shurlock

Little to see here as it cherry picks one or two examples -and the most obvious ones. Thus it was pretty clear even at the time that NA didn't have much involvement in the Gaston deal -there's nothing revealing here. The Yoshida story is news but one transaction among many is small fry (arguably NA not wanting a first class keeper is a more interesting revelation which validates the need for a committee and wisdom of many approach). Just as important, what about some of our British buys -Rodriguez, Davis, Clyne. Am pretty sure these were consensus decisions -and if anything were heavily informed by NA, a long-time admirer of the likes of Jrod. The article is ultimately weaker for not examining our entire transfer history. You win some, you lose some -surprise, surprise that's the nature of doing transfers by committee. Some wet-behind-the-ears-types on here who somehow think otherwise.

Maybe NC was frustrated that he couldn't get the CBs in he wanted because he felt that NA/the club weren't high profile enough -and this strengthened his decision to replace NA. The logic is perverse but I wouldn't put it past NC.

That it was not uncommon knowledge, that you weren't some prophetic voice in the wilderness that people were abusing and mocking, that its possible to accept some of what you say and dismiss other parts without any contradiction or being dismissed as having their head in the sand.

The RDM link was first made by Nixon back last May - well before preseason. Article dated 20 May "Saints Chief Under Threat" in The People.

The accounts will look very different once the Sky money has been included. For a man of business, you also misunderstand how stock markets work - they operate on the basis of future expectations of profits and revenues, not actual or current ones. Shareholders make money as long as share prices exceed earnings expectations.

Cheers

Anyone got any links?

Well the UK labour market is much more flexible, reflecting the general openness of the economy and indeed the culture. Its probably easier to find work here (not necessarily 'good' jobs but jobs nonetheless), keep your head down and get on with things. The attractions of other EU countries are well-taken but they're not necessarily relevant to or high on the list of priorities of many migrant workers.

Going for Wham. As much for the s**t twitchy's going to get.

Would take a Wham-QPR draw. Might actually prefer it.

So your argument is as much about what Liebherr estate might do in the future -not what is currently attainable. And it has more to do with assumed financial backing than actual attendances.

Alright Sheff U, Derby etc then...Nobody's denying that Everton did it but for your one example there are about ten counter-examples which makes your argument flimsy at best. I can name one person who won the lottery - doesn't mean I will.

How about West Ham, Sunderland, Villa, Newcastle, Wolves, Leeds etc etc - all clubs that get attendances of 30K+ either now or when they were in the Prem and have failed to get near the top 4. Can name you more teams that have been relegated than have made the CL with your magical attendances. Proves nothing. Stop cherry picking

Should be picking for cherries for a living. And all the clubs that have had similar, if not bigger attendances and budgets than Everton and have finished nowhere near the top 4. What about them?

Commending your ability to represent a few minority voices on here as mongboard consensus.

Maybe how to mix your charlie and drinks but that's about it.

Hearing voices again?

Exactly. Could not give a f**k what the rest of the footballing world thinks -we're just being used as a soapbox. Some other opportunity for people to take the moral highground will present itself and the world will move on. Thats why I try to cut a bit more slack for people on here, even if they hold extreme views. At least, they mean it and are ultimately coming from the same place.

While there's a chance he'll improve on NA, the improvement will be marginal -not massive; but the downside risk, at least in the short-term, is much greater with this appointment.

My question is how far the summer window strengthened NC's determination to get rid of NA? How many knock-backs in the transfer market, not least in the CB position, did we suffer because NA wasn't high profile enough - as opposed to the handicap of just being a newly promoted side. Nixon's suggestion that NC wanted 'sexy' is also part of this subplot. IMO, the Ramirez interview remains very revealing - not one mention of NA other than GR had just met NA and found him to be 'funny guy' and everything about the vision for the club as it was sold by NC. Perhaps that was the tip of the iceberg of a much bigger problem for NC.

The problem with this interpretation is that NA was probably a dead man walking before the chopping and changing at keeper, the questionable subs, the throwing away winning positions etc etc, that NC wanted a change in the summer and that ultimately he wasn't going to give NA a chance to prove himself. My instinct is that NA would have still been fired even if we were higher up the table.

And you're the moronic embodiment of why people on here who claim to be able to have their cake and eat it can't. There's no way you can separate legitimate anger with NC from supporting the new manager and getting behind the team.

And they are the same people?

While I agree with the sentiment, how can you separate the two in practice? And United is different: they have the ever-constant of Fergy while in our case, the new manager and NC's actions are fundamentally intertwined, so one will invariably spill onto the other. Are we going to save protests for outside matches like United have often done? Our fanbase doesn't have the brains or organisational backbone to be so 'surgical'.

Was OK -was better out of possession than in possession.