I agree about the good and bad but you can't really draw a line in the sand as it doesn't take into account the outstanding debt and the legacy of a wage bill which wasn't producing on the field success. If Ashley had really written off the debt instead of claiming at various stages that it was a. gone b. unimportant or c. the sole reason for all the troubles then you could judge him completely on his performance since.
My view is still the same - I think he's fucked most things he's done up but there is a begrudged underlying view that an interest free loan underpinning the club and a willingness to meet further running costs is a lot better than some of the other possible scenarios.
LM goes between stating he doesn't care what the finances were under the previous regime to picking magic words out to try and argue the finances were better. I think our finances have been pretty much screwed for the entirety of my lifetime no matter's who's been in charge. A few good years of football shouldn't really blind anyone to that fact.
my view is the same as it has always been. This is one of the biggest clubs in the country and ought to act like it, not like the Stokes and the Wigans etc. When we did, we had the best 15 years all of us on here has experienced so far in our lifetime. But as the above poster points out, far too many people have been brainwashed by the propaganda machine into thinking that we did it all wrong and could and should have done it without the expenditure involved, despite the absolute proof of history which shows if you want to be successful you have to spend the money.
I don't know how many times it has been stated that the vast majority of clubs are in debt, yet these morons continue to peddle the line that for some reason we were the only ones facing certain administration and, despite enjoying every single minute of playing in the champions league and buying the players that we did, pouring scorn on the people who owned the club and completely transformed the club, and attempting to say they should have instead aimed for mid table survival at best and been grateful for that. Some of them have actually stopped going to games since the club under the new owner chose to take this path, the one they now advocate, the hypocrisy is staggering.
At the end of the day, you go to watch your football team, you want to see it win, and you enjoyed it when it was winning, a damn sight more than now when it isn't. So don't bother spouting the bollocks you spout in your last comment ie "A few good years of football shouldn't blind anyone to that fact". This is precisely the rubbish the previous poster has highlighted. What has happened since Ashley took over is entirely his responsibility and nobody elses. The team is in danger of going down again and perhaps this will be the best season we will ever see under Ashley when he has now made it clear we will sell our best players, the club has gone backwards, the revenues are down, the ambitions and aims have been set at a lower level. This is nothing to do with the previous owners. It is Mike Ashley who has set up the club in this way, it is in decline and it will continue this decline until someone raises the bar again to where this club ought to set it and goes about doing it in the way the other clubs do it. Like Spurs are now doing, and Liverpool are attempting to do again. It's an absolute joke that some people appear to think we are getting it right and these clubs are getting it wrong. Try telling a Spurs supporter he shouldn't be enjoying the current run in europe, what a prize prick you would look if you did. No wonder people laugh at Geordies. Nobody else in my opinion would spout such utter nonsense, but we all get tarred with the same brush.
Even Toonpack said once "enjoy today and don't worry about what may or may not happen". Typically, the mug had no idea how that could be taken.
I thought we'd got you off mentioning Spurs and Liverpool?
The latter have a billionaire owner and are a much bigger club than us despite your arguments on crowds - there's no getting away with it.
Spurs have been lucky on transfers - you still don't get that.
You mock Villa now because they have "failed" and because they were mentioned as a blueprint but fail to mention they did exactly what you advocate - they heavily backed their manager with 100m, and it failed miserably.
You don't mention the Mackems who have spent millions and shown "ambition" for almost no reward and a probable firesale in the summer because the owner is sick of it.
Would you rather Ashley say "We're aiming for the top 4" - that would bring a lot more ridicule than you mention as it would take 100s of millions at least - a thing you acknowledge.
You should also stop using the magic word of "revenues" - as I said HF proved that's shit.
"15 years of the best" is also utter, utter shit - we were good for 6 seasons at the most.
As I've said before I did enjoy watching the team when we were "good" but I also enjoyed it when we were halfway decent when nobody expected us to be like in the Gazza years - I always resigned myself to the fact we weren't destined to be a "winner" and I think its you that's deluded to the level that people take the piss. This talk of being as big as you say we are is a load of shit. We have never been one of the top clubs in England (apart from maybe the Edwardian days) for anything like any decent period and to claim otherwise based on crowdsize is exactly the kind of stereotypical shite you criticise.
I do think we're bigger than Stoke and Wigan but for the forseeable future there are 5 or 6 teams we won't better and no amount of unrealistic hot air will change that.
Unless of course you can tell us all how to achieve that.
Sorry like but 8 or 9. Your point about Liverpool being much bigger than us. They've won more trophies since Shankly, and that is an obvious thing to say, but if they are that much bigger how come from 1995 to 2003 Newcastle generally had a higher turnover? A little bit of success on the pitch and you wouldn't even mention that.
