Yes Kenny Dalglish and Liverpool are done. MOD POST #425 *ALL READ*

I love these shite seasons that involves 2 cup finals.

Will I Amnt

redzerdrog wrote: »

If it wasn't Kenny other fans would be saying he got you to two finals in his first full season in charge, give him a chance as you were never gona win the league and top 4 was also a massive ask so there if sweet f all of a difference if you come 5th or 17th in the league.

I'm surprised how many people agree with this but not by who.

It's all relevant to the club and the money spent.
If it was David Moyes at Everton or Mark Hughes at Fulham with 30m spent then yea I'd agree.

It's a completely different scenario when your goal is to get back to the Champions League where you have been a regular for so long and the investment to ensure that is so big.

K-9

cambo2008 wrote: »

Yea man.....whatever.
You didn't explain anything about context,you tried using it as an excuse.

64 posts in here, don't know why you bothered unsubscribing from the Liverpool thread tbh, its like an Alcoholic in denial saying wine isn't as bad.

Chucky the tree

Saying there is no difference between 5th to 17th place is nearly as bad as the Carroll+ £15m line.

Winning trophies does no club any harm financially.

Winning cups breeds new fans

Jesus Wept

cambo2008 wrote: »

I'm surprised how many people agree with this but not by who.

It's all relevant to the club and the money spent.
If it was David Moyes at Everton or Mark Hughes at Fulham with 30m spent then yea I'd agree.

It's a completely different scenario when your goal is to get back to the Champions League where you have been a regular for so long and the investment to ensure that is so big.

How much was the investment?

Will I Amnt

K-9 wrote: »

64 posts in here, don't know why you bothered unsubscribing from the Liverpool thread tbh, its like an Alcoholic in denial saying wine isn't as bad.

How sad is that?checking somebody's post count in a thread lol :rolleyes:
I unfollowed the other thread because I couldn't be arsed anymore trying to make a point and then being swarmed by over precious muppets who take everything no matter how innocuous as a dig.
At least in here there's balanced views....

Leiva

cambo2008 wrote: »

.... with 30m spent then yea I'd agree.

That's probably bang on the amount invested . Better start agreeing then and sticking by your word

Will I Amnt

Andy Carroll wrote: »

How much was the investment?

Maybe investment was the wrong word,I don't care about the net spend nonsense,there was 100m or thereabouts spent and spent poorly.

Will I Amnt

Leiva wrote: »

cambo2008 wrote: »

.... with 30m spent then yea I'd agree.

That's probably bang on the amount invested . Better start agreeing then and sticking by your word

Yea but ur are not Everton or Fulham and also see above ^^^^

:pac:

Jesus Wept

cambo2008 wrote: »

Maybe investment was the wrong word,I don't care about the net spend nonsense,there was 100m or thereabouts spent and spent poorly.

No it was spot on actually.

Net spend nonsense... If you'd like me to be your accountant and take care of your money, let me know.

Will I Amnt

Andy Carroll wrote: »

Net spend nonsense... If you'd like me to be your accountant and take care of your money, let me know.

Net spend does not excuse poor signings for huge money.
It's nonsense in that sense,not in their finances obviously.

Jesus Wept

cambo2008 wrote: »

Net spend does not excuse poor signings for huge money.
It's nonsense in that sense,not in their finances obviously.

I agree that it doesn't and but the margin between a £30m injection into a playing squad and a £100m are quite far apart.

Will I Amnt

Why football fans care about net spend is beyond me.
You should care about who you have in your squad not how much money your owners are making or saving for themselves.

Dubit10

cambo2008 wrote: »

Why football fans care about net spend is beyond me.
You should care about who you have in your squad not how much money your owners are making or saving for themselves.

I cant believe this is a serious question. Not everyone is Chelsea or City, net spend matters. Some clubs need to sell to buy.

Will I Amnt

Dubit10 wrote: »

I cant believe this is a serious question. Not everyone is Chelsea or City, net spend matters. Some clubs need to sell to buy.

I'm not talking about getting into financial trouble.
After selling players and with a cash injection there was a 100m to spend,it's not ok to blow it and then say sure it was really only 30m.

darced

This post has been deleted.

Will I Amnt

darced wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

That makes no sense,I'm sitting here watching it and posting here,same way as the people in the match thread are watching it and posting there

Dubit10

cambo2008 wrote: »

I'm not talking about getting into financial trouble.
After selling players and with a cash injection there was a 100m to spend,it's not ok to blow it and then say sure it was really only 30m.

Who said anyone blew 100m?

darced

This post has been deleted.

Will I Amnt

darced wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Yea,I would,what's that got to do with anything?
It's not like Liverpool and United have history or anything :rolleyes:

darced

This post has been deleted.

Fuhrer

cambo2008 wrote: »

Yea,I would,what's that got to do with anything?
It's not like Liverpool and United have history or anything :rolleyes:

Obsessed!

Will I Amnt

Dubit10 wrote: »

Who said anyone blew 100m?

Me,sure you quoted the post yourself :pac:
Seriously though,it's opinion,if it makes you feel any better the point I was trying to make would be the same if I replaced blow with spend.

Jesus Wept

cambo2008 wrote: »

Why football fans care about net spend is beyond me.
You should care about who you have in your squad not how much money your owners are making or saving for themselves.

I don't expect us to make a huge improvement when £80m worth of players are sold concurrently with £100 million worth of players being bought, it's not realistic.

It is possible to sell well and spend well and see an improvement while threading water financially. Newcastle appear to have done just that thus far by improved this year (but there are a lot of other variables, perhaps they'll be viewed differently in 12 months time).

I care because at this rate the owners wouldn't even have to put any money into the team, they don't have to, plenty of our own fans think they have ponied up £100m too. How retarded is that?!

They could continue to rearrange the deckchairs till the end of time and these people wouldn't be able to see the difference, that's pretty irritating.

It's about expectation and managing expectation. The expectation shouldn't be that we should be making massive strides if the same policy were to continue year on year, it'd be nice if we did, but it shouldn't be expected with such a policy.

Will I Amnt

darced wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I'll tell you what it says.
It says that I'm interested in that game because the outcome of it will have an effect on my day whether I like it or not.
Whether its on boards or the people I meet call or text.
This game now is not all that relevant to me.
Is that ok with you?

darced

This post has been deleted.

Will I Amnt

Andy Carroll wrote: »

I don't expect us to make a huge improvement when £80m worth of players are sold concurrently with £100 million worth of players being bought, it's not realistic.

Fair enough if that's the way you see it.
Personally I don't see it that way,I would expect the players sold to be replaced with similar or better not worse.

Will I Amnt

darced wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I'm not winding anyone up,show me where you think I am.
I'm putting across a point I believe in,an alternative one to what you must believe.