Putney Canary

Mr Carrow, you may be right in that Howard might have made a difference this season. Equally, we might have carried on leaking goals at the back and losing games in the last 5 minutes. If his wages were as high as 20k per week, would you still advocate us doing the deal? The summer before we lose parachute payments? The problem with this whole debate is that we don''t know specifics like what Derby are actually paying him (I have heard 20k per week but have no idea if its true) and we don''t actually know how much the board were prepared to pay. Since Abramovich, transfer fees and especially wages have gone through the roof and most fans don''t seem to understand this. Our board obviously don''t like the inflated prices that teams like Birmingham, Sunderland and Derby are paying and won''t match them. I don''t think this is necessarily a bad thing, I think that football could implode and we will be seeing a lot more clubs in financial difficulty. Although the football pie is getting huge now it is being inflated with Sky money, there are just the same number of slices going around. Nutty Nigel says that he isn''t convinced the board have found the right balance between prudence and ambition and I think he is probably right, although they have spent way more than most give them credit for. Despite what some of the idiots say, I don''t think our board are perfect but equally I don''t think they are doing a job bad enough to be sacked for. Especially as there are no obvious replacements lined up or even knocking at the door. I would love to see us get additional investment to spend, but I agree with Delia that the investment must come from someone with the long term interest of our club at heart, not someone looking to simply double their money in 3 years and then disappear.

This conversation seems to be going round in circles. Obviously some people are upset by the club spending money on things other than players (although I would maintain that we need a ground and a pitch to be a football club leagally able to compete in the football league, and this needs money). People would also rather ignore the fact that we had one of the highest wage bills in the league (yes I agree not a cripling wage bill Mr Carrow, but still much higher than the average) and label the board as lacking in ambition, and if all the facts don''t fit hey lets just ignore all the facts! I would also prefer it if the club didn''t feel the need to invest money in restaurants and hotels, but ALL THE OTHER CLUBS FEEL THE NEED TOO! You guys go on as if its only Norwich who have these facilities, pretty much all the clubs in the top two leagues have invested in corporate hospitality and catering, they all recognise the need for raising revenues from any way possible. People have rightly been praising the Sunderland board recently, here is a link to their restaurant http://www.safc.com/home/?page_id=9786. Why do clubs do this? Because you can''t compete money wise with the bigger spenders through tv rights and gate receipts alone. If you have aspirations of challenging at the top of the championship or higher, you need money to do so.

I have defended actions by the board on other threads, but I can''t defend that statement. We should be treated to an outline of a plan to get us challenging at the top of the league, we get wishy washy nothingness. Contrast this to the words coming out of Sunderland. The sad thing is I DO have faith in Grant, but I damn well hope he is getting stronger management and support by the board than this. Whilst I wouldn''t expect details, I want to see the board stating a goal for next season, tied to a 3 and 5 year plan, outlining how the club will achieve these goals and actually sounding like they are in control of the situation. Grant himself seems to have a plan and an idea of how to achieve it. He has highlighted weaknesses (such as scouting and youth development) and made moves to fix the issues. However we fans need to see him working on these areas in tandem with the board. The club needs and deserves stronger leadership than this.

Nutty Nigel - thats how I remember the Howard saga, it ws the wages that we couldn''t / wouldn''t match.  We got outbid on a few players, I have it in my mind for example that we had a 750k bid for Vine accepted only for Birmingham to totally outbid us. Mystic, you said "During the Worthington era, the only big signing that was primarily football-led was Hucks imo.  As we know, the board did their level best to wriggle out of it, despite the fact that he represented as near a guarantee of promotion as you will ever see in football. " Why do you think the Ashton deal wasn''t primarily football related? I don''t remember the board trying to wriggle out of the Hucks deal, what did I miss? I do remember Huck''s agent saying in the press that we couldn''t afford him, and our board saying also in the press that it looked like he wouldn''t be coming because his wage demands were too high, but then Hucks told his agent to shutup, and he signed. Have I remembered incorrectly?

I''m sorry Mystic and Cluck but there is absolutely no evidence that the board decide on who to bring to the club purely for financial reasons. In fact the evidence shows otherwise, not for all purchases but for enough. I really don''t think Worthy would have accepted players being forced on him, or any other manager for that matter, and I don''t see Grant accepting it. It is entirely logical that the board run the financial rule over players suggested by the manager, I still don''t see why you think otherwise. This is not falling for club spin, its listening to what they say, what the manager says, watching what they do, and looking at the facts. The manager wants a player for footballing reasons, if it is a major investment the board decide on the financial aspects - just as it should be.

Mystic - I have no problem with it *IF* 1. The player is bough primarily for football reasons. EG if two player names are on the table, one aged 22 and one 32, we should obviously chose the younger as it is also a good investment. If the board *suggested* to Worthy that Earnie would be a good target as they felt his value could only increase, I would be angry. If Worthy said "I want to buy Earnie" and the board said yes, because they believed him to be a good footballing choice by Worthy AND they thought his value would go up, thats fine with me. 2. Clubs in our position will get used as a career stepping stone by players. I was pleased when we got Ashton, I would have been very pleased with Cotterill. If we can regularly get lower league uncut diamonds and turn them into expensive gems, I would be really happy. Didn''t Worthy want Earnie as he thought he would partner really well with Thorne, as they had done previously? Why are you convinced Earnie was a purely financial choice? I don''t see where the evidence is for that... I think it has been well documented that all purchases are put to the board by the manager, the board look at the purchase from all angles including finances, and then make the call. Ricky - Birmingham have several Premiership years worth of money, and big backing from personal investment from the board. Their board are just richer than ours. However, many Brum fans are unhappy (yes despite promotion! My girlfriends and all her family are blue noses) because of 1. Steve Bruce (they think he is tactically inept) but mainly 2. how much it costs to see their team. Their gates have been terrible this season, they are still paying Premiership prices (one major downside of large outside investment into any club). I''m sure Sunderland fans are happy, their investers have the club first and foremost (like our investers) but their investers are just richer than ours. We just don''t have the money to compete with them. If a previous player of Norwich wanted to invest 20million into our club I would be ecstatic, and I''m sure Delia wouldn''t say no either. But as it stands we just don''t have the money to spend like either Brum or Sunderland. Nobody likes the idea of being a poor club, unfortunately the millions that Worthy had to spend resulted in us being 17th in the league. We are losing parachute payments, we just won''t have the same levels of money to spend. Thats where we are. I personally will look at how Grant spends his money with great interest over the summer, as I am sure you will. Lappin has turned into a great buy, Marshall as a loan signing was a great move until his injury, and Brown was bought to partner Earnie, lets see what he can do next season. Fotheringham hasn''t been great but then we needed bodies and he was cheap. I think I like Grant more than you do...  

CJF - re targets - I don''t often listen to Simon Jordon, but he was moaning in his weekly Guardian column that the whole football industry doesn''t set achievement targets for their staff especially their managers. Jordon wanted to do this, but with no other club doing it he couldn''t find a manager who would sign up to such a contract. Targets are used in business as a way of dismissing unproductive staff, with the money in football management contracts this is a large amount of money (as we saw with Worthy''s pay-off). So it isn''t just Norwich who don''t provide these targets, its everyone. Mystic - I agree that *probably* the board look at big player investments, and decide whether or not to release funds based partly on the players investment potential. Ashton, Earnshaw (and Cotterill) are players who we will / could have made money on. I don''t see the problem with this! Surely it is sensible to invest in a player (all purchases on players are an investment) in whom you have a good chance of making money on? If you think the board forced Worthy to buy Earnie based purley on the investment potential, where is the evidence? I think it is a big jump in logic to make. Bradford are just another example of where teams can end up when they gamble with the club''s money. They over-spent HUGELY in the Premiership and now they are paying the price. Mystic, Cluck and Smudger and friends are certainly not trying to prevent this. They are repeatedly saying we should be spending MORE on the team, and that our current board is not spending enough and thus proving their lack of ambition. Bradford are a reminder of what can happen all to easily when boards get too ''ambitious''.

[quote user="blahblahblah"]Mr. Carrow : [quote]I think the crowd who seem to prefer celebrating a nice, big profit at the end of each financial year (and subsequent large tax donation to the treasury) to success on the pitch are more likely to be the ones who supported the status quo when the Chase protests were going on.[/quote] If it hadn''t been for the last minute pull out of Cotterill from a 2 million pound plus transfer, we would have avoided having that profit, and paying that tax. [quote]a shred of evidence to show there is ambition in the boardroom[/quote] Hmm, let''s see.  Welsh fella, short but quick, what''s his name ?  Robert Earnshaw ?  Yep, that''s him.  If anything, I''d argue that we''ve gambled too much on name players (within the context of the Championship), rather than building a larger and less well known squad along the lines of Colchester. We''ve also recruited a manager who as a coach and assistant has got West Ham promoted.  So he probably knows a thing or two about how to recover from relegation to bounce back. Mystic : [quote] Financial success and footballing failure ARE mutually exclusive qualities, except at Norwich City[/quote] With hindsight, we can see that we''ve had bad value for money for the wages over the last 2 seasons.  18 million of your 24 million will have gone on wages for our small squad.  Some of the players who came here have been paid very well and didn''t do enough for their money. The summer will be a crunch time for the club - can we hold onto the name players with the big wages (Huckerby and Earnshaw are worth the money in my opinion) ?  Who can we afford to lose ?  What standard will their replacements be ?  It should be an interesting 3 months which will determine the immediate future of our club. [/quote] Well said Blah. Why is it that all the people calling for the board''s heads don''t account for; 1. The high wages of the squad over the last two years. Huge amounts of money have been paid in wages (and add-ons, agents fees etc) yet people only count the base transfer fee paid. 2. We are in our current position because Worthy gambled on having a small, highly paid squad, in which too large a proportion of our highly paid players have done nothing.  Worthy rightly paid the price for this by being sacked, Grant must be given time to turn this situation around. Without the parachute payments we can''t buy our way out of trouble, so rebuilding will take time. 3. We can''t just sack the board (what with some of them being majority shareholders). Whilst I would welcome additional investment, I''m not in that dreamland which believes any money from anywhere can only be good. There are many investers chasing the Premiership jackpot, not all will succeed, we will see clubs facing serious financial troubles as a result of failing to buy their way out of this league. You can''t really think that there is enough earning potential to satisfy these investers in the Championship? What happens when they pull the plug on their money, leaving us unable to pay a wage bill? When they double our debt and call it in? When they sell our ground to cover the money they have lost? When tickets rise by 50% to fund the new investors profits? 4. You say we need more money coming into the club, but scorn the off-field activities despite the fact they are profit making. The vast majority of clubs in the top two divisions have catering / restaurants / corporate entertainment (go on name clubs that don''t) because nobody can run a club at this level purely from gate receipts. We have a nationally aclaimed chef to run our restaurant and catering/corporate facilities, isn''t this a good thing? Our board are far from perfect, but whilst they are there we will have a club to follow. They HAVE proved their ambition, by backing Worthy with millions. That failed, Worthy has gone, we are where we are. Grant will show us over the summer and next season if he has the skills to take us where we ALL want to go. Please feel free to debate the above, but don''t just call me a blind sheep (I''m addressing this obviously to Cluck and Smudger), that line is getting really old and is not covering the fact that you can''t debate your position effectively without resorting to personal insults because you just haven''t thought it all through.

I joined at the same time! I had been lurking for a long while but never really had the time to contribute. My time freed up around then, so I signed up and joined in. I haven''t been able to get to games regularly for years, and I find the forums good for staying in touch with the team.

Thing is Bly you should really be talking about Old Football and New Football. Its the whole game that has changed, and Norwich are just adapting into the new order. Our wonderful FA has allowed money to rule the game, whilst not ensuring upcoming players and managers have the right skills. New Football is about Russian billionaires, 30m pound gap between the Championship and the Premiership, TV rights, and all seater stadia. They are killing the game, not Delia. Go check out other teams message boards and see the general levels of discontent, even at table topping Birmingham and premiership Middlesburgh (for example). Only the big four will ever win anything meaningful again, the rest of us are playing for crumbs. Oh and Robert Green belongs to New Norwich and red shirts belong to both ;-)

So basically if we don''t agree with Smudger or Cluck on everything, we are ''PC patsys'', ''sheep following the herd'' and ''brainwashed''. Sounds like pathetic posturing by people who can''t win the debate. I''m not PC, far far from it, but I believe this woman has the right to pursue the career of her choice and the BBC have the right to employ her. You have the right to switch off. You need to go back to the drawing board on how you debate this one. The best example of political correctness gone mad that I can give is as follows. I used to work for an American software company, as a regional director - my region included Israel and the Middle East. It is tradition to send Christmas cards to customers, the marketing team wouyldn''t let me send cards saying Happy Christmas in case it offended someone of another religion. So all the cards said ''happy holidays''. I did, however, get cards saying ''happy christmas'' from all my jewish and muslim clients who wern''t in the least bit offended by our religious holidays. That is political correctness gone mad. I''m sure this woman is just the first to do commentary for football. Frequently the pioneers in life are mocked, but in a few years it will be accepted and won''t feel at all strange. Women have faced this in all walks of life and us men have to adjust. I didn''t hear it, maybe I would have been put off by a higher pitched voice, I don''t know. Personally I''m put off by Waller constantly getting names wrong, Andy Gray and others not knowing the laws of the game (why don''t they understand IT DOESN''T MATTER if a player gets the ball, a tackle from behind has been outlawed for YEARS!) and BBC pundits building their ego rather than give an accurate measure of the game. I would much rather listen to a higher pitched voice if the speaker isn''t talking bollox all the time. I detest political correctness. But the world IS a better place because women and minorities are given the rights they should have been born with. What annoys/worries me about the modern world (in no particular order) is US expansionism in a quest for oil (which our government supports), capitalist globalisation at the expense of the starving, the resulting pressure on our environment, and Pop Idol.  

This has got to be the most unbelievable thread I have ever read on this board. Is it really 2007? Cluck / Smudger, I can''t believe your attitude to women. If you aren''t making yourselves a laughing stock because of your outdated beliefs, I will really dispair at the state of this message board. Women have proven themselves more than capable in so many fields previously thought to be mans'' domain, this is just one more. Its not a question of women trying to be men, or of women trying to control men, its a question of women living their life to the full as they wish to. I certainly don''t feel threatened by this, why do you? Life might have been better for you in the 50s/60s Cluck, but I know of many many women growing up during those decades who would have loved the chance to follow the career of their choice. They look upon the new generation of women with a touch of jealousy for what they have been able to achieve, but also huge amounts of pride. I''m sure you enjoyed having the little woman controlling her kitchen and balancing the housekeeping , but women these days balance global budgets. My girl has an MBA, a very succesful career in IT sales management to a very senior level, and is now starting her own business and I am VERY  proud of her. Why is her fulfilling her potential in life ''political correctness''? I''m not knocking women who are home makers, a career isn''t for everyone. I also know couples where the man is a house husband and the woman builds her career and earns the money, and this suits them just fine. What we are talking about here is the right for people to live their life as they chose, fulfilling their ambitions and dreams, without the outmoded restrictions placed on people based on the shape of their genitals. At least we now fully understand your attitude towards Delia. Its just not a woman''s job, being on the board of a football club, is it? Should she just stick to the cooking?

If its Grant''s decision to sell him to help fund a team rebuild, then so be it. If Earnie wants to go, and provided we get a good fee with up front payment terms, we should definately get rid. I don''t think our board would just sell him from under Grant, we are a much better run club than that. Although his goals are great, they did nothing for our league position as others have pointed out. We must improve the defence and midfield, we have lots of options up front. Personally I would love us to keep him, Brown was bought to combine with Earnie and we haven''t seen this at all yet.

It seems to be that his performances have improved since Duffy came on board. Earlier this season I would have been all for getting rid of him, but since January I think he has shown that he can perform more consistently. I agree that skill isn''t enough and attitude is also important, but with Dickson it seems to be a lot about confidence. I think we should hold on to him, on his day he is one of the best in this league and we are getting a much better proportion of good days.

Despite what many say on here, Worthy was a good manager for a few seasons for us turning around a relegation bound team to a Premiership team. You can''t do this through good fortune alone. Unfortunately, since then he has gambled on squad size prefering to spend the money he was given on a few players on high wages. Most of those players haven''t worked out, and now we need to totally rebuild our squad as we are losing parachute payments and we find ourselves in a worrying position. At promotion, we lost 3 very important players who have never been replaced (Iwan Roberts, goal scoring talisman and leader on the pitch, Malkay Mackay leader in defence and Gary Holt midfield workhorse who just couldn''t cope with our Premiership season). Very, very few of those now labling him as ''rubbish'' were doing so when we got promoted. We gave a decent account of ourselves in the Premiership, our injury crisis has been largely forgotton which was for me the reason we got relegated (tied to our small squad). Our 6-0 loss at Fulham left a very bitter aftertaste in everyone''s mouth. Otherwise his biggest fault for me is his old fashioned approach to squad discipline, and he seemed to alienate a good few players here. However, those players haven''t exactly set the world alight elsewhere (as you have seen with Kenton). I don''t think players these days respond to his approach when he ''gets tough'', their egos just can''t handle it. I have a bit of a soft spot for the Foxes, two good mates support them. Good luck, I hope you stay up. I''m sure Worthy will do a good job for you for 5 games and even to possible promotion, but unless he has learnt from his mistakes he won''t take you further.

I agree 100% NN. Don''t blame Sky, all they did was bid for touted business. The BBC used to provide excellent sports coverage but now Sky do it 10 times better. The HUGE amount of money coming into the game is not a problem, its the unfair distribution that is killing the sport. The FA are definately partly to blame for this. We need salary caps and curbs on agent fees but I doubt the former will ever happen. The FA supported the Premier League breakaway because 1. It was supposed to make the England team stronger 2. they wanted to get one over on the football league and 3. it was/is an old boy''s club that worries more about not upsetting the likes of Edwards and Dein. It was also supposed to make the England team stronger with a top league reduced to 18 teams and therefore less fixtures at club level, so more time for players to be with the England squad. They never enforced the reduction to 18 though (it did drop from 22 to 20) as then FA chief Sir Bert Millichip washed his hands of responsibility for it. The FA are toothless. They didn''t enforce laws stopping the flotation of clubs on the stockmarket and they have allowed a few individuals to make huge profits from the game, one of the major reasons they were set up to protect our game. What has been allowed to happen at clubs like Wimbledon is a disgrace. I''m going to stop now before I go into serious rant mode.

I like him. He strikes me as being the type who knows his weaknesses, and does something about it - as in recognising his inexperience and bringing in Duffy to compensate. he has also seen the weaknesses in the club and made moves to improve (transfers in therefore bringing in Gunn, youth progression therefore sending them on loan, scouting has been mentioned etc). Since the end of the transfer window things just seem to be moving in the right direction. Yes to all the other plusses you mention. The problem is, with the money we have at the club we need him to be not just good but exceptional. If he isn''t another Allerdyce / Curbishley we won''t gain AND sustain the Premiership status we all want. We might need to be patient while we give him a chance to get as good as them.

The life of an exile can be a lonely one, Gazza. I have met City fans where I live, Perth in Western Australia, but they are more fans because they come from Norfolk rather than the type to sit up until 2am listening to a game on Canary''s World (thats me I''m afraid). The only Norwich game televised over here so far has been the defeat to Ipswich. Meanwhile my girl supports Birmingham who seem to be on every week. I love it out here, just wish I could be back for Saturday afternoons...

[quote user="sheded"] Me ? if we have to look abroad , I`d go to Oz  ,  they speak the lingo ,  play hard ,  and usually  have  a good  alround work ethic   ... [/quote] PLEASE don''t bother looking in Oz! I live in Perth, the A-League is a pretty poor standard. Its a league where Neil Emblen can get a regular game. Nick Ward, who won the previous season''s A-League ''rising star'' award, couldn''t get a regular game at QPR and is on load at Brighton. Stan Lazaridis is a god over here. All the exciting young players come from South America or southern/eastern Europe.... Play hard? Er, Harry Kewell? Mark Viduka?

[quote user="Smudger"][quote user="Putney Canary"] [/quote] oh here we go again... Bolton, Blackburn, Sheff Utd, Reading, Portsmouth, Wigan/Charlton???  All have done pretty ok in the Premiership without breaking the bank!!! Hotel was a waist of time... would of got more money back plus another 3,000 plus fans in each week if they had built a corner extension instead. If our board do not have the funds for further investment then it is time for them to step aside and let somebody come in that does have the necessary funds to take this club forwards. AS FOR YOUR CLUBS THAT YOU LIST IN DANGER OF GOING UNDER... please point me to ONE example, just ONE of a reasonable sized club that actually has gone under...  Cambridge fans do have a club and Wimbledon are an extreme (a club that were punching well above their weight for years.... it is like Accrington Stanley trying to compete in the Premiership ffs As for the communication with the board.. with the constant c**p that comes out of their moths I would much prefer that they said nothing at all!!! Exciting time to be a Norwich fan???  I have never been so unexcited in 25 years of following the club, Cluck has never been so unexcited in 45 years, others I know in 30 odd years... surely that must say something??? Are you sure that you don''t work for the club PUTNEY??? [/quote] Of course I don''t work for the club. Please lets debate FACTS and not get back to the playground. Wimbledon don''t exist as the club anymore, you claim they were punching above their weight but they were well established in the top flight for many years. There is your one example. Some fans broke away and started their own club in the lower leagues, MK Dons is NOT the same club. How the FA allowed this to happen will always defeat me, it is an absolute disgrace. At Cambridge, they no longer have league status and their ground now belongs to a company the club''s directors set up. Ask a Cambridge fan how they feel right now. Try attending a League 1 / League 2 match without someone rattling a bucket of change under your nose. Have a look at what happened at the clubs mentioned, how ''investors'' have taken huge amounts of money out of many clubs. There are loads more examples, I can list them for you if you really can''t do your own research. Look at all the clubs that have gone into administration. THIS IS THE DOWNSIDE OF INVESTMENT GONE WRONG! Get the wrong people in, this is what can happen. Most of the clubs you mentioned got significant funding. I see why you think it would be a good idea. Our board don''t have the funds for this themselves, so I can see your logic in replacing them. I would love us to get significant extra investment we could fund a new squad with. I just see the dangers that can be associated with this, and the fact that right now, there are a lot of investors chasing 3 promotion places. Don''t presume money = happiness. Don''t deny the dangers just because it doesn''t fit in with your argument.

A bright young manager?   Surely what Grant has delivered is the very least that any City fan would of accepted from a new manager (no more, no less)??? Turn the club around???  We were never in any danger of going down in most peoples eyes (apparantly). His budget will be £millions next season?   Don''t make me laugh!!! I agree that Grant is doing well with the little money he has been given...  I do not believe that Worthy (in his later days) would of got 2 reasonable players in (Chadwick & Lappin) if he was given only £500k plus to spend on bringing 4 new players in... two out of 4 with that kind of money to spend is pretty good going in anybody''s books. and finally you have stated what I believe to be true of most City fans... you would be happy with another season of mid-table dross next season.... I Thank You!!! I don''t think you are understanding my point. You seem to think that anyone not screaming for Delia''s head on a platter is happy with our league position and happy with the state of the club. The last few seasons have been difficult for all fans, not just you. Worthy took a huge gamble putting together a small squad on big wages, it didn''t work, he has been sacked. This squad now has to be dismantled to a large extent and rebuilt, without the benefit of parachute payments. The club needs turning around so we are fighting at the top of the league not the bottom. Many fans see this progress has started, but understand it can''t happen over night. If we play better football with better spirit next season, and bring in some good young and ambitious players next season (and get 6 points off the scummers) I would be happy with a mid-table finish, as it would show we are turning things around. However, I am not happy with the last few seasons and I won''t be happy if mid-table continues. If you want to class this as ''happy with mid-table mediocrity'' purely to support your own argument, then we might as well finish the debate now because you obviously AREN''T interested in the debate. You mention 500k on 4 players, but forget wages and agents fees. God only knows what the agents fees are. Wages, perhaps 5,000 per week each would be realistic, over a year that would be over 1 million spent on 4 players. For a squad of 26, you can see that the budget for next season WILL be millions - why do you only count the transfer fee?

[quote user="John Boubepo"]So everyone is getting excited about Grant, can I ask why? what has he actually done in almost one full season? apart from feed you all waffle and stay rooted to the bottom third of the table. With players like Hux, Earnie, Martin and DD our forward line looks rather tasty for next season, our 4 best players by a long shot,  all brought in by Worthington, as far as I''m concerned, Grant has done nothing yet to suggest he is better than Worthington, except for spinning waffle in which he must hold a degree with honors! [/quote] Grant has instilled some belief into the fans. He is saying what we want to hear about the players and off field activities like scouting, he has brought in a back-room team that is getting better performances out of some key players (Etuhu and Hughes), he is giving the youngsters a chance either here (Martin, Eagle) or on loan and maybe in doing so re-kindling careers (Ryan Jarvis). He is shipping out players most fans have given up hope in (McVeigh, Robinson). In only one transfer window he has started bringing in players who are making a difference (Lappin) but he will need probably 2 more to rebuild a small, underperforming squad (with very high wages at a time when parachute payments are going). Yes he talks a lot but he is starting to deliver. Smudger, our board didn''t get off the hook, but are seeing the results of installing a bright, young ambitious manager to turn around the club. His budget will be millions of pounds for next season, but many won''t count it as it will be spent on wages, agents fees, as well as transfer fees. He will balance this budget with selling under performing, over paid players and bringing in younger, ambitious players from lower leagues but many won''t recognise this as good either as they will be looking for household names to come in. I think the future is bright, and this doesn''t mean I accept mediocrity either. Top 6 is undoubtedly the target for next season, but I would think this will be tough considering the other teams all fighting for a top 6 place, and our current squad predicament. I would be happy to see next season used as a re-building season, with us challenging automatic promotion the year after. A mid-table finish this season, after the threat of being dragged into a relegation battle, is a step in the right direction, surely?

Isn''t it a shame that this key discussion always gets hijacked by playground name calling. Just because I don''t support an extreme view does not mean I am happy with mediocrity. Of course money is important to succeed these days in football, you can get promoted without huge piles of money (us, Watford) but to stay up you need big investment (as we and Watford proved). Unfortunately the money you can earn via gate receipts are never enough any more. That is exactly the reason our board have allowed the building of the hotel, and other off-field activities such as the restaurant and corporate entertainment facilities. All clubs in our position and higher do it, don''t they? Personal investment is another route, and our board have already invested heavily, and probably don''t have the personal funds for substantial future investment. Losing the parachute payments next season, we must expect the currently high wage bill to be cut, I expect to see some of our high earners go over the summer (though thank god not Hucks) and I don''t expect us to spend big money on replacements. Should we be looking for further outside investment? I think we should, but we should be wary. People investing money without an interest in the clubs wellbeing are obviouisly only in it for the money, and I would argue that their expected return on investment would only be realised if we were to get promoted and sustain premiership status. Now that might sound good, but it can easily come unravelled. Money does not guarantee success, there are numerous clubs who have overspent to either gain premiership status or retain premiership status and it has all gone wrong (Leeds, Ipswich, Leicester, Notts Forest, Wimbledon / MK Dons, QPR... its a big list). Now we see a new raft of investment at clubs like Cardiff, Sunderland, Derby, Stoke, in an effort to get the higher TV cash in next season''s premiership. They can''t all get promoted. What happens to the ones that don''t? Will the investment get pulled, and what will happen to the club then? Will the assets get sold? Will a club that doesn''t even own its ground ever compete again at a high level? The bottom line is, these investors just can''t get sufficient refund from a championship club, something somewhere will have to give. If we can get a Norwich equivalent of a Niall Quinn to invest, I would support it fully. He loves Sunderland, has the money, and a seemingly good consortium together. From what Delia said, she would entertain selling to such a figure (although I for one would be sad to see her go). However, investors such as those investing in Cardiff (hoping for a ''Welsh Premiership Franchise'') I would want to avoid, they will pull their investment extremely quickly if things don''t go their way. I would also bet money on the price of a season ticket going through the roof (just as a Birmingham fan right now about that). And who is to say a new ''Mandaric'' style figure isn''t a Sam Hamman? As for communications with our board, we enjoy considerable access to them. Email/phone contact for our chief exec openly available, and fan''s forums with board members held regularly. Delia regularly sits with the fans (only she gets criticised by some for being attention seeking when she does - she just can''t win with some of you). Do other clubs do the same? Make use of these opportunities, and speak up to get your point across! I think its an exciting time to be a Norwich fan. I believe we have an exciting new manager, and now he has had a chance to change his backroom staff and bring in a few new faces, we are seeing the benefits. I am optomistic about our summer transfer activities (which will be CRUCIAL), Grant seems to be able to spot a good deal. Martin is an exciting player from our academy, as are other youth prospects. Its probably going to take a couple of seasons before we can challenge at the top of this league, but next season I don''t expect us to be close to a relegation battle and I do expect us to be well ahead of Ipswich.  If you disagree with me, thats fine, but can we DEBATE it and not resort to childish name calling please? It is on these sorts of decisions that the entire future of our club depend. I am sure there are Wimbledon and Cambridge United fans who thought they would always have a club...

I agree with Master J. We are all but mathmatically safe from relegation now, so any loan must be with a view to next season. So much money was wasted on unsuccesful loans and especially agents fees, no more please unless there is a decent prospect of a permanent transfer at the end of it. Smudger, you do realise we are in the process of reducing our wage bill and expenses because of losing parachute payments next year? You do know how big our current wage bill is? Do you think that its only the transfer fee that counts?

Without the parachute payments to fund a huge wage bill, we are going to see a lot of changes in the team. Grant will have to look to bring in more players with careers ''on the up'' (like Lappin and Marshall) or careers stalled but with good prospects (like Fozzie and Brown), young and hungry for success. This is not an overnight thing. I expect us to carry on improving next season, but think we should not have overly high expectations. Top 10 finish next season, with being in the top 6 the season after.