Hillary wrote:
Chelsea were already up there before RA turned up. However, like Leeds, they were only there because they had spent way beyond their means. Chelsea would be in an even worse mess than Leeds had RA not bailed them out.
They were in the 'chasing pack' that the 4th spot varied around. Only when Ambramovich came in did they turn the Big 3 into the Big 4.
They haven't been in the top 4 for nearly 10 years and there's no sign that this will change.
More like 5 years. We finished 3rd in 2002-03, 4th the season before that (2001-02) and 5th in 2003-04
I'm consistently mystified that a club that has not won a single trophy for over 50 years is considered a 'big' club. Wimbledon, Middlesborough, Bolton, Norwich, Ipswich, QPR, Coventry - all clubs that have won trophies since Newcastle's last triumph. Oxford United for fuck's sake!
Maybe we haven't won but we've come in 2nd place a lot. We were runners up in the league in 95-96 and 96-97 and in the FA cup final in 98 and 99.
We've had numerous other good runs in the League, FA and UEFA cups.
We've also been promoted into the premiership and stayed there. All those teams you just listed have been relegated at some point while Newcastle haven't, or in other words Newcastle have remained in the top 20 teams of the country for over 15 years now, more often than not finishing in the top 5 of those.
We might not have won much, but we're consistantly doing well and that is why, along with a large dedicated fan base and sound financial controlling (we spend big but you never here about us being worried of bankruptcy), we're considered a big club.
Leeds were a part of the top echelon - but only because they had (over)borrowed money to get there, Otherwise, they'd have never been more than a second tier club.
And because they played well. You can buy as many players as you like but if they don't perform you wont win.
Difference being that Everton's 4th place team was put together with 37 pence and some Bostik (and was a quite amazing achievement), the last two seasons has seen them back to a more realistic level - Newcastle have been spending shitloads on average/injured/troublemaking players and have still been pretty mediocre.
Yup, they're back in the chasing pack at 6th place. But they show you that big money is not as important as you're players playing well.
Bolton's gradual climb up the table, Ipswitch getting a UEFA cup spot (before suffering from second season syndrome), Newcastle finishing 3rd in their first season in the Premiership. All show how if you can get a team that wins without bankrupting yourself.
Well, one season anyway. They were never seriously contending for 4th last season and were only so close as both Arsenal and Liverpool had a reasonably average season. This despite Spurs being the 2nd highest spending club after Chelsea over the last 3 years. Again, they are probably favourites for 5th this season (although Man City may have something to say about that).
They've finished 5th for the past 2 seasons and have been 2 and 8 points behind 4th place respectively. Arsenal have been 4th with 67 and 68 points (to Spurs' 65 and 60)in those seasons so just a slight drop in form for them and/or a slight increase in form for Spurs and they're in.
Spurs have continued to bring in players while Arsenal lost their best. If it's going to happen then this looks like the most likely season.
But how does this help the smaller teams?
What's your version of free agency and how would it help smaller teams?
Either a player is in contract, in which case his club sells to the highest bidder, or is out of contract, in which case the player signs to the club who will paying the highest wages and signing on fee. Hardly a level playing field.
What's the alternative? The player is forced to stay with his club past when his contract expires?
As it stands the descision to move clubs rests completely with the player, which is as it should be.
The only way in which a team in England can break into the top 4 consistently is to find an owner willing to spend silly money on the club
Going by that statement the next few seasons should be interesting. West Ham, Man City and Newcastle have all had big money takeovers and investors and there's seems to be no end to the big investors coming into the premiership.
It could even be said that the wealth of Man Utd and Chelsea are threatening to make the league a two-horse race, rather than 4.
Maybe, but Liverpool have spent big this season and as noted above there's
been more big money investors in the premiership than just the Glazers and Abramovitch.
If your theory of 'big money = big prizes' holds out then this will be an interesting season.
And as for West Ham.........