Jump to content

BigFish

Members
  • Content Count

    6,819
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

Everything posted by BigFish

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. .....and on that we agree entirely 😀
  6. 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?
  7. 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.
  8. 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.
  9. 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.
  10. Well @Jim Smith in that case you are making judgements based on an amateur view in real time (as most of us on here are). There are clear patterns of play, which we didn't have under Smith: the pair of false nines, the inverting wide players and the overlapping full-backs. Clearly this has worked on occasions but has also misfired. I think many on here would think the players are playing at the level they are capable of, the team is the equal of the sum of its parts and we are making the most of that talent. It is just that those players arn't up to the job. We don't know who decided on Barnes or even why for example. The signings of Forshaw and Batth are even more mystefying. The emergence of Rowe though is a surprising bonus. Again we don't know Wagner's part in this. Knapper will know and untimately will recommend what comes next.
  11. On the contrary, this League is much stronger than last season. Leicester are probably the best team seen at this level for a few seasons, Southampton and Leeds remain strong and Ipswich have momentum. Judging a League by the proximity to 5th/6th is not the same as judging the probability of promotion. If the expected benchmark is mid-table with this collection of players and he hits mid-table that is pretty much exceptable coaching.
  12. This is obviously key, there is no point sacking Wagner now if we are not going to have something better in place immediatly. Many on here forecast a mid-table (or worse) finish this year so on that metric Wagner is actually achieving as expected despite the hyperbole. The Champs this season is stronger than it has been for years so promotion was always unlikely.
  13. Chelsea's record of developing top level Pros far exceeds ours, what you describe is true but if he stays he is on a pathway to the Champs, but if he goes he is on a pathway to the Champions League. If sold to Palace that sadly is still a step up to playing at CR.
  14. Strangely though, the Environment Agency think there is a 1 in a 1000 chance of Carrow Road suffering flooding in any one year.
  15. Give your head a wobble, probably a late contender for the dumbest post of 2023. If you compare Chelsea's developed players with ours recently it is no contest, and spoiler City don't win. If you are young, ambitious and want to play at the highest level (let alone earn much more) and you are given the choice between Chelsea and Norwich the choice is Chelsea.
  16. A quick google gives me CR 17 feet above sea level. Both St Mary's and the KC are lower. The whole flooding question/global warming question is purely for the tin foil hat brigade.
  17. Not a lottery @Morph, which implies fortune or luck but probability, and that within parameters of the fundamentals of the club. As @Don J Demorr posts money in the principal determinant of football success. But within that his position that good methods, lead to better decision making and this increases the probability of better outcomes is also true. Finally, it comes to @Parma Ham's gone mouldy's result spectrum. Good decisions & a good coach might shift the results from around 40% e.g. good coach +5%, bad coach -5% but it takes money to move the baseline from 40% to 60%. Even then, it is only the cost of failure that is mitigated. Without the prior two "success"" is not guaranteed. Manchester United, the greatest cash generating machine football has ever seen, and Chelsea, bankrolled by US billionaires, look a long way from being in a position to win the big trophies. They lack that right time, right place serendipity that keeps football interesting.
  18. Not really hindsight, just magical thinking. The club never had the money, and the business case never stacked up. It is why Carrow Road looks like the way it does today with a stunted Main Stand & a hotel in the corner. Very difficult to financially engineer a building where all the seats look at a small grass rectangle & you can only fill it (maybe) 23 times a year.
  19. Yes @ricardo, that is the truth that underpins this thread. 🙂
  20. With Lambert & NCFC, it was it was serendipity. Much of the success was down to players that were already here, bought by unlamented managers or coming through the ranks. Add the momentum that could be built from League One (see Ipswich also) and a bit of motivation/organisation and the recipe was there. He then went on to fail at enough clubs to evidence that it was City that was the outlier rather than Villa. Leaving wasn't a stupid decision, he would have been found out soon enough. It was just one more throw of the dice. It could have worked, but it didn't.
  21. Hey @Darth Vadis, I don't subscibe so why so much for Palace please? I always had a £2.5k per seat figure in mind which would give £30/40m, but inflation probably makes this out of date,
  22. No, it doesn't, it really doesn't. We knew that before, Luton has nothing really to add that.
  23. Fair play to them, it is a nice haert warming story and they deserve their day in the sun. Tells us absolutely nothing about NCFC.
  24. I am shocked, shocked I tell you, at the idea that people in football might lie to us fans. Add the argument McLean is worth his place and the defence of football coaches and this post is beyound the pale 😀
  25. Football has changed @Morph, gates held up very well in those dark days by historical standards. All seater stadiums and the rise in season ticket holders mean that in absolute terms fans go more often but there are possibly fewer of them.
×
×
  • Create New...