True Faith sum things up very succinctly.

I'd take Keegan back, there are certainly better options out there but if it was a choice between Pardew and Mike or Keegan and Freddie (albeit with Freddie running the finances properly and not like it's a game of Football Manager) then I'd go for the latter in a heartbeat.

Personally, as a fan I ask for the team to try and win every game/competition that they enter. Every season the aim should be to win the league until it's no longer possible, of course it's not realistic but why enter a competition without the intention of trying to win it? You wouldn't go to a job interview where there was only 1 vacancy but 1000 applicants and be happy to make the last 10 but ultimitely not get the positionm, so why should sport be any different?

I don't even demand we spend millions upon millions, we should simply spend every last penny of our profit to make the squad, academy, training ground & stadium better. At present we turn a profit every window which isn't good enough and isn't fair to the supporters. If we were running at a loss then maybe, but we aren't so there is no need for it.

Back to Keegan, he's an improvement on Pardew so i'd take him but Rosler, Garde, Howe etc are an improvement on Keegan and should all be attainable targets...meaning they're the candidates we should be targeting.

 

Keegan was unique - His sides went out to try to win every game and outscore the opposition. He had a short fuse at times but you accepted that because he genuinely wanted to win for the fans. We don't have that under Pardew. He wants to win because of 'Mike'.

I would have Keegan back in a heartbeat if it meant we were playing fluent attacking football. People wouldn't mind losing or not signing superstars as long as we tried.

 

Unique? Are you aware of Brendan Rodgers?!

 

If only Shepherd was more than a scrap metal merchant and perhaps less of a greasy criminal this would be palatable.

I would accept a consortium with Shepherd on board, but better visibility on finances and a much stronger handle on what to spend and what not to spend. I think with FFP, that would happen anyway and the club, for all its' MASSIVE faults, at least has a base of stability that would lend itself very well to an ambitious and Toon-sympathetic leadership. I'd also want to see Keegan back at the club, as DoF, not manager, and Beardsley to remain involved. I'd want the backroom staff perhaps doubled, I don't think Stone/Carver/Woodman offer enough variety or experience, so someone like Clark in as assistant (if he'd be up for it) would be ideal. Then down to the manager - well, we're in blue sky thinking land (otherwise known as cloud cuckoo land) so it'd have to be someone specifically tied to all the area, because this is about an dedicated and geographically sympathetic group. So the options would be Steve Bruce, Alan Shearer or even Pedro himself (ahead of Clark who needs to learn more about being in charge of a big club). This isn't a "who should be in charge" comment, by the way, this is a "what if all these geordies mounted horses and rode Ashley/Parps out of town"!!

 

I think this is a bit like asking whether we'd be happy with Mike Ashley provided he didn't act like Mike Ashley. Sure, why not?

I'd also be happy with Freddy Shephard so long as he didn't act like Freddy Shephard and the Venkeys as long as they didn't act like the Venkeys.

I'd also be happy with Shola if he didn't play like Shola and HBA if he didn't have HBA's personality.

I'd no doubt fancy that ugly lass as well, as long as she was really attractive.

 

Drinking solves your last problem.

 

I mean for us not in terms of the general football world.