feel that he has done enough already and that the club should be self-sufficient. My guess is that it will be the latter.

[LeazesMag 0]

Did he ever put huge amounts of money into transfers? I don't think it's a recent change of heart.

 

Though he was happy to hand out big contracts in the early days.

 

First season in he forked out 10m on Colo. I don't think we've spent more than half that in the last couple of years, despite the 35m profit floating around the club account. Who is our most expensive signing since coming back up - 4m on Cabaye was it? The rest have mainly been freebies or bargains.

 

Not saying there's anything wrong with bargain hunting when it works. But we're still woefully short in most areas of the squad. It would only have taken moderate investment by Ashley to make all areas of the squad competitive. He's not arsed though is he? He'd rather not lose more of his own money.

 

I know we had a net spend in that window but we also took in decent fees for Parker and Dyer that summer.

 

My initial point to Leazes was that he is not pocketing the money himself, the club is not currently sitting on a mountain of cash. If we spend money then it is going to have to come from Ashley and at the moment there are very few PL owners putting in huge amounts of their own money at the moment.

 

according to Toonpack, the financial whizz kid who doesn't put cash into the club [therefore has a different perspective of it all, which is what I pointed out in my Ashley apologists thread] we were "cash rich" in the summer, hence his assertion that he would "re-assess" the intentions of our owner. Basically, he thought he was going to show more ambitions. But I knew he wouldn't, and he never will. He will pocket the cash and use the club as an advertising medium to sit alongside Sports direct as a premiership club as long as he owns it. This is why he bought the club, and he is happy just to be a premiership club, and will sell a player a season rather than go for the money to be made in europe, because it is far easier and less risky.

 

I'm not explaining this again to you.

[ewerk 30167]

unlike selling them and pocketing the cash such as 2nd rate clubs that are half our size.

 

What cash has been pocketed?

[LeazesMag 0]

Mike Ashley has CHOSEN to make Newcastle United a selling club, nobody is forcing him to do it, its his choice to sell our best players and pocket the cash.

 

 

Where does the money come from? It's a very simple question.

 

what happened to the 14th biggest revenues in football ? Thats a very simple question, isn't it ?

 

I've got to say, again, that as you appear to have little perception of the size and potential of NUFC, answering these sort of questions is becoming very tedious, if you continue to believe we should behave like clubs such as Bolton and Blackburn do, and compete at their levels and using their rules.

 

You can't use revenue as an argument without looking at costs. We have been losing money for a long time now and cash has been put into the club to make up that shortfall.

 

The word coming out of the club is that we should be coming close to breaking even. Ashley has previously spoken of his willingness to put in £25 million per year, he has been doing that and more in the past. If he continues to do that while the club's operations are running at break even then that could make a big difference to the team.

 

So he may chose to continue investing in the club and growing the team or he may decide to reduce his input and feel that he has done enough already and that the club should be self-sufficient. My guess is that it will be the latter.

 

So all he had to do was cut costs and retain revenues ? How do you do that in football ? Should be easy enough for a financial whizz kid like Mike, or as was said, anybody as the old owners were so shit that anybody with half a brain could do better ?

 

Sorry for that, but sometimes its necessary. Maybe you could tell us ? 14th in revenues ? Where did it all go wrong, how come we are selling our best players with the 14th biggest revenues in football and how come the money is disappearing in the way it is ?

[LeazesMag 0]

unlike selling them and pocketing the cash such as 2nd rate clubs that are half our size.

 

What cash has been pocketed?

 

I've explained a thousand times. I'm fed up of your footballing ignorance.

Edited December 22, 2011 by LeazesMag