Imagine the uproar

[Guest alex]

Like it

102780[/snapback]

 

To be fair.....when Leazes name goes into itallics and you know he's responding with a fucking massive critique, I can well imagine him with Jack Nicholson's expression at the time.

102783[/snapback]

Here's Johnny tbh

[LeazesMag 0]

I see another big city club with a chairman maximising its resources more than Fred

 

PEARCE IN £20M PLEA FOR BIG NAME PLAYERS

By Steve Bates

STUART PEARCE will ask his Manchester City paymasters for £20 million this summer - to fund the import of five top players.

 

The Blues boss knows it'll help his cause if City can sneak into a UEFA Cup place before the season ends - and that's why he'll be looking for a win over doomed Sunderland today.

 

"The way the kids have come in this season has given us a big lift," said Pearce last night, "but I really need another four or five top players to have a real bash at it next season.

 

"I still need to bring in four or probably five top line additions to the squad to address the situation and that's going to cost £20 million or more. Qualifying for Europe would help our cause.

 

"I might be able to be cute again and bring in a player like Andy Cole on a Bosman - but it's getting harder to do that." Cole will be missing again as he recovers from a knee injury - and that means another outing for £6million striker Georgios Samaras, who scored twice on his full debut for Greece against Kazakhstan.

 

"We are delighted for him that he's got these goals for his country in midweek but he now has to deliver for us."

 

Quite a lot of people will be screaming blue murder if he doesn't find another 16m to replace Shearer, as they think Owen's a replacement for 4.5m Bellamy .......

 

Not to even mention Robert and 9.5m man replacement Luque

 

 

EEEHHH lad haven't those Man City fans got great directors !!!

Edited March 5, 2006 by LeazesMag

[Dr Gloom 22188]

Obsessed

101162[/snapback]

 

No, I'm not Alex, I'm realistic enough to be happy enough with Fred not to rabbit on about replacing him all the time

101164[/snapback]

 

What's the relevance of Doug Ellis to NUFC? How much money do Villa make compared to us? Why don't you compare our spending to comparable clubs like Liverpool?

 

I think you are beginning to sound obsessed on this one Leazes. Shepherd takes much more money out of the club than he should - this is something every expert accountant seems to agree on. He also reinvests money in buying players, but this is NOT HIS MONEY. It's the proceeds that he gets from fleecing the fans, something he openly admits to. Yet we put up with it because we love our club, it's that simple.

 

Comparing Shepherd to chairmen of poorer clubs or NUFC chairmen from a bygone age proves nothing and certainly does not make up for Shepherds gross incompetence of the past few years which have cost us a fortune.

101170[/snapback]

 

end of discussion tbh. no point in trawling through the other pages after this post because it answers everything.

[Howaythelads 0]

Obsessed

101162[/snapback]

 

No, I'm not Alex, I'm realistic enough to be happy enough with Fred not to rabbit on about replacing him all the time

101164[/snapback]

 

What's the relevance of Doug Ellis to NUFC? How much money do Villa make compared to us? Why don't you compare our spending to comparable clubs like Liverpool?

 

I think you are beginning to sound obsessed on this one Leazes. Shepherd takes much more money out of the club than he should - this is something every expert accountant seems to agree on. He also reinvests money in buying players, but this is NOT HIS MONEY. It's the proceeds that he gets from fleecing the fans, something he openly admits to. Yet we put up with it because we love our club, it's that simple.

 

Comparing Shepherd to chairmen of poorer clubs or NUFC chairmen from a bygone age proves nothing and certainly does not make up for Shepherds gross incompetence of the past few years which have cost us a fortune.

101170[/snapback]

 

end of discussion tbh. no point in trawling through the other pages after this post because it answers everything.

103399[/snapback]

 

For anyone who has a grasp of the big picture, the post doesn't answer much, tbh.

Edited March 5, 2006 by Howaythelads

[LeazesMag 0]

Obsessed

101162[/snapback]

 

No, I'm not Alex, I'm realistic enough to be happy enough with Fred not to rabbit on about replacing him all the time

101164[/snapback]

 

What's the relevance of Doug Ellis to NUFC? How much money do Villa make compared to us? Why don't you compare our spending to comparable clubs like Liverpool?

 

I think you are beginning to sound obsessed on this one Leazes. Shepherd takes much more money out of the club than he should - this is something every expert accountant seems to agree on. He also reinvests money in buying players, but this is NOT HIS MONEY. It's the proceeds that he gets from fleecing the fans, something he openly admits to. Yet we put up with it because we love our club, it's that simple.

 

Comparing Shepherd to chairmen of poorer clubs or NUFC chairmen from a bygone age proves nothing and certainly does not make up for Shepherds gross incompetence of the past few years which have cost us a fortune.

101170[/snapback]

 

end of discussion tbh. no point in trawling through the other pages after this post because it answers everything.

103399[/snapback]

 

It doesn't even respond to the FACT that we are one of the best run clubs in the country, with one of the highest turnovers, as there are lots of other big city clubs that could match us and beat us, because they have done in the past. So, the question is, why don't they now ? And who in all football clubs is responsible for running this business side of the company.

 

All these clubs have been mentioned in this thread by me, the post does not respond in any way whatsoever to that FACT.

 

I'm not holding my breath for the correct factual answer to this, simply because it doesn't suit the claims that some of you are making.

Edited March 5, 2006 by LeazesMag

[peasepud 59]

Obsessed

101162[/snapback]

 

No, I'm not Alex, I'm realistic enough to be happy enough with Fred not to rabbit on about replacing him all the time

101164[/snapback]

 

What's the relevance of Doug Ellis to NUFC? How much money do Villa make compared to us? Why don't you compare our spending to comparable clubs like Liverpool?

 

I think you are beginning to sound obsessed on this one Leazes. Shepherd takes much more money out of the club than he should - this is something every expert accountant seems to agree on. He also reinvests money in buying players, but this is NOT HIS MONEY. It's the proceeds that he gets from fleecing the fans, something he openly admits to. Yet we put up with it because we love our club, it's that simple.

 

Comparing Shepherd to chairmen of poorer clubs or NUFC chairmen from a bygone age proves nothing and certainly does not make up for Shepherds gross incompetence of the past few years which have cost us a fortune.

101170[/snapback]

 

end of discussion tbh. no point in trawling through the other pages after this post because it answers everything.

103399[/snapback]

 

It doesn't even respond to the FACT that we are one of the best run clubs in the country, with one of the highest turnovers, as there are lots of other big city clubs that could match us and beat us, because they have done in the past. So, the question is, why don't they now ? And who in all football clubs is responsible for running this business side of the company.

 

All these clubs have been mentioned in this thread by me, the post does not respond in any way whatsoever to that FACT.

 

I'm not holding my breath for the correct factual answer to this, simply because it doesn't suit the claims that some of you are making.

103431[/snapback]

 

thing you seem to miss (and Im not necessarily a critic of Fatty Fred, I dont think hes the worst chairman by a long shot) is that we'd have that turnover regardless of who was in the hot seat.

 

Think about it, 3 months ago we were shit and facing relegation yet 50k+ turned up every game, we still sold hundreds of thousands of home and away shirts before Owen appeared, in fact Id wager that the purchase of Owen didnt result in a huge jump in shirt sales, this isnt Real Madrid and he aint David Beckham so the young schoolgirls didnt rush out to grab one.

 

I cant think of anything other than handing over money from the clubs purse which Fred has done to make us into a world class club.

 

Over to you, convince me, give me three things Fred has done which have greatly benefitted NUFC.

[LeazesMag 0]

Obsessed

101162[/snapback]

 

No, I'm not Alex, I'm realistic enough to be happy enough with Fred not to rabbit on about replacing him all the time

101164[/snapback]

 

What's the relevance of Doug Ellis to NUFC? How much money do Villa make compared to us? Why don't you compare our spending to comparable clubs like Liverpool?

 

I think you are beginning to sound obsessed on this one Leazes. Shepherd takes much more money out of the club than he should - this is something every expert accountant seems to agree on. He also reinvests money in buying players, but this is NOT HIS MONEY. It's the proceeds that he gets from fleecing the fans, something he openly admits to. Yet we put up with it because we love our club, it's that simple.

 

Comparing Shepherd to chairmen of poorer clubs or NUFC chairmen from a bygone age proves nothing and certainly does not make up for Shepherds gross incompetence of the past few years which have cost us a fortune.

101170[/snapback]

 

end of discussion tbh. no point in trawling through the other pages after this post because it answers everything.

103399[/snapback]

 

It doesn't even respond to the FACT that we are one of the best run clubs in the country, with one of the highest turnovers, as there are lots of other big city clubs that could match us and beat us, because they have done in the past. So, the question is, why don't they now ? And who in all football clubs is responsible for running this business side of the company.

 

All these clubs have been mentioned in this thread by me, the post does not respond in any way whatsoever to that FACT.

 

I'm not holding my breath for the correct factual answer to this, simply because it doesn't suit the claims that some of you are making.

103431[/snapback]

 

thing you seem to miss (and Im not necessarily a critic of Fatty Fred, I dont think hes the worst chairman by a long shot) is that we'd have that turnover regardless of who was in the hot seat.

 

no we would not. You can't say that. That is the point of mentioning other clubs who have been successful, the reason they have slipped is in ALL cases they changed their directors for inferior ones who couldn't run the club so well, or lacked the courage to back their managers with big money or were simply just too conservative in their approach. This is the direct opposite to how we were, compared to now, and although SJH was the best, Freddie isn't as good, but he HAS kept the club running with ambition, and we could EASILY end up with someone of that calibre if Fred went.

 

At the end of they day, we are one of the best run clubs in the country, with one of the highest turnovers, ahead of many many clubs who could match us and beat us, but they don't. So who is responsible for this.

 

Think about it, 3 months ago we were shit and facing relegation yet 50k+ turned up every game, we still sold hundreds of thousands of home and away shirts before Owen appeared, in fact Id wager that the purchase of Owen didnt result in a huge jump in shirt sales, this isnt Real Madrid and he aint David Beckham so the young schoolgirls didnt rush out to grab one.

 

Before the Halls and Shepherd we were getting 15,000 crowds. Where were all the missing fans then ? Where are all the missing fans at the other big clubs who could match us and beat us, and why don't they ?

 

I cant think of anything other than handing over money from the clubs purse which Fred has done to make us into a world class club.

 

Over to you, convince me,  give me three things Fred has done which have greatly benefitted NUFC.

103433[/snapback]

From a business point of view.

 

1. Building the training academy.

 

2. Expanding the ground.

 

And from a playing point of view.

 

3. Continue to fill the ground and keep us ahead of most of our rivals in the turnover, financial stakes and therefore ability to buy big players.

 

These 3 things are what the chairman/directors are for PP !!!

 

What do you think of my man city post, and the Villa post for instance .....

[peasepud 59]

From a business point of view.

 

1. Building the training academy.

 

2. Expanding the ground.

 

And from a playing point of view.

 

3. Continue to fill the ground and keep us ahead of most of our rivals in the turnover, financial stakes and therefore ability to buy big players.

 

These 3 things are what the chairman/directors are for PP !!!

 

What do you think of my man city post, and the Villa post for instance .....

103436[/snapback]

 

How can the chairman take the credit for number 3? The 3rd one is down to one of two possibilities,

 

1. The team are fantastic and making people come to see them by playing fabulously attractive football, week in week out.

 

or 2. The fans love the club and would turn up regardless.

 

I know which camp Im in on that one, I havent gone to games this season because of point 1 but because I'd go watch them kick a tin can about if it was on offer. I've sat at games and thought "what the hell am I doing here? this is depressing" then still turned up the following week.

 

 

Using the argument though that many years ago we were shite and got only 15k doesnt cut it, that was 15k out of 30 odd thousand capacity, that was in the days when you stood in the cold surrounded by heedcases (happy days), the days when the catering consisted of a Keegans hotdog stall stood at the back of the corner. The days when women and children didnt go. More importantly though those were the days when most people paid on the gate and therefore could think "sod it I cant be arsed, I'll have another pint instead" now most people have season tickets and no matter how shite we are will still turn up because its paid for.

 

The end of those days isnt down to Shepherd or even Hall, its down to people dying in Bradford and Hillsbrough, its down to Sky TV glamourising the game, its even down to the likes of *shudder* Beckham marrying miserable spice.

 

Yes we are better run than Villa and the Makems but face it most people could run a football club better than Ellis or Murray, it doesnt take a genius to see where they are going wrong. The likes of Man City though are different, Ive seen nothing that shows their chairman as being shite, yes they have less cash but thats down to the rather large neighbours they have. You quote the expansion of the ground as a reason Shepherd is good then state hes better than Citys? City have moved to a whole new ground so surely on that basis their chairman is ahead of Shepherd? City have employed a previous England manager (Keegan) and what looks like the next England manager (Pearce). What did ours do? Souness.

 

When Shepherd hands money over for a new player it is not his money it is the clubs, its the plcs, the shareholders, its there in the books to be used for the promotion of the club. As Ive stated many many time before my football memory is crap but wasnt it Shepherd in charge when Shearer got injured and we still sold Ferdinand because it was nearing the end of the financial year? where was his vision and "best for the club" then?

[LeazesMag 0]

From a business point of view.

 

1. Building the training academy.

 

2. Expanding the ground.

 

And from a playing point of view.

 

3. Continue to fill the ground and keep us ahead of most of our rivals in the turnover, financial stakes and therefore ability to buy big players.

 

These 3 things are what the chairman/directors are for PP !!!

 

What do you think of my man city post, and the Villa post for instance .....

103436[/snapback]

 

How can the chairman take the credit for number 3? The 3rd one is down to one of two possibilities,

 

1. The team are fantastic and making people come to see them by playing fabulously attractive football, week in week out.

 

or 2. The fans love the club and would turn up regardless.

 

The board as a whole take the credit for number 3, as they are responsible for all business decisions made by the club, so good or bad Fred is only the figurehead for the board, probably with the casting vote if needed.

 

As I've said mate the fans don't turn up regardless, they didn't turn up regardless for a decade and a half at least until the Halls and Shepherd came in, now this is a FACT.

 

I know which camp Im in on that one, I havent gone to games this season because of point 1 but because I'd go watch them kick a tin can about if it was on offer. I've sat at games and thought "what the hell am I doing here? this is depressing" then still turned up the following week.

 

 

Using the argument though that many years ago we were shite and got only 15k doesnt cut it, that was 15k out of 30 odd thousand capacity, that was in the days when you stood in the cold surrounded by heedcases (happy days), the days when the catering consisted of a Keegans hotdog stall stood at the back of the corner. The days when women and children didnt go. More importantly though those were the days when most people paid on the gate and therefore could think "sod it I cant be arsed, I'll have another pint instead" now most people have season tickets and no matter how shite we are will still turn up because its paid for.

 

It wasn't always 15k out of 30k capacity, and even so it was still only 15k !!!!

 

They didn't go because the team was shite and the club was run like a corner shop, selling our best players and scouting round the lower divisions, for players and managers had nowt to do with the catering ... and if people wanted season tickets there were plenty available but there was simply no demand, the reason there is a season ticket policy only is because there is a demand. Now you mention it, why don't all the other clubs have the same demand for season tickets as we do ?????

 

The end of those days isnt down to Shepherd or even Hall, its down to people dying in Bradford and Hillsbrough, its down to Sky TV glamourising the game, its even down to the likes of *shudder* Beckham marrying miserable spice.

 

true, but its the same for everybody, the point being we are doing it better than the vast majority of other big city clubs who could all be doing it like us, so why don't they ?

 

At the end of the day, the club is being run better than the vast majority of a lot of clubs who could all match us and beat us, as they have done before, and the people responsible for the good running of the club and the level of competition we live in transfer wise are the directors of the club.

 

Yes we are better run than Villa and the Makems but face it most people could run a football club better than Ellis or Murray, it doesnt take a genius to see where they are going wrong. The likes of Man City though are different, Ive seen nothing that shows their chairman as being shite, yes they have less cash but thats down to the rather large neighbours they have. You quote the expansion of the ground as a reason Shepherd is good then state hes better than Citys? City have moved to a whole new ground so surely on that basis their chairman is ahead of Shepherd? City have employed a previous England manager (Keegan) and what looks like the next England manager (Pearce). What did ours do? Souness.

 

Man City moved to a new stadium because the council wanted one built to host the games and helped and approved it, ours stood in the way of the club and stopped us from building a new ground. For all the praise Pearce is getting I don't see anything that suggests they are any better off than they were under Keegan, in fact in my opinion based on their results they are no better off at all, so what makes Pearce an England manager, he is only using the players Keegan left him, and has proved absolutely nothing. In fact all their best players are still players Keegan brough to the club, not Pearce. And I think if Keegan was still there they would be doing better than under Pearce as he had improved them every season.

 

When Shepherd hands money over for a new player it is not his money it is the clubs, its the plcs, the shareholders, its there in the books to be used for the promotion of the club. As Ive stated many many time before my football memory is crap but wasnt it Shepherd in charge when Shearer got injured and we still sold Ferdinand because it was nearing the end of the financial year? where was his vision and "best for the club" then?

103450[/snapback]

 

It was the flotation of the club which brought about the sale of Ferdinand and the nosing into the books by Mark Corbridge a man from the Stock Exchange who oversaw it, the details of this from Keegans view are all in the first chapter of his book, and he lays the blame firmly at Corbridge. I realise the club decided to go PLC though, however that is a board decision not Shepherds, who wasn't even the major shareholder so couldn't possibly have been his. In this respect I do agree that I would like the club to de-list.

[ChocChip 0]

Regardless of foresight and hindsight, which of the 4 managers FS has appointed do you think has bought success to the club?

 

Just give me a number, not an explanation for his choices, i've read them already.

[Guest alex]

Leazes doesn't duck questions.

[LeazesMag 0]

Regardless of foresight and hindsight, which of the 4 managers FS has appointed do you think has bought success to the club?

 

Just give me a number, not an explanation for his choices, i've read them already.

103520[/snapback]

 

 

Well, comparative success to who? The other big city clubs that we are currently doing better than ? Dalglish, Gullit and Robson all brought more success to the club than the vast majority of other big city clubs, and the vast majority of ex NUFC managers, despite the club having the same resources to play with.

 

What was to stop Leeds, mackems, Man City, Villa, West Ham, Everton, Portsmouth, Southampton, Wolves, Birmingham, Sheffield Wednesday etc from reaching 2 Cup Finals and playing in the Champions League, along with matching our turnover and the buying of England players ? As they have all done once, having been better than us ? As I said earlier, the lack of response to this means you can't answer, the answer being that the absolutely proof of raised standards and expectations the club have which is down to the board of directors, is shown by the amount of people who don't realise it !!!

 

And no amount of silly little interjections from Alex is going to alter that FACT.

Edited March 6, 2006 by LeazesMag

[Guest alex]

Regardless of foresight and hindsight, which of the 4 managers FS has appointed do you think has bought success to the club?

 

Just give me a number, not an explanation for his choices, i've read them already.

103520[/snapback]

 

 

Well, comparative success to who? The other big city clubs that we are currently doing better than ? Dalglish, Gullit and Robson all brought more success to the club than the vast majority of other big city clubs, and the vast majority of ex NUFC managers, despite the club having the same resources to play with.

 

What was to stop Leeds, mackems, Man City, Villa, West Ham, Everton, Portsmouth, Southampton, Wolves, Birmingham, Sheffield Wednesday etc from reaching 2 Cup Finals and playing in the Champions League, along with matching our turnover and the buying of England players ? As they have all done once, having been better than us ? As I said earlier, the lack of response to this means you can't answer, the answer being that the absolutely proof of raised standards and expectations the club have which is down to the board of directors, is shown by the amount of people who don't realise it !!!

 

And no amount of silly little interjections from Alex is going to alter that FACT.

103594[/snapback]

Millwall got to the Cup Final Leazes with a draw not dissimilar to the one Daglish had. The draw we had the following year wasn't much harder so that means very little in my book.

[Guest alex]

And Leeds did play in the Champions League, in case you didn't notice, and they did better than us. What does that prove, exactly?

[LeazesMag 0]

Regardless of foresight and hindsight, which of the 4 managers FS has appointed do you think has bought success to the club?

 

Just give me a number, not an explanation for his choices, i've read them already.

103520[/snapback]

 

 

Well, comparative success to who? The other big city clubs that we are currently doing better than ? Dalglish, Gullit and Robson all brought more success to the club than the vast majority of other big city clubs, and the vast majority of ex NUFC managers, despite the club having the same resources to play with.

 

What was to stop Leeds, mackems, Man City, Villa, West Ham, Everton, Portsmouth, Southampton, Wolves, Birmingham, Sheffield Wednesday etc from reaching 2 Cup Finals and playing in the Champions League, along with matching our turnover and the buying of England players ? As they have all done once, having been better than us ? As I said earlier, the lack of response to this means you can't answer, the answer being that the absolutely proof of raised standards and expectations the club have which is down to the board of directors, is shown by the amount of people who don't realise it !!!

 

And no amount of silly little interjections from Alex is going to alter that FACT.

103594[/snapback]

Millwall got to the Cup Final Leazes with a draw not dissimilar to the one Daglish had. The draw we had the following year wasn't much harder so that means very little in my book.

103599[/snapback]

 

Twice ? And the Champs League ? Have they bought England players, including the number 1 goalscorer ? No. So stop making stupid comparisons.

 

Actually, for the last time, take a look at the likes of Millwall. THAT is what we were like before Shepherd and the Halls, despite having 50k crowds and a huge turnover........

Edited March 6, 2006 by LeazesMag

[Guest alex]

Regardless of foresight and hindsight, which of the 4 managers FS has appointed do you think has bought success to the club?

 

Just give me a number, not an explanation for his choices, i've read them already.

103520[/snapback]

 

 

Well, comparative success to who? The other big city clubs that we are currently doing better than ? Dalglish, Gullit and Robson all brought more success to the club than the vast majority of other big city clubs, and the vast majority of ex NUFC managers, despite the club having the same resources to play with.

 

What was to stop Leeds, mackems, Man City, Villa, West Ham, Everton, Portsmouth, Southampton, Wolves, Birmingham, Sheffield Wednesday etc from reaching 2 Cup Finals and playing in the Champions League, along with matching our turnover and the buying of England players ? As they have all done once, having been better than us ? As I said earlier, the lack of response to this means you can't answer, the answer being that the absolutely proof of raised standards and expectations the club have which is down to the board of directors, is shown by the amount of people who don't realise it !!!

 

And no amount of silly little interjections from Alex is going to alter that FACT.

103594[/snapback]

Millwall got to the Cup Final Leazes with a draw not dissimilar to the one Daglish had. The draw we had the following year wasn't much harder so that means very little in my book.

103599[/snapback]

 

Twice ? And the Champs League ?

103603[/snapback]

So what are you trying to prove exactly? That success on the field is down to Shepherd? In that case, I'll ask you this, how come it was down to Souness when we were doing so badly under him? You can't have it both ways.

[LeazesMag 0]

And Leeds did play in the Champions League, in case you didn't notice, and they did better than us. What does that prove, exactly?

103602[/snapback]

 

It proves how much a shitty chairman can fuck up a club and quickly, as you ask,

rather than keep them on a good keel and hold the same ambitions...

[Guest alex]

And Leeds did play in the Champions League, in case you didn't notice, and they did better than us. What does that prove, exactly?

103602[/snapback]

 

It proves how much a shitty chairman can fuck up a club and quickly, as you ask,

rather than keep them on a good keel and hold the same ambitions...

103607[/snapback]

So Leeds' predicament has nothing to do with the poor signings O'Leary made when Ridsdale released the funds then? It's all down to the chairman is it?

[ChocChip 0]

LM, i'm quite aware that i'm loading these questions in my favour and as you disagree i can understand your reluctance to give me satisfaction on this issue, but to pursue my point further:

 

Do YOU think Dalgleish was a sucees ? YES/NO

 

Do YOU think Gullit was a succes ? YES/NO

 

Do YOU think Robson was a succes ? YES/NO

 

Do YOU think Souness was a success ? YES/NO

 

Ideally i would like you to answer yes or by your own criteria, though of course you quite free to answer in any way you see fit. I just feel a direct yes or no to each of these would be a good spring board for ongoing discussion. I don't need to know your criteria, you don't have to justify your answers imo. If someone thinks a certain way, so be it.

[adios 717]

And Leeds did play in the Champions League, in case you didn't notice, and they did better than us. What does that prove, exactly?

103602[/snapback]

 

It proves how much a shitty chairman can fuck up a club and quickly, as you ask,

rather than keep them on a good keel and hold the same ambitions...

103607[/snapback]

 

Two seasons out of Europe and the financial outlay on players we've already made, plus the outlay we need to make to replace Shearer and replenish the squad, takes us close to Leeds' precarious financial state; and if it doesn't that's because of the number of loyal supporters going to matches. Despite what you and he seem to believe, he didn't create Geordies.

Edited March 6, 2006 by DotBum

[Guest alex]

[Renton 22024]

And Leeds did play in the Champions League, in case you didn't notice, and they did better than us. What does that prove, exactly?

103602[/snapback]

 

It proves how much a shitty chairman can fuck up a club and quickly, as you ask,

rather than keep them on a good keel and hold the same ambitions...

103607[/snapback]

 

Two seasons out of Europe and the financial outlay on players we've already made, plus the outlay we need to make to replace Shearer and replenish the squad, takes us close to Leeds' precarious financial state; and if it doesn't that's because of the number of loyal supporters going to matches. Despite what you and he seem to believe, he didn't create Geordies.

103611[/snapback]

 

Correct. Except I'm hoping it will only be one season out of Europe. However, if he'd acted sooner regarding Souness, we would be in the running for the CL now.

 

I'd like to put Shepherd in charge of a club with a fan base like Millwall (since it came up before) and see how this genius of a chairman would pull that club round.

[ewerk 31230]

And Leeds did play in the Champions League, in case you didn't notice, and they did better than us. What does that prove, exactly?

103602[/snapback]

 

It proves how much a shitty chairman can fuck up a club and quickly, as you ask,

rather than keep them on a good keel and hold the same ambitions...

103607[/snapback]

So Leeds' predicament has nothing to do with the poor signings O'Leary made when Ridsdale released the funds then? It's all down to the chairman is it?

103608[/snapback]

 

It had a lot to do with the ludicrous way the chairman financed O'Leary's signings, which were for a large part good signings, if overpriced but the manager doesn't decide the fee.

[Guest alex]

And Leeds did play in the Champions League, in case you didn't notice, and they did better than us. What does that prove, exactly?

103602[/snapback]

 

It proves how much a shitty chairman can fuck up a club and quickly, as you ask,

rather than keep them on a good keel and hold the same ambitions...

103607[/snapback]

So Leeds' predicament has nothing to do with the poor signings O'Leary made when Ridsdale released the funds then? It's all down to the chairman is it?

103608[/snapback]

 

It had a lot to do with the ludicrous way the chairman financed O'Leary's signings, which were for a large part good signings, if overpriced but the manager doesn't decide the fee.

103620[/snapback]

I wouldn't disagree, it's more an argument between me and Leazes over how he exonerates our chairman of any blame in matters. That said though, I can't think of too many decent signings by DOL at Leeds.

[Renton 22024]

And Leeds did play in the Champions League, in case you didn't notice, and they did better than us. What does that prove, exactly?

103602[/snapback]

 

It proves how much a shitty chairman can fuck up a club and quickly, as you ask,

rather than keep them on a good keel and hold the same ambitions...

103607[/snapback]

So Leeds' predicament has nothing to do with the poor signings O'Leary made when Ridsdale released the funds then? It's all down to the chairman is it?

103608[/snapback]

 

It had a lot to do with the ludicrous way the chairman financed O'Leary's signings, which were for a large part good signings, if overpriced but the manager doesn't decide the fee.

103620[/snapback]

 

Plus he bought them on all sorts of buy now, pay twice as much later type deals. Risdale was an apalling chairman, but I don't see how that is relevant to Shepherd's chairmanship.