NUFC_Mag

Wigan beat us to Victor Moses from palace, £2.5mill

Are they keeping that wage ceiling though? Will be a problem...

Another quality one:

If you want to win, it costs money. Ever heard of the phrase "if you don't buy a ticket you won't win the raffle". Amazed at your dumbness. You sound just like some of the dicks on Newcastle Online Again...so why didn't Leeds win? You sound like the bloke who spends his life savings at the bookies saying "If I don't put a bet on, how can I ever win?" It's a nonsense argument. I've already said several times that you need to spend money but ONLY if that money is spent wisely and ONLY if you can afford the debt. We'd run out of credit and were going nowhere fast....or do you think we were on the verge of greatness before Ashley arrived. Seriously. I want you to answer the specific question. Were we about to win something before Ashley came along? do you bet on the lottery ? How come you don't win every week then ? Your questions are getting dafter by the second. Its piss easy this spending money wisely, in fact its so so soooooooo easy, how doesn't everybody do it By the way, for their spending, you got the 5th most qualified team for europe including the Champions League, the 5th highest average position, an expanded stadium full to capacity every home game [they must have done something right ], world class footballers attracted to the club, 2 FA Cup Finals, and one of the highest turnovers in world football. All on the back of bad appointments and wasting money. Not bad going eh. I don't bet on the lottery. The odds of me losing a pound are loads loads loads loads loads loads higher than me winning a million quid (which btw is statistically more likely to wreck my life than improve it). Now let's suppose for a second I DID play the lottery. When do you think I should stop buying tickets and sort my life out? When I'd lost my wife? My house? My kids? Are you telling us all Leazes that in your opinion there is NEVER a time when you should stop spending money on a possible good outcome? You should be official adviser to Alex Ferguson trotting out such wisdoms as that, I don't think he would agree though. Avoiding the question again Leazes? That's weird. Alex Ferguson wouldn't have bought Boumsong to please Willy McKay. Do you see the point yet? You have to spend money in the right way. If you succeed you got it right, if you fail you got it wrong. That's why it's difficult. ...but you can't say the guy who shot and missed got it right. Shepherd's job wasn't to back shit managers, his job was to hire the right people to get those decisions right. He didn't. he bought Veron though And that Uruguay player [name escapes me] and others. Berbatov isn't setting the place alight either. But NUFC are the only club that make bad buys, in your deluded little world. A FACT by the way, is that only 4 clubs [yes FOUR] qualified for europe more than we did under the Halls and Shepherd, that means only FOUR clubs generally speaking ran their clubs and spent money better over the course of 15 years. Not too bad. Diego Forlan is the Uruguay player, not great for Man Utd but doing well at Athletico. In regard to evaluating the running of a club, should this not be measured relatively speaking? For example, only 4 more teams may have qualified for Europe than we did under Hall and Shepherd, yet clubs with little or no European hopes (even over this 15 year peroid) may have been run "better" than us as they possibly progressed more in regard to stature, position or silverware. Basically, should we not measure how "well" a club is run contextually? for instance, paying attention to the resources at their disposal and what they can and have achieved with them? do you have any idea the state the club was in when they found it in 1992 ? Do you think Everton had a better 15 years than we did because they won the FA Cup in 1995 ? Or do you think Joe Royle is a better manager than Keegan because he won a trophy and KK didn't ie with Everton in 1995? Is this your point ? No...I am not name-dropping. I am merely suggesting that your benchmark of achieving European success as an indicator of a clubs spending credibility is potentially misleading and ignorant of the context of the clubs and how they interpret "success." I also think you have to consider the long-term effects of this spending as well. Rangers may have bought much of the SPL titles in the 90's but this was not sustainable and now they are up shit creek financially. The legacy of transfer dealings should be considered as well as any success or failures they bring in the short run. So ? They capitalised on the potential fanbase - which nobody else has done including the current owner and I will be very surprised if he does - and over the 15 years we were the 5th most qualified team for europe, brought international top quality footballers, filled the ground, expanded the stadium, had the 5th highest average league position and played in 2 FA Cup Finals. Whats your problem apart from the obvious disappointment of coming 2nd on 4 occasions which is hardly the fault of the board ? THIS ... why doesn't he answer I'm not contesting those achievements in anyway, I am also not trying to assert that our progress wasnt impressive. I was merely suggesting that we should evaluate clubs contextually on how well they are run as opposed to measuring them by European credentials which are not a realistic possibility for the majority. I think this is an unfair benchmark. I derived that view from you when you said this: "A FACT by the way, is that only 4 clubs [yes FOUR] qualified for europe more than we did under the Halls and Shepherd, that means only FOUR clubs generally speaking ran their clubs and spent money better over the course of 15 years" Yet when you start mentioning factors such as stature, attendances and the quality of player a club can attract, then I am in agreement with you. I just think the European measure of success is a bit uncomprehensive. I also still stand by the view that transfer dealings should be evaluated in the long run as well as the short run.

Bottled it for their header though...

Even the most pessimistic amongst you must congratulate the team and the manager if not Ashley. Although it is not a time for Euphoria and mindless optimism as the hardest part lies ahead, it is still a big stepping stone that we have passed and I will enjoy the moment bearing cautious consideration upon the future. Yes our opposition has been gash and our football unremarkable, yet 10months ago we would have snapped up this position and hopefully we are on the right way up. Well done boys!

Little preview on BBC right now...

Chelsea's away support was shocking last season at St James*. Man Utd and the Mackems should be good tho

I think we will be ok as well...will be a struggle though.

Certainly wont miss the Football League Show Not looking forward to the relegation battle m'lark though...

That's a good point and he does seem popular throughout the squad. I think the way to play it is, if he has a good WC and someone comes in for him we shouldn't stand in his way. Rip a few from Portsmouth if possible O'Hara (though his price will be inflated) Maybe Yebda? dunno How much do you reckon for O'Hara? quite keen on him. Diamanti is sound technically as well. I think if Colo has a good world cup he could be difficult to hang on to even with his wages.

If you want to win, it costs money. Ever heard of the phrase "if you don't buy a ticket you won't win the raffle". Amazed at your dumbness. You sound just like some of the dicks on Newcastle Online Again...so why didn't Leeds win? You sound like the bloke who spends his life savings at the bookies saying "If I don't put a bet on, how can I ever win?" It's a nonsense argument. I've already said several times that you need to spend money but ONLY if that money is spent wisely and ONLY if you can afford the debt. We'd run out of credit and were going nowhere fast....or do you think we were on the verge of greatness before Ashley arrived. Seriously. I want you to answer the specific question. Were we about to win something before Ashley came along? do you bet on the lottery ? How come you don't win every week then ? Your questions are getting dafter by the second. Its piss easy this spending money wisely, in fact its so so soooooooo easy, how doesn't everybody do it By the way, for their spending, you got the 5th most qualified team for europe including the Champions League, the 5th highest average position, an expanded stadium full to capacity every home game [they must have done something right ], world class footballers attracted to the club, 2 FA Cup Finals, and one of the highest turnovers in world football. All on the back of bad appointments and wasting money. Not bad going eh. I don't bet on the lottery. The odds of me losing a pound are loads loads loads loads loads loads higher than me winning a million quid (which btw is statistically more likely to wreck my life than improve it). Now let's suppose for a second I DID play the lottery. When do you think I should stop buying tickets and sort my life out? When I'd lost my wife? My house? My kids? Are you telling us all Leazes that in your opinion there is NEVER a time when you should stop spending money on a possible good outcome? You should be official adviser to Alex Ferguson trotting out such wisdoms as that, I don't think he would agree though. Avoiding the question again Leazes? That's weird. Alex Ferguson wouldn't have bought Boumsong to please Willy McKay. Do you see the point yet? You have to spend money in the right way. If you succeed you got it right, if you fail you got it wrong. That's why it's difficult. ...but you can't say the guy who shot and missed got it right. Shepherd's job wasn't to back shit managers, his job was to hire the right people to get those decisions right. He didn't. he bought Veron though And that Uruguay player [name escapes me] and others. Berbatov isn't setting the place alight either. But NUFC are the only club that make bad buys, in your deluded little world. A FACT by the way, is that only 4 clubs [yes FOUR] qualified for europe more than we did under the Halls and Shepherd, that means only FOUR clubs generally speaking ran their clubs and spent money better over the course of 15 years. Not too bad. Diego Forlan is the Uruguay player, not great for Man Utd but doing well at Athletico. In regard to evaluating the running of a club, should this not be measured relatively speaking? For example, only 4 more teams may have qualified for Europe than we did under Hall and Shepherd, yet clubs with little or no European hopes (even over this 15 year peroid) may have been run "better" than us as they possibly progressed more in regard to stature, position or silverware. Basically, should we not measure how "well" a club is run contextually? for instance, paying attention to the resources at their disposal and what they can and have achieved with them? do you have any idea the state the club was in when they found it in 1992 ? Do you think Everton had a better 15 years than we did because they won the FA Cup in 1995 ? Or do you think Joe Royle is a better manager than Keegan because he won a trophy and KK didn't ie with Everton in 1995? Is this your point ? No...I am not name-dropping. I am merely suggesting that your benchmark of achieving European success as an indicator of a clubs spending credibility is potentially misleading and ignorant of the context of the clubs and how they interpret "success." I also think you have to consider the long-term effects of this spending as well. Rangers may have bought much of the SPL titles in the 90's but this was not sustainable and now they are up shit creek financially. The legacy of transfer dealings should be considered as well as any success or failures they bring in the short run.

Hence fucking off after 7 minutes? I know it was a minority, but there were sufficient of them leaving to be picked up, so we're not talking about 3 or 4. Oh and that stat has been trotted out in front of me for Blackburn, Portsmouth, and Middlesbrough (off the top of my head), so I'd like to see some empirical data to back it up. Look at their attendances pre-premier league. 12-13kish...

If you want to win, it costs money. Ever heard of the phrase "if you don't buy a ticket you won't win the raffle". Amazed at your dumbness. You sound just like some of the dicks on Newcastle Online Again...so why didn't Leeds win? You sound like the bloke who spends his life savings at the bookies saying "If I don't put a bet on, how can I ever win?" It's a nonsense argument. I've already said several times that you need to spend money but ONLY if that money is spent wisely and ONLY if you can afford the debt. We'd run out of credit and were going nowhere fast....or do you think we were on the verge of greatness before Ashley arrived. Seriously. I want you to answer the specific question. Were we about to win something before Ashley came along? do you bet on the lottery ? How come you don't win every week then ? Your questions are getting dafter by the second. Its piss easy this spending money wisely, in fact its so so soooooooo easy, how doesn't everybody do it By the way, for their spending, you got the 5th most qualified team for europe including the Champions League, the 5th highest average position, an expanded stadium full to capacity every home game [they must have done something right ], world class footballers attracted to the club, 2 FA Cup Finals, and one of the highest turnovers in world football. All on the back of bad appointments and wasting money. Not bad going eh. I don't bet on the lottery. The odds of me losing a pound are loads loads loads loads loads loads higher than me winning a million quid (which btw is statistically more likely to wreck my life than improve it). Now let's suppose for a second I DID play the lottery. When do you think I should stop buying tickets and sort my life out? When I'd lost my wife? My house? My kids? Are you telling us all Leazes that in your opinion there is NEVER a time when you should stop spending money on a possible good outcome? You should be official adviser to Alex Ferguson trotting out such wisdoms as that, I don't think he would agree though. Avoiding the question again Leazes? That's weird. Alex Ferguson wouldn't have bought Boumsong to please Willy McKay. Do you see the point yet? You have to spend money in the right way. If you succeed you got it right, if you fail you got it wrong. That's why it's difficult. ...but you can't say the guy who shot and missed got it right. Shepherd's job wasn't to back shit managers, his job was to hire the right people to get those decisions right. He didn't. he bought Veron though And that Uruguay player [name escapes me] and others. Berbatov isn't setting the place alight either. But NUFC are the only club that make bad buys, in your deluded little world. A FACT by the way, is that only 4 clubs [yes FOUR] qualified for europe more than we did under the Halls and Shepherd, that means only FOUR clubs generally speaking ran their clubs and spent money better over the course of 15 years. Not too bad. Diego Forlan is the Uruguay player, not great for Man Utd but doing well at Athletico. In regard to evaluating the running of a club, should this not be measured relatively speaking? For example, only 4 more teams may have qualified for Europe than we did under Hall and Shepherd, yet clubs with little or no European hopes (even over this 15 year peroid) may have been run "better" than us as they possibly progressed more in regard to stature, position or silverware. Basically, should we not measure how "well" a club is run contextually? for instance, paying attention to the resources at their disposal and what they can and have achieved with them?

Yes, I acknowledged the Irish audience. I think Rangers seem to get the majority of the Scottish audience outside of Glasgow simply due to each clubs affiliations. This seems to be the case from what I have witnessed although I admit this isnt exactly gospel. Still very high attendances considering the opposition mind.