• The first stage of the forum upgrades has now been completed but they remain in a degraded state and are still being worked on. Normal posting/reading should now be possible.
    Please read this thread for more details.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.

When it rains, it pours...

Status
Not open for further replies.
reginald_molehusband said:
Why 5 seasons? Our net spend under Ashley's tenure is a whopping £37M, or £3.7M a season.

In these days of the cash strapped football industry, I have to say that's incredible generosity on his behalf.
Click to expand...

Actually, for a club outside the top six, that's about where it should be. You need to look at the gross numbers - £500m in, £470m out (that's an example - I can't be arsed to look up the real numbers) is a transfer policy that's working really well. That implies buying decent players, and getting your money back on them most of the time.
 

Grumpy Old Man said:
Actually, for a club outside the top six, that's about where it should be. You need to look at the gross numbers - £500m in, £470m out (that's an example - I can't be arsed to look up the real numbers) is a transfer policy that's working really well. That implies buying decent players, and getting your money back on them most of the time.
Click to expand...

The same transfer policy has seen us relegated twice in that period, costing the club circa £70M, so I wouldn't say it was working 'really well' at all.
 
Grumpy Old Man said:
Actually, for a club outside the top six, that's about where it should be. You need to look at the gross numbers - £500m in, £470m out (that's an example - I can't be arsed to look up the real numbers) is a transfer policy that's working really well. That implies buying decent players, and getting your money back on them most of the time.
Click to expand...
Don't talk daft, football fans don't want their clubs sensibly financed.
 
Sima said:
So he didn’t spend a penny before we were relegated but he should take the blame for spending money leading us to be relegated?

:lol:
Click to expand...
Not for getting you relegated McClaren spent that money. Just stating that he's been backed.
 
safc_grindon said:
Nope - I said 'you started banging on about obsession' in reference to the conversation we were having. It was you accusing me of it. I didn't say you were first to do it, not by any means - and that's irrelevant. I said you accused me of it. And you STILL haven't admitted that that's clearly not true.

Sunderland getting relegated (again) would be far worse than them being taken over. That wasn't the point, though, was it? The point was them being taken over and given heavy investment - like, as said, City - would be awful for Sunderland fans to have to endure, when we're so shit.

You've dodged round it a few times, and answered other points, but that's essentially what I've been saying from the start. For Newcastle to become "City-like rich" while we're clearly so awful would only add to our feeling of despair. Hence it doesn't rain, but it pours.

Anyhow, enjoy the last day of your holiday. And good day to you, too.
Click to expand...
Your words, "started banging on about obsession", I didn't I Accused you of it, there are 3 other posters including Cartwright who alluded to it first. The point still is, Sunderland are shit, sort our own house in order, until then nowt else matters. Lunchtime
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top