Questions about the team that finished 3rd in 1993/94

This is a question mainly for the people who were old enough at the time to appreciate the season, and give a proper view on the matter. I'm not saying there's no one on here around my age that knows anything about the season, but I really want to get the views of the older toon fans.

I was only a 1/2 year old little nipper when the lads got promoted and finished 3rd first season up.

Before everyone ****s themselves, I'm not suggesting we are going to finish in the top 4, what I want to know is -

Was the team that finished 3rd that season better than the team that we currently have? I know we had some fantastic players back then, like Andy Cole, who were a class above anyone we currently have, but I'm talking as an overall team/squad, was the 93/94 team as a whole, better than our current team?

Were many players bought before the start of of the 93/94 season, to boost the quality of the team?

When we finished 3rd that season, was everyone shocked? Was our team back then like it is now, a team that no one thinks is a top 4 side, but could shock a lot of people?

Again I'm not saying I believe we'll finish there, I'm just trying to learn about the similarities between the 93/94 team and our current team.

Cheers.

 

Tough to say as football has changed a lot since then, but I would say probably though Keegan had a knack of signing players at their peak and getting the best of them, people like Gillespie, Fox, Cole and Sellars all spring to mind.

 

It was a different league those days, the 'Big 4', or 5, or 6 or whatever it was didn't exist in terms of having vastly greater resources than the rest of the league, so 'breaking into the top 4' wasn't even a thing in those days. It was a great achievement from a great team, led by a top manager, with a great team spirit (no jailbird scousers...) and some quality players playing a system to suit them. If we can manage third this year its honestly probably a greater achievement what with United, City, Chelsea, Liverpool, Spurs, Arsenal all recent Champions League participants.

Transfers are here, nothing spectacular in fairness, as you can see the overhaul started in Division 1 when Keegan came in.

 

Completley different game now. We'd do better comparing the time we got third and fourth under Sir Bobby.

Trouble is, it's not always how good your team is, but how good every other team around you is.

 

As others have said there was no Big 4 then & only 2-3 European places up for grabs.

Keegan revamped our defense more than anything to start with the likes of Venison, Beresford & Kilcline then brought in Beardsley, Lee & Cole

 

I was a young'un at the time and it's towards the start of my footballing enjoyment. (first match was standing in the gallowgate when we beat Norwich 3-0). I'd say Keegans early team was more attack minded and everyone pushed up, swarming the oppositions half, and we had players who could score all across the team. I don't buy into the 'we had a **** defence and just aimed to score one more' branding. I just think at the time there was less emphasis on positional play, so if Newcastle had the ball up the pitch the opposition followed it; reducing the amount of counter attacking choices if the ball was lost. Today our team is a bit more defence minded and perhaps limited with the array of scoring players. That defensive play has reduced the amount of players up field, but we've increased the accuracy of passing and holding the ball. Dare I say it... the current Man City squad has that similar swarming style but added to that their passing and holding ability is miles ahead of ours back in the 90's.

 

When you talk about Toon legends, Andy Cole's record stands against them all..........68 goals in 84 games. Prolific does't really do the las justice.

Then we sold him to Manure, where he kept banging them in.........Doh!

 

A good read here.