angelman

Problem Everton have is that they are replacing a top striker, with those that probably aren't as good. With the "mass sale" 3 years ago, we signed improvements with the probable exception of Tadic/Lallana.

Contracts can be broken if both sides want to, regardless of what is written into them. Difference with us, while nice but at the same time not great, is that we don't air our laundry (be it dirty or otherwise) in public. Liverpool, West Ham are the worst.

Yes, they should get a chance, but should they get a chance at the very top, or at a slightly lower level?

What Todd said about Tisdale is moronic. Why should he jump to the top of the pile, like Giggs is trying? If he seriously thinks it mystifying, the what is more "mystifying" is that a Championship side hasn't given him the chance but that seemingly doesn't compute!

Where is our manager? As Pilch says, no press conference, no interview. Nothing. Guess he must be on holiday.

My concern with FdB, although I would have been OK with him coming here, is that he has coached Ajax and Inter. Two huge fish in their respective leagues (and indeed world football) and that we, and Palace, are a step down in stature but (probably) not wages.

Maybe. We have to walk that particular line where we can attract players in, knowing that we will let them go, but at the same time, that we won't lie down and be trampled all over. I thought Morgan might have shown that already, but seemingly the players and (especially) press seem to have forgotten that and they all think that we are sops

Seems, as they say, to know where the back of the net is. Still only 21 so a good number of years for his peak. The question I guess is, if he does sign on, does he stay or go out on loan? I would like the former, but if he will sit on the bench most the time, far better to go our on loan and develop more.

I read this thread, and find the whole thing rather "depressing". All these clubs to one degree or another, including us, are spend spend spend. Man City is the worst - what is the point of spending £200m on their academy when they don't have any academy players in their team and are unlikely to? Hell, they didn't have any English players in their starting XI when they came to SMS, although Sterling did manage 5 minutes. The bit in the Times about Liverpool hierarchy telling Klopp to forget VVD and look for other targets, leaves me thinking, why not develop your own? I do think that Marcus had the right dream of having, what was it, 75% of the 1st squad having come from the academy. That might be unrealistic, but having the few that we do have is great (as well as making a lot of financial sense). I have always thought that a premium should be added to players bought from overseas, a premium that would go to grass roots football. All these huge fees we pay overseas clubs takes money out of the game to our detriment. I was thinking about 15% would be adequate, but I like the Chinese way of doing it - 100%!! - although that might be way OTT. But I realise that I am living in the past, and now have got to the stage of "if you can't beat them, join them" and look forward to £30m signings arriving. Am I alone in thinking like this?

Many many moons ago, I was offered an unconditional place at Portsmouth Poly, so I went to live/work abroad instead.

I managed to leave a comment on Samuels' article yesterday pointing out that he was having yet another go at Saints. But it seems that that was verboten and it has now disappeared. Strange as nothing rude in the slightest, and nothing more than the bit about having a go at Saints again. Nice to see that he can't take the merest criticism while he dishes it out in bucket loads.

Not sure if FdB was in the running last season or not, but if he was and we didn't offer him the job last year, why would he be appropriate this year?

You don't think anyone who start a thread just for him though, do you?

I do think that we played a strange way with him last season. Many times he was left wanting for the ball over the top so that he could use his speed and get in behind the back line, but it never seemed to com, instead it was played out wide.

Success - business or sporting or both? It's pretty hard to be successful at both unless you are a big boy, and even then some clubs base their finances on debt, which some might not consider successful. But then you have the likes of Arsenal. They aren't considered particularly successful sporting wise (no title in 11 years, crash out of CL early, etc etc) but as a business they most certainly are. There was a headline last year saying that Arsenal had more cash in the bank that Real, Barca and Bayern combined. A nice new stadium. Then you have say, Chelsea, who are successful on the pitch but hugely in debt off of it. So you have smaller clubs like us. Our success on the pitch is very much limited by the need to keep our finances under control, and the need to run the club properly and not do it like Pompey. With that in mind, taking both sporting and financial aspects into account I think we are generally pretty successful. I am not sure what Samuels expects - us to start paying all our players £120m a year (despite of the rules)? Shrulock - maybe the Southampton Way annoys him - personally I ignore it as being nonsense. Maybe anything Saints does annoys him seeing as he was taken to court and lost. As a supposedly esteemed journalist, not sure it does much for his integrity if he is trying to push Saints' button.

Or,,,, Gabbiadini NEW Austin Gallagher That lacks a bit of pace maybe. I am a great fan of Long, love the work he puts in, love his speed, but, his goal scoring ain't good enough. I know that he makes the opponents team's back line sit a little deeper so that they don't get caught out by his pace. But goals......! With Gallagher, I heard that he quite often sits in block 29 - is that true?

I guess finishing above them means we have achieved more. But what else are we supposed to achieve? We are making up the numbers pure and simple. It is the way football is, with the top sides consolidating their position. Leicester, and i hate the phrase, was the exception that proves the rule. Fair do to LCFC, they have achieved something. 15 other clubs in PL haven't.

It may be realistic, but he goes on and on and on and on and on about it. It is hugely trite. He adds nothing new.

Sour, this was your response to my accusation that Samuels held a rather childish grudge against us. OK our opinions differed on that but not sure why he has just published the below. Sell, sell, sell! The Saints way As expected, Mauricio Pellegrino is the new manager of Southampton. 'He has an excellent understanding of the "Southampton Way",' said vice-chairman Les Reed. 'His style of play and aspiration matches the philosophy, culture and ambition of the club. He knows our players and believes we have a great squad that with some fine-tuning will be able to deliver continued success.' Continued what? Southampton's success is largely financial. They haven't won anything since 1976. They have made it into Europe three times since 1985. They haven't progressed beyond the group stage or first round of a European competition since 1982. Last season's EFL Cup run was their first domestic final since 2003. They have had a decent team for a number of years, but are not successful by recognisable sporting standards because they sell their best players. So, they can't have it all ways. They can't duck the responsibility of genuinely aiming for a major trophy, then pretend that eighth place is success. Leicester won the Premier League with half the squad that Southampton could have had with a little more ambition. If there is a 'Southampton Way' it involves a fine academy that generates revenue and helps maintain an upper mid-table position. It is, indisputably, a very well-run club. But that's all it is. In the modern game, there are plenty of clubs that survive in the Premier League. Stoke, Swansea and West Brom have all been in the top division longer than Southampton. Are they considered successful, too? Let's see. Swansea won the League Cup in 2013 and have gone further than Southampton in Europe, while Stoke have reached as many domestic finals this decade and got to the Europa League's last 32. One could argue they're more successful. Claude Puel having been dumped because his football was deemed dull, Pellegrino already has a difficult job emulating last season's League position, while upping entertainment levels. He may also find out more about the 'Southampton Way' if a better offer comes in for Virgil van Dijk. Seems a rather strange article to write IMO, with no other point seemingly than to be overly negative about us.

Well I guess Bertrand will be the same.... £50m

Agree.

Although Cobham is about 30 miles further than Marchwood from Winchester (isn't that where he lives), it is an easy journey and quite pleasant up the A31. Didn't someone months ago say that VVD's Mrs didn't want to move. Chelsea means he wouldn't have to move. Although reports are that Klopp called him and discussed tactics, which accompanied reports that he wanted to play for them, it is something only Liverpool and their army of media men said. But maybe it is all ploy on the agents behalf to get Chelsea to pull their finger out. There are other reports that Conte was mad that CFC hadn't got his targets and that he was thinking of going. Maybe that was a ploy by his agent - it got him a pay rise, and now the CFC interest in VVD. When it comes to transfers, I think things are often/usually a lot lot murkier than they appear.

1) Several hectares would require, urrr, 1 tractor (if that). 2) Juve could give him some money and he could buy his own tractor(s).

So he's the Skinny One with a Long Pork Sausage. (still nowhere near the description the Mrs uses about me).

Maybe because you didn't ask a question and therefore no one gave you a response. Or maybe no one wanted to play your game with you.