Even more insulting than "Geordie women are dogs"

[sweetleftpeg 0]

Exactly. Yes, we remember the bad times, and the protests against the McKeag board, but does that mean we have to be happy with Shepherd on the basis that he isn't McKeag? SJH showed the potential of this club, Shepherd IN MY OPINION hasn't acted upon it.

 

I've getting de ja vue here.

[Guest Patrokles]

I think he's right though, to an extent. Psychologically, if we'd only signed Rossi on loan, Antoine S. and Bernard, and then we suddenly pulled Duff and Martins out of the bag, people would be relieved and pleased. But because we set the bar high by getting Duff and Martins earlier...

 

As a whole, I don't think the transfer window can be judged as a success or not yet; not until we've seen how good the signings turn out to be. The fact is, we needed a new left-back; we've got one. We needed one first-team striker and two additional ones (one of whom with a bit of presence in the air); we've got them. We didn't need a left-winger, but I don't think anyone can argue that we shouldn't have bothered with Duff.

 

We needed a central defender, true, but it's not as though we didn't try for one. It's not as easy- as this summer has clearly, clearly shown- as just picking who you want and then signing them just like that.

[Guest alex]

I think he's right though, to an extent. Psychologically, if we'd only signed Rossi on loan, Antoine S. and Bernard, and then we suddenly pulled Duff and Martins out of the bag, people would be relieved and pleased. But because we set the bar high by getting Duff and Martins earlier...

 

As a whole, I don't think the transfer window can be judged as a success or not yet; not until we've seen how good the signings turn out to be. The fact is, we needed a new left-back; we've got one. We needed one first-team striker and two additional ones (one of whom with a bit of presence in the air); we've got them. We didn't need a left-winger, but I don't think anyone can argue that we shouldn't have bothered with Duff.

 

We needed a central defender, true, but it's not as though we didn't try for one. It's not as easy- as this summer has clearly, clearly shown- as just picking who you want and then signing them just like that.

193258[/snapback]

Not that old chestnut

To be honest, I think the majority are underwhelmed by the whole thing. Sibierski smacks of last minute panic/asking Willie McKay who's available while Bernard's career has nosedived of late and he's screwed the club twice in the past. But we still got him. As for the central defender thing? We tried to hijack other deals rather than identify targets and then get them. We also missed out of the likes of Campbell and Hasselbaink (sp?) and we're now supposedy after Tristan - presumably only because he's out of contract. As for the Milner thing, ffs! It was a shambles man!

[adios 717]

I think he's right though, to an extent. Psychologically, if we'd only signed Rossi on loan, Antoine S. and Bernard, and then we suddenly pulled Duff and Martins out of the bag, people would be relieved and pleased. But because we set the bar high by getting Duff and Martins earlier...

 

As a whole, I don't think the transfer window can be judged as a success or not yet; not until we've seen how good the signings turn out to be. The fact is, we needed a new left-back; we've got one. We needed one first-team striker and two additional ones (one of whom with a bit of presence in the air); we've got them. We didn't need a left-winger, but I don't think anyone can argue that we shouldn't have bothered with Duff.

 

We needed a central defender, true, but it's not as though we didn't try for one. It's not as easy- as this summer has clearly, clearly shown- as just picking who you want and then signing them just like that.

193258[/snapback]

 

Signings can be judged from the point of view of whether we got what we needed, surely? Where's the target man? Where's the commanding centre-back we're obviously so desperate for? Would Woodgate or Campbell not have filled that description? We could have had either/both if we'd tried.

 

I was quite confident in their ability to get it right this transfer window, I realise my confidence has been misplaced.

 

btw I agree with you saying that plenty/the majority of people would have been happy, that's not the fucking point! Firstly it proves Fred is more interested in what the punters think than what's actually good for the team and secondly, would you want that majority running the club? A greengrocers?

Edited September 5, 2006 by ObaGol

[Guest alex]

I'll wager that even the Tristan thing is after we heard Bolton were interested.

[adios 717]

I'll wager that even the Tristan thing is after we heard Bolton were interested.

193291[/snapback]

 

Read my pleas tbh.

[LeazesMag 0]

For someone who actually suffered the days when we really were shite, to suggest we are shite now is also stupid and embarrassing and saying football has changed as some justification for not doing so is stupid and embarrassing. Every club plays on the same playing field, in any era, the simple fact is we are capitalising on our potential, when we didn't before, and its that easy.

193059[/snapback]

 

Its all swings and roundabouts though, people only know what they have experienced, you fully experienced the shite years, I have memories of it but the young fans coming through only know us as being a big club.

 

Get someone on who was around in the 50's when we were a big club winning successive cup finals and they'll tell you a different story again.

193068[/snapback]

 

Possibly. There ARE some who don't like Fred, obviously. However, I have a cousin who isn't so keen on him and this cousin of mine stopped going to matches for probably about 15 years pre-1992, and spent all that time saying to me why do I go and watch that shite all the time. Even for many years when I lived a long way from Newcastle, or especially so.

 

Now he says he has "always supported the club" and occasionally slags off the board. I suspect that - as much as I like him - the complete irony of what he says passes him by --- this is more the norm I suspect.

 

The simple fact is - we have spent loads of money - again. Only well run clubs with good boards get themselves in a position to do this. It is not automatic, they do it because they desire success and are prepared to take risks to do it. You underestimate the value of this. This is all I have ever said, along with the fact that as very few clubs have done better than us, and we have risen so much in the last 14 years, replacing them with better is far from guaranteed and in fact probably extremely difficult, so people should be careful what they wish for and examine the facts that are put up here - along with the views of Rob concerning McKeag etc should not be ignored by you's.

Edited September 6, 2006 by LeazesMag

[Kevin Carr's Gloves 3181]

For someone who actually suffered the days when we really were shite, to suggest we are shite now is also stupid and embarrassing and saying football has changed as some justification for not doing so is stupid and embarrassing. Every club plays on the same playing field, in any era, the simple fact is we are capitalising on our potential, when we didn't before, and its that easy.

193059[/snapback]

 

Its all swings and roundabouts though, people only know what they have experienced, you fully experienced the shite years, I have memories of it but the young fans coming through only know us as being a big club.

 

Get someone on who was around in the 50's when we were a big club winning successive cup finals and they'll tell you a different story again.

193068[/snapback]

 

Possibly. There ARE some who don't like Fred, obviously. However, I have a cousin who isn't so keen on him and this cousin of mine stopped going to matches for probably about 15 years pre-1992, and spent all that time saying to me why do I go and watch that shite all the time. Even for many years when I lived a long way from Newcastle, or especially so.

 

Now he says he has "always supported the club" and occasionally slags off the board. I suspect that - as much as I like him - the complete irony of what he says passes him by --- this is more the norm I suspect.

 

The simple fact is - we have spent loads of money - again. Only well run clubs with good boards get themselves in a position to do this. It is not automatic, they do it because they desire success and are prepared to take risks to do it. You underestimate the value of this. This is all I have ever said, along with the fact that as very few clubs have done better than us, and we have risen so much in the last 14 years, replacing them with better is far from guaranteed and in fact probably extremely difficult, so people should be careful what they wish for and examine the facts that are put up here - along with the views of Rob concerning McKeag etc should not be ignored by you's.

194114[/snapback]

 

 

No well supported clubs with lots of high ARPF (Average revenue per Fan) can do that. Even ones whose success in the transfer market has been abysmal in recent times. That success is down to the management of the club and the decisions are the chairmans. The manager should say I want this player. The chairman should then ask why, how they will fit into the team, ask for reports and a business proposal how this would benefit the club. He shouldn't just give him the money to spend on sh*te. He should also not have an agent working on the premises saying "I have someone free want to buy him".

[sweetleftpeg 0]

Unlike other clubs, NUFC are a cash cow. Big season ticket sales added to the fact you get a shit load of people, a large majority who don't even go to games either, buying tonnes of merchandise. That's what all this ridiculous Geordie Nation shit is about, getting people to buy into NUFC as a regional pride thing, even if they aren't that bothered about football.

[adios 717]

Does anyone pay any attention to anything Leazes writes anymore. He is just turning into Shepherds mouthpiece. It's becoming embarrasing TBH.

192103[/snapback]

[Toonpack 6766]

Unlike other clubs, NUFC are a cash cow. Big season ticket sales added to the fact you get a shit load of people, a large majority who don't even go to games either,  buying tonnes of merchandise. That's what all this ridiculous Geordie Nation shit is about, getting people to buy into NUFC as a regional pride thing, even if they aren't that bothered about football.

194358[/snapback]

 

Totally agree, tbh even an imbecile could make money with the NUFC “brand” and they always could (a’la McKeag, Seymour et al). The old saying goes “you’d get 20,000 Geordies in to watch the grass grow at St James”

 

If anything it is easier to make even greater sums these days than it was 30 years ago, the fact we can generate cash is not a measure of how good (or not) the current directors are. The simple fact is that, given the cash that we do generate, we should be performing better - at all levels from a first class scouting network through to the first team (a strategy anyone ???).

 

The only difference between now and 30 years ago is that, because of the nature of the game these days, we now generate SO MUCH dosh, that there’s plenty for the directors/shareholders to get fat(ter) on. But there’s also plenty left over. It is the incompetence with which the “left over” is utilised which is the problem, and THAT is down to “the management” (and I don’t mean Souness).

 

We should have a plan for the growth of the business, we should not be chopping and changing managers every 5 minutes, we should not be writing off vast sums on crap transfers (with monotonous regularity) and we most certainly shouldn’t be skint.

[Guest alex]

Good post TP

[Kevin Carr's Gloves 3181]

Does anyone pay any attention to anything Leazes writes anymore. He is just turning into Shepherds mouthpiece. It's becoming embarrasing TBH.

192103[/snapback]

194386[/snapback]

 

I know but I can't help it.

[Renton 17622]

Unlike other clubs, NUFC are a cash cow. Big season ticket sales added to the fact you get a shit load of people, a large majority who don't even go to games either,  buying tonnes of merchandise. That's what all this ridiculous Geordie Nation shit is about, getting people to buy into NUFC as a regional pride thing, even if they aren't that bothered about football.

194358[/snapback]

 

Totally agree, tbh even an imbecile could make money with the NUFC “brand” and they always could (a’la McKeag, Seymour et al). The old saying goes “you’d get 20,000 Geordies in to watch the grass grow at St James”

 

If anything it is easier to make even greater sums these days than it was 30 years ago, the fact we can generate cash is not a measure of how good (or not) the current directors are. The simple fact is that, given the cash that we do generate, we should be performing better - at all levels from a first class scouting network through to the first team (a strategy anyone ???).

 

The only difference between now and 30 years ago is that, because of the nature of the game these days, we now generate SO MUCH dosh, that there’s plenty for the directors/shareholders to get fat(ter) on. But there’s also plenty left over. It is the incompetence with which the “left over” is utilised which is the problem, and THAT is down to “the management” (and I don’t mean Souness).

 

We should have a plan for the growth of the business, we should not be chopping and changing managers every 5 minutes, we should not be writing off vast sums on crap transfers (with monotonous regularity) and we most certainly shouldn’t be skint.

194390[/snapback]

 

Spot on.

[Craig 6287]

I'd love to know how much cash we've thrown away in terms of compensation over the last 8 years. Souness in particular who cost us, not only for sacking him, but also for buying him out of his Blackburn contract.

[East Stander 0]

Best serious post for a long time TP. Sums up the whole situation perfectly.

[LeazesMag 0]

Unlike other clubs, NUFC are a cash cow. Big season ticket sales added to the fact you get a shit load of people, a large majority who don't even go to games either,  buying tonnes of merchandise. That's what all this ridiculous Geordie Nation shit is about, getting people to buy into NUFC as a regional pride thing, even if they aren't that bothered about football.

194358[/snapback]

 

Totally agree, tbh even an imbecile could make money with the NUFC “brand” and they always could (a’la McKeag, Seymour et al). The old saying goes “you’d get 20,000 Geordies in to watch the grass grow at St James”

 

If anything it is easier to make even greater sums these days than it was 30 years ago, the fact we can generate cash is not a measure of how good (or not) the current directors are. The simple fact is that, given the cash that we do generate, we should be performing better - at all levels from a first class scouting network through to the first team (a strategy anyone ???).

 

The only difference between now and 30 years ago is that, because of the nature of the game these days, we now generate SO MUCH dosh, that there’s plenty for the directors/shareholders to get fat(ter) on. But there’s also plenty left over. It is the incompetence with which the “left over” is utilised which is the problem, and THAT is down to “the management” (and I don’t mean Souness).

 

We should have a plan for the growth of the business, we should not be chopping and changing managers every 5 minutes, we should not be writing off vast sums on crap transfers (with monotonous regularity) and we most certainly shouldn’t be skint.

194390[/snapback]

 

If it is easier to generate cash, please explain why the mackems aren't doing it, or Wolves, or Sheffied Wed to name 3 ?

 

The fact - and always has been the simple fact - is that the field is level for everybody in all or any era , how much advantage you take of it to ourperform your rivals at any particular time, is on merit.

[adios 717]

If I race someone over 3 legs, and after the 1st leg I cut off both my opponents legs, is the race even over the last 2 legs?

[Ted Maul 0]

If I race someone over 3 legs, and after the 1st leg I cut off both my opponents legs, is the race even over the last 2 legs?

194835[/snapback]

 

[Toonpack 6766]

Unlike other clubs, NUFC are a cash cow. Big season ticket sales added to the fact you get a shit load of people, a large majority who don't even go to games either,  buying tonnes of merchandise. That's what all this ridiculous Geordie Nation shit is about, getting people to buy into NUFC as a regional pride thing, even if they aren't that bothered about football.

194358[/snapback]

 

Totally agree, tbh even an imbecile could make money with the NUFC “brand” and they always could (a’la McKeag, Seymour et al). The old saying goes “you’d get 20,000 Geordies in to watch the grass grow at St James”

 

If anything it is easier to make even greater sums these days than it was 30 years ago, the fact we can generate cash is not a measure of how good (or not) the current directors are. The simple fact is that, given the cash that we do generate, we should be performing better - at all levels from a first class scouting network through to the first team (a strategy anyone ???).

 

The only difference between now and 30 years ago is that, because of the nature of the game these days, we now generate SO MUCH dosh, that there’s plenty for the directors/shareholders to get fat(ter) on. But there’s also plenty left over. It is the incompetence with which the “left over” is utilised which is the problem, and THAT is down to “the management” (and I don’t mean Souness).

 

We should have a plan for the growth of the business, we should not be chopping and changing managers every 5 minutes, we should not be writing off vast sums on crap transfers (with monotonous regularity) and we most certainly shouldn’t be skint.

194390[/snapback]

 

If it is easier to generate cash, please explain why the mackems aren't doing it, or Wolves, or Sheffied Wed to name 3 ?

 

The fact - and always has been the simple fact - is that the field is level for everybody in all or any era , how much advantage you take of it to ourperform your rivals at any particular time, is on merit.

194823[/snapback]

 

I never said it was easy to generate cash for everyone, what I said was:

 

even an imbecile could make money with the NUFC “brand” and they always could (a’la McKeag, Seymour et al)

 

Any comparison to the poor performers is irrelevant and missleading, our current "extra richness" is to do with riding the Keegan wave for a few years and the position that put us in. Not to mention 52,000 every week. Level playing field my arse, we were in a GREAT position but that position is now being badly squandered.

 

Despite the irrelevance IMO of the point you make, IF David Kelly had never scored that goal and we'd gone down and IF we were "doing a Sheff Wed" we would still by comparison be much better off than them because of the unique nature of this club.

 

There is no kudos due to "powers that be" because we can say "thank fuck we're not Sunderland, Wolves or Sheff Wed". Because we are rightly asking "why aren't we Liverpool or Arsenal" in terms of both on-field performance AND club image/professionalism.

Edited September 8, 2006 by Toonpack

[Guest alex]

Leazes got pwned

[luckypierre 0]

[Dr Gloom 19736]

Unlike other clubs, NUFC are a cash cow. Big season ticket sales added to the fact you get a shit load of people, a large majority who don't even go to games either,  buying tonnes of merchandise. That's what all this ridiculous Geordie Nation shit is about, getting people to buy into NUFC as a regional pride thing, even if they aren't that bothered about football.

194358[/snapback]

 

Totally agree, tbh even an imbecile could make money with the NUFC “brand” and they always could (a’la McKeag, Seymour et al). The old saying goes “you’d get 20,000 Geordies in to watch the grass grow at St James”

 

If anything it is easier to make even greater sums these days than it was 30 years ago, the fact we can generate cash is not a measure of how good (or not) the current directors are. The simple fact is that, given the cash that we do generate, we should be performing better - at all levels from a first class scouting network through to the first team (a strategy anyone ???).

 

The only difference between now and 30 years ago is that, because of the nature of the game these days, we now generate SO MUCH dosh, that there’s plenty for the directors/shareholders to get fat(ter) on. But there’s also plenty left over. It is the incompetence with which the “left over” is utilised which is the problem, and THAT is down to “the management” (and I don’t mean Souness).

 

We should have a plan for the growth of the business, we should not be chopping and changing managers every 5 minutes, we should not be writing off vast sums on crap transfers (with monotonous regularity) and we most certainly shouldn’t be skint.

194390[/snapback]

 

If it is easier to generate cash, please explain why the mackems aren't doing it, or Wolves, or Sheffied Wed to name 3 ?

 

The fact - and always has been the simple fact - is that the field is level for everybody in all or any era , how much advantage you take of it to ourperform your rivals at any particular time, is on merit.

194823[/snapback]

 

I never said it was easy to generate cash for everyone, what I said was:

 

even an imbecile could make money with the NUFC “brand” and they always could (a’la McKeag, Seymour et al)

 

Any comparison to the poor performers is irrelevant and missleading, our current "extra richness" is to do with riding the Keegan wave for a few years and the position that put us in. Not to mention 52,000 every week. Level playing field my arse, we were in a GREAT position but that position is now being badly squandered.

 

Despite the irrelevance IMO of the point you make, IF David Kelly had never scored that goal and we'd gone down and IF we were "doing a Sheff Wed" we would still by comparison be much better off than them because of the unique nature of this club.

 

There is no kudos due to "powers that be" because we can say "thank fuck we're not Sunderland, Wolves or Sheff Wed". Because we are rightly asking "why aren't we Liverpool or Arsenal" in terms of both on-field performance AND club image/professionalism.

195064[/snapback]

 

spot on. this is where leazezmag's argument falls flat on its arse.

 

i wonder if he's got an answer to this

[afternoonfix 0]

Perhaps our timing was wrong. If we had signed Damien Duff or Oba Martins on transfer deadline day our fans would have been dancing in the street.

 

he has a point..

[LeazesMag 0]

Unlike other clubs, NUFC are a cash cow. Big season ticket sales added to the fact you get a shit load of people, a large majority who don't even go to games either,  buying tonnes of merchandise. That's what all this ridiculous Geordie Nation shit is about, getting people to buy into NUFC as a regional pride thing, even if they aren't that bothered about football.

194358[/snapback]

 

Totally agree, tbh even an imbecile could make money with the NUFC “brand” and they always could (a’la McKeag, Seymour et al). The old saying goes “you’d get 20,000 Geordies in to watch the grass grow at St James”

 

If anything it is easier to make even greater sums these days than it was 30 years ago, the fact we can generate cash is not a measure of how good (or not) the current directors are. The simple fact is that, given the cash that we do generate, we should be performing better - at all levels from a first class scouting network through to the first team (a strategy anyone ???).

 

The only difference between now and 30 years ago is that, because of the nature of the game these days, we now generate SO MUCH dosh, that there’s plenty for the directors/shareholders to get fat(ter) on. But there’s also plenty left over. It is the incompetence with which the “left over” is utilised which is the problem, and THAT is down to “the management” (and I don’t mean Souness).

 

We should have a plan for the growth of the business, we should not be chopping and changing managers every 5 minutes, we should not be writing off vast sums on crap transfers (with monotonous regularity) and we most certainly shouldn’t be skint.

194390[/snapback]

 

If it is easier to generate cash, please explain why the mackems aren't doing it, or Wolves, or Sheffied Wed to name 3 ?

 

The fact - and always has been the simple fact - is that the field is level for everybody in all or any era , how much advantage you take of it to ourperform your rivals at any particular time, is on merit.

194823[/snapback]

 

I never said it was easy to generate cash for everyone, what I said was:

 

even an imbecile could make money with the NUFC “brand” and they always could (a’la McKeag, Seymour et al)

 

Any comparison to the poor performers is irrelevant and missleading, our current "extra richness" is to do with riding the Keegan wave for a few years and the position that put us in. Not to mention 52,000 every week. Level playing field my arse, we were in a GREAT position but that position is now being badly squandered.

 

Despite the irrelevance IMO of the point you make, IF David Kelly had never scored that goal and we'd gone down and IF we were "doing a Sheff Wed" we would still by comparison be much better off than them because of the unique nature of this club.

 

There is no kudos due to "powers that be" because we can say "thank fuck we're not Sunderland, Wolves or Sheff Wed". Because we are rightly asking "why aren't we Liverpool or Arsenal" in terms of both on-field performance AND club image/professionalism.

195064[/snapback]

 

It isn't that simple. Numerous clubs have sank to far lower positions than where we are now, from far higher ones. These were also "squandered" opportunities. Football is different to normal business too. The manager of the club - coupled with the fact that in terms of the very few trophies to be won if this is what is meant by "success" mean it is impossible for every club to forever be "successful". A lot of people - especially other fans of other clubs - would say that appearing in europe the amount of times we have done in the last decade, filling the ground every week, buying top England and other international players, is successful - as we would too before 1992, and we did. And indeed it is, in the overall picture. Not as successful as we would like, but its hardly crap either.

 

There has been nothing to stop the clubs I mention from being ambitious or trying to be, the mackems have the potential to be just like us. There was nothing either to stop us showing the ambition back in the 60's, 70's and 80's. We had a platform to move on 3 times during these periods - The Fairs cup win, the european qualification under Lee and the promotion team under Cox with Gazza, Waddle and Beardsley coming through. ALL these situations were squandered, and in fact the past decade has surpassedd ALL of those periods in every possible way. On merit, because they attempted to do it because they wanted to do because they had the courage to do it.

 

You may not like the board very much, through not looking at the bigger picture and through them [ ie Fred as Chairman although he is not the major shareholder and wasn't before ] taking over from someone who was better, but it doesn't mean you should not recognise what they have done - on and off the field - and at least give credit where it is deserved.