Club Come here to laugh at Nu-Castle

[Herclueless]

No shit.

Manchester United (despite their recent struggles) remain one of the most famous, most trophied and most storied clubs on the face of the planet. That we couldn't beat them to the signings we're after is no great shock. However instead of shopping for midtable PL clubs' cast offs (Hendrick, Shelvey, Geremi, et al) we're signing their best/better players. And you yourself admit that we're competing with top clubs for players in the market, Chelsea, Man Utd, Bayern Munich, Milan, etc. These are the clubs we're trying to beat to a player and no, we're not winning most of those races, but we're trying.

And that's an improvement on where we were. Instead of finding a risky bargain from the continent (Cabella, Thauvin, Cabaye, Sissoko,Cisse), we're signing top talent (Botman, Bruno, Tonali, Thiaw, Woltemade). Instead of failing to agree a loan deal for Leicester City's unwanted midfielder, we're cherry picking Forest's assist-King.

What Elanga does in the next 3-5 years definitely does matter. He was signed because the club sees something in him, that he's got potential to improve on his decent season and be a consistently good PL player. Just as it matters for your signing of Mathys Tel. If he rocks up and does nothing, you've had your pants pulled down, if he delivers on his promise you've made a good signing.

Click to shrink...

You're only calling these players top talent with the benefit of hindsight, at the point of signing them they weren't players that would be out of reach for any of the top 17 PL sides.

Perhaps if the list of players you're so disdainfully reeling off from pre-blood money had had the benefit of playing under Howe you'd be calling them the best things since Newcy Brown.

When you're talking about the calibre of players you're signing, you can't compare anything from their Newcastle career post-signing, only what happened pre-signing. So the ambition of signing Sissoko from being well regarded in France, vs

Excuse me sir, I think your logic is broken. We signed a 1 in 3 striker from Real Sociedad, he turned out ok. You signed a skinny left back from Championship Southampton, he turned out ok.

Do you only measure success if you buy the best player from the best team? That's both expensive, and a waste of your scouting department...

Click to shrink...

If you went out and signed Mbappe in the winter for £200m and he inexplicably went on to stink up the place, scored no goals, and left on a free in 5 years time, would you judge that as an uambitious signing from the owners?

There's a difference in evaluating the success of a transfer and few years in, andn evaluating the ambition of the signing at the point of signing them.

That's why there's no point in claiming that Newcastle under Ashley couldn't sign Tino Livramento of today, could they have signed him from a relegated Southampton? Of course they fucking could!

Would Cabaye, Ben Arfa, Remy, Cabella, etc. Have been better playing under Howe? Also probably yes, so comparing them AS SIGNINGS against your recent signings, by comparing their performances for Newcastle under vastly different managers, isn't a fair comparison.

 

[This Fish]

You're only calling these players top talent with the benefit of hindsight, at the point of signing them they weren't players that would be out of reach for any of the top 17 PL sides.

Perhaps if the list of players you're so disdainfully reeling off from pre-blood money had had the benefit of playing under Howe you'd be calling them the best things since Newcy Brown.

When you're talking about the calibre of players you're signing, you can't compare anything from their Newcastle career post-signing, only what happened pre-signing. So the ambition of signing Sissoko from being well regarded in France, vs

If you went out and signed Mbappe in the winter for £200m and he inexplicably went on to stink up the place, scored no goals, and left on a free in 5 years time, would you judge that as an uambitious signing from the owners?

There's a difference in evaluating the success of a transfer and few years in, andn evaluating the ambition of the signing at the point of signing them.

That's why there's no point in claiming that Newcastle under Ashley couldn't sign Tino Livramento of today, could they have signed him from a relegated Southampton? Of course they fucking could!

Would Cabaye, Ben Arfa, Remy, Cabella, etc. Have been better playing under Howe? Also probably yes, so comparing them AS SIGNINGS against your recent signings, by comparing their performances for Newcastle under vastly different managers, isn't a fair comparison.

Click to shrink...

But you've dismissed out of hand the ambitious signing of Thiaw who is a highly rated centreback. Woltemade who is Germany's next big striking hope. Elanga who is a Swedish international and was 3rd in the assist charts in the previous season. You're basing the ambition of another club on your estimation of the players they've signed.

You've dismiss unrealised ambition as well. Newcastle tried to sign Sesko, Pedro, etc. Would these not have been ambitious signings?

You've also conflated ambition with immediate success. It is still ambitious to buy promising players. Livramento cost £40m. Hall cost similar. Isak cost £65m, Woltemade cost £70m. Are these not ambitious signings? Ashley isn't spending £40m on a promising right back. Whether he be from Southampton or Man City. He only ever spent over £20m twice and that was on Almiron and Joelinton.

Would Newcastle needed to have signed Erling Haaland to be considered ambitious? Or Gabriel? Would they need to have signed Barella to be considered to have made progress?

 

[Herclueless]

But you've dismissed out of hand the ambitious signing of Thiaw who is a highly rated centreback. Woltemade who is Germany's next big striking hope. Elanga who is a Swedish international and was 3rd in the assist charts in the previous season. You're basing the ambition of another club on your estimation of the players they've signed.

You've dismiss unrealised ambition as well. Newcastle tried to sign Sesko, Pedro, etc. Would these not have been ambitious signings?

You've also conflated ambition with immediate success. It is still ambitious to buy promising players. Livramento cost £40m. Hall cost similar. Isak cost £65m, Woltemade cost £70m. Are these not ambitious signings? Ashley isn't spending £40m on a promising right back. Whether he be from Southampton or Man City. He only ever spent over £20m twice and that was on Almiron and Joelinton.

Would Newcastle needed to have signed Erling Haaland to be considered ambitious? Or Gabriel? Would they need to have signed Barella to be considered to have made progress?

Click to shrink...

What I'm doing, is saying that bar 2 standout signings that your owners made to announce themselves in style, your transfer business has now tailed off to something that is pretty much achievable for any Prem club, and yes, would have been just as achievable under Ashley.

And sheesh, ease off on the We Tried FC brags would you? I thought that was supposed to be our niche.

 

[This Fish]

What I'm doing, is saying that bar 2 standout signings that your owners made to announce themselves in style, your transfer business has now tailed off to something that is pretty much achievable for any Prem club, and yes, would have been just as achievable under Ashley.

And sheesh, ease off on the We Tried FC brags would you? I thought that was supposed to be our niche.

Click to shrink...

Could it be that you don't think the transfers are that impressive because we're making them? I don't remember people being shocked that we signed Tonali, he was respected but mostly by hipsters. It wasn't like we'd signed Mbappe or anything. And the gobshites in the media were the ones pushing the "Geordies are genuinely expecting Neymar and Mbappe!" When in reality while we didn't know what to expect, we knew that we couldn't attract that level of player.

You say "any Prem club" could have signed them, but I don't think that's true. I don't think Fulham could have attracted Woltemade, or that Brentford could have attracted Thiaw. Burnley weren't getting Elanga from Forest, Forest weren't getting Ramsey from Villa. Could Spurs have signed any of them? Yeah, probably, but you're a massive club considered in the "Top 6". Could Aston Villa have signed Thiaw? Maybe, but again they're a massive club with Emery at the helm recent forays into the Champions League.
Could Brighton have signed Woltemade? No. They couldn't. Despite how well run they are, despite how respected their coach is, despite the fact they're likely to have a tilt at Europe again.


Our transfer business has been consistently good, consistently at a level below the elite, and there's only been a few question marks (Targett, Vlachodimos). Each signing has either raised the floor or the ceiling of the squad.

So I come back to your original point, that the business we're doing could have been done under Ashley. It couldn't. We didn't have the money to spend, we didn't have the standing to attract and we didn't have the ambition to attempt.

 

[CJJ]

You're only calling these players top talent with the benefit of hindsight, at the point of signing them they weren't players that would be out of reach for any of the top 17 PL sides.

Perhaps if the list of players you're so disdainfully reeling off from pre-blood money had had the benefit of playing under Howe you'd be calling them the best things since Newcy Brown.

When you're talking about the calibre of players you're signing, you can't compare anything from their Newcastle career post-signing, only what happened pre-signing. So the ambition of signing Sissoko from being well regarded in France, vs

If you went out and signed Mbappe in the winter for £200m and he inexplicably went on to stink up the place, scored no goals, and left on a free in 5 years time, would you judge that as an uambitious signing from the owners?

There's a difference in evaluating the success of a transfer and few years in, andn evaluating the ambition of the signing at the point of signing them.

That's why there's no point in claiming that Newcastle under Ashley couldn't sign Tino Livramento of today, could they have signed him from a relegated Southampton? Of course they fucking could!

Would Cabaye, Ben Arfa, Remy, Cabella, etc. Have been better playing under Howe? Also probably yes, so comparing them AS SIGNINGS against your recent signings, by comparing their performances for Newcastle under vastly different managers, isn't a fair comparison.

Click to shrink...

1000% this.

Wasn't too long ago the people on here who shit on the club ownership/management were using Bergvall and (Vuskovic incl) co as a criticism of us only signing "cheap teenagers" who are "punts", then next thing you know those are amazing signings etc.

My original point was that the 'profile' of the signings hasn't changed - only the success of them, which is due to not having the likes of Pardew and Bruce responsible for how they play

 

[Herclueless]

Could it be that you don't think the transfers are that impressive because we're making them? I don't remember people being shocked that we signed Tonali, he was respected but mostly by hipsters. It wasn't like we'd signed Mbappe or anything. And the gobshites in the media were the ones pushing the "Geordies are genuinely expecting Neymar and Mbappe!" When in reality while we didn't know what to expect, we knew that we couldn't attract that level of player.

You say "any Prem club" could have signed them, but I don't think that's true. I don't think Fulham could have attracted Woltemade, or that Brentford could have attracted Thiaw. Burnley weren't getting Elanga from Forest, Forest weren't getting Ramsey from Villa. Could Spurs have signed any of them? Yeah, probably, but you're a massive club considered in the "Top 6". Could Aston Villa have signed Thiaw? Maybe, but again they're a massive club with Emery at the helm recent forays into the Champions League.
Could Brighton have signed Woltemade? No. They couldn't. Despite how well run they are, despite how respected their coach is, despite the fact they're likely to have a tilt at Europe again.


Our transfer business has been consistently good, consistently at a level below the elite, and there's only been a few question marks (Targett, Vlachodimos). Each signing has either raised the floor or the ceiling of the squad.

So I come back to your original point, that the business we're doing could have been done under Ashley. It couldn't. We didn't have the money to spend, we didn't have the standing to attract and we didn't have the ambition to attempt.

Click to shrink...

I don't think so. Most of the players you've signed were at some point or another linked to us beforehand, and the vast majority of them elicited little more than a shrug and a "meh".

You could probably name search them on here and if you go back far enough find these links and the majority of posters turning their noses up, or just indifferent.

I think the conversation has diverted a bit too much from the original intent, it's less about ambition, of course your owners have ambition, every club in the PL has ambition to be better than they currently are, I'm sure Newcastle under Ashley had ambition to be better than they were, my point was simply that you aren't signing anyone that couldn't have been signed by most Prem Clubs. You haven't been elevated to another level.

The signings of Bruno/Tonali were statement signings, you can look at them and say "wow, that couldn't have happened without the new owners". Whether that was due to a buzz around the club, or simply that they were willing to chuck bucketloads of cash at them, is another debate.

But the rest of your signings? None of them are in that realm for me. It's hardly even a criticism of the NUFC approach to say that, but you're now just making sensible, non-earth shattering signings, generally the standouts from lower Prem clubs, or highly rated players from poorer Euro clubs who cannot compete when the PL comes knocking (and yes, that includes Milan). Brighton, Bournemouth, and Brentford all do that, we do that.

A few posts back I went through your list of signings and laid out the reality of what they were at the time you signed them, it's not a dig, it's true, Hall was a Chelsea academy fullback, Livramento was from a relegated Southampton, even Isak, he'd gone to Dortmund young and hyped, floundered a little and been sent packing to Sociedad, where he rehabbed his rep a little but didn't set the world alite, when you signed him he was nowhere near the "elite" striker you sold.

You can make claims about the fees paid under Ashley, but that's a little disingenuous as it doesn't account for the ridiculous inflation in fees in the meantime, and also the blood money tax that is added on for your owners. If you try and say with a straight face that Newcastle under Ashley couldn't have signed a Chelsea academy player, a relegated Southampton player, a relegated Burnley keeper, and Woolwich backup keeper, a striker from Brentford... Then I'd either have to call you deluded, or a liar.

 

[Herclueless]

1000% this.

Wasn't too long ago the people on here who shit on the club ownership/management were using Bergvall and (Vuskovic incl) co as a criticism of us only signing "cheap teenagers" who are "punts", then next thing you know those are amazing signings etc.

My original point was that the 'profile' of the signings hasn't changed - only the success of them, which is due to not having the likes of Pardew and Bruce responsible for how they play

Click to shrink...

Absolutely this.

 

[This Fish]

1000% this.

Wasn't too long ago the people on here who shit on the club ownership/management were using Bergvall and (Vuskovic incl) co as a criticism of us only signing "cheap teenagers" who are "punts", then next thing you know those are amazing signings etc.

My original point was that the 'profile' of the signings hasn't changed - only the success of them, which is due to not having the likes of Pardew and Bruce responsible for how they play

Click to shrink...

The profile of the signings has 100% changed man. I can't be bothered to go through every transfer made during the 14yrs that Ashley was at the club, but just look at the signings we've made in the past 4yrs. The first window saw the likes of Bruno and Trippier join. Then it was Botman, Gordon and Isak. Regardless of their performances since they joined, these players are all levels above the average standard/profile we were signing under Ashley. Guimaraes was one of the highest rated young midfielders in Europe, Trippier had just won La Liga. Botman was the next big thing, Gordon was the best player from a Premier League rival and Isak was a highly rated young striker who was 'worth' €30m when we signed him, rather Wilson who was 'worth' €20m.

Moussa Sissoko, DeAndre Yedlin, Ayoze Perez, Jack Colback, These weren't outliers like Wijnaldum or Wilson. These were the level we were at. Gambles on cheap foreign players, or cast offs from English clubs, or just Zurab Khizanishvili.

 

[Herclueless]

The profile of the signings has 100% changed man. I can't be bothered to go through every transfer made during the 14yrs that Ashley was at the club, but just look at the signings we've made in the past 4yrs. The first window saw the likes of Bruno and Trippier join. Then it was Botman, Gordon and Isak. Regardless of their performances since they joined, these players are all levels above the average standard/profile we were signing under Ashley. Guimaraes was one of the highest rated young midfielders in Europe, Trippier had just won La Liga. Botman was the next big thing, Gordon was the best player from a Premier League rival and Isak was a highly rated young striker who was 'worth' €30m when we signed him, rather Wilson who was 'worth' €20m.

Moussa Sissoko, DeAndre Yedlin, Ayoze Perez, Jack Colback, These weren't outliers like Wijnaldum or Wilson. These were the level we were at. Gambles on cheap foreign players, or cast offs from English clubs, or just Zurab Khizanishvili.

Click to shrink...

You're just doing the same thing over and over again here...

One final time, the reality of your transfer business outside of Bruno/Tonali.

Chelsea academy fullback.
Relegated fullback.
Tottenham reserve (also passed his best).
Young cb Punt from Lille.
Bit part cb from Milan.
Relegated Leicester winger.
Opportunistic winger from skint Everton.
One season wonder pace-merchant from counter attacking one season wonders Forest.
Punt on potential from Sociedad having flopped at Dortmund.
Massive overpayment for 24 year old one season wonder at mid-table Bundesliga.
Absurd outlay for a 29 year old one season wonder mid-table club striker.

The profiles are no greater than Cabaye, Ben Arfa, Sissoko, Remy, Cisse, Ba, Santon, Lascelles, Cabella, Wijnaldum, Mitrovic, Thauvin, Mikel Merino, Joelinton (~40m btw), Saint-Maximin.

All of whom had they joined a club not managed by Alan Pardew or Steve bloody Bruce might well have left with a greater reputation than they did in reality.

You can keep flogging your dead horse (I assume you punched it to death?) if you like, but if you really want to just read non-stop felattio of NUFC then perhaps a Spurs forum isn't the right place. That you try to suggest the bias of me not really giving a shit about NUFC outside of a general distaste for your hollow sports washing success, outweighs your bias of, you know, being a Newcastle fan, is amusing.

 

[Crockett]

You're just doing the same thing over and over again here...

One final time, the reality of your transfer business outside of Bruno/Tonali.

Chelsea academy fullback.
Relegated fullback.
Tottenham reserve (also passed his best).
Young cb Punt from Lille.
Bit part cb from Milan.
Relegated Leicester winger.
Opportunistic winger from skint Everton.
One season wonder pace-merchant from counter attacking one season wonders Forest.
Punt on potential from Sociedad having flopped at Dortmund.
Massive overpayment for 24 year old one season wonder at mid-table Bundesliga.
Absurd outlay for a 29 year old one season wonder mid-table club striker.

The profiles are no greater than Cabaye, Ben Arfa, Sissoko, Remy, Cisse, Ba, Santon, Lascelles, Cabella, Wijnaldum, Mitrovic, Thauvin, Mikel Merino, Joelinton (~40m btw), Saint-Maximin.

All of whom had they joined a club not managed by Alan Pardew or Steve bloody Bruce might well have left with a greater reputation than they did in reality.

You can keep flogging your dead horse (I assume you punched it to death?) if you like, but if you really want to just read non-stop felattio of NUFC then perhaps a Spurs forum isn't the right place. That you try to suggest the bias of me not really giving a shit about NUFC outside of a general distaste for your hollow sports washing success, outweighs your bias of, you know, being a Newcastle fan, is amusing.

Click to shrink...

Maybe the point is that they are being smarter than before?

Winger from Everton ... Gordon is a great signing.
If the 24 year old you mean is Woltemade that is going to turn into proper gold for them.

I wish we had done both those deals!

 

[Hampshire Spur]

I always think with Newcastle we should be above and better than them. If were not then were underachieving.

 

[CJJ]

Maybe the point is that they are being smarter than before?

Winger from Everton ... Gordon is a great signing.

Click to shrink...

So were Joelinton and Saint-Maximin. Has Schar not been excellent for them? They signed Toney and let him go.

To rephrase/reangle thing - I don't think there's a profile of player they are now going for that they weren't before. It is just Howe is doing better with the players. Case in point being players who were already there

 

[Perryman]

I always think with Newcastle we should be above and better than them. If were not then were underachieving.

Click to shrink...

I don’t think they have made a bad buy since Eddie Howe went there. It makes a big difference, no passengers.
Tonali , Bruno and Joelinton is almost the best midfield in the league. Good job they had to sell Elliot Anderson or they would have the best midfield.
With our resources and being in London we should be able to get that sort of player. No doubt Howe will get a proper top job one day. Would be perfect for England after the World Cup. Home euros to follow.

 

[Herclueless]

So were Joelinton and Saint-Maximin. Has Schar not been excellent for them? They signed Toney and let him go.

To rephrase/reangle thing - I don't think there's a profile of player they are now going for that they weren't before. It is just Howe is doing better with the players. Case in point being players who were already there

Click to shrink...

That, and with their cheatcode money they can afford to do this kind of business in greater numbers, so instead of being restricted to 2 or 3 of this type of signing per year, they can make 5 or 6.

Which in turn gives the side a greater chance of competing on the pitch.

It's exactly the same players they were wanting to sign before, but now they're paying twice as much for the privilege because of the blood money tax, and the market that they've helped to inflate to absurd levels.

So same as usual with Newcastle now, all it comes down to is money. Mike Ashley was shit because he didn't have a bottomless pit of money, but these new guys are amazing because they have a bottomless pit of money the absolute heroes, but the powers that be are bastards because they've put rules in place that aren't allowing the barcodes to buy their way to success with their bottomless pit of money...

 

[Crockett]

That, and with their cheatcode money they can afford to do this kind of business in greater numbers, so instead of being restricted to 2 or 3 of this type of signing per year, they can make 5 or 6.

Which in turn gives the side a greater chance of competing on the pitch.

It's exactly the same players they were wanting to sign before, but now they're paying twice as much for the privilege because of the blood money tax, and the market that they've helped to inflate to absurd levels.

So same as usual with Newcastle now, all it comes down to is money. Mike Ashley was shit because he didn't have a bottomless pit of money, but these new guys are amazing because they have a bottomless pit of money the absolute heroes, but the powers that be are bastards because they've put rules in place that aren't allowing the barcodes to buy their way to success with their bottomless pit of money...

Click to shrink...

Their net spend in the last 5 years is less than ours, and most of that came in years 1 and 2 ... for the last 3 years they haven't really pushed the boat out.

 

[Herclueless]

Their net spend in the last 5 years is less than ours, and most of that came in years 1 and 2 ... for the last 3 years they haven't really pushed the boat out.

Click to shrink...

I'm not saying they're buying success, I'm saying it's all their fans care about.

They've had to curtail their spending due to the first window or two absolutely blitzing their PSR allowance with the initial showpiece signings.

Although this does give an insight into the way perception warps opinions in football, because so much of our fanbase have spent that time moaning about Levy being tight and causing us to fall behind.

 

[Perryman]

The profile of the signings has 100% changed man. I can't be bothered to go through every transfer made during the 14yrs that Ashley was at the club, but just look at the signings we've made in the past 4yrs. The first window saw the likes of Bruno and Trippier join. Then it was Botman, Gordon and Isak. Regardless of their performances since they joined, these players are all levels above the average standard/profile we were signing under Ashley. Guimaraes was one of the highest rated young midfielders in Europe, Trippier had just won La Liga. Botman was the next big thing, Gordon was the best player from a Premier League rival and Isak was a highly rated young striker who was 'worth' €30m when we signed him, rather Wilson who was 'worth' €20m.

Moussa Sissoko, DeAndre Yedlin, Ayoze Perez, Jack Colback, These weren't outliers like Wijnaldum or Wilson. These were the level we were at. Gambles on cheap foreign players, or cast offs from English clubs, or just Zurab Khizanishvili.

Click to shrink...

Yes Howe has done a great job. Strange how things turn out . Howe was on the verge of going to Celtic while Newcastle had almost got Unai Emery. Both moves failed for some reason and Howe ends up at Newcastle.
I do hope he leaves you and takes the England job after the World Cup. Who else are England going to get.
We will have him when Thomas goes. Not sure about that suntanned halfwit mate of his though.

 

[This Fish]

I don't think so. Most of the players you've signed were at some point or another linked to us beforehand, and the vast majority of them elicited little more than a shrug and a "meh".

You could probably name search them on here and if you go back far enough find these links and the majority of posters turning their noses up, or just indifferent.

I think the conversation has diverted a bit too much from the original intent, it's less about ambition, of course your owners have ambition, every club in the PL has ambition to be better than they currently are, I'm sure Newcastle under Ashley had ambition to be better than they were, my point was simply that you aren't signing anyone that couldn't have been signed by most Prem Clubs. You haven't been elevated to another level.

The signings of Bruno/Tonali were statement signings, you can look at them and say "wow, that couldn't have happened without the new owners". Whether that was due to a buzz around the club, or simply that they were willing to chuck bucketloads of cash at them, is another debate.

But the rest of your signings? None of them are in that realm for me. It's hardly even a criticism of the NUFC approach to say that, but you're now just making sensible, non-earth shattering signings, generally the standouts from lower Prem clubs, or highly rated players from poorer Euro clubs who cannot compete when the PL comes knocking (and yes, that includes Milan). Brighton, Bournemouth, and Brentford all do that, we do that.

A few posts back I went through your list of signings and laid out the reality of what they were at the time you signed them, it's not a dig, it's true, Hall was a Chelsea academy fullback, Livramento was from a relegated Southampton, even Isak, he'd gone to Dortmund young and hyped, floundered a little and been sent packing to Sociedad, where he rehabbed his rep a little but didn't set the world alite, when you signed him he was nowhere near the "elite" striker you sold.

You can make claims about the fees paid under Ashley, but that's a little disingenuous as it doesn't account for the ridiculous inflation in fees in the meantime, and also the blood money tax that is added on for your owners. If you try and say with a straight face that Newcastle under Ashley couldn't have signed a Chelsea academy player, a relegated Southampton player, a relegated Burnley keeper, and Woolwich backup keeper, a striker from Brentford... Then I'd either have to call you deluded, or a liar.

Click to shrink...

Mate, you're way off the mark painting with broad strokes here.

The £30m signing of Hall wasn't some gamble on a nobody. He was highly-rated at Chelsea and already had senior appearances. That massive fee is exactly why Mike Ashley wouldn't have gone near it. Ashley paying £30m on a kid? Nah. £2.5m maybe.

I can state Ashley wouldn't have spent big because he never did. His £16m transfer record stood for 14 years! He broke it after seven years of ownership for £21m on some random from the MLS! £30-40m on a talent under 20 is huge money, and he didn't do huge money.

You're Dismissing Wissa, but the lad scored as many non-penalty goals as the rat we sold for £135m That's smart business.

Saying Ashley could have signed these players means imagining a totally different bloke—one with football sense, ambition, and no massive ego. In the real world, he had none of that. We'd have been Tony Bloom's Brighton if he was like that, not a massive mess.

If we have to sign someone "impressive" by gazumping an elite club, then Woltemade is a huge win. Perma-Champions Bayern Munich tried and failed repeatedly to sign that massive talent this summer. That's impressive, full stop.

What's the real issue: signing genuinely good players, or needing players who make a massive statement?

 

[This Fish]

I'm not saying they're buying success, I'm saying it's all their fans care about.

They've had to curtail their spending due to the first window or two absolutely blitzing their PSR allowance with the initial showpiece signings.

Although this does give an insight into the way perception warps opinions in football, because so much of our fanbase have spent that time moaning about Levy being tight and causing us to fall behind.

Click to shrink...

Wait, what do our fans care about exactly? Big signings?

 

[This Fish]

That, and with their cheatcode money they can afford to do this kind of business in greater numbers, so instead of being restricted to 2 or 3 of this type of signing per year, they can make 5 or 6.

Which in turn gives the side a greater chance of competing on the pitch.

It's exactly the same players they were wanting to sign before, but now they're paying twice as much for the privilege because of the blood money tax, and the market that they've helped to inflate to absurd levels.

So same as usual with Newcastle now, all it comes down to is money. Mike Ashley was shit because he didn't have a bottomless pit of money, but these new guys are amazing because they have a bottomless pit of money the absolute heroes, but the powers that be are bastards because they've put rules in place that aren't allowing the barcodes to buy their way to success with their bottomless pit of money...

Click to shrink...

That's not why Ashley was shit.
These new owners aren't heroes despite having access to seemingly endless wealth.

Both of your assertions show that, frankly, you don't know enough about this subject.

Ashley ran the club poorly and regardless of his wealth operated like the regular European club that he bought, was only able to just about survive in the Premier League. He was appalling to legends of the club, shit with the fans and his parsimony was damaging to the club, the brand and the players. That's just a brief overview of why he's hated. Money didn't come into it. Run us well on a shoestring and we're happy enough.

The current owners are glacially slow to react, have made repeated PR gaffes, has fucked up the board appointments more often than they've got them right. And that's before you get to the elephant in the room that they're inexorably linked to a murderous repressive regime.

We keep dancing around in circles, where you paint every single signing bar Bruno as the same standard as those we were pursuing under Ashley, but that's just patently not true. We're not going after Dwight Gayle, or Ayoze Perez, Grant Hanley or Salomon Rondon. We're going for a higher caliber of player, because a) we can now afford to and b) our ownership have ambitions beyond survival.