manc-mag

Surely got to be worth a point Happy? Is this in relation to Erdinc or Cisse btw, as you were welcoming them both 5 only minutes ago?

Twitter gone quiet for the last 2 minutes. Deal off tbh.

Must have hit the prostate tbh!

Click on your profile and then 'manage ignore prefs' and add him. The only time I've used that function in 10 years of using this place is for him btw. Says a lot. and it doesn't work when people quote though it will get rid of half the pyramids Aye, quoting still brings it up but it's better than nowt.

4 posts in 3 minutes...easy there Barney!

You are the only one saying that people are so no suprises that you agree with yourself. Not surprised you forget what you have said. You sure as hell can't remember what anyone else has said so why should you remember what you have said yourself. Or was it the others again Leazes? Answer the question. Typical. Pipe down. Answer the question. Pocketing the cash etc. where is the Carroll money ? You're an out of towner, that knows fuck all. Say something, or say nothing. I know that good strikers are worth more than £3 or £4 million. apparently Mike Ashley thinks that's all they cost. BA cost nothing, does a price tag or performances make a player? so where is the money from the sale of Carroll ? Listen chum, a couple of other people have asked you this today/yesterday, and myself. YOU said we are 2 players away from being a "very good side", so do you think that your man is going to keep this side together and sign those 2 players [with the Carroll cash] or sell someone else valuable again ? Take your time, with this fairly obvious and straightforward scenario. I realise it may task your tiny brain. My man, lol, back there again are we I've said over and over if a player wants to go and we get a massive offer they will sell. Will we get an offer big enough? Dunno, I'm not a psychic. If we add a couple this window with no major outgoings that,imo,will be a good window. Even better if we tie up Collo Do you understand, or are you going to keep asking me the same thing?? so, as myself, brummiemag and Stevie {think it was Stevie] has asked you today, do YOU think that your man will go and spend this money and attempt to bring in the 2 players you think will step us up to being a "very good side", without selling any of his best core players. After all, this is YOUR words and what you said yourself. I'm trying to stay on track and be patient with you, because I realise you need educating. 1. He's not my man 2. As I said, if the right bid comes in and a player indicates he wants out then they will sell 3. Will we sign any players this window, I would like to think so but I prefer to comment on facts rather than speculate on ifs and buts Stevie talks sense and has knowledge on a vast amount of subjects you post the same Shite, constantly. I wouldn't put you anywhere near him in knowledge about nufc and football in general Stevie will be along shortly to magnanimously play this down, with his trademark certificate smile.

Click on your profile and then 'manage ignore prefs' and add him. The only time I've used that function in 10 years of using this place is for him btw.

That's exactly how it scans in LM's mind like. Fucking mental.

Straight talking common sense. Great post.

What he did would make sense if the £35m was taken to be extraordinary income and used in addition to our planned expenditure. However, it hasn't. And given that we're supposed to be near breaking even and looking like we may earn more money than planned through our league position then, 'where has the money gone?' is a valid question. It's so fucking frustrating because he calculates the wage over the term of the contract as being the outgoing NOW. It's so fucking stupid because you're calculating the cost of a five year contract, who's to say any given player isn't to leave in 2 years time. Are you sure that is the approach being taken? I thought that the transfer fee, plus agent fees, plus the first year of the wages were being considered not the entire contract that would be beyond taking the piss. I don't know which exact matrix he uses, but he certainly uses one which essentially amounts to 'if player wages equals more than the club brings in, that's food out of my (fat) mouth at the end of the day'. In that sense turnover is absolutely meaningless to him, it's the approach of someone who owns the clubs liabilities 100% and can't look to anyone else to finance it. In that sense he's worlds apart from 'other chairmen' as Stevie says, and also from our previous chairman. Theres loads of reasons for that though. It doesnt give him a hard on like it does City or Chelsea's owners at the end of the day, that's the only thing that matters. That's whats required if you're prepared to risk and probably not recoup £100's of millions of your own personal wealth as they have done.

We've got surplus cash if you take the view that every penny of transfer sales should go on transfer spend. Ashley doesnt take that view because you obviously also have to pay for those players once theyre here and obviously theyre going to want more wages than those leaving. If a trainee goes for £35 million, what does a £35 million replacement come in for? They'll expect four or five times the wages-so over 5 years that might cost an extra £20 million again than the original player was on. It's an extreme example but it's the bit that just gets ignored as the debate gets over simplified. It's the wages he's got an issue with rather than transfer fees per se imho. Hence why Barton can go on a free etc etc. So yeah as long as players are looking for more than the ceiling in wages they'll go and as long as there are daft bids (Carroll) they'll go. Theres only a few clubs who can offer this though and Leazes has already said that we shouldnt compete with those teams financially, so the ridicule is deserved because he's just shouting slogans at the end of the day and contradicting himself. That and he's stuck in the past. nb even Chelsea have tried to get Cahill on his existing Bolton wages so it'll be interesting to see where their policy is going in terms of which clubs are likely to just walk in and throw trucks of money at our players. The wage issue is a valid point, but Tottenham are managing with a ceiling of £75,000 a week, with TV revenues going up every season, and no doubt commercial ventures will increase as our profile continues to rise, why is 75k a week such an obscene figure? We were paying Owen £103,000 a week plus bonuses. Owen and Martins must've been the straw that broke the camels back, but Tottenham are managing with that, and Arsenal did for years, so I don't see why that ceiling is beyond us. Fucking Everton's wage bill is higher than ours. Everton!?? Aye, this is what I mean though, there will be a time when we do need to increase the ceiling or put in place some sort of imaginative loyalty/bonus system which allows us continue to progress. We will plateau if we don't and that's a massive issue. Whether he does that or not is another matter. On the whole I think it's likely that he won't (or more probably won't go quite far enough when it's vital he does), but the point about us just having £35 million sloshing around for a replacement £35 million striker is over simplifying it (or at the very least not being realistic, because we know Ashley doesn't think that way anyway). Either way though, it'll be decided by what he feels that increment can sustainably be across the team rather than what one £35 million headline transfer replacement decides he wants per week now he's some sort of superstar. I can understand a massive signing pacifying a few, but we never win fuck all anyway so I'm content as long as the overall picture is upward. I'm not deluded in thinking it's inevitable it will be, far from it, but we were expected to be relegated just over a year ago and now the demand is Europe, so if we reach that target it'll be testament to what a certain approach can achieve. The big signing(s) have to come when they are demonstrably a step up from the recent crop we've brought in for modest fees. So far the cheaper players have been better than the 'big' players we've let go by and large. It's when that dynamic changes that there is no option than to look at the bigger 'names'/fees.

aye

We've got surplus cash if you take the view that every penny of transfer sales should go on transfer spend. Ashley doesnt take that view because you obviously also have to pay for those players once theyre here and obviously theyre going to want more wages than those leaving. If a trainee goes for £35 million, what does a £35 million replacement come in for? They'll expect four or five times the wages-so over 5 years that might cost an extra £20 million again than the original player was on. It's an extreme example but it's the bit that just gets ignored as the debate gets over simplified. It's the wages he's got an issue with rather than transfer fees per se imho. Hence why Barton can go on a free etc etc. So yeah as long as players are looking for more than the ceiling in wages they'll go and as long as there are daft bids (Carroll) they'll go. Theres only a few clubs who can offer this though and Leazes has already said that we shouldnt compete with those teams financially, so the ridicule is deserved because he's just shouting slogans at the end of the day and contradicting himself. That and he's stuck in the past. nb even Chelsea have tried to get Cahill on his existing Bolton wages so it'll be interesting to see where their policy is going in terms of which clubs are likely to just walk in and throw trucks of money at our players.

Wahey!!!!

This thread is mint btw.

The one he laid on for Best was superb.

We should have a poll really. Which Leazes did you prefer? i) The one who predicted Champions League finishes upon the appointment of Kevin Keegan; or ii) The one who predicted we were going to be run as a corner shop, would sell all our best players while Ashley pocketed the cash and that this was always obvious to him from day one. I think both had their senile charms, but there can be only one winner, so get voting. Exactly.

Fucking quality!

RIP. Very sad.

I actually think he'd be tempted to retain players now if the world markets were in order. ie if he could see a CL place with an exit strategy. It's the lack of exit that means he won't step the liabilities up iyam as it's him that's saddled with them effectively. There was a time when there were queues for PL clubs, but it must be quiet as the grave these days-which is obviously the only real consideration to a completely non-sentimental money man who's paid the (in hindsight) frankly ludicrous sums Ashley has.

He's gone and fucked off. Isn't he glum, Norwegian WUM.

Good point that tbf. The next level of continued 'progress' as it were. Didn't come to Spurs quickly and probably isn't on Ashley's radar anytime soon (if at all), which means we'll still see players out the door and look to replace them. Emphasis will remain on the replacements for at least another season or so yet, so the back room/scouting is going to need to keep coming up with the goods. Perhaps the only thing I'm happy to say with certainty is I'm confident that the players coming in are at least joining a club they want to join now (for the right reasons) and that does count for a lot. We got that wrong for a long time (across both 'regimes').

Shit or get off the pot, MT.

Fair post. Both Liv and Spurs are vulernable however. Think Spurs are at their limits now reg spend and might need to cut back a bit if they don't make CL. Although Liv have bigger income I'm not convinced that their new owners are that gung ho...This season will tell. Aye. I reckon Spurs are probably alright but you may well be on to something with Liverpool. They will need to continue to be gung ho if they don't want to fall out in a massive way with Dalglish mind. Obviously I hope they're not and they do.