Chez

the kit being worn by the players in the cartoon looks better than the away kit shown on here

just need to avoid playing them in the warmer months at start and end of the season then...

The Glaziers bought the club using loans secured against the assets of the club, thus they didn't have to use their own money and the club carried the debt and risk not the owner. Kroenke used his own money to buy 67% of Arsenal, so didn't add more debt and neither do must new owners, so not sure what you mean. Most clubs are not debt free, that's for sure and most are in debt to their rich owners. But that's not the same as someone buying a club using loans secured on the assets of the club. If Lander are doing this then it's a big ****ing no thanks from me.

could not agree more. This is pivotal moment in the clubs life. What VVD, Bertrand or Puel might do could pail into insignificant compared to this takeover.

I can not fault KL. It was her money that took us through the leagues, all be it inherited. However, she bloody well does have an obligation to sell to someone that wont **** us up for decades should it all go pear shaped. Obviously that is a very worse case scenario, and I might be over worrying about nothing, but now is the time to do so not when it is too late.

Incredibly worrying if you ask me. One or two false moves in the transfer window and who knows what might happen in a football season. With a mountain of debt on the club and not the owner you have all sorts of problems on your hands...

But won't a new owner simply loan more money to the club and take us further into debt? Lander are not going to gift the club money. New investment mean new debt. So any `taking the club forward' talk is just another phrase for the owner gambling on future success. Spend now and pay later...maybe. Can't the club simply progress organically with all the money brought in through TV and Prem?

On face value, I struggle to see how KL can say with all honesty that she is selling us to the `right' new owner. They might have the right money, but unless you regard someone that offers backhanders and then shafts the receiver (who is executed) to save their own skin as the right type of person, then you are simply not telling the truth. I struggle to imagine Markus even contemplating talking to Gao Jisheng, never mind selling the club to him. Maybe I am wrong, maybe I don't know the corruption case in intrinsic detail, but if the Premier League are concerned enough to change their own rules, then this fella must be a right sort.

team loses you change it. Team wins you keep it the same. Players get injured you change it. New manager you change it. Not always rotation in the strictest sense, which is to keep players fresh. Personally I thought rotation made total and utter sense, but it didn't help the side.

he left in November 2014 so Soares, Romeu and VVD all signed since.

what a good question. These transfer committees are all very well, but if results don't come, the only one blamed is the manager, yet its the scouting team that make the recommendations (unless of course that's not the case). I suspect `the committee' got their way regarding Redmond (who was signed 5 days before Puel joined), McCarthy and maybe Hojbjerg too, but Puel will have brought in Pied and Boufal. All of those players need more time and may all prove to be great signings. What we desperately needed was one or two to hit the ground running, which I am not sure any did. What compounded that problem was the second season guys in Classie and Austin didn't or couldn't fill the shoes of those leaving. Those two signings leave a lot to be desired in my eyes, but again one was probably a committee signing the other RK (despite the claims - in order to downplay RK's involvement - he had been on Saints radar for years). Apportioning blame is tricky these days unless you know exactly how much power the manager has in terms of forcing changes to the squad. Will a new manager have the power to make wholesale changes or is his hands tied because the likes of Long are on huge wages and have little reason to budge?

woeful. Obviously Puel must take some blame, but don't think for one minute the quality of player we have at the club at this moment doesn't have a bearing on these stats. Removing the likes of Morgan, Wanyama, Mane, Lallana and Pelle does make a difference. Controlling games and having 'difference makers' is essential to create genuine chances, and quite frankly we don't have either. I dont see these players making up those 15 points next season no matter who is in charge. A manager can do only so much.

no club of our size and position has bought and developed talent (that importantly has enabled us to shine in the prem and show off that talent), that when sold, has been successfully replaced like we have. When you have genuine talent, in the likes of Shaw, it is pretty much impossible to fight off interest form the big clubs. But to then go and bloody replace him with someone like Bertrand, that shines equally bright is actually a tremendous feat. What other club has had a Shaw then signed a Bertrand? One England fullback replaced by another? No one has. Lovren replaced by Toby then VVD. Chambers and Clyne. Lallana then Mane. Lambert then Pelle. Bloody amazing recruiting that is. That's why we and we alone have been raided in the way we have each summer for the last few years. It's a perfect storm. We are a mid size club. We can attract players from smaller clubs, but attract the eye of bigger fish. We have tremendous talent, some developed like Morgan and Lallana, some bought like Lovren and VVD. By and large they are young and healthy. Critically they are proven in the prem, no actually they have proved that they can thrive in the Prem. The likes of Morgan were stand out players. These players have got international recognition - that attracts attention. They play in positions the big sides are weak. What has happened has nothing to do with the club contriving to engineer a lack of control (what a total load of ********). It is simply a case of the club not being able to control things like bids from bigger clubs. They have made some errors and perhaps forcing Shaw to stay might have stopped the domino rally that followed, Toby should have been pinned down, but beyond that?

We signed them all on long term contracts, paying bigger wages than ever before. We tell everyone they are not for sale. We even hold one or two to their contracts, despite potentially losing resale value. We increase the attractiveness of the club by investing in improved training facilities and even have the audacity to improve final league position each year. Is there much else the club can do to try and make the players stay? The fact is we are way down the pyramid and top quality players will be bought by those higher up. Always have done, always will. If you have a solution to this problem, I'd be interested to hear it and if that response includes the phrase "just hold them to their contract" or "make them sit in the stands" then you will be wasting your breath. Activity? By that do you mean announcing the signings? I say that because scouting and negotiating with a player's club and agent can often start months (even longer for scouting) before the deal goes through. Often the transfer relies on the selling club having a replacement lined up. Deals fall through, others become available. Another factor is cash flow. Sell Mane, real money is available to pay off debts and make down payments on the next player. Its not championship manager. Things take time. If you are at the top of three pyramid like Man City you can lead the way, but as ManU showed a few season back, even with their money and clout, there is no guarantee that targets will be got and got quickly. Not sure Saints are any worse than the next club. What's you ideal scenario. Sack manager before the media get a hint of whats going on. Tie up all lose ends in a day. Announce the new guy the following day? Good luck with that. Hope so. As it seems to annoy squinnying fans. Yep. That's the plan...

and we get to see a manager standing up all game shouting "press" and "go on James" continuously for 90 minutes. What fun. Can't wait.

because the previous manager at each was worse than the current incumbent?

A very good point. However, conversely if they had and we relied on both as starters then we would have been relegated.

Bertrand is much better, so who is to say that a new signing from abroad might not also be much better? I like McQueen, but if we signed someone worse than Targett is right now, then whoever was responsible would want shooting.

Interesting comparison with Gylfi and Bertrand. Not quite the same as Bertrand started at Chelsea, whilst Gylfi made the move to Spurs and then returned. I suspect he will be very reluctant to make another move, whilst Bertrand doesn't have a `failed' move playing on his mind. The fact is, Swansea sold Gylfi first time round and clubs of our size will continue to sell their top players to bigger fish if they are wanted. The only way to keep them is to pay them more than they can get at those clubs, but as was proved with Arteta, even that doesn't always work.

Simple really. Those two clubs haven't tapped him up, like Liverpool seem to have, or there is no evidence that they have tapped him up, which there appears to be in Liverpool's case. Hope that helps.

Agreed, but agents touting their player around via a newspaper doesn't necessarily equal actual interest from another club. Can't see JRod being here beyond the summer, but not sure there is much clamour to sign him. If a prem side doesn't take a punt then his current wage becomes an issue for teams in the championship for example.

you have to have interested buyers to sell players. Do we have them for these players?

Depends on your point of view. **** load of money coming in, but most of it going straight back out in wages, which as you'd expect are rising. Everything is rosy until you get relegated. Sunderland £110m in debt...scary.

Seems like a very cheap loan to the club compared the Vibrac deal. Is Kat taking a huge wage or dividend?

long way short of Nik Naks £1.2m wage...