What do you think? You can have your say by posting below.
If you do not already have an account Click here to Register.

The club has changed and so has the league, did Fulham get the man over us because he thought they were better than us, they started the deal ages ago where we came in late or was it because it is a London club as that certainly has a pull.

Everybody gets caught up on the forward, which I admit I was p@ssed of about it, but look at the side in general, I would rather have ours than a lot in the league obvious taking away the top 6 and a couple of others. The forward aint the only reason you win a game, plenty teams get by with goals from all areas, which I think the toon are capable of, we have defence which can score and a midfield which will get goals. Best will easy get 10-15 goals which is bloody good going, not many teams outside the top 6 can say that, add in some by BA and Shola (if we are lucky).

Would everybody be happy if we sp@nked 15 million and finished 10th or go along with what we are doing and still finish 10th. I am not getting carried away with the start we have had but always thought we would shock a few this year, and thought 10th is possible. I agree we can't let anybody else go in Jan who would be viewed as a first teamer.

I would like the club to invest a little but more, but then have always said that I would be happy if we didn't spend if it meant we still got players in (free contract), would people whinge had we got somebody of Crouch's standard had he been a free.

I am f@cking sick of all this negatively about the club, f@cking get real when following the team when I was younger we were really sh@t, I remember the days of Davey Mac, Reoder and the rest of the sh@t we had. Get behind the team and move on from this Andy Carroll money, FFS it comes up every week

While your argument is without doubt good its also besides the point.

I am posing one simple question what league are we now in. Its alright keep telling us what league we are not in.

And the fulham argument holds up just fine, a knee jerk reaction to attempt to apease the easily baffled.

January an Nzogba anyone?

So what league are we in then?

Quote:

davenufc
While your argument is without doubt good its also besides the point.
I am posing one simple question what league are we now in. Its alright keep telling us what league we are not in.

And the fulham argument holds up just fine, a knee jerk reaction to attempt to apease the easily baffled.

January an Nzogba anyone?

So what league are we in then?

So how is it beside the point, I am pointing out the club invested in other areas of the team which was needed, more options in midfield and we got a LB in as we all knew that Enrique was leaving. All the discussion is about a forward and nothing else and I am pointing out a team is made up off more than one position.

Zog was split on here is we should have got him, and I am sure that his history could have easliy been taken into account if we went after him or not. Personally I would have taken the chance on him if the money was right but not on what Villa paid especially with the past dealing with the club.

If Cabaye lives upto his standard then he would certainly have cost more than we got him for, but then doesn't that make us better than the rest as we had good scouting. Ben Arfa, Gosling, Tiote are oter players, we got them way below what was expected. Marveaux is another on a free and people are wanting him to start

It's not all about the money spent but the point I am trying to make is the players brought in

Aye canny question dave but TTID makes a good point. Are Stoke in a different league from us because they brought in a striker and spent more than us. We brought in more players than them and I wouldnt swap their signings for ours. Two perma crocks, a DM who has lost his head and couldnt lace Tiote's boots and two very average stikers, one of whom was a large fee and big wages.

I actually like the way Stoke have done things the last few years though...Slowly. Every year adding to the squad.

Put QPR in there as well. I dont rate any of their new back four. Barton is quality but there is baggage. SWP will run hot and cold and has done nothing over the last 5-6 years. Two average strikers. What they have at the minute is experience and some spirit. If their owner is going to keep pumping money in then great for them. If he isnt then they have spent a fortune on fees and wages and pull in 16,000 fans at home. Thats not sustainable.

To answer your question I would put us mid table in the transfer market and Im pleased with it. We were close to top of the table in transfer money spent a few years back....and were regularly relegation fodder in terms of how good our team was. Leading ultimately to.... relegation.

We're in the Everton league. We can't keep our best players (Arteta, Piennar, Given, Barton) and top prospects (Rooney, Gosling, Milner, Carroll), because we won't pay the wages. History and fan base suggests we should be higher, but the table doesn't lie.

Dave, you ask if Stoke and Fulham are leagues above us now, the answer is yes. We have not played a competitive match on the continent since the spring of 2007. In other words, if we somehow sneak into the UEFA cup next season, it will have been after a 6 year absence. In football term that's 33% of a player's professional career (excepting Ryan Giggs).

Dave, I realize it was a rhetorical question, but I say ask yourself the following: If you were Bryan Ruiz or Peter Crouch, would you rather play in front of 50,000 fans for 20 home games a year and an international broadcast maybe 6 times out of the 45 games a year, or in front of 25,000 fans 30 matches a year and an international broadcast 15 times out of the 60? I know which one I would pick.

So Stoke are in a higher league than us because they overpaid for Jerome and Crouch, the very player who most on here didn't want and were criticising the club for showing an interest in!


Fulham are in a higher league than us because they signed a player who they were negotiating with and he was decent enough to complete negotiations with Fulham instead of doing a runner at the first mention of a possibly better offer! Also take into account the fact that many on here conveniently forget about which is the player has stated he wanted to live in London! Fulham = London, Newcastle = hundreds of miles away!

As for us being in Everton's league because we cant keep our best players, who exactly other than Enrique haven't we been able to keep?

Does that put us in the same league as Arsenal because they can't keep their best players either, MAn Utd couldn't keep hold of Ronaldo so does that mean we are in the same league as them?

The management are right when they state we aren't in the same league as the top clubs and even the likes of spurs but i would say we have bought better quality players than the clubs that finished around us and even a few places above us last season!

Toontillde Sorry it is besides the point. This is a question not about who we have or have not brought in.

Its not even a question about who we may or may not bring in.

Its simply a question of what league of clubs are we competing against for transfers.

if we could have that actually explianed we could then temper our expectations accordingly.

This to be honest is not even a footballing question, its just pointing out that every single time we supposedly go in for someone and do not get him, Labia explains he was priced out of our league.

He says it so often I am suprised he doesn't repeat it in greggs stocking up on FCW's pies.

What he never tells us though is what league we are in.

And if the everton equation is right, and I suspect it probably is then we are @#$%&.

My guess is the official policy is we don't go after anyone who has attracted attention from another PL club. I bet that any or all of Maiga, Pieters & Cissokho will soon be at other PL (or Spanish/Italian-who offer comparable money) clubs. If we think a player will get an offer comparable to ours, why bother?

Mental-let's try another example. Real paid 80M for Ronaldo-too much, because nobody's worth that (I just mean footballers and relatively: Chicharito @ 6M; a reasonable scale). Does Real's willingness (not ability: MA has one of the largest personal fortunes among PL owners) to pay-over the odds at times-for that sort of player put them in a "higher league" than us? Indeed, it does.

More relevant to this issue than whether a team sells good players (they all do) is what happens after. EFC has reinvested the funds in the past and I will be surprised if they don't again. (In any case Kenwright can believably claim relative poverty and he's gotten that message out directly to the fans.) Ronaldo left United, but then United spent 50M+ while selling only squad players.

Stoke and Fulham (and recently Villa, Sunderland and Spurs) have decided that they want to move up the table and that part of the formula is spending market rates on quality players. NUFC behave differently, therefore either:

-NUFC does not believe that spending market rates on quality players is necessary to move up the table

or

-NUFC does not care to move up the table.

I have my opinion but I've given up trying to convince anyone.

Quote:

waffles
Dave, I realize it was a rhetorical question, but I say ask yourself the following: If you were Bryan Ruiz or Peter Crouch, would you rather play in front of 50,000 fans for 20 home games a year and an international broadcast maybe 6 times out of the 45 games a year, or in front of 25,000 fans 30 matches a year and an international broadcast 15 times out of the 60? I know which one I would pick.

I think that some of it also comes down to, where your family and friends are living.

I would of course prefer to play in Newcastle any day, but if you put yourself in another country, maybe that would not really matter..

I think we got some pretty good bargains, even though HBA have not really played since january (?). BUT, we really needed another striker, and one with a bit of pace..

The whole London thing is overblown. There are a lot of people in this world who specifically dislike big cities/urban lifestyle. I'm sure plenty of them are footballers. I don't think we're missing out on many because they refuse to live in Newcastle. I mean, isn't Liverpool a backward, crime-ridden s.hithole?

liverpool is, Birmingham has no redeaming features what so ever, Manchester is bleak and crime ridden, and speaking as someone who lived in London for four years I fail to see the attratction.

I am biased I know, but Newcastle is the only UK big city I would actually choose to live in.

However I have to be honest here and say although I grew up a city kid I would rather not live in a city any more, Newcastle offeres that within eay comuter distance.

I've lived in NYC for 8 years now-visiting Tyneside earlier this year was a nice change of pace. If I had a job waiting for me, I'd be off (the wife even liked it).

Funniest part of all of it is that I ride a train for an hour every day-just to commute. If you were dying for nightlife/culture as an NUFC player you could go to London (or Amsterdam for that matter) every damn weekend.

There may have been occasions where newcastle being smaller and a bit quieter made a player choose us but there'll have been a lot more occasions when it has gone against us!

Look at Jenas and his whole fishbowl saga, Barton has recently tweeted how nice it was being able to go out in the city centre for a coffee and not be recognised!

Harry Redknapp made it clear he didn't want to move this far north!

Why would a player use this excuse if it wasn't true!

I don't think any one is saying that they do not believe it to be true, at least I wasn't.

Merely that usually they are not going by experience.

I do believe it's true but probably not that frequently. Money and likelihood of winning anything will have been determining factors #1 and 2 in most of those decisions.

Quote:

davenufc
Toontillde Sorry it is besides the point. This is a question not about who we have or have not brought in.
Its not even a question about who we may or may not bring in.

Its simply a question of what league of clubs are we competing against for transfers.

But all you are looking at Dave is the money spent, rather than the quality brought in which we did good business on those who actually signed. I fully understand the question and do see your point about is money available and can we compete with teams in the league to bring in a player who actually costs money, which was the case when it came to the forward.

We went after the lad who went to Fulham, offered the club a amount they wanted and according to sky on deadline day offered them more wages than Fulham. To me the deal was going to struggle for a number of reasons, it was so late where Fulham had basically agreed in advance. So I suppose it is was not going to happen as if you were the player you would probably sign for the club that showed a lot of interest from a earlier stage and had agreed with them, just how we got Santon.

Regarding the league I would say we are mid table, which is in the guide of when the club should finish, which to me is good business. Lots of club who are around our standard spend more than they should, Sunderland spend loads and the bubble has to burst. QPR needed it as there team was a championship one who would have went down, and there is no way they can maintain it otherwise they will go under as they don't have the fan base as well as the commercial side. QPR need massive investment of the pitch new staduim and a training ground as they are using Chelsea old one, so that will obviously long term have a effect on the transfer dealings. We are defo in a better position of Everton as they can't manage the premiership money with the debt they bring in, constantly going on loans, maybe in the past they spent but not over the last couple of years.

I don't think it makes a massive difference on where you live if you are a top club challenging for the title and european cup, as Manchester has proved, people will live out of London. Newcastle in the past under Keegan. But if the team isn't going to challenge for anything and the money was about the same most decent foriegners would probaly choose the capital

Sorry Toontillde but we seem to be having two seperate arguments here.

Its not about money spent (or lack of it, and it is lack of it)

Its to do with the fact he gives the same excuse time after time, I am merely trying to call the excuse into play and ask what league it is.

If only there was a new excuse occasionely, but its always this old chestnut.

I do agree that the same old cr@p that comes out of his gob is the same old rubbish, where he should be more honest. The thing is how many clubs actually come out and talk about signings and who they are going to get.

Blackburn used to, and when they were taken over they were talking about the worlds best players and we see what happened, a load of rubbish. Fulham didn't come out and say they were getting a forward, just went ahead and did it.

Problem with the toon is, is the fans wanted a forward and so did AP, club have other thoughts or not being realistic about the cost of players or leaving it to late. I am hoping that the club learns from this one and sort it out in Jan, personally I think it will be a loan as I suppose you will pay a premium in Jan which we won't do.

I agree I mean I don't expect them to ring me up personally and run it by me (although to be frank they could do worse)

Its really the reptative argument that was begining to grind.

ransfers by there very nature have to be speculative and carry a degree of secrecey.

But I would of thought by continually saying this one was out of our league, or that one etc.

They are demeaning the club and frankly the fans inteligence.

That was really my argument.

It did promote some debate though, which is usually what I look to do in these things so in that alone it was succesful.

Quote:

davenufc
I agree I mean I don't expect them to ring me up personally and run it by me (although to be frank they could do worse)

Quote:

Biffins Bridge
Put QPR in there as well. I dont rate any of their new back four. Barton is quality but there is baggage. SWP will run hot and cold and has done nothing over the last 5-6 years. Two average strikers. What they have at the minute is experience and some spirit. If their owner is going to keep pumping money in then great for them. If he isnt then they have spent a fortune on fees and wages and pull in 16,000 fans at home. Thats not sustainable.

Its nice to stumble on this after they were spanked 6-0. I know it wont happen every week but I stand by my comments on the players they brought in.

Fair enough, though I wouldn't want anyone judging our team from last season based solely on our 0-4 demolishing by Stoke.

Im not judging their team on the big loss which I sort of said on my post pal. Just remember how the press were right up Warnocks ar.se following the signings he made. Many average on big money.

Bothroyd and Traore were wastes of time/money.

Luke Young and Anton Ferdinand aren't worldbeaters but they're better than what QPR had, for sure.

Campbell, Barton and SWP are quality additions at a total combined outlay of about 5-6M, tops. I do think Warnock & Co did pretty well at improving a squad that most had nailed on for relegation over the course of about 10 days.

campbell is a quality addition? As for SWP he can run and thats about it

QPR needed investment quickly and not a bad thing that they have done, but it is not that they can run like this every year, so they will need to re-look at how much is spent, as longterm financially they cant last with the size of the stadium and the needed development work on the training ground

What do you think of Best & Obertan, mental? I don't think they're any better than Campbell and SWP but they can certainly help a non-sugar daddy backed PL side. "Quality addition" is not the same as "worldbeater".

But soemtimes you need to have the options like Obertan personnaly I would play Marvaeux but for the cash in the premiership it is a good signing

I don't disagree. He's been useful but not spectacular. QPR supporters probably feel the same about SWP.

Really glad that we didn't go for somebody like SWP, great on his day but too inconsistance, especially on the wages that he will on

we've bought a player who can cut it in the premier league and has a lot of future potential!

QPR have bought in SWP a player who has made some big moves and each time has been found out to not offer a lot!

Clubs again and again look at his pace and are taken in by it and then realise that really thats all he has to offer!

We can agree to disagree, but I think you've overevaluated Obertan there. He'll be 23 at the end of the season, not 18 so I think what you see is what you get. He's only a year and a half younger than Aaron Lennon for example, and I don't think anyone's waiting for him to add another dimension to his game at this point.

SWP is on higher wages, no doubt. He also has 39 top-flight and 6 full international goals to Obertan's respective 4 and 0. QPR was more in need of a veteran presence than us, so SWP was the right choice for them while Obertan was right for us.

Yeah I would agree, both clubs got what we wanted, we got somebody who was cheap and less of a gamble and with his pace could offer us another dimension. QPR got expereince