BigFish

Thanks Guys, my bad, my Internet skills failed me 🙂

Have I missed something, as far as I can see he is without a goal in senior football, I think you might be hyperventillating

Of course it is knee jerk short termism. Nothing about it speaks to a future beyond the next twenty games. When we sacked Farke we didn't have a plan, when we sacked Smith we didn't have a plan and now you suggest we sack Wagner again without a plan. Have you learnt anything?

The last thing the club needs is knee-jerk short termism - we have had enough of this. That is assuming that doing something, doing anything would be able to turn this round or even that Wagner can't yet redeem himself. The EPL money would be handy but can anyone imagine a side based on these foundations in the EPL? If strategic change comes it needs to be methodical, planned and well thought out ahead of action. The January window is no place for it.

Such entitlement, so many hurt feelings that BK isn't pandering to the desire of a few posters on here to do something, anything even.

That isn't his position, is it? I have always be bemused by posters thinking he is a CDM (mainly because we don't have one and they think we need one). He is not a 6 and never will be.

That would be fluvial flooding, not tidal.

Too right @king canary, it was Webber's mistake. Given the choice of sticking or twisting he decided to twist and it didn't come off. I don't think all the checks and balances in the World can mitigate for that sort of mistake in football. However, if the club recognised the situation as @Parma Ham's gone mouldy articulated above, it wouldn't have happened e.g. acknowledged that relegation was probable and continuity was important. Not that the fans would have appreciated dodging the bullet they never saw the implications of.

Easy questions @Don J Demorr, the clubs fans 1) want to win football matches and trophies and the more they win the more they will want to win. The club fans 2) need the club to be there, to provide a sense of identity, belonging, emotional connection and meaning to their proverbial Saturday afternoons e.g. the very tip of Maslow's hierarchy

Well yes. @fen canary, I am suggesting that Webber should have maintained the the same approach during the window ahead of our last EPL season on the basis that it was already too late to change, one window is not enough to turn round something like this. Which is why your last paragraph is bang on the money, we need to go up playing the type of football that enables us to stay up. As for the criticism, lets face it many fans, but not on this thread of course 🙂 are idiots. Ambition is largely spending money we don't have on players we can't afford. We need a system where someone is planning 4 windows ahead, that survives relegation and that focuses on performance improvement that is achievable not magical thinking. That includes succession planning. Smith was a mistake, we should have been able to replace Farke with a head coach to deliver within ideology, not a new ideology. It is probably not a coincidence that our most successful period coincided with a series of internal management appointments. If all this means we yo-yo, so be it. That might be the best we can expect. As we see from last season and this one there are worse positions to be in.

Mmmmm, well @Don J Demorr I am not so sure. It depends what you mean by "football person". Traditionally this was an ex-pro who had been in the business from a playing perspective. Increasingly our Universities are churning out hundreds of bright new sports scientists. Not "football people", but academically trained. Webber's failure is rooted in the fact he was too much in the former camp and not enough in the latter. He paniced off the back of Covid and faced with another car crash EPL season. In part he became a lightening rod for fan discontent, tore up what had been a successful model and we saw the result. The club needs continuity if it is to be successful. The alternative is to keep churning through head coaches, managers, sporting directors, playing styles, identities, models and projects in the hope of another Lambert, or another Farke. To do this we need a separation of accountabilities. We need proper business management, but proper football management as well. Business can set the financial envelope. football can spend it. That needs someone from the latter camp, but a proper Director of Football capable of operating at board level. They should set the ideology while delegating to others to deliver. They should here for the long run and near invisible (which is why I am encouraged by Knapper's low profile) rather than stroking the bellys of needy fans calling for better coms. It should be possible to change players, coaches, managers, sporting directors, back room staff etc without changing the ideology so to maintain a performance culture. It needs to be able to cope with relegations and losing streaks without needing to rip it up and start again.

Probably, and probably quite right too. Although I don't expect it will popular (subject to results) as is seen by Mowbrey's response to the constraints of the Sunderland model.

I agree with pretty much everything @shefcanary posted on this matter. The quibble is that the evidential basis you present is pretty much non-existent. Firstly, you say this organisation released data. This would appear to be untrue, what they do is visually represent other people's data. They may be part of the conversation, but they are certainly not world leading flooding scientists and they certainly have never considered flood risk at Carrow Road. Secondly, you say Carrow Road will be underwater so regularly that football is unsustainable but offer up no scientist saying this, or evidence on why this might be the case. The synthesis here is all yours, the conclusion is all yours, it is largely untouched by scientific evidence. To achieve this you even have to discount what the Environment Agency publish, the government agency responsible for flood risk.

So they do absolutely zero climate change research, but produce some pretty visualisations of other people's data? And these are the experts you are citing, or rather using a visualisation model of a location on which they have done zero research. Any development would come with a detailed Flood Risk Assessment, in which actual experts would visit the site and consider local factors as well as global ones. They would also consider mitigation factors such as @kingsway describes above, that were used in the housing by the river. There would be no issue considering advice from these experts, but random stuff from the Internet really carries no weight.

The sources you use are not experts, one is a football writer the other is a US visualisation company. Neither are working in the area of climate change on a scientific basis. The projection doesn't actually show any change from the current situation. Good design can mitigate the risk, unless there is an expert who will say otherwise.

Currently the EA has the chance of a tidal flood event at Carrow Road as 1 in a thousand per annum. Even if if those chances increased ten fold it only gets to about 1 in 100 and that is without mitigating actions. That you think it will be salt water demonstrates that beyond some scarey hyperbole you haven't really researched this very well. Perhaps you should share your insights with the City Council and Broads Authority as the Greater Norwich Local Plan has the land downstream of the ground between the Yare and the railway lines, including the May & Gurney site, earmarked for development.

Yes, it mitigates two major issues. One is Sara's poor discipline out of posession and the extra free man that Ben Mee identified in his last piece. (This only applies if the 3rd CB has the ability to step up and track retreating deep lying attackers). Utimately, though we need better players in key positions. Through this we can move between base formations.

Lol @Parma Ham's gone mouldy and thank you for a more questions than answers answer. I must admit I thought of 343 using the roster we have but I suspect the answer lies in better, or at least different players. The flexibility you describe requires intelligence, technical ability, and speed. Not sure we have any of those. In fact it looks pretty close to the Ajax tips model.

It would be staggering if any posters thought that the current squad was up to the job, and I think you would struggle to find support on here for your idea that they are.

Nice one @Barham Blitz, would agree will all except 19. I think Idah is easy to play against with his back to goal but terrifies defenders at this level if you give him something to chase.

.....and on that we agree entirely 😀

Well something we agree with @Jim Smith, the false 9 approach is interesting but the wheels come off too often. Leaving Barnes out (and not replacing the position) seems to be the key. However, I don't feel either 4231 or Gibbs mitigate our issues when pressing or on transition. I would go with a 343 base formation with Kenny as a third CB with the license to step out if the oppositions striker drops deep to create an overload in midfield. I am sure there is a weakness in this though @Parma Ham's gone mouldy?

That isn't why he left though, that is just the stick to beat the club with. He left because being a young player with Chelsea is better than being a young player at Norwich.

Much to agree with here, that is the shape of the modern game. We can't change it, we can only go with it and accept that we will lose our best young players to the likes of Chelsea leaving us with the talent they don't want.

True, but irrelevent. It is clear if you want to be a top level pro the chances are better and more lucrative at Chelsea than Norwich. Whether you do it Stamford Bridge or win the Champions League with Man City.