Things are looking up!

[Guest Insider]

By your logic, I'd be a great NUFC chairman if tomorrow I appointed Joe Pasquale as manager and spend the next 10 years worth of season ticket revenue backing him?

 

you could however, appoint me.

 

Edit. Its a matter of having bricks in place. A good manager with a shit board will move on. A good board, when they find a good manager, will have success.

 

 

A good board doesn't appoint the likes of Souness and Roeder in their quest for a good manager.

 

Liverpool appointed Souness. They also promoted Fagan, and Roy Evans, and a double act with Houillier

 

Chelsea promoted Vialli. Arsenal appointed Rioch.

 

 

Liverpool appointing Souness was completely different to us appointing him. He was young, fresh, and a legend of their glory years. Vialli won trophies with Chelsea. Houillier did with Liverpool. Fagan won a european cup.

 

they also all took over clubs in the habit of winning trophies. The principle was that they were ALL a similar risk. Would you care to stop and think about how many clubs have appointed managers that have had the sack from other clubs or promoted someone from within ?

 

It is when people like you make out we are the only ones to do this, which makes me smile.

 

Because - at the end of the day, we were the 5th most qualified club for europe over the period of the Halls and Shepherd, and they saved a club from going bust and with one foot into the 3rd division into what that.

 

 

Don't put words into my mouth.

 

You seem to think it makes it okay if others did the same.

 

Why don't you go to a Portsmouth forum and assure them that they've been ran by good chairmen because other clubs have also had financial difficulty in the past?

 

why don't you ask them if, on the day they won the FA Cup, they should have been worrying about being taken over by someone who would fuck them up in a few years time.

 

 

Fuck them up? There's nothing wrong with them though. What about all the other clubs that aren't in the premiership Portsmouth has been ran superbly They've averaged more F.A cups in the last 10 years than Shepherd!

 

 

You're losing it now.

 

What has happened at Pompey has no relevance whatsoever to Newcastle United. You may like painting a doomsday scenario, but we are twice the club Pompey are.

 

 

... So to win an f.a cup with half the club we are means that their chairman at the time must have been more competent than Shepherd?

[ChezGiven 0]

"Pompey chairman competent" in the week they go into administration

 

And howay Leazes, one of the best posters on here is also one who gives player ratings from listening to the radio? Damning stuff that.

[Deano 0]

By your logic, I'd be a great NUFC chairman if tomorrow I appointed Joe Pasquale as manager and spend the next 10 years worth of season ticket revenue backing him?

 

you could however, appoint me.

 

Edit. Its a matter of having bricks in place. A good manager with a shit board will move on. A good board, when they find a good manager, will have success.

 

 

A good board doesn't appoint the likes of Souness and Roeder in their quest for a good manager.

 

Liverpool appointed Souness. They also promoted Fagan, and Roy Evans, and a double act with Houillier

 

Chelsea promoted Vialli. Arsenal appointed Rioch.

 

 

Liverpool appointing Souness was completely different to us appointing him. He was young, fresh, and a legend of their glory years. Vialli won trophies with Chelsea. Houillier did with Liverpool. Fagan won a european cup.

 

they also all took over clubs in the habit of winning trophies. The principle was that they were ALL a similar risk. Would you care to stop and think about how many clubs have appointed managers that have had the sack from other clubs or promoted someone from within ?

 

It is when people like you make out we are the only ones to do this, which makes me smile.

 

Because - at the end of the day, we were the 5th most qualified club for europe over the period of the Halls and Shepherd, and they saved a club from going bust and with one foot into the 3rd division into what that.

 

 

Don't put words into my mouth.

 

You seem to think it makes it okay if others did the same.

 

Why don't you go to a Portsmouth forum and assure them that they've been ran by good chairmen because other clubs have also had financial difficulty in the past?

 

why don't you ask them if, on the day they won the FA Cup, they should have been worrying about being taken over by someone who would fuck them up in a few years time.

 

 

Fuck them up? There's nothing wrong with them though. What about all the other clubs that aren't in the premiership Portsmouth has been ran superbly They've averaged more F.A cups in the last 10 years than Shepherd!

 

 

You're losing it now.

 

What has happened at Pompey has no relevance whatsoever to Newcastle United. You may like painting a doomsday scenario, but we are twice the club Pompey are.

 

 

... So to win an f.a cup with half the club we are means that their chairman at the time must have been more competent than Shepherd?

 

LM he has a point

[Deano 0]

"Pompey chairman competent" in the week they go into administration

 

And howay Leazes, one of the best posters on here is also one who gives player ratings from listening to the radio? Damning stuff that.

 

Love you too mukka

[Acid 0]

This has turned into one of the best threads on here in a LONG time!

 

cringe.

[Deano 0]

This has turned into one of the best threads on here in a LONG time!

 

cringe.

 

What?

 

In fairness this board was better years ago and has lacked "good" debates for a while.

[ChezGiven 0]

"Pompey chairman competent" in the week they go into administration

 

And howay Leazes, one of the best posters on here is also one who gives player ratings from listening to the radio? Damning stuff that.

 

Love you too mukka

 

[LeazesMag 0]

"Pompey chairman competent" in the week they go into administration

 

And howay Leazes, one of the best posters on here is also one who gives player ratings from listening to the radio? Damning stuff that.

 

 

Ok Chez, I don;t see those. Pretty much like NO in fact, I only read threads that I think will interest me but GeordieLad seems to have a bit more savvy than some.........

 

Sorry it that sound patronising but I'm just responding.

[LeazesMag 0]

By your logic, I'd be a great NUFC chairman if tomorrow I appointed Joe Pasquale as manager and spend the next 10 years worth of season ticket revenue backing him?

 

you could however, appoint me.

 

Edit. Its a matter of having bricks in place. A good manager with a shit board will move on. A good board, when they find a good manager, will have success.

 

 

A good board doesn't appoint the likes of Souness and Roeder in their quest for a good manager.

 

Liverpool appointed Souness. They also promoted Fagan, and Roy Evans, and a double act with Houillier

 

Chelsea promoted Vialli. Arsenal appointed Rioch.

 

 

Liverpool appointing Souness was completely different to us appointing him. He was young, fresh, and a legend of their glory years. Vialli won trophies with Chelsea. Houillier did with Liverpool. Fagan won a european cup.

 

they also all took over clubs in the habit of winning trophies. The principle was that they were ALL a similar risk. Would you care to stop and think about how many clubs have appointed managers that have had the sack from other clubs or promoted someone from within ?

 

It is when people like you make out we are the only ones to do this, which makes me smile.

 

Because - at the end of the day, we were the 5th most qualified club for europe over the period of the Halls and Shepherd, and they saved a club from going bust and with one foot into the 3rd division into what that.

 

 

Don't put words into my mouth.

 

You seem to think it makes it okay if others did the same.

 

Why don't you go to a Portsmouth forum and assure them that they've been ran by good chairmen because other clubs have also had financial difficulty in the past?

 

why don't you ask them if, on the day they won the FA Cup, they should have been worrying about being taken over by someone who would fuck them up in a few years time.

 

 

Fuck them up? There's nothing wrong with them though. What about all the other clubs that aren't in the premiership Portsmouth has been ran superbly They've averaged more F.A cups in the last 10 years than Shepherd!

 

 

You're losing it now.

 

What has happened at Pompey has no relevance whatsoever to Newcastle United. You may like painting a doomsday scenario, but we are twice the club Pompey are.

 

 

... So to win an f.a cup with half the club we are means that their chairman at the time must have been more competent than Shepherd?

 

 

You're losing it.

 

Nothing constructive anymore. You know I am right.

[Renton 17789]

Geordie Lad (one of LM's favourite posters apparently );

 

When we finished 5th FS realised he has fucked up and inturn threw borrowed money at Sounness hoping and praying that the gamble would pay off, which i agree with LM in saying that is what he should of done. Thing is FS and us fans didnt know Sounness was going to be an unmitigated disaster....FS gambled and lost and that is why we were in the state MA found us in.

 

Well, I'm sorry, but I knew from the start he was was going to literally destroy our club. I wasn't the only one either for that matter.

 

P.S. When I wrote stuff LM used to agree with, I was also one of his favourites poster too .

 

P.P.S. All that dreamy stuff that LM wrote about Souness (after his initial OK start) never happened, he was stitched up.

[Deano 0]

Geordie Lad (one of LM's favourite posters apparently );

 

When we finished 5th FS realised he has fucked up and inturn threw borrowed money at Sounness hoping and praying that the gamble would pay off, which i agree with LM in saying that is what he should of done. Thing is FS and us fans didnt know Sounness was going to be an unmitigated disaster....FS gambled and lost and that is why we were in the state MA found us in.

 

Well, I'm sorry, but I knew from the start he was was going to literally destroy our club. I wasn't the only one either for that matter.

 

P.S. When I wrote stuff LM used to agree with, I was also one of his favourites poster too .

 

P.P.S. All that dreamy stuff that LM wrote about Souness (after his initial OK start) never happened, he was stitched up.

 

Fair enough but i think the majority of fans were hopeful when we brought Sounness in after being at Liverpool.

 

But like i said earlier i maybe dont know as much as some on here in the sense iv only been watching football for 18 years where alot of you have been for alot more there would of known better what to expect from Souness?

 

The point remains though...FS fucked up and tried to redeem himself by throwin coin at Sounness and it didnt work...simples.

 

As for your remark about agreeing with LM you will find that on the whole i do not but i respect his opinions. Even though i may not sahre most of them they are better than some on here.

 

As for LM saying what he did......well....i was suprised myself.

[AmericanMag 0]

Geordie Lad (one of LM's favourite posters apparently );

 

When we finished 5th FS realised he has fucked up and inturn threw borrowed money at Sounness hoping and praying that the gamble would pay off, which i agree with LM in saying that is what he should of done. Thing is FS and us fans didnt know Sounness was going to be an unmitigated disaster....FS gambled and lost and that is why we were in the state MA found us in.

 

Well, I'm sorry, but I knew from the start he was was going to literally destroy our club. I wasn't the only one either for that matter.

 

P.S. When I wrote stuff LM used to agree with, I was also one of his favourites poster too .

 

P.P.S. All that dreamy stuff that LM wrote about Souness (after his initial OK start) never happened, he was stitched up.

 

Fair enough but i think the majority of fans were hopeful when we brought Sounness in after being at Liverpool.

 

But like i said earlier i maybe dont know as much as some on here in the sense iv only been watching football for 18 years where alot of you have been for alot more there would of known better what to expect from Souness?

 

The point remains though...FS fucked up and tried to redeem himself by throwin coin at Sounness and it didnt work...simples.

 

As for your remark about agreeing with LM you will find that on the whole i do not but i respect his opinions. Even though i may not sahre most of them they are better than some on here.

 

As for LM saying what he did......well....i was suprised myself.

 

I can't remember anyone being hopeful with Souness after what he had done with Blackburn... and following the comments that the Blackburn fans were saying didn't give any reason for being hopeful either. Wasn't he on the verge of being sacked when FS hired him?

[Renton 17789]

Geordie Lad (one of LM's favourite posters apparently );

 

When we finished 5th FS realised he has fucked up and inturn threw borrowed money at Sounness hoping and praying that the gamble would pay off, which i agree with LM in saying that is what he should of done. Thing is FS and us fans didnt know Sounness was going to be an unmitigated disaster....FS gambled and lost and that is why we were in the state MA found us in.

 

Well, I'm sorry, but I knew from the start he was was going to literally destroy our club. I wasn't the only one either for that matter.

 

P.S. When I wrote stuff LM used to agree with, I was also one of his favourites poster too .

 

P.P.S. All that dreamy stuff that LM wrote about Souness (after his initial OK start) never happened, he was stitched up.

 

Fair enough but i think the majority of fans were hopeful when we brought Sounness in after being at Liverpool.

 

But like i said earlier i maybe dont know as much as some on here in the sense iv only been watching football for 18 years where alot of you have been for alot more there would of known better what to expect from Souness?

 

The point remains though...FS fucked up and tried to redeem himself by throwin coin at Sounness and it didnt work...simples.

 

As for your remark about agreeing with LM you will find that on the whole i do not but i respect his opinions. Even though i may not sahre most of them they are better than some on here.

 

As for LM saying what he did......well....i was suprised myself.

 

I can't remember anyone being hopeful with Souness after what he had done with Blackburn... and following the comments that the Blackburn fans were saying didn't give any reason for being hopeful either. Wasn't he on the verge of being sacked when FS hired him?

 

Most people were massively underwhelmed at best, a few tried to convince themselves it was some how a good appointment ('he'll bring discipline' etc). As you say though he was on the verge of being sacked from Blackburn and, with any detailed analysis, had a very dubious CV. Then of course there was the timing of Robson's dismissal (without a planned replacement) which put us into this situation to begin with. Simply awful leadership from the chairman and directors (Hall jnr as much if not more than Shepherd). Around the same period Liverpool and later Villa made planned appointments and look at them now. At the time I stated we should have moved Heaven and Earth to get O'Neill. Had we done, with a sensible policy on team strengthening, then I honestly don't think we'd be in the Championship now with Ashley as our owner.

 

Anyway, its all been covered dozens of times before, I just brought it up because I don't think the previous incompetence should be forgotten, and because certain people are under the strange illusion they are infallible when it comes to opinion on football matters. They're not.

[Guest Insider]

By your logic, I'd be a great NUFC chairman if tomorrow I appointed Joe Pasquale as manager and spend the next 10 years worth of season ticket revenue backing him?

 

you could however, appoint me.

 

Edit. Its a matter of having bricks in place. A good manager with a shit board will move on. A good board, when they find a good manager, will have success.

 

 

A good board doesn't appoint the likes of Souness and Roeder in their quest for a good manager.

 

Liverpool appointed Souness. They also promoted Fagan, and Roy Evans, and a double act with Houillier

 

Chelsea promoted Vialli. Arsenal appointed Rioch.

 

 

Liverpool appointing Souness was completely different to us appointing him. He was young, fresh, and a legend of their glory years. Vialli won trophies with Chelsea. Houillier did with Liverpool. Fagan won a european cup.

 

they also all took over clubs in the habit of winning trophies. The principle was that they were ALL a similar risk. Would you care to stop and think about how many clubs have appointed managers that have had the sack from other clubs or promoted someone from within ?

 

It is when people like you make out we are the only ones to do this, which makes me smile.

 

Because - at the end of the day, we were the 5th most qualified club for europe over the period of the Halls and Shepherd, and they saved a club from going bust and with one foot into the 3rd division into what that.

 

 

Don't put words into my mouth.

 

You seem to think it makes it okay if others did the same.

 

Why don't you go to a Portsmouth forum and assure them that they've been ran by good chairmen because other clubs have also had financial difficulty in the past?

 

why don't you ask them if, on the day they won the FA Cup, they should have been worrying about being taken over by someone who would fuck them up in a few years time.

 

 

Fuck them up? There's nothing wrong with them though. What about all the other clubs that aren't in the premiership Portsmouth has been ran superbly They've averaged more F.A cups in the last 10 years than Shepherd!

 

 

You're losing it now.

 

What has happened at Pompey has no relevance whatsoever to Newcastle United. You may like painting a doomsday scenario, but we are twice the club Pompey are.

 

 

... So to win an f.a cup with half the club we are means that their chairman at the time must have been more competent than Shepherd?

 

 

You're losing it.

 

Nothing constructive anymore. You know I am right.

 

 

So it's ok to apply your logic to defend Shepherd but not other clubs chairmen?

Edited February 24, 2010 by Insider

[Guest alex]

"Pompey chairman competent" in the week they go into administration

 

And howay Leazes, one of the best posters on here is also one who gives player ratings from listening to the radio? Damning stuff that.

 

 

Ok Chez, I don;t see those. Pretty much like NO in fact, I only read threads that I think will interest me but GeordieLad seems to have a bit more savvy than some.........

 

Sorry it that sound patronising but I'm just responding.

Fucking Bungalow Bill? You're having a laugh aren't you?

[manc-mag 1]

Geordie Lad (one of LM's favourite posters apparently );

When we finished 5th FS realised he has fucked up and inturn threw borrowed money at Sounness hoping and praying that the gamble would pay off, which i agree with LM in saying that is what he should of done. Thing is FS and us fans didnt know Sounness was going to be an unmitigated disaster....FS gambled and lost and that is why we were in the state MA found us in.

 

Well, I'm sorry, but I knew from the start he was was going to literally destroy our club. I wasn't the only one either for that matter.

 

P.S. When I wrote stuff LM used to agree with, I was also one of his favourites poster too .

 

P.P.S. All that dreamy stuff that LM wrote about Souness (after his initial OK start) never happened, he was stitched up.

 

 

So true and so utterly pathetic. What a bairn!

[Park Life 70]

Pompey nothing club. [/stevie]

[LeazesMag 0]

Geordie Lad (one of LM's favourite posters apparently );

 

When we finished 5th FS realised he has fucked up and inturn threw borrowed money at Sounness hoping and praying that the gamble would pay off, which i agree with LM in saying that is what he should of done. Thing is FS and us fans didnt know Sounness was going to be an unmitigated disaster....FS gambled and lost and that is why we were in the state MA found us in.

 

Well, I'm sorry, but I knew from the start he was was going to literally destroy our club. I wasn't the only one either for that matter.

 

P.S. When I wrote stuff LM used to agree with, I was also one of his favourites poster too .

 

P.P.S. All that dreamy stuff that LM wrote about Souness (after his initial OK start) never happened, he was stitched up.

 

thought you weren't going to respond to me anymore Renton ? boo hoo

 

Still think "anybody but Fred "

 

I proved you to be an utterly clueless cunt once before.............you can't even admit it. Still, I'm sure a smart lad like you knows best...

Edited February 24, 2010 by LeazesMag

[LeazesMag 0]

Geordie Lad (one of LM's favourite posters apparently );

When we finished 5th FS realised he has fucked up and inturn threw borrowed money at Sounness hoping and praying that the gamble would pay off, which i agree with LM in saying that is what he should of done. Thing is FS and us fans didnt know Sounness was going to be an unmitigated disaster....FS gambled and lost and that is why we were in the state MA found us in.

 

Well, I'm sorry, but I knew from the start he was was going to literally destroy our club. I wasn't the only one either for that matter.

 

P.S. When I wrote stuff LM used to agree with, I was also one of his favourites poster too .

 

P.P.S. All that dreamy stuff that LM wrote about Souness (after his initial OK start) never happened, he was stitched up.

 

 

So true and so utterly pathetic. What a bairn!

 

are those awful mancs still laughint at you and upsetting your poor little feelings dear

[snakehips 0]

It's this 'have to go into debt to achieve things' which baffles me.

 

Let's assume that we 'need debt to achieve 'success' i.e. continous top four and CL football. By definition, that therefore means that withought debt we are what, a mid-table club? With our fan base, surely we must be a mid-table club without debt??

 

So why are Chelsea unable to rid themselves of their debt? They are winning championships, playing continuous CL football, winning cups, based in London which, I imagine, their ticket reflects, continuous tv money, hoards of advertising revenue, country and world wide merchandising. Yet they still CANNOT rid themselves of the debt. How the fuck could we even begin to believe that 'must go into debt to achieve success' would be anything other than financial crisis for this club? Surely it's an imossible dream to assume that any 'success' we had could pay off the initial debt incurred to get there in the first place.

 

That's what I can't understand. This comment of 'must go into debt to achieve success' is absolutely fraught with danger. This is because the going into debt to pay transfer fees and wages of the top class players is no guarantee of success in the first place; it's a complete gamble, that even if does work - in the context of getting the club to the top four - is bound to fail, due to the reasons I've given above regarding Chelsea. Getting to the top four doesn't end there. A team need continual evolvement in order to stay there, which means continual top whack prices, which means no debt repayment.

 

Are we ultimately a mid-table club, and should we act accordingly????

Edited February 24, 2010 by snakehips

[Guest alex]

It raises a good point about the lack of sustainability in football at the top end of the league. The only club bucking that trend up there is Arsenal but they don't look like winning a major trophy any time soon (success isn't purely about winning everything but you probably see my point). Meanwhile you have Chelsea and Man City who are bankrolled by owners who aren't bothered about losing loads of money in the process. Then you have teams like Villa and Spurs who are being well-managed and living within their means with the consequence that any long-term notion of breaking the stranglehold of the top 4 seems a bit of a distant dream for them. Then you have the two biggest and most successful clubs in the land who are in serious financial difficulty. It doesn't seem right, does it?

[LeazesMag 0]

"Pompey chairman competent" in the week they go into administration

 

And howay Leazes, one of the best posters on here is also one who gives player ratings from listening to the radio? Damning stuff that.

 

 

Ok Chez, I don;t see those. Pretty much like NO in fact, I only read threads that I think will interest me but GeordieLad seems to have a bit more savvy than some.........

 

Sorry it that sound patronising but I'm just responding.

Fucking Bungalow Bill? You're having a laugh aren't you?

 

what ?

 

Amusing as fuck to see the indignation on the smart lads like Renton come out of their closet when I say something like this about someone else.

 

Have I rustled his feathers a wee bit. As it happens, Renton is one of the biggest plonkers on here. Just my opinion of course.

[LeazesMag 0]

It raises a good point about the lack of sustainability in football at the top end of the league. The only club bucking that trend up there is Arsenal but they don't look like winning a major trophy any time soon (success isn't purely about winning everything but you probably see my point). Meanwhile you have Chelsea and Man City who are bankrolled by owners who aren't bothered about losing loads of money in the process. Then you have teams like Villa and Spurs who are being well-managed and living within their means with the consequence that any long-term notion of breaking the stranglehold of the top 4 seems a bit of a distant dream for them. Then you have the two biggest and most successful clubs in the land who are in serious financial difficulty. It doesn't seem right, does it?

 

You phrase that quite well. It doesn't seem right, but its reality.

 

Too many idealogical numpties around, that's the problem.

[Deano 0]

The best run club in the PL imho is Aston Villa...thing is with them they are pretty much at their full potential in terms of size.

 

Everton are pretty well run and maybe have more scope for growth.

 

Spurs *SPIT* seem to be ran well but like Villa are pretty much at full potential.

 

The clubs are what we should be trying to base ourselves on in terms of what they have done...slow steady growth, growth that is solid, secure and can be sustained.

 

The difference with us and them clubs is we are already a bigger club and quite possibly have alot more potential.

 

We are the 2nd biggest club in the country in my opinion....yes Liverpool, Arsenal and Forest have more history but in terms of size, support and potential only ManUre are bigger.

 

Which makes it all the more frustrating that we are where we are.

 

How the mighty have fallen...but we will rise again!

[LeazesMag 0]

It's this 'have to go into debt to achieve things' which baffles me.

 

Let's assume that we 'need debt to achieve 'success' i.e. continous top four and CL football. By definition, that therefore means that withought debt we are what, a mid-table club? With our fan base, surely we must be a mid-table club without debt??

 

So why are Chelsea unable to rid themselves of their debt? They are winning championships, playing continuous CL football, winning cups, based in London which, I imagine, their ticket reflects, continuous tv money, hoards of advertising revenue, country and world wide merchandising. Yet they still CANNOT rid themselves of the debt. How the fuck could we even begin to believe that 'must go into debt to achieve success' would be anything other than financial crisis for this club? Surely it's an imossible dream to assume that any 'success' we had could pay off the initial debt incurred to get there in the first place.

 

That's what I can't understand. This comment of 'must go into debt to achieve success' is absolutely fraught with danger. This is because the going into debt to pay transfer fees and wages of the top class players is no guarantee of success in the first place; it's a complete gamble, that even if does work - in the context of getting the club to the top four - is bound to fail, due to the reasons I've given above regarding Chelsea. Getting to the top four doesn't end there. A team need continual evolvement in order to stay there, which means continual top whack prices, which means no debt repayment.

 

Are we ultimately a mid-table club, and should we act accordingly????

 

no mate, we aren't a mid table club. We are one of the biggest clubs in the country. Clubs that are above us that should not be, are there [now] either because they are better run or have a sugar daddy.

 

I don't think you are on of the idealogical numpties I've just mentioned by the way.