Newcastle boss Alan Pardew takes blame for Kevin Nolan exit

Newcastle manager Alan Pardew had admitted it was his refusal to offer Kevin Nolan a five-year contract that led to his captain quitting the club - and he stands by his decision.

Nolan quit St James' Park last month to join Championship side West Ham, who were prepared to give him the long-term deal he wanted.

Pardew said he made his decision because he wants to look to the future and didn't envisage Nolan being in the team in five years.

He said: "Kevin didn't want to stay, that's the end of the debate. Kevin couldn't get a contract for four or five years.

"My opinion is that we couldn't give Kevin a five-year contract because if Kevin isn't playing first-team football, he isn't going to be the leader that we want, I am convinced of that.

"Kevin is so full-on as the captain of a football club and at the level he has gone to now, he will easily cope with that and he will come back to the Premier League.

"But in four or five years' time, Kevin needs to be doing the business in the first team, and we couldn't and I couldn't see that possibly happening here at Newcastle, and we had to make a decision on that."

 

He didnt take the blame, to be fair. Nolan wanted a 5 year deal, which would have been ridiculous given how slow and unfit he is even now. We quite rightly refused to give him such a long deal and allowed him to go to a club foolish enough to give him one.

He wouldnt have been a starter next season IMO, let alone in 2016.

 

He wouldnt be good enough for us in 5 years time, so lets get rid of him now whilst we can get some money for him!

Woooo!

 

Good. Right decision. Anyone who would give a player of Nolan's ability and fitness a 4 or 5 year contract at the age of 29 is a mental case. I'd dish one out to a world class striker who still has plenty to burn, but Nolan is an average EPL-level midfielder and already looks like he's running through hummus when he tries to sprint.

A good player for next season, and possibly the season after that, but from then on, his fitness and CM ability will go down and down. By the 3rd or 4th year, we will have a midfielder sitting on the bench who is simply nowhere near capable enough to play in the first team anymore.

 

This! Although i doubt Kevin Nolan would go anywhere near anything as healthy as hummus!

 

Giving him a 5 year contract would have been an absolute shambles. We would have wasted millions on him when in a couple of years time he definitely wouldnt have been in the team. I think it was the right decision to stand by it. We could have offered him another year on his contract but we all know he wouldn't accept it. I agree with what we did.

 

Id rather us give Ferguson a 5 year contract

 

We have haven't we?

but don't worry i get your point

 

semolina with treacle

Nicky butt and Alan smith spring to mind

 

Or, he's not going to be in the starting XI next season, however we've just tied him up with a nice lucrative contract for the next five years which means if we do want to sell him, we are trying to offload an even fatter, even older benchwarmer on massive wages with 4 years left on a bumper contract. Not good business in anyone's eyes.

Add to that the fact he wouldn't accept the top 10 incentive he was offered, instead wanting a nice easy payday.

 

Nolan would have made 20+ appearances next season in all competitions, coming off the bench as well as starting. He was our captain and influencial in the dressing room. I didnt want us to keep him for 5 more years, but I dont see why we shouldnt have kept him here until the end of next season then let him go. When our key players get struck down with injuries and we can only look to the likes of Gosling and Vuckic on the bench I'm sure others will agree with me!

 

Short-sightedness. Nolan would have easily been worth the £4 million (£2 mil fee, £2 mil wages) or so we would have lost by keeping him

 

I disagree, did you see how off the pace he was when coming back from a brief injury or suspension? If he was only playing every 2 or 3 games he'd never get a run together and he'd be terrible IMO, because he'd never be match sharp. Young players like Gosling and Vuckic would be far fitter and would be in a much better state to play a bit part role. They'd probably play reserve games to get fit as well, and Nolan wouldnt because we'd have to keep him on as captain.

 

the fat one got an offer from another fat one he couldn't refuse

 

This

 

I don't think blame has to be apportioned here. Nolan wanted five years we only wanted to offer three. Three being a sensible offer for the reasons already stated many times.

Nolan had a better offer and took it. Club and player both made the decisions that were the best for each. Why bring blame into it?

 

well put

 

Right decision to not offer him a 5 year contract, I wonder how much the extra 10 000 a week mattered to Nolan

 

Exactly that. Putting money ahead of whats best for the club. Just because he isnt playing doesnt mean he isnt an important part of the squad. Arent City offering Viera a new deal because how important he was last year despite rarely playing?

80th minute. 1-0 down, look to the bench. Who is more likely to be able to nick us a goal? Thats what it comes down to in my opinion