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

How long can Rafa last?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Seen there on Sky Sports the Mags are linked with Batshuayi and Shaw? Can't imagine Ashley sanctioning those wages.
Roughly £100k each A week?
 
What A Waster said:
In the last 10 years Stoke with the biggest net spend of those three have finished between 9th and 16th, no relegations.

West Brom have had one relegation in 09 and one promotion in 2010 and have never finished below 15th since the relegation.

Newcastle have had two relegations in 10 years and just stayed up on game 37 in 2013 and game 38 in 2015.

So teams that spend more and speculate to accumulate tend to do better.
Click to expand...
Newcastle spent £120m MORE than West Brom and £102m MORE than Stoke in that period what they received in sales is irrelevant.
 
Binxy said:
Newcastle spent £120m MORE than West Brom and £102m MORE than Stoke in that period what they received in sales is irrelevant.
Click to expand...

We'll never agree so best just to leave it there then. I get the impression you're too biased to have a level headed doscussion about it because it concerns Newcastle. Pointless retreading the same ground to reach the same conclusion.
 
The Fish said:
Signing a player chiefly to sell him for a profit is a risky strategy, even more so when the needs of the team are secondary to the need to make a profit.
.
Click to expand...

you say this as if it is a pre-meditaded plan. if it were that simple, then he and every other chairman would be at it constantly. your scouts want most of the praise for finding such players for relative low prices. if they turn out to be worth 10 times more than what you bought them for after a season or too, nearly every club outside of the top 6 then sell them on. its nothing new and nothing splits ashley apart from other chairman. it just happened to occur at Newcastle several times in succession and on a grand scale.
 
What A Waster said:
We'll never agree so best just to leave it there then. I get the impression you're too biased to have a level headed doscussion about it because it concerns Newcastle. Pointless retreading the same ground to reach the same conclusion.
Click to expand...
Not biased at all, just don't get all this net spend bollocks. Spurs for example have a net spend of £2m over the past 5 seasons so by Newcastle fans logic surely they should have been relegated not fighting for the title.
 
I suppose all these mags who bang on about net spend work on that when negotiating their pay rise in their so called ‘jobs’.
 
Binxy said:
Not biased at all, just don't get all this net spend bollocks. Spurs for example have a net spend of £2m over the past 5 seasons so by Newcastle fans logic surely they should have been relegated not fighting for the title.
Click to expand...

Newcastle fans and logic just doesn't go together that's why it makes no sense.
 
tunstallhill said:
you say this as if it is a pre-meditaded plan. if it were that simple, then he and every other chairman would be at it constantly. your scouts want most of the praise for finding such players for relative low prices. if they turn out to be worth 10 times more than what you bought them for after a season or too, nearly every club outside of the top 6 then sell them on. its nothing new and nothing splits ashley apart from other chairman. it just happened to occur at Newcastle several times in succession and on a grand scale.
Click to expand...
Wish we could have made huge profits on players instead of the huge losses we've made, Ashley should be applauded.
 
Binxy said:
Not biased at all, just don't get all this net spend bollocks. Spurs for example have a net spend of £2m over the past 5 seasons so by Newcastle fans logic surely they should have been relegated not fighting for the title.
Click to expand...

No, there's always going to be anomalies. Palace or QPR for example. It's a massive factor though. Have a look at net spend vs average league position over the same period and there'll be a clear correlation. Same as wage bill vs league position tends to show if you're paying more you've got better players and tend to finish higher
 
What A Waster said:
No, there's always going to be anomalies. Palace or QPR for example. It's a massive factor though. Have a look at net spend vs average league position over the same period and there'll be a clear correlation. Same as wage bill vs league position tends to show if you're paying more you've got better players and tend to finish higher
Click to expand...
Like I said earlier Newcastle have spent more than most clubs (and will have on wages as well). The fact they received huge sums for their players doesn't alter these facts.
 
What A Waster said:
No, there's always going to be anomalies. Palace or QPR for example. It's a massive factor though. Have a look at net spend vs average league position over the same period and there'll be a clear correlation. Same as wage bill vs league position tends to show if you're paying more you've got better players and tend to finish higher
Click to expand...
Did you's all use this argument when other managers were doing so poorly?
 
f***ing Rafa man ... Even he must be thinking what a bunch of simple bastards :lol:

At least when hes been defended and worshiped (well Liverpool) at other clubs because of his achievements. The Mags can't accept it and get into their thick heads hes not all that now hes very much a manager who's stock is on the way down rapidly unlike his waist size
 
The net spend arguement is a valid arguement against Ashley but not against Benitez.
Benitez has spent the money which he has been allowed to spend, but he has spent it averagely. I doubt there will be huge profits on the signings which he has made, Ashley will know this and therefore since he has clearly stated that the club has to generate its own funds then there will be limited amounts available.
 
Binxy said:
Not biased at all, just don't get all this net spend bollocks. Spurs for example have a net spend of £2m over the past 5 seasons so by Newcastle fans logic surely they should have been relegated not fighting for the title.
Click to expand...

I do get net spend- bollocks or not. If you spend less than you sell the team is weaker surely. We got £1m from the £30m Pickford transfer. Spurs are a strange comparison-got the Bale windfall yet never ended up with a team that was an improvement despite costing so much. They will sell Kane for multi millions & spend so much to replace him without being able to. And they spent £30m on Siisoko.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top