FAO Smudger

[Stephen Frys Evil Twin 0]

How would you react if City ended up spending £5m on transfers this summer?

Hypothetically speaking (which is a perfect way to approach things when you are involved), it''s not impossible that it could happen. What would you do, Smudger? Would you finally admit that your slightly warped outlook towards all thing NCFC is just a smear campaign? As warped and smeared as your avatar? Would you finally give in and call it a day?

I''m really intrigued to know...

[djc 0]

It''s a bit harsh having a go at Smudger''s avatar just because his views and opinions differ from yours.

[Green and Yellow 0]

[quote user="Stephen Frys Evil Twin"]

How would you react if City ended up spending £5m on transfers this summer?

Hypothetically speaking (which is a perfect way to approach things when you are involved), it''s not impossible that it could happen. What would you do, Smudger? Would you finally admit that your slightly warped outlook towards all thing NCFC is just a smear campaign? As warped and smeared as your avatar? Would you finally give in and call it a day?

I''m really intrigued to know...

[/quote]

Hypothetical question old mate as you said. Who are you to decide who has a warped out look?

[blahblahblah 2]

Oh no ! Not the avatar !  If anyone had a go at me kilt, Why-AYE-OUGHTA !!!![:|]

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="Stephen Frys Evil Twin"]

How would you react if City ended up spending £5m on transfers this summer?

Hypothetically speaking (which is a perfect way to approach things when you are involved), it''s not impossible that it could happen. What would you do, Smudger? Would you finally admit that your slightly warped outlook towards all thing NCFC is just a smear campaign? As warped and smeared as your avatar? Would you finally give in and call it a day?

I''m really intrigued to know...

[/quote]

Read my posts again MR FRY...

and when you have come to grips with what is actually written in them then I will have the courtesy of giving you a reasoned response  [;)]

[7rew 0]

Aboslutely no substance is written in any of them - could we have any answer please smudger.

[Stephen Frys Evil Twin 0]

Statten Island couldn''t come to grips with the amount of garbage you spew out, Mr. Smudger.

So, would you be placated if we spent £5m in this transfer window? It''s a simple question, really.

[blahblahblah 2]

[quote]So, would you be placated if we spent £5m in this transfer window? [/quote]I''m kind of waiting for him / anyone other than me and 7rew to say what his Ideal Transfer Window would be in my thread.  Can''t hurt to get a shopping list together, and then compare with what we end up with by the End of August, to see how the club matched our expectations.  But I guess it''s more fun to have slanging matches.  And yes, I am aware of the hypocrisy of me saying this. [:)]

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="Stephen Frys Evil Twin"]

Statten Island couldn''t come to grips with the amount of garbage you spew out, Mr. Smudger.

So, would you be placated if we spent £5m in this transfer window? It''s a simple question, really.

[/quote]

If Earnie is sold then NO.

I would expect the full fee we receive for Earnie to be re-invested (lets say £5million) plus at least another £2million+ that the Turners have promised to invest...

So if/when Earnie is sold we need to be spending a minimum of £7million before the end of August...  and we all know that ain''t going to happen don''t we???

[Putney Canary 0]

[quote user="Smudger"][quote user="Stephen Frys Evil Twin"]

Statten Island couldn''t come to grips with the amount of garbage you spew out, Mr. Smudger.

So, would you be placated if we spent £5m in this transfer window? It''s a simple question, really.

[/quote]

If Earnie is sold then NO.

I would expect the full fee we receive for Earnie to be re-invested (lets say £5million) plus at least another £2million+ that the Turners have promised to invest...

So if/when Earnie is sold we need to be spending a minimum of £7million before the end of August...  and we all know that ain''t going to happen don''t we???

[/quote]Does anyone know how many transfer deals these days are cash up front? My impression was not many at all, but clearly Smudger thinks they are.

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="Putney Canary"][quote user="Smudger"][quote user="Stephen Frys Evil Twin"]

Statten Island couldn''t come to grips with the amount of garbage you spew out, Mr. Smudger.

So, would you be placated if we spent £5m in this transfer window? It''s a simple question, really.

[/quote]

If Earnie is sold then NO.

I would expect the full fee we receive for Earnie to be re-invested (lets say £5million) plus at least another £2million+ that the Turners have promised to invest...

So if/when Earnie is sold we need to be spending a minimum of £7million before the end of August...  and we all know that ain''t going to happen don''t we???

[/quote]
Does anyone know how many transfer deals these days are cash up front? My impression was not many at all, but clearly Smudger thinks they are.
[/quote]

So how little are you prepared to see the board spend (if Earnie is sold) by the end of August before you will actually decry us not spending enough then PUTNEY???

Considering there should still be at least £2million sitting around in Delia''s handbag and the Turners are supposedly investing at least another £2million... that would mean that we would only need to get £3million upfront for Earnie in order to spend £7million.

But oh no... you keep those eyes closed tightly and keep on making excuse after excuse for this board of directors that are letting you down BIG STYLE!!!

[......and Smith must score. 1,600]

[quote user="Putney Canary"][quote user="Smudger"][quote user="Stephen Frys Evil Twin"]

Statten Island couldn''t come to grips with the amount of garbage you spew out, Mr. Smudger.

So, would you be placated if we spent £5m in this transfer window? It''s a simple question, really.

[/quote]

If Earnie is sold then NO.

I would expect the full fee we receive for Earnie to be re-invested (lets say £5million) plus at least another £2million+ that the Turners have promised to invest...

So if/when Earnie is sold we need to be spending a minimum of £7million before the end of August...  and we all know that ain''t going to happen don''t we???

[/quote]
Does anyone know how many transfer deals these days are cash up front? My impression was not many at all, but clearly Smudger thinks they are.
[/quote]

To be fair to Smudger, PC, although he says " .......we need to be spending a minimum of £7 million before the end of August...." we all know that " spending " at any football club is hardly ever " up front ".

Buying footballers is a bit like using a credit card really.........you seem to be able pay for them when you feel like it.

[ricky knight 0]

[quote user="Putney Canary"][quote user="Smudger"][quote user="Stephen Frys Evil Twin"]

Statten Island couldn''t come to grips with the amount of garbage you spew out, Mr. Smudger.

So, would you be placated if we spent £5m in this transfer window? It''s a simple question, really.

[/quote]

If Earnie is sold then NO.

I would expect the full fee we receive for Earnie to be re-invested (lets say £5million) plus at least another £2million+ that the Turners have promised to invest...

So if/when Earnie is sold we need to be spending a minimum of £7million before the end of August...  and we all know that ain''t going to happen don''t we???

[/quote]
Does anyone know how many transfer deals these days are cash up front? My impression was not many at all, but clearly Smudger thinks they are.
[/quote]

A deal is a deal whether up front or not. If you are talking add ons thats different, then the fans deserve honesty on what we are getting for said player, no BS. If we are to sell Earnie it should be a good price not if, when, but, We need money to re-invest not promises of future payments.

[Mr.Carrow 394]

[quote user="Putney Canary"][quote user="Smudger"][quote user="Stephen Frys Evil Twin"]

Statten Island couldn''t come to grips with the amount of garbage you spew out, Mr. Smudger.

So, would you be placated if we spent £5m in this transfer window? It''s a simple question, really.

[/quote]

If Earnie is sold then NO.

I would expect the full fee we receive for Earnie to be re-invested (lets say £5million) plus at least another £2million+ that the Turners have promised to invest...

So if/when Earnie is sold we need to be spending a minimum of £7million before the end of August...  and we all know that ain''t going to happen don''t we???

[/quote]
Does anyone know how many transfer deals these days are cash up front? My impression was not many at all, but clearly Smudger thinks they are.
[/quote]

A bit of a daft post IMO Putney. We all know that we won`t recieve the Earnshaw fee upfront and we all know that we won`t pay upfront for any replacements either. Therefore we are talking about a fee of say £5million which we will be due over 3 or so years and we should be able to commit £5million to pay for replacements over a similar time period.

[Yellowfuture 71]

If we sell Ernie for £5m then we will invest £7m. No doubt in my mind. If that is not the case then I will be more sympathetic to the Smudger view.

I am prepared to give our new investors a vote of confidence, why should we do anything other than that? You are all making so many judgements without any basis of evidence it`s rediculous.

Give the new Board a chance and then make your decision.

We are active in the transfer market, take it from me, and there will be results, if we fail to make signings then I will be behind the small cheese man (Smudger) who I witnessed last year making a one man protest outside the changing rooms. To be honest people walked around him with a very wide bearth and the whole thing was embarrasing.

I will back Grant and the new |Board until I have good reason not to, the pre season and the first half dozen games will determin that for me, lets hope we get off to a flying start! 

[Putney Canary 0]

Of course it would all depend on the terms of the relative contracts. I would expect us to see a majority of any fee re-invested but not necessarily this summer, it would all depend on so many factors such as the timing of deals, how much we actually want to let Earnie go, how much over/under our own valuation we might get, the nature of add-ons etc. Sorry if I wasn''t clear. In my mind I was responding to another post on another thread Smudger made, where he was saying the board should spend all 5m of our hypothetical fee for Earnie this summer. This is obviously unlikely.

[ricky knight 0]

Where does all this new board talk come from, a couple of people Loan us 2 mill and we have a new board, City fans are so easily pleased.

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="Putney Canary"]Of course it would all depend on the terms of the relative contracts. I would expect us to see a majority of any fee re-invested but not necessarily this summer, it would all depend on so many factors such as the timing of deals, how much we actually want to let Earnie go, how much over/under our own valuation we might get, the nature of add-ons etc.

Sorry if I wasn''t clear. In my mind I was responding to another post on another thread Smudger made, where he was saying the board should spend all 5m of our hypothetical fee for Earnie this summer. This is obviously unlikely.
[/quote]

If you were responding to a comment which I made on another thread PUTNEY then why did you not just post a reply on said thread instead of confusing matters by spreading your views on a certain subject over many threads (or even starting new ones)?  I only ask as this appears to be a tactic frequently used by those who choose to defend the board and does you no favours when it comes to the miserable disgruntled fans brigade taking your posts at face value.

THEFUTUREISYELLOW... thanks for your comments mate... 

To be fair everything you have said is exactly how a view the situation right now (at least some people seem to be able to grasp the nettle of what is actually said on here).

City ''DO'' need to spend a reasonable amount of money and ''DO'' need to get off to a flyer this coming season and never look back!!!  [Y]

[7rew 0]

[quote user="Smudger"]

If you were responding to a comment which I made on another thread PUTNEY then

why did you not just post a reply on said thread instead of confusing

matters by spreading your views on a certain subject over many threads (or even starting new ones)?  I only ask as this appears to be a tactic frequently used by those who choose to defend the board and does you no favours when it comes to the miserable disgruntled fans brigade taking your posts at face value.

[/quote]

I would accuse you of the same thing here, but that it is

mathematically impossible to spread your coherant reassoned arguements

around - being as how they don''t exist or anything.

About starting new threads thing, on the current front page (latest post 12:19 11/06/07) there are

multiple threads by:

Arthur Wittle

BlyBlyBabes

Mystic Megson

*Blainsey

*Northern Canary

There are single threads by:

Smudger

1st Wizard

and others

Posters notable from their lack of threads started:

7rew

Evil Monkey

Shack Attack

Mbncfc

BlahBlahBlah

Nutty Nigel

PutneyCanary

In general, (ie except those posters marked * who are not vocal on this

kind of subject) the thread starters appear to be on your side - where

as those who frequently oppose you  haven''t started any.

Please when you post could you tone the irony down, it is a serious chocking hazard.

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="7rew"][quote user="Smudger"]

If you were responding to a comment which I made on another thread PUTNEY then why did you not just post a reply on said thread instead of confusing matters by spreading your views on a certain subject over many threads (or even starting new ones)?  I only ask as this appears to be a tactic frequently used by those who choose to defend the board and does you no favours when it comes to the miserable disgruntled fans brigade taking your posts at face value.

[/quote]

I would accuse you of the same thing here, but that it is mathematically impossible to spread your coherant reassoned arguements around - being as how they don''t exist or anything.

About starting new threads thing, on the current front page (latest post 12:19 11/06/07) there are
multiple threads by:
Arthur Wittle
BlyBlyBabes
Mystic Megson
*Blainsey
*Northern Canary
There are single threads by:
Smudger
1st Wizard
and others
Posters notable from their lack of threads started:
7rew
Evil Monkey
Shack Attack
Mbncfc
BlahBlahBlah
Nutty Nigel
PutneyCanary

In general, (ie except those posters marked * who are not vocal on this kind of subject) the thread starters appear to be on your side - where as those who frequently oppose you  haven''t started any.

Please when you post could you tone the irony down, it is a serious chocking hazard.

[/quote]

Yes... how many threads have I started in the last 3 months then 7rew???

I think they will certainly summount to probably less than one per moth for the whole time that I have been posting on this forum.

Anyway you are kind of missing the point... if I have a response to what another poster has written then I will respond to that poster within that thread (unless of course they have been playing silly beggars by spreading a debate across several threads in an aim to confuse matters).

[7rew 0]

The point is that you accuse those who support the board of starting

new threads for their views when old ones get to hot for them.  I

was pointing out that while this tactic is certainly employed it is not

employed by the people you accused, in fact it is the other side that

use it.

I feel that putney made a genuine mistake, which is quite easy if you

are using tabbed browsing with the new internet explorer or firefox,

yet you sort to make "political" capital out of it for your own

arguements when such an action was factually incorrect. 

I will credit you personally for not many starting new threads (you

just take over unconnected ones) and you will notice that I only

mentioned you as starting one thread that was on the front page -

because there happened to be one of your threads on the front page at

the time -

Turners/Delia & Co... either put up or shut up!!!".  BlyBlyBabes is the poster that I actually had in mind as the main culprit, he starts about 4/5 a day.

I cannot comment on how many new threads you start - I don''t know I can

think of three, I guess you,ve started around 15, about one every 3

weeks.  I''m fairly sure I''ve started less on the main section of

the site (rumours now - I''ve posted loads more than you).

[Bogbrush 0]

I don''t often post on this board but dip into it for a read from time to time. To be honest most of the posters, apart from realists like Smudger 1st Wizard etc, appear to me to be self-delusional and in denial. I have supported NCFC for as long as I care to remember but my confidence and faith in the people owning/running the club started to erode at the time we won the Championship. Alarm bells started to ring when I listened to all of the "ambition with prudence" "need for responsible management" quotes emanating from the club in a mantra like way.  How can anybody disagree with such statements, how can anybody doubt the wisdom of them without sounding grossly unreasonable ? Dissent at such statements can be readily swatted away with contemptuous disregard. The problem was and still is that prudence and ambition are such diametrically opposed concepts that being "prudently ambitious" is just nonsensical. Bing ambitious means having a strong desire to succeed and prudence simply means caution or, at best, being careful. IMO what the club really meant was "prudence" but they couldn''t really say that so they created the soundbite "ambition with prudence".  Anyway, the facts are that the club had the real opportunity of staying in the premiership but they blew it. Too late the money was found to buy Ashton and when he was sold the bulk of the cash was not reinvested in new players. Earnshaw will be sold and the same thing will happen again. I hope I''m wrong but in my view nothing like £5M will be spent on players this summer and Grant will be left to cobble together a side made up of bargain basement players. Most of them will probably come from Scotland and no one can deny Grant the logic of that - he is Scottish, his staff are Scottish and his contacts and experience are in Scotland. If anyone can "source" some decent quaility Scottish players Grant can. But to dwell on that is missing the point. The arrival of the Turners looks "encouraging" and will keep most of the fans hoping but the truth is that there continues to be a culture of caution, resignation and lethargy at the club which of itself is a betrayal of the surprisingly high number of supporters who each year renew their season tickets, buy the new kit and live in baseless hope and I, for one, am now starting to lose patience.

[beelsie 0]

Baron Buudgeon!! good post ,well put.

[Temp the Revelator 0]

[quote user="Baron Bludgeon"]I don''t often post on this board but dip into it for a read from time to time. To be honest most of the posters, apart from realists like Smudger 1st Wizard etc, appear to me to be self-delusional and in denial. [/quote]

[:D]

I love this - it''s not me that''s mad - it''s all them others!

[:P]

[Putney Canary 0]

[quote user="Smudger"]

If you were responding to a comment which I made on another thread PUTNEY then why did you not just post a reply on said thread instead of confusing matters by spreading your views on a certain subject over many threads (or even starting new ones)?  I only ask as this appears to be a tactic frequently used by those who choose to defend the board and does you no favours when it comes to the miserable disgruntled fans brigade taking your posts at face value.

[/quote]As I said in my post I thought I WAS responding on another thread. As it happens you put similar but conflicting messages on two seperate threads (so why you are accusing me of being confusing beats me). As for you commenting on spreading views over multiple threads, er, what exactly is your point? I try not to hijack a thread to get a personal point across, I respond to points others make. All I am doing is putting my point of view in as logical, factual way as I can. I have no interest in being in a ''Delia Lovers'' or ''Delia Haters'' camp, I have no interest in using ''tactics'' to try and ''win'' an argument. For heavens sake Smudger this is an internet message board, it has no importance in the real world. I enjoy reading people''s views (when made clearly and without insults to others) and by using the board I feel connected to the club I love, even though I live on the other side of the planet. Maybe you need to get things back in proportion...