I'm obviously happy we won today and I don't really want to say anything negative, but heads need to roll for the money we've spent on wingers and still have no good ones apart from an 18 year old in his first season from Brazil. Around £150m spent on Neto, Garnacho and Gittens and they are all, at best, inconsistent, at worst complete sh*te. Palmer could have had 5 today if Neto knew how to be an attacker and then Garnacho came on and contributed absolutely nothing.

3 minutes ago, timetowaste said:

I'm obviously happy we won today and I don't really want to say anything negative, but heads need to roll for the money we've spent on wingers and still have no good ones apart from an 18 year old in his first season from Brazil. Around £150m spent on Neto, Garnacho and Gittens and they are all, at best, inconsistent, at worst complete sh*te. Palmer could have had 5 today if Neto knew how to be an attacker and then Garnacho came on and contributed absolutely nothing.

I think it’s constructive to recognize players aren’t of the quality we need to progress. Recruitment team should really be held responsible for that.

I’m curious how Quenda settles next year, but a lot of what I read suggests he is right sided also, competing with Estevao.

where are the right footed, left winger equivalents!

10 hours ago, PhilH930 said:

I think it’s constructive to recognize players aren’t of the quality we need to progress. Recruitment team should really be held responsible for that.

I’m curious how Quenda settles next year, but a lot of what I read suggests he is right sided also, competing with Estevao.

where are the right footed, left winger equivalents!

Those are a rarity, which is why we had to get it right last summer instead of signing two overrated ones. The best thing to do sometimes is just standstill.

Blue Co.s model isnt working.

Buy young players, develop them and sell them for profit.

Transfer activity appears to be changing, many clubs in January and last summer are opting to loan players. Perhaps due to financial restrictions, poor value for money signings previously, lack of funds, lack of confidence or whatever.

Meanwhile we have many potentially high quality expensive young players on our books and we are bringing in more in the summer.

I can see a new bomb squad forming, maybe around August 2026.

1 hour ago, markpitts said:

Those are a rarity, which is why we had to get it right last summer instead of signing two overrated ones. The best thing to do sometimes is just standstill.

For me, whilst I was very doubtful, it is starting to look like Simons, in the right environment could have been the answer. Even in the farcical Spurs side he looks like he has some real quality. Something clearly had an uncomfortable whiff about us getting ourselves geared up for Simons to then faff around and divert to Gittens and, more worryingly, Garnacho.

1 hour ago, WhiteWall said:

For me, whilst I was very doubtful, it is starting to look like Simons, in the right environment could have been the answer. Even in the farcical Spurs side he looks like he has some real quality. Something clearly had an uncomfortable whiff about us getting ourselves geared up for Simons to then faff around and divert to Gittens and, more worryingly, Garnacho.

I think the Simons situation like the Olise and Huljsen before him came down to the wage ceiling. He is on £190k/w, which would have made him one of our highest earners.

They don't look at players as players. They look at them as assets. Young, with long term contracts and relatively low wages are the easiest to move, even if you can't sell them outright you can still make money on loan fees and then sell them years later because the contracts are 7-8 years long.

23 hours ago, markpitts said:

I think the Simons situation like the Olise and Huljsen before him came down to the wage ceiling. He is on £190k/w, which would have made him one of our highest earners.

Xavi simmons? It got nothing to do with wages, the deal was done but we needed to sell Jackson.

22 hours ago, abramovich said:

They don't look at players as players. They look at them as assets. Young, with long term contracts and relatively low wages are the easiest to move, even if you can't sell them outright you can still make money on loan fees and then sell them years later because the contracts are 7-8 years long.

This is pretty much the answer to everything. This player suck, bla2. It doesn't matter 😴😴

How much can you sell him in 4/5 years, how much is his salary?

Edited February 9Feb 9 by Bob stark

45 minutes ago, Bob stark said:

Xavi simmons? It got nothing to do with wages, the deal was done but we needed to sell Jackson.

You might be right but Garnacho came in after Xavi went to Spurs, and club was adamant they had money to spend.

Without overlapping full backs you lose the weapon of the left footer cutting in from the right anyway, the full back just shows them down the line on their wrong foot where they can’t cross it and it winds up back at the half way line.

I don’t see the problem with left or right footers playing either side, preferably swapping about a bit as well. Our back ups ain’t doing it and we just need to get our best players on the pitch as much as possible without obviously just shoe horning them in. Left footed winger playing left wing is no problem.

It looks like Enzo is playing no matter what, we need Santos in with Caicedo. Enzo in with them.Flat back 4Stop inverting full backs they go up the line and say to the front 3 which is picking itself right now palmer, pedro, Estevau do what you like upfront, be fluid. I think we’d attack and defend better as a team.

Poxy inverted full back. We have 2 world class full backs and are using them as average midfielders. I’m not sure the managers and tactics get anywhere near the best from our squad.

It amazes me they are bad at every aspect of owning a football club. The only thing they managed to do was expose loopholes that they cannot even rely on anymore.

I've come to terms that nothing will happen with the stadium until after their ownership, but will we actually see a sponsor for the club on a yearly basis? They are advertising the club as one of the best in the world yet the product on the pitch is conference league quality when you remove 4 or 5 players.

Now Chelsea women are feeling the pain:

f**king with the women’s team - BlueCo need to die

Will it could be worse I suppose ... we could have the Forest owner LOL

4 hours ago, Sexyfootball said:

Will it could be worse I suppose ... we could have the Forest owner LOL

Or Man Utd’s. I’ve not read past the headlines but I suspect there are mentions of no go zones in Sadiq Khan’s London and the like!

5 hours ago, Munkunku said:

6 hours ago, Munkunku said:

Or Man Utd’s. I’ve not read past the headlines but I suspect there are mentions of no go zones in Sadiq Khan’s London and the like!

Oh he's on about foreigners colonising Britain and getting benefits etc. While the billionaire Jim Ratcliffe lives in Monaco to avoid paying UK taxes, and actually suggested that the Government should use our tax money to fund his ridiculous new stadium. ......vvv

"At a lavish London presentation in March, United unveiled its ambitious plan for a state-of-the-art stadium with 100,000 seats to replace Old Trafford. The club's controversial co-owner, Sir Jim Ratcliff, hinted that the massive project would be completed by 2030. The billionaire tax exile even proposed that taxpayers contribute to the £2 billion plan's funding.

Ratcliffe argued: "People in the north pay their tax, and there is an argument you could think about a more ambitious project in the north which would be fitting for England, for the Champions League final or the FA Cup final." Ratcliffe has been responsible for several of the ruthless cuts at United since the chairman of INEOS chemicals took over in February 2024......

The hypocrisy of him saying " people in the North pay their tax" when he doesn't!!

Edited February 12Feb 12 by The Rising Sun
Info

5 hours ago, The Rising Sun said:

Oh he's on about foreigners colonising Britain and getting benefits etc. While the billionaire Jim Ratcliffe lives in Monaco to avoid paying UK taxes, and actually suggested that the Government should use our tax money to fund his ridiculous new stadium. ......vvv

"At a lavish London presentation in March, United unveiled its ambitious plan for a state-of-the-art stadium with 100,000 seats to replace Old Trafford. The club's controversial co-owner, Sir Jim Ratcliff, hinted that the massive project would be completed by 2030. The billionaire tax exile even proposed that taxpayers contribute to the £2 billion plan's funding.

Ratcliffe argued: "People in the north pay their tax, and there is an argument you could think about a more ambitious project in the north which would be fitting for England, for the Champions League final or the FA Cup final." Ratcliffe has been responsible for several of the ruthless cuts at United since the chairman of INEOS chemicals took over in February 2024......

The hypocrisy of him saying " people in the North pay their tax" when he doesn't!!

@dkw @PloKoon13 called it, I knew he would be asking for a taxpayer handout before long.

This is/was his MO with INEOS too. He hasn't built a damn thing, his entire wealth has been formed off the back of the British taxpayer.

8 hours ago, SydneyChelsea said:

@dkw @PloKoon13 called it, I knew he would be asking for a taxpayer handout before long.

This is/was his MO with INEOS too. He hasn't built a damn thing, his entire wealth has been formed off the back of the British taxpayer.

Yeah its exactly how he built his "empire" bought ICI, drove it into the ground then demanded a massive handout from the taxpayer to save it. Utter c**t, proper piece of sh*t, and now he pontificates from his tax haven about how those black men are ruining the country. Never has this image been more perfect.

10 hours ago, SydneyChelsea said:

@dkw @PloKoon13 called it, I knew he would be asking for a taxpayer handout before long.

This is/was his MO with INEOS too. He hasn't built a damn thing, his entire wealth has been formed off the back of the British taxpayer.

I would bet you actual money (my own, not the taxpayer's) that he has at some point unironically referred to himself as a 'captain of industry'.

23 hours ago, SydneyChelsea said:

@dkw @PloKoon13 called it, I knew he would be asking for a taxpayer handout before long.

This is/was his MO with INEOS too. He hasn't built a damn thing, his entire wealth has been formed off the back of the British taxpayer.

I thought he was one of the fabled "wealth creators" ...........😂

Ratcliffe battles to save Ineos from drowning under £18bn of debt

Aggressive Wall Street vulture funds hope to profit from industrial giant’s struggles

I have to admit, I haven't been all that focused on the BlueCo out stuff. So I have likely missed a lot of discussion on this, but if a protest and chanting was to force BlueCo to sell up, is there any idea what might be next? Three of the oil states already have clubs, and Roman isn't coming back, so is there a risk it could actually get even worse? What are the odds of a future owner being the government/wealth fund of an oil state? And given that it hasn't helped Newcastle very much with the rules that didn't exist when Roman owned us, would it help us if we were owned by such an owner? It strikes me that simply rich business people are all like the Glazers, BlueCo, Ineos, etc and aren't really in it for the pure love of football, a clubs followers or trophies. And then there's the utterly bonkers Marinakis type owner who neither that rich or all together there.

So I feel like the only option might be to just grin and bear it.

Saw this in an article about Private Equity...

Think it describes Clearlake's ownership precisely...vvv

""Private equity’s central conceit is that financiers, not skilled workers or industry experts, are best positioned to figure out what makes any given business work. In her reporting, Greenwell makes a detailed argument for the fundamental misguidedness of this stance. Many private equity managers don’t know very much at all about the businesses they run "'

Just a little late. Only 7 months into the season is all.

And only a FOS sponsor until the end of the season.

Always rated IFS, best industrial AI tool 💀

Edited February 20Feb 20 by petre ispirescu