0Amarillo<P><FONT color=#cccc00 size=4><EM>  º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸ Amarillo ¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°<EM><FONT><P>ddMMyyyy0Falseen-US<P><FONT color=#cccc00 size=4><EM>  º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸ Amarillo ¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°<EM><FONT><P>True

The people who start these rumours must be wetting themselves at how seriously it all gets taken. When did one last come true? Reality check!

There''s a reason we look like a good First Division side. Because we are. Which side that has been promoted in recent years looked like a Prem side at the start of their first season up? Most come back down again, and then get stronger for the next run at it. We seem to have shifted from knowing we''ll come back down but enjoying ourselves anyway to really expecting to stay up and then being disappointed if we don''t. I blame Rick Waghorn. Let''s try and see things in perspective. We are and will be one of the weakest sides in the Prem. End of. Enjoy the football, hope out team spirit gets us through and hope we can emulate, say, Portsmouth or Birmingham. But let''s not get all depressed before the season has even started, else what''s the point in getting promoted? As for the quality of signings... I have to say: what did you expect? There was a lot of talk of famous names coming here, but never from the club. Just a bunch of fans who are used to playing fantasy football and CM, and who think we can just make signings and ''release money'' when it ain''t so simple. And when Drury, Holt, Edworthy, Francis, Cooper, McKenzie arrived, did they seem like players to set the first division alight? Only Hux, maybe Svensson, Brennan would fit into that category, but they turned out to be excellent signings that were more than capable at that level. Who''s to say the new signings, and a couple more that might come aren''t the same? Ama

I doubt Worthy would use up another loan slot with a season loan. I think we''re only allowed 3 at any one time in the Prem, so with Bentley.... A

A year''s loan is unlikely. We''re very limited in terms of loans in the Prem, and with Bentley on a year''s loan I don''t think Worthy would use up nearly all of his allocation so soon. Plus, aren''t you only allowed to loan players under 24 for a whole year. Older players are limited to 3 months max? Ama.

Even leaving aside the emotional links, he is a striker who scored 28 goals last season in the SPL-winning side, so yes.

I think very important. If we assume that we''ll get nothing out of ManU (A), Arsenal (H) or Newcastle (A), I think its kind of important that we get to the end of August with some points on the board for morale! The autumn looks a little easier with some games we''ll fancy our chances in, its just that start!!!

Ayrton - I agree with your points. And if we get, say, Primus in then you''d expect that Malky will have to work very hard for his place. But he was a key member of the team that got us promoted so I think it''s only fair to give him a go and see what happens - say in the first 10 games. If we clearly have better options then take them, but we don''t honestly know how well or otherwise many of the team will performm, that''s part of the excitement of going up. We may be pleasantly surprised! Ama

Looks positive doesn''t it, from the quotes in the EDP this morning. I think he''d be a good signing, and we''d have: Edworthy Fleming Malky Drury Briggs Primus Charlton Shackell in defence, plus Brennan, Holt in an emergency. That at least means we have the magic 2 players per position, even if the likes of Briggs and Shackell are inexperienced. Ama

Eventually, yes.

No better than what we have already? And yet he played in 38 league and cup games last season for a side that finished 8th in the Prem. So if he''s no better than, say, Malky - does that mean Malky is good enough to play that many games and with that kind of success? And he''s younger than Malky (a bit!). I''d say he''s exactly what we need, a proven Prem player with a good few years left in him yet. Ama

That''s because he''s a good player. Not the finished article, sure, but he scored some good goals last season, set some others up, represented and scored for his country. If he was a Man U player and we were in for him everyone would be saying ''exciting prospect'' but because he is young and inexperienced and has poor patches in games he gets barracked. Its bizarre if you ask me. Ama

Yes of course, every player has their level at which they will be impress! Hell, I could impress in an under 9s team probably! Rivers and Easton have just dropped down to a level where they can shine ;-) Ama

How can we know? I like him, he holds the ball up well and generally menaces defences with his pace and ability to turn a player. He''s barely played in the Prem so we don''t really know how far he can go. Put it this way, players with a lesser goalscoring ratio than him (1 in 2 wasn''t it?) have been snapped up from the 1st div in the past and been successful in the Prem. There are also those that haven''t of course.... maybe he''s the next Stead.

Ah, the old debate about what makes a club ''big''. I reckon there are perhaps only a handful of ''big'' clubs - those ''buying'' clubs. There are lots of medium sized ones - including us - and then smaller ones, in the lower divisions. Medium and Small clubs will always lose their better players to the big clubs. Its probably fair to say that Everton, Spurs etc were once big clubs, but are only medium-sized now. Realistically the best they can hope for is a great season ending up with a place in Europe. They have no realistic chance of finishing in the top 3. We''re a small Premiership club but overall a medium-sized club. Fish and pond size and all that. Ama

Hmm, it depends what else he has up his sleeve. The consensus seems to be that we still need one more defender (probably right sided) to give us adequate cover - at least numerically! But I think we still need one striker/right winger to replace Rivers, if you assume two players for each position and we have Hux/Svensson and McKenzie/Abbey/Jarvis/Henderson already. So both please! Ama

Surely they were the best defensive pairing in the 1st division last season. Its a step up, but we won''t really know until we try them. And its all very well talking about van N and Henry, as everyone does, but who exactly can reliably keep them under wraps? And how much would that kind of defender cost. I wouldn''t underestimate the team thing. People seem obsessed with how the team looks on paper compared to others and what transfer fees we pay, as if its just one big game of CM. I hardly ever read about the team thing, getting the right mix etc. Last year plenty of players beat our defenders for pace. What I saw though was that we were so well organised that there was invariably another player covering, just in case. Either it was a full back, or a midfielder - remember how many times Holt chased attacking players to the byline and stopped them putting crosses in? So its not all about Malky''s pace. Its a combination of players and their strengths. A lot of fast defenders who don''t have the instinct to get back and cover when we lose posession are going to be pretty stretched. A team that works hard for each other and covers each others backs might stand more of a chance, surely?

Surely desire to play for Norwich is quite high up the list of priorities when looking at players. After turning us down last season, he hardly qualifies for that does he?!! A

Here we go again. When you talk about a pot of gold, please can you set out a) how much we receive from the Prem (not the big headline numbers the papers throw around) b) the value of existing commitments that eat into it (additional fees and wage increases for players that were based on gaining promotion) c) existing commitments like the corner infill d) how much debt we are going to pay off e) how much was needed anyway just to meet existing running costs (remember we made a loss of £4.6m last year - that has to be covered f) what remains to go to Nigel as his player budget. He can choose to spend it on wages (players on a free) or wages and fees combined for a player. So when you talk about £2m for a player who might then want £15k per week for a 3 year contract, that''s a total commitment of £4.25m over 3 years. And bear in mind that we might not have the same income next year.... It then all starts to make more sense, because this isn''t a game of CM, its real money. Its also a stark realisation that the board took a gamble last year and if we hadn''t got promotion we''d be pretty stuck by now and looking at selling our best assets. It does mean we made a big loss and that has to be covered, even before we can invest for the future. So unless you''re calling for a Leeds-type ''live the dream'' and gamble on staying up, prudence is the key. That means going for players like Primus, which he is! Ama

So, is Gallacher a monkey then? Was Iwan better than Hux cos we paid more for him? Was Rivers better than Mackenzie and Svensson combined? Its way too simplistic to judge a signing on the size of the fee, because a number of factors are involved. e.g. what the other club paid for the player (crouch), their age (iwan), or the length of their remaining contract (primus). And, we only have to look back to last year to see that signing players before pre-season isn''t a pre-requisite to their success!! Ama

Interesting, if not very scientific... the numbers of prem players is just your opinion - there will be others that step up and some that don''t for some reason. Plus, what is it with people''s obsession with the size of transfer fees paid?? It is NOT necessarily a measure of quality... Hasselbaink went on a free! Hux cost less than half the fee paid for Crouch...? Judge the players, not the size of the fee. Ama

Yes but remember the last player they took from us on a free (he, he!!). Is he the player to get them out of the first division? Er, no. Ama

First of all, I don''t think there is such a thing as a ''budget for transfers''. The board give Worthy his player budget for next season. He has to spend it on a combination of wages and transfers. Hence we can have lots of plyers on frees, or pay a big transfer fee and blow a big lot in one go, or save some for loans. Its up to Worthy. By removing Rivers he may have increased his room for manouvre a little. The budget he has been given will be after paying off some debts, new corner infill, etc, etc. Its the only way to do it. And for those who don''t think the sums add up... we were already going to make a loss of over £4m last year, so we need that much of the Prem money just to stand still as it were. So many people seem to just take the headline figure and go spend it, as if they''re playing CM or something. Its a bit like taking your gross salary and thinking about what you can buy, without taking into consideration tax, bills, mortgage etc. After which there''s only a bit left to play with (if that!!). Ama

Nah, I think he could do them a great disservice, so here''s hoping. He could have been great, but he wasn''t, so... Ama

Nope, because I''m too tight. And, largely, because going to home games uses up enough of my ''pink slips'' without spending hours a week in front of the box. That would go down like a lead balloon! Ama

He''s an ex-scummer, so he''ll get booed I would think. You''re right though, he entertained us more than them! Ama