Papa Lazaru 0 Posted March 12, 2007 Share Posted March 12, 2007 The mackems as usual are getting overexcited and talking utter bollocks about our squad relative to theirs. But i do think Keane looks a damn site better than their previous managers and Quinn will back him from the start if they get up giving them a good chance of doing alright. However they aren't even up yet and whilst i think they might sneak second place, its not that easy and they could end up knocked out in the play offs putting them back right when the big TV money is being thrown around in the prem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJS 3989 Posted March 12, 2007 Share Posted March 12, 2007 Since they started to win fter the new year I've just assumed they're going up - recent results would suggest automatically. They are over-reacting but at the same time hope is a good thing - I still think they have no premiership quality players so would have to do a lot in the summer. I also hope it will stir Shepherd into digging deep for us. Funnily enough I remember posting a questiion ages ago on the SMB on why they found the idea of Shearer being a manager so hilarious - they described his traits of being too single-minded, tough and likely being "a bully" as being fatal - traits in Keane that they now cream over. I think Keane will be found out when things get tough - I can't see him standing failing mediocrity without exploding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gejon 2 Posted March 12, 2007 Share Posted March 12, 2007 Said from the start they'd do well under him, swap him for Rodent any day. The man is a born winner and anything less unacceptable I agree, and what worries me is that if Sunderland do get promoted and when it comes to signings would players choose to play for Keane or Roeder ? Neither, they will go for what they normally go for £££. All this "born winner" bollocks, wasnt Souness a "born winner" ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ally 0 Posted March 12, 2007 Share Posted March 12, 2007 My mackem mate is convinced it will be best for the club to stay in Division 1 for another season, let Keane really get to grips with the team and management in general before they get promoted. I can see where he's coming from like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted March 12, 2007 Share Posted March 12, 2007 I'm no Sunderland lover, but they have a chance of becoming a good club right now. To me they're bigger than the likes of Tottenham Stevie utterly blinded by his hatred of Spurs again. or blinded by hatred of the mackems ? The mackems are a bigger potential club than Spurs, easily Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom 13885 Posted March 13, 2007 Share Posted March 13, 2007 Fuck that. Sunderland are bigger than Spurs. Fare enough theyre on a blip, But never the less, Safc have better fans & a better ground No plans and no money..... Oh... but Safc have more potential [Cue Sima/] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sima 0 Posted March 13, 2007 Share Posted March 13, 2007 See no need to repeat myself tbh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
themags 0 Posted March 13, 2007 Share Posted March 13, 2007 remember reading a thread on the smb during i think their 19 point season. They managed a 2-1 victory at the SOL, most of the posts were suggesting after that performance and victory they were about 3 or 4 players off been able to challege for a UEFA cup place next season we all know what happend next Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted March 13, 2007 Share Posted March 13, 2007 Spurs are bigger than the Mackems tbh. The latter have won one trophy since the war, had one European campaign in their history and have been up and down like a yo-yo over the past few decades. There's more to being a 'massive club' than having the potential to be huge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Carr's Gloves 3236 Posted March 13, 2007 Author Share Posted March 13, 2007 Spurs are bigger than the Mackems tbh. The latter have won one trophy since the war, had one European campaign in their history and have been up and down like a yo-yo over the past few decades. There's more to being a 'massive club' than having the potential to be huge. Got to agree there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 35096 Posted March 13, 2007 Share Posted March 13, 2007 Agreed an'all. Although it shouldn't even need spelling out tbh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stevieintoon Posted March 13, 2007 Share Posted March 13, 2007 I'm no Sunderland lover, but they have a chance of becoming a good club right now. To me they're bigger than the likes of Tottenham Stevie utterly blinded by his hatred of Spurs again. or blinded by hatred of the mackems ? The mackems are a bigger potential club than Spurs, easily By far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 35096 Posted March 13, 2007 Share Posted March 13, 2007 Potential means fuck all if you aren't fulfilling it tbh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom 13885 Posted March 13, 2007 Share Posted March 13, 2007 And thats why im happy to be a toon fan! Oh wait Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sima 0 Posted March 13, 2007 Share Posted March 13, 2007 (edited) The mackems are a bigger potential club than Spurs, easily By far. Then the mackems are bigger than us then, because Spurs definitely are. I stll consider them the 2nd biggest club in London, no matter how much money gets thrown at a yo-yo club on the kings road Edited March 13, 2007 by Sima Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted March 13, 2007 Share Posted March 13, 2007 The mackems are a bigger potential club than Spurs, easily By far. Then the mackems are bigger than us then, because Spurs definitely are. I stll consider them the 2nd biggest club in London, no matter how much money gets thrown at a yo-yo club on the kings road Well, I think Spurs were the 2nd biggest club in London, but not now. That's point really imo, history only being part of what makes a club big (and it loses its significance the further back you have to go for success). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stevieintoon Posted March 13, 2007 Share Posted March 13, 2007 The mackems are a bigger potential club than Spurs, easily By far. Then the mackems are bigger than us then, because Spurs definitely are. I stll consider them the 2nd biggest club in London, no matter how much money gets thrown at a yo-yo club on the kings road That's why you're an idiot. We're richer, have more fans, bigger ground, we're a bigger name, more championships, they're no bigger than Everton to be fair, and certainly in real terms no bigger than the SMB. The day we fail to sell 33,000 tickets for a Semi Final against Sunderland is the day, Spurs are bigger than us. Nothing club. Why don't you go to Easter Road? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted March 13, 2007 Share Posted March 13, 2007 You could make a decent case for Everton being bigger than us imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sima 0 Posted March 13, 2007 Share Posted March 13, 2007 The mackems are a bigger potential club than Spurs, easily By far. Then the mackems are bigger than us then, because Spurs definitely are. I stll consider them the 2nd biggest club in London, no matter how much money gets thrown at a yo-yo club on the kings road That's why you're an idiot. We're richer, have more fans, bigger ground, we're a bigger name, more championships, they're no bigger than Everton to be fair, and certainly in real terms no bigger than the SMB. The day we fail to sell 33,000 tickets for a Semi Final against Sunderland is the day, Spurs are bigger than us. Nothing club. Why don't you go to Easter Road? I think you'll find we're very far from richer than Spurs. Just because we have a bigger stadium than them, we're so much superior? Nice of you to bring up the two championships they have won, as it's the only honour we're ahead of them on, carelessly forgetting to mention they have won 8 FA Cups, 3 League Cups and 3 European trophies. When is the last time Spurs were relegated? Oh and for the record, Everton are bigger than us as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted March 13, 2007 Share Posted March 13, 2007 Potential means fuck all if you aren't fulfilling it tbh. and, having a shit board, like the mackems have had, doesn't detract from the fact that you have a bigger club. As we had ourselves too for decades. I didn't think you would understand that Gem, and I bet quite a lot of others don't either. The mackems are miles bigger than Spurs. The real shame is that people on here harp on about me talking about our takeover in 1992, but the reason I do that is most of you lot think football only started in 1992. When did Spurs take 8,000 fans to an away game, they don't even take that many to away games in London. By your criteria, all the teams who have won a domestic trophy since us and the mackems are bigger club, which of course is why I list the teams we have overtaken, for the simple reason that they were at the time they won those trophies and were better than us. I will let you think about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stevieintoon Posted March 13, 2007 Share Posted March 13, 2007 The mackems are a bigger potential club than Spurs, easily By far. Then the mackems are bigger than us then, because Spurs definitely are. I stll consider them the 2nd biggest club in London, no matter how much money gets thrown at a yo-yo club on the kings road That's why you're an idiot. We're richer, have more fans, bigger ground, we're a bigger name, more championships, they're no bigger than Everton to be fair, and certainly in real terms no bigger than the SMB. The day we fail to sell 33,000 tickets for a Semi Final against Sunderland is the day, Spurs are bigger than us. Nothing club. Why don't you go to Easter Road? I think you'll find we're very far from richer than Spurs. Just because we have a bigger stadium than them, we're so much superior? Nice of you to bring up the two championships they have won, as it's the only honour we're ahead of them on, carelessly forgetting to mention they have won 8 FA Cups, 3 League Cups and 3 European trophies. When is the last time Spurs were relegated? Oh and for the record, Everton are bigger than us as well. The sad fact is, this how knowledgable our support is in 2007. Our support used to be the best, when it was 90% Tyneside based, this is the result of SKY and the Keegan days. I hate it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted March 13, 2007 Share Posted March 13, 2007 Potential means fuck all if you aren't fulfilling it tbh. and, having a shit board, like the mackems have had, doesn't detract from the fact that you have a bigger club. As we had ourselves too for decades. I didn't think you would understand that Gem, and I bet quite a lot of others don't either. The mackems are miles bigger than Spurs. The real shame is that people on here harp on about me talking about our takeover in 1992, but the reason I do that is most of you lot think football only started in 1992. When did Spurs take 8,000 fans to an away game, they don't even take that many to away games in London. By your criteria, all the teams who have won a domestic trophy since us and the mackems are bigger club, which of course is why I list the teams we have overtaken, for the simple reason that they were at the time they won those trophies and were better than us. I will let you think about it. It isn't all down to fans/potential fanbase though is it? That would make for a particularly narrow definition of what makes a club big. It would also suggest we're the second biggest club in the country, after Man Utd., which we clearly aren't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sima 0 Posted March 13, 2007 Share Posted March 13, 2007 The mackems are a bigger potential club than Spurs, easily By far. Then the mackems are bigger than us then, because Spurs definitely are. I stll consider them the 2nd biggest club in London, no matter how much money gets thrown at a yo-yo club on the kings road That's why you're an idiot. We're richer, have more fans, bigger ground, we're a bigger name, more championships, they're no bigger than Everton to be fair, and certainly in real terms no bigger than the SMB. The day we fail to sell 33,000 tickets for a Semi Final against Sunderland is the day, Spurs are bigger than us. Nothing club. Why don't you go to Easter Road? I think you'll find we're very far from richer than Spurs. Just because we have a bigger stadium than them, we're so much superior? Nice of you to bring up the two championships they have won, as it's the only honour we're ahead of them on, carelessly forgetting to mention they have won 8 FA Cups, 3 League Cups and 3 European trophies. When is the last time Spurs were relegated? Oh and for the record, Everton are bigger than us as well. The sad fact is, this how knowledgable our support is in 2007. Our support used to be the best, when it was 90% Tyneside based, this is the result of SKY and the Keegan days. I hate it. I'm based on Tyneside and have been more or less since birth, ul Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stevieintoon Posted March 13, 2007 Share Posted March 13, 2007 Potential means fuck all if you aren't fulfilling it tbh. and, having a shit board, like the mackems have had, doesn't detract from the fact that you have a bigger club. As we had ourselves too for decades. I didn't think you would understand that Gem, and I bet quite a lot of others don't either. The mackems are miles bigger than Spurs. The real shame is that people on here harp on about me talking about our takeover in 1992, but the reason I do that is most of you lot think football only started in 1992. When did Spurs take 8,000 fans to an away game, they don't even take that many to away games in London. By your criteria, all the teams who have won a domestic trophy since us and the mackems are bigger club, which of course is why I list the teams we have overtaken, for the simple reason that they were at the time they won those trophies and were better than us. I will let you think about it. Well said mate. There's so many genuinely clueless people on these boards these days. "Tottenham a richer club than Newcastle", classic example, it's sad for the people who lived through the late 80's and mid 90's to find outsiders claiming to be Newcastle fans with no clue. I never thought it would be like this. Partly Murdoch, partly drug rehabilitation programs in Edinburgh and partly Taylor's fault people like "Sima" follow us now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sima 0 Posted March 13, 2007 Share Posted March 13, 2007 Potential means fuck all if you aren't fulfilling it tbh. and, having a shit board, like the mackems have had, doesn't detract from the fact that you have a bigger club. As we had ourselves too for decades. I didn't think you would understand that Gem, and I bet quite a lot of others don't either. The mackems are miles bigger than Spurs. The real shame is that people on here harp on about me talking about our takeover in 1992, but the reason I do that is most of you lot think football only started in 1992. When did Spurs take 8,000 fans to an away game, they don't even take that many to away games in London. By your criteria, all the teams who have won a domestic trophy since us and the mackems are bigger club, which of course is why I list the teams we have overtaken, for the simple reason that they were at the time they won those trophies and were better than us. I will let you think about it. Irony of this comment is that the only real suggestion that we are anywhere near as big as Spurs has been our record since this date. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now