The Judge

[quote user="Jim Kent"]What rubbish are debt is because we have a wage bill we can''t afford. Nearly every championship club makes yearly losses. How do you suggest we make up the short fall, if not via off the field stuff? One thing we could do is slash the wage bill to 4.5 million. However, it would be very difficult to be successful that way.[/quote] Sorry but you are incorrect. Our 19m debt (i.e. AXA secured loan) has nothing to do with player wage bills. It has been built up over time through off-field infrasture developments, such as the Jarrold stand. The Corner infill, the land behind the Jarrold stand, the Road etc etc. Some things we had to invest in some we didn''t. You could argue that we could have paid more of it off if we didn''t have such a high player wage bill - but to think the debt funds player wages is wrong.

[quote user="Matt Juler"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"] Yeah, venture capitalists have got a great rep at the moment.....[8-)] It has been an absolutely disastrous policy for us an we even had a precedent not to follow after what happened with Chase. [/quote] You are deluded, if it wasn''t for our off the field activities this football club would have ceased to exist many many years ago.[/quote] and this off field activity that is also one of the main reasons for our £19m debt - which we have to service (i.e.repay inc interest) buy selling players....great strategy.. Yes it is absolutely essential and worthwhile for the top teams as they can rake in millions due to brand association - but you can''t apply that same logic to Norwich.    

[quote user="Creative Midfielder"][quote user="The Judge"] [quote user="colneycanary"]Its times like these that we need the press and media to put pressure on the board and let the board of directors know how the majority of fans, have had enough of Roeder. Again they are leaving things too late, just like they did with Grant and they actually admitted this too! They have to act NOW![/quote] So the majority of fans want him out do they ?? not me - not unless we have a new board and investment to go with it. Appreciate I may be in the minority on this web forum - but i know for sure that most of the supporters I know realise the main problem is the Board. Yes getting rid of Roeder may appease those out for his head - but i suppose you''ll be the ones shouting for the next manager to lose his job in 9 months time, when results haven''t changed due to lack of player budget, and the next one after that (maybe you''ll be more generous with him and give him 10 months..).. By all means change the manager when we have a new board in place - but nothing will fundamentally change unless we have new owners..   [/quote] I dont think most people do think the board is the main problem. How is the board, or the player budget which is certainly in the top half of this division, our main problem when we have struggled desperately for goals all season whilst our all-knowing manager has frozen out the most effective goal scorer at the club for over three months? I grew up watching Norwich when we really had no money. When managers had to play youngsters, or find good but cheap players in the lower leagues, or surprise, surprise, coach, organise and motivate the players that they already had rather than destroy their confidence as Roeder does. There are still mangers around who do these things and produce decent sides on far less money than Roeder has wasted but Roeder doesn''t have these qualities. In fact its pretty hard to identify any qualities that he does have, and I say that as someone who at the time thought he was a good appointment. A lot of people on here predicted he would be a one season wonder, which seemed to me to be harsh, but sadly they were spectacularily correct. He needs to go, and before he wastes any more of that budget that you are so concerned about.   [/quote] Yes I agree there could well be a manager or coach out there that may well make the current crop of players perform better. Are you however saying you know who this manager is ?? - if you do great... write in and tell the board (i.e. the same board who asked for ideas at the AGM) who they should appoint - but lets not forget that just because a manager has been good at one club doesn''t necessarily mean he will be good at Norwich. There are only a handful of managers that can move around clubs and be successful - there are far more that have tried and failed (and with a budget to change the team aswell).  Also let not forget getting rid of Roeder will mean a pay off - using up any money we may have - money I would rather have spend on the team... I''m not saying he is doing well - infact in an ideal world I would love to have him replaced by some who will give us a greater chance of success - but I stand by the fact that until the board are replaced any change in manager is likely to do more damage than good

[quote user="colneycanary"]Its times like these that we need the press and media to put pressure on the board and let the board of directors know how the majority of fans, have had enough of Roeder. Again they are leaving things too late, just like they did with Grant and they actually admitted this too! They have to act NOW![/quote] So the majority of fans want him out do they ?? not me - not unless we have a new board and investment to go with it. Appreciate I may be in the minority on this web forum - but i know for sure that most of the supporters I know realise the main problem is the Board. Yes getting rid of Roeder may appease those out for his head - but i suppose you''ll be the ones shouting for the next manager to lose his job in 9 months time, when results haven''t changed due to lack of player budget, and the next one after that (maybe you''ll be more generous with him and give him 10 months..).. By all means change the manager when we have a new board in place - but nothing will fundamentally change unless we have new owners..  

Far more balanced, thought through and sensible article than the Fan''s Eye piece which is too one sided and anti Roeder - The Man obviously has more of a brain to understand the bigger issues that engulf our club at the moment rather than just the latest symptom of the disease.

Forest''s tactics worked a treat. As has every other side that came to Carrow Road and got 3 points. They know were gonna attack for 90 mins, so the game plan is to defend from the off and try and hit us on the break. It worked, they scored 3 and won. How many times have we seen this pattern of play in matches this season? In every single match weve lost. So its tactics that have been our undoing. And who''s fault is that? Disagree on certain points Barclayman. If you watched the game against Forest before xmas on sky you will have realised that this is the style Forest adopt at home aswell - with the lightning pace of Nathan Tyson up front the outlet everytime. I disagree that Semmy pushes too far forward (and this is tactics) in fact he doesn''t get forward enough for my liking - but thats probably because he is the worst positional defender i''ve seen at Norwich for a while and the reason why Roeder has replaced him in this position at every opportunity. He is only playing at the moment because Oz is playing in the middle. You are right however that we can''t defend - that is clear for all to see - but that isn''t poor tactics, its just poor defending - so you can''t pin that one on Roeder however much of a personal axe you seem to want to grind. Our defense has been shite since Malky left so I suppose you want to blame Roeder for the last 5 years defending aswell.

[quote user="grantroederdisaster"] Another difference between the board and Roeder(nowhere) is that the board admit they are past their sell by date while Roeder(NOWHERE) will continue to blame everything and everyone bar himself and hang on for dear life although I suspect going on by whats hes said to various media sources lately deep down he knows hes no good as Norwich City manager!   I respect the board for putting their money where their mouths are and they do want the best for our club but have made too many mistakes and need to go!   But Roeder(nowhere) has to go ASAP!  [/quote] Yes the board (Smith and Jones) have stated they are willing to sell (although this isn''t the same as admitting they past their sell by date - I can''t ever imagine Smith. Munby & Doomcaster ever admitting this). But they have only done this now they have finally realised that they have dug us into a hole that they can''t get us out of - it has been their strategies and policies over the past 5 years (and over) around  investing in off field activities rather than prioritising funds on what should be the life blood of the club - the TEAM..they are therefore primarily responsible and if anyone should go it should be them.. by saying they are willing to sell - does not, and should not absolve them from wrath of the supporters..

[quote user="grantroederdisaster"][quote user="Gazza"][quote user="grantroederdisaster"][quote user="Gazza"][quote user="grantroederdisaster"][quote user="Gazza"][quote user="grantroederdisaster"] The board are well past their sell by date and they know it. But until they get bought out what are they meant to do?   I respect them for what they have done for the club and thats why I''d never barrack them. That said they have made another cr*p managerial appointment in Roeder(nowhere) and need to rectify this by getting rid of him ASAP! [/quote] People can keep blaming the managers like we have done with the last three but the common denominator for failure at the club is SMITH & JONES and until that terminal disease  is gone from the club things do not improve. FACT! She once said she would give the club away if it was in the best interests of the club, but as we know our board does not live up to its promises!! [/quote]   We both agree that the board need changing but please don''t use this to hide up Roeders complete ineptness as our manager which I suspect would be no different whoever owned our club! [/quote] In my eyes Roeder is not the main problem at the club, I agree he has made mistakes but the overriding problem is the smugness of Queen Deals who needs knocking off her throne and remaining south of the border once and for all!! [/quote]   Get rid of Delia - YES!   But Roeder not the main problem at the club - Of course he bloo*y is, the club revolves around the results the club gets on the football pitch of which Roeder is answerable for. He picks the team, hires and fires players. Hes been given money to spend and would have more resources than quite a few other managers in this Division.   Like I said before in other words - RoederNOWHERE wouldn''t suddenly turn into a great manager because Delia Smith and the board were replaced!  [/quote] Money?!, don''t make me laugh he has had to beg, steal and borrow players and without his contacts we probably already be fooked, as I said he has made mistakes but last season he produced a miracle! The results on the pitch are dictated by finance also are they not and knackers has he been given more money than most other managers in this league, remind me who did we sign perm in the summer?!, prob spent £1 million quid while our oponents today managed to spend £2.5 million on a certain Mr Earnshaw yes one player!. Now tell me that Roeder is ou main problem! Capiche?! [/quote]   Don''t most other clubs have to beg steal and borrow to get players?   I bet Rodents had more money than the £1M you state. How much was Stefanovic?   Koromas not up to it and would of cost how much?   Henville never played for us yet we still had to pay his wages after he returned to Spurs.   I bet having Lupoli (who Roedernowhere won''t play anyway), Bertrand and Ommorzussi on loan for the season wouldn''t of been cheap.   Clingans a good signing but no doubt would of been paid a significant sign on fee because he was a free transfer.   Bell and Hoolahan alone cost the best part of £700,000 to £1M.   Retaining the never will be good enough but probably cheap Robert Eagle would still drain money out of the club un necessarily.   All this doesn''t sound like a club with no money!   Yes we have a massive financial constraint but this should not be used as an excuse for our ineptitude when other clubs probably less well of are doing better!   "Roeder nowhere produced a miracle last season" you said - Not quite but he done very well to rescue us from the mire helped by the long unbeaten run which I think occurred through the ''new manager syndrome'' where the players performed over and above their norm in order to impress a new manager. In fact if he''d of made the right moves in January rather than mess about with the useless loanees Henry and Gibbs we could of comfortably finished in the top 10!   Please take of your blinkered glasses regarding Rodent - Hes woeful and should be replaced ASAP! [/quote] ..and we also had to sell Shackell the last day of the transfer window to recoup some of the money spent because the Turners had walked... The thing is I don''t think you will get too many people saying that Roeder is doing a great job at the moment - results don''t lie. However - he is the easy target in all this and getting rid of him WILL NOT fundamentally change the real problems that lie with in our club. Yes it might make you feel better for a few weeks, but when the new man comes in and the results stay the same, I assume you will want him out aswell, and the next one, and the next one ?? Not forgetting that everytime you you sack someone you have to pay them off, aswell as paying compensation to another club should you want their manager.. The only way things will change for the better at this club is if we get new investment. Whether this means Delia Smith & MWJ going (preferrable) or not. Yes they have said they will sell the club to for the right offer - but they did this only after they realised that they took us down a hole they couldn''t get us out of. Its unfortunate that the state of the economy is as it is because regardless of this, NCFC were and are in terrible financial meltdown, and it would still have been the case if the economy was holding up. They messed up big time by systematically year by year not investing in the thing a football club is all about - THE TEAM because it was deemed too risky. In fact they have forced sales of the best playing assets to fund the debts they have created on all the wonderful off - field activities, including the ridicious amount of wages paid to ''non'' footballing employees - including our wonderful CEO Mr Doncaster.. Delia Smith & MWJ asked an open question at the AGM - "have you any ideas" - well i''m sorry Mrs Smith the most highly paid employee at the club - a certain Mr Doncaster - your CEO - is the one that is paid his £180k salary to have those ideas, and seek investment (and if he was so good at that why have you had to appoint someone else to do this for you ?) - and if he isn''t up to finding the investment or having the ideas then a replacement needs to be found and quickly.  So back to the original point - yes Roeder isn''t performing - and I''m as angry as anyone about the state of affairs. All I ask is that you, and others, vent their anger in the right direction - and that isn''t primarily Roeder. Don''t let Delias "the club is for sale, what more can i do" line let her off the hook - she and the board are the reason we are in this mess (its been heading this way for years now) - with out them going we are only heading in one direction - and i''ll let you make up your own mind which way that is...

[quote user="John Boubepo"][quote user="Gazza"] How can anyone seriously balme Roeder for this, just shows that he is working with his hands tied!. The only disgrace at our club are the fools in the boardroom and our celebrity chef for running the club into the ground! DELIA OUT! [/quote] So Roeder isn''t to blame, would that be the same Roeder who sold young injury free Shackle and brought in Injury prone Stefanovic and Kennedy, lets get real GR is making a hash of it. If you can only afford a small squad you need to make sure the players you bring in are not injury liabilities and can make it through a season - did someone shout Carl Cort? [/quote] No - its the same board who sold Shackell because the Turners had just jumped ship and we needed to recoup some of the money they were supposed to put in to the summer transfer kitty ..if you are going to start pointing the finger get your facts right..

[quote user="We Want Worthy Back"]I honestly don''t think he would. I believe he would achieve brief success over a short period, but ultimately would lose the dressing room and thus performances nosedive.[/quote] Just like Worthington then... and I assume from your userid you are a Worthington fan....? So why Worthington and not Roeder ? Roeder has far better credenials, contacts and respect in the game than Worthington ever did  

[quote user="porkyp"]Hi JUDGE                    some really good points there, and I totally realise that the demise, especially in the last few years, has to be laid at the Board''s door. I''m sure we all recall Doncaster''s prudence with ambition remarks when we struck gold and entered the premiership. Without doubt, this was the beginning of the decline.... a little more forethought there may not have seen us where we are today. It does make me angry that at that time, Delia, MWJ and the rest jumped on the bandwagon and shouted their prowess and success from the rooftops, but we all know success is consistency, built on strong foundations, and yet when the going gets tough, we hear very little from them, other than that the club is ''For sale'' However, the day to day running of the Football side of this club is down to Glen Roeder and his staff. I have to say that when the appointment was made, I was not disappointed. He is a strong character, well thought of by other managers/coaches, who I thought could do well here, (if his track record was  bit shaky) I do have contacts in the North East, and he was well thought of at Newcastle, after all, he saved them from relegation.......but similarly to here at NCFC he could not carry that on. A manager can only be judged on performances, and there is no doubt that here the buck stops with him. we have witnessed ONE good performance this season, against Wolves. The stats do not lie, his record is very nearly the same as Peter GRANT''s, over a very similar timescale, and the board chose to firstly warn this manager that results had to improve, and they didn''t.....the rest is history....... I appreciate that to get rid of Roeder now will more than likely be financial suicide to a club obviously in dire straits, and perhaps that is why Delia and Co are saying nothing.....but financial suicide will be committed if things do not improve......can we afford to be relegated and more than likely lose vast sums through lost season ticket and casual ticket sales.......I mean do you really fancy paying £350+ or more to watch the likes of Carlisle, Walsall, Swindon to name but a few, at home on a very cold, wet and windy December or January Tuesday night..!! I love this club, and have done for fifty years or more, so is it too much to ask for a bit of success, we have underachieved now for so long, and on the playing side, that can only be down to the Manager,  coaches, and tacticians taking the daily training and picking the teams......and that is Glen ROEDER. [/quote] Fair play Porky again some good points which I agree with. Like you I have supported the club for many years (only 30 odd for me though) and yes we have underachieved for a long time. The key phrase here is ''a long time''. Yes I agree the performance on the pitch week in week out is down the the manager and his team but how many managers have we had over the last 10/12 years ?  - but what and who have been the constants over that period ??who have made the managerial appointments, set the player budgets etc ? starved the manager of funds whilst investing in off field activity and having to sell other players to manage the debt created by it. ? Mangers can only work within the budget set for them - yes it then down to them how to spend it and we can all have views on whether that money was well spent or not - but the bigger picture is that although as said before removing Roeder may well remove a symptom, the main disease will still remain. I sadly feel that the club is in a position where we are ''damned if we do and damned if we don''t'' I honestly believe that if we get no investment to spend in January we will go down this season and the club will go in to financial meltdown with or without Roeder in charge. Though I sympathise with your views, and understand them - I still feel Roeder is the easy and wrong target here....

Good passionate letter Porky - will be interested if you get a reply. However though I understand and share your disappointment with Roeder to a certain extent, I personally think you and alot of others on this board are venting your anger in the wrong direction - changing manager at this point in time may mean you get someone who is abit better in the media, and makes all the right noises to start with - but will it address the fundamental problems we have at our football club ? The answer for me at the moment is still no. Yes removing Roeder may well sort some short term issues you have with him as a person and his tactical decisions but it will not address the real problems at our club and help us move forward ? The board have made mistakes time and time again (manager appointments being just one of many). They and ONLY they are responsible for the situation we are in and I have no sympathy for them whatsoever. Delia has finally realised that the way they have run the club and invested the revenues, has led her and the club in to a hole she can''t get out of and wants to jump ship. Just because she has put a "for sale" sign up outside her door does not absolve her, Munby, Doncaster etc from the flack they should be getting. Without a change in Board (which is obviously a much harder thing than changing a manager), along with the necessary investment this would bring, this club is unfortunately and very sadly not going to move forward. If you still feel (as I expect you may well do) that changing the manager now is the right thing to do - ask yourself these questions: 1. Can we afford to pay Roeder off ? (aswell as Clark and Stephenson - who would undoubtedly follow.) Please remember when answering this that the club can''t even afford Lita''s wages at the moment - they are being paid by someone outside the club ) 2. Who would come as a replacement ? (remember those currently at other clubs will result in a compensation payment - can we afford that ? Those out of employment aka Boothroyd - aren''t out of a job for no reason i.e. they have failed in their previous jobs) 3. Why would they want to come here ? (no money, a club in decline, very little chance of success) 4. Would you rather our obviously very limited (if not empty) funds be spent on removing Roeder and his team, and bringing in competent replacements, or on team strenghtening ? Although I can understand your, and alot of others, frustration with Roeder I do feel that you are venting your anger in the wrong direction, and would also say that it wouldn''t necessarily move the club forward and up the league. The manager here is the easy target for fans (and the board) but we have been here too many times and for too long - we must aim higher and target those really responsible and who without changing we will never move forward.

I hope you are right with the number of nails to go Super - personally I think we are down to the last 2 or 3. Delia will fight tooth and nail not to go into adminstration as by doing that she can wave good bye to at least 95% of the money she has in share value - some thing she can''t afford to do. But whether she will find a buyer on her terms is another thing. Have to point out a couple of things though. You have to admit that it is unlikely Clark and Stephenson would stay - Roeder brought them here and Clark has already had offers from other clubs. So with them all going the club management/coaching team would be in turmoil again. You say you would like someone like Bowen or Crook. I have to say I was keen for Bowen to come last time. Thing is as I stated they are both employed and would require a compensation payment - something we can''t afford. Also though they have ties to Norwich, it is still a major risk, neither have had management experience, and yes sometimes people can step up, however if you look at history the vast majority fail. Also I say again why would they want to come here with no money to spend ? - they would be on a hiding to nothing (unless we paid them a ridicious amount - again unlikely). If they wanted to take the step up to management then surely they would want to go somewhere with some chance of suceeding. You say the board got it right with Worthington and Walker. I think you have forgotten that Walkers successful spell here was when Chase was here. He left went to Everton and then came back under Smith & Jones and failed. Managers coming back rarely work out. On to Worthington, no one can doubt he bought us a play off and promotion - however the board also kept him at least 18 months too long. Also I think you are looking at his transfer activity with slightly ''Worthy'' tinted glasses there - for every Malky there was a Briggs, Higginbottom, Hughes, and Thorne. Far more duff buys than good i''m afraid and they were ultimately his undoing. So in terms of past managerial appointments our board have been found wanting on too many occasions and I for one wouldn''t trust them in appointing anyone or worth next time. I think we are broadly agreeing on the need to shake up the team last season - however you feel Roeder may have gone too far, personally I don''t. Shackell was a forced sale following the exit of the Turners, and Cureton should never have been here in the first place. I do agree the number of loans is not benefical, but he has not had the necessary funds to purchase the amount of permanents he would like. However in terms of the permanent signings he has made so far; Bell, Hoolahan, Patterson, and Clingan these are all definately good additions to the squad. As said like you i''m far from happy with the state of affairs at NCFC at the moment - but in my opinion changing the manager at this point time would do us more damage than good. New investment/board then yes I would be the first to agree with you - but at the moment no.

[quote user="SuperWesIrishWizard"]Dear Mr Roeder, Since your arrival at this football club you have succeeded in banging in all but the last few nails into the coffin of the football club that is such an important part of my heritage, my life, and the life of thousands of other Norwich City Fans. Whilst doing so you have shown absolute disregard to the opinions, feelings and beliefs of those fans. The fans that will be the lifeblood of this club if, or possibly when, this club gets relegated and files for administration. The fans that have followed this club through thick and thin. I have been particularly upset with your attitude towards the fans, and players, of Norwich City Football Club. Your obnoxious and arrogant attitude is not welcome at this club and will not, has not, been tolerated. Your treatment of Darren Huckerby, a true hero of so many fans, disgusted even the thickest skinned and coldest of Norwich fans. I will never forgive that. Upon leaving Norwich City Football, if you choose not to resign, you would have taken a large proportion of the FANS money in return for helping to destruct their football club. I ask that you resign with immediately effect, to enable the board of directors to appoint an alternative manager. A manager that the fans can relate to, a manager that cares about other people and the football club, and hopefully as a result a manager that can save us from relegation to league one and begin to lay the foundations for a sustainable long term future and the ability to invest money into permanent signings with potential resale value - a capital and asset growth that will ensure the future of this football club. At this moment in time, with the situation that this football club is in, I would personally be content for this club to be an average Championship team for four or five years, as long as we as fans can identify with the players and staff of the football club and we can begin to build a community focused and enjoyable football experience again. As of today, 29th November 2008, we are 21st in the league with about 14 permanently contracted pro players. Regrettably, it appears that you have failed to lay the foundations for a promising future and have instead taken actions that seriously compromise the ability of this club to compete on any level. I call therefore for you to resign from your position of manager of Norwich City FC, with no compensation payment, and look forward in anticipation to press coverage reporting this accordingly. Yours Sincerely, SuperWesIrishWizard (pink un forum member and life time Norwich fan) [/quote] Well written and passionate letter Super, but I''d like you and those who think this is so fantastic to think through the answers to some of these questions. 1. Who put the first 98 out of the 100 nails in our coffin ?? 2. How by changing manager will this change fortunes on the pitch ?? - remember there is NO money to spend to bring in new players, and if Roeder goes so will Clark, Stephenson etc. 3. Whilst agreeing Roeder should be more empathetic towards fans, why should he listen to the opinions, feelings and belief of fans ? would you in his position ? which particular one of the thousands of different opinions and feelings should he listen to ? 4. Yes, Darren Huckerby had done great things for Norwich in the past, but was he not also part of the failing team over the seasons prior to Roeder arriving ? Did you feel there was a need for a total revamp of the squad ? 5.  Do you trust our current board of directors to appoint a suitable alternative ? 6. Who do you think they should appoint ? Who would you ''relate to'' ? Who do you know would have the best interest of Norwich City and the community at heart ? 7. Where will the money come from to invest in permanent signings ? (remember you have just spent all your money paying off Roeder and his coaching staff, and paid compensation for this fantastic new manager and coaching staff who you can ''relate to'' - because if you expect him to work the miracles you hope for they are surely in employment someone else - and why would they come here ?) 8. Haven''t our current majority shareholders and board of directors spent all our income over the past 5 years on making this a ''community'' club - do you think this money was wisely spent instead of investing in the team therefore making enjoyable and successful football more of a reality than an dream ? 9. Is it Glen Roeder alone in 12 months that has ''destructed'' our football club, or are others more culpable for the situation we find ourselves ? Do you feel by removing Glen Roeder alone everything will magically improve ? Don''t get me wrong, I''m as jarred of as anyone about the current situation we find ourselves in but I''m sorry I can''t agree that removing Roeder will achieve anything at this point in time. I wait in anticipation for your answers

Sorry guys - can''t agree with you on this one. Although I, like you would love a change in manger i''m afraid we aren''t going to get anything better than what we currently have to replace him - and lets face it if he went so would Clark, Stephenson etc. We just can''t have that sort of change round at the club again whilst we are in the perilous postion. These guys won''t go without a pay-off and where would you rather see any money we have got spent ? - on changing a managment / coaching team or getting better players in. Lets not forget to get someone else in who is currently in employment elsewhere would also mean conpensation to the club involved - again money we don''t have. and who will come here ? - to a club with NO money too spend. Would you want another Grant ?? - because thats the type of pond you would be fishing in - too risky i''m afraid. Sorry but changing manager at this point in time will solve nothing - the problems at our club are far more deep rooted than that and you all know that. Unfortunately until we have new owners / new investment (which doesn''t look likely) no manager will be successful at this club - so like it or not we have to stick with what we have and I do really fear that will mean going down this season. Don''t get me wrong i''d love a change, but only in the right circumstances - but at this point in time for our club, without other changes it won''t make any difference - in fact it could be suicidal.

Yes he was a very costly mistake - but just add him to a very long list of those over the past 4 years The thing was that Earnshaw had gone and Grant was struggling to find anybody who wanted to to come to Norwich (other than his useless Scottish contingent...) Billy Sharp didn''t want to come (no great loss there), Luke Varney didn''t want to come (no great loss there either). Then there was this little lad at Colchester who released a number of articles to the press saying that he loves Norwich & would love to go back there. So I think it was basically a case of Jamie talking up a move for himself off the back off the season he had just had (and no doubt a bigger pay cheque than at Colchester) and the fact that Grant couldn''t attract any other strikers here..especially with the budget the board gave him. Lets face it you have just sold Earnie for £3.5m and the board give you say £1m to find a replacement. With out any contacts in the English game (other than West Ham where his mate Pardew had just been sacked) Grant was always going to struggling until Jamie (and no doubt his agent) talked up a move for himself... Basically we needed a striker and there were very few other options..

Surely the way to solve the Cullum / Delia debate once and for all is to get Keith Harris to go and speak to Peter Cullum to find out whether he is prepared to invest or not, and on what basis. Delia and MWJ have appointed him to "seek investment" what ever this means. I am pressuming it means the whole spectrum of investment from small investment for no shares to total share buy out and control. As PC has publicly stated he was prepared to invest £20m for new shares in NCFC - I would suggest he is a pretty good place for Mr Harris to start - and it would provide (should the outcome be made public) absolute clarity on where each party stands.    

[quote user="BBFF"] Remember when the Smiths took over they said the man who ran the club from then on would not be on the board! With Mr Doncaster sitting on the board I wonder what happened to that promise?   FOOTBALL MUST COME FIRST [/quote] They also said no one person would ever have a majority controlling shareholding - and hey presto look who has a 60%+ shareholding now .....

[quote user="T"][quote user="Canary Nut"][quote user="T"]  I think the majority of people could accuse the Board of mismanagement if they had failed to take on a project which is expected to realise a 4m profit. Furthermore if you say the external loans to be repaid is only 2.5m then the prospective cash flow benefit of this to the club is now 7.5m. [/quote] Utter rubbish!  Putting the £2.5m loan to one side, you are ignoring the CASH spent on buying the rest of the land, interest payments and the spine road to date. If they manage to rollover the £2.5m loan this December there will still be more CASH outlays regarding the interest payments each season plus a possible arrangement fee. In addition if the club goes ahead and builds a 335 space multi storey car park that will probably cost say £2.5m. and there will be £579k''s worth of planning obligations regarding the multi storey car park. So that wouldn''t leave NCFC much CASH would it?   [/quote] The key word above which you seem to have missed is prospective. Prospective means future so it means that I''m talking about the future cash flows rather than the sunk cash flows. Of course as anyone who understands finances the profits equal the cash flows over the longer term. My point is only the timing of the cash flows in that as the external loan is smaller more of the cash flows  have been spent in the past and therefore the net cash flows to the club in the future will be larger when the land is sold.  The car park is also a long term decisions but a far shorter pay back than the land as you''d expect the project to start generating revenue after about a year I would have thought. Currently a lot of other people make considerable money from people parking their cars to go and see NCFC play - I see absolutely nothing wrong in NCFC seeking to redirect these revenues and profits to the club so that the club has a higher long term revenue base to spend on players. The key point of the debate is that you are thinking short term rather than than taking a long term view. The clubs strategy are sound financial decisions which any long term financial decision maker would agree with. As I''m sure you know you need to take the expected  revenues less the expected operating costs less the investment costs and discount them for the time value of money to come up with the net present value of the investment decision. This is the fundamental basis of investment decisions and of course if the NPV is negative than you are correct. The land is a postive deal and therefore a good decision. The revenues from the car park (say 335 cars x 5quid per car x 25 times a year) appear to be less than the interest costs ie 3m x say 8% so that would be  a wrong decision based on the fugures that you have given but then you would need to see the full projections to assess the decision. [/quote] T - you obviously are trying to blind people with lots of long financial phrases to try and prove your point - valid though it may be. The thing is as you have eluded to yourself - most of the off field investments are long term. Once loans etc have been paid off etc hopefully they will make a profit and provide revenue to the club. However - again as you have mentioned previously these revenues although undoubtedly helpful to bolster the managers transfer kitty will never be enough to finance a successful promotion push with the ridicious prices and wages that have to be paid for even an average championship footballer. Long term investments/returns are safer from the owners/shareholders perspective as they add value to their shares, however like it or not football is very much turning in to a short term business - success is needed and quickly to recoup the revenues needed to run a even a championship club. Football is, and has changed dramatically over the past 5/10 years and this trend doesn''t appear to be changing. Our board have chosen to dismiss investing in the much riskier short term strategy of success on the field, in preference to investing in long term off-field activity which ultimately has left us unable to compete in the transfer market whilst increasing their share value in the process (although I''m not necessarily suggesting this was their primary objective). As stated, in my view, with football going the way it has over the last 10 years - this strategy was doomed to failure - and it has failed. A football club regardless of all the nice associated off the field activities (restuarants, hotels, offices etc) will only be successful if the team is successful.  Over the past 3/4 seasons NCFC supporters have bucked the trend in match attendances in the hope that we will see success on the pitch - the board, regardless of what they say, have taken this for granted as they merrily continue to invest in off field activities - whilst hoping what is being served up on the pitch is good enough to keep the fans coming in. Fans want success - the board haven''t delivered or adopted a strategy that gives a chance to achieve it. They have dug themselves into this hole - they are responsible - and they must be held responsible. Delia & Co keep coming up with the mantra of long term sustainability - and their off field investments have backed this up. However as stated a football team (as well supported as Norwich is) is about success - with out success it is nothing and people will drift away, with the ultimate scenario of adminstration. Yes short term investment in the squad may back fire and you could end up in the same position much quicker - but ultimately the outcome is the same. One is a slow painful death with year after year of flirting with relegation and the hopes & dreams of 1000s of fans dashed each season, the other could result in a massively quick disarster - but the difference is that it also brings the chance of success and the riches that the premier league would bring - and the only way the debts of the club would ever be fundamentally reduced. Unfortunately the opportunity for the second option is no-longer there as we don''t have the finances to take this approach even if we wanted to meaning we are only left with Option One - the slow painful death (which we have been witnessing over the past 3 seasons). Delia & Co therefore have to move aside if this club is to progress - i think they have realised this - shame they didn''t abit earlier......

[quote user="T"]Unpopular with a number of fans, maybe not brilliant communicator but evidence that he is useless at administrating the club?[/quote]   Sorry T got to take you up on that one. As CEO Doncaster is ultimately responsible for the success of NCFC - financial and otherwise. The Turners were apparently brought in last year to cast an eye over his performance. How on earth they could say he was "doing a good job" at last years AGM beggars belief. We were bottom of the league with 8 points and £19m in debt - so how is that doing a good job ??  How many of the rest of us in employment currently would be given the same luxury if we were performing that well in our jobs eh ??? We are a football club T - success is judged (rightly or wrongly) by success on the pitch - and we are failing year after year. Yes Managers and coaches are hired to run the football side of things but they can only work within the budgets and remits given to them. Not much has changed from last year - other than the debt has gone up. Go Neil go - at this rate you''ll be heading for a good bonus - especially as the Turners aren''t there now either. 

[quote user="T"] The catering  business is profitable, the stands are full and generate a return, the offices are rented out and generate a return, the Road/land deal is expected to generate a significant profit and the hotel was not paid for the club so the argument does not stand up at all. This expenditure was primarily financed by loans which would only be available for infrastructure not players and allow the club to generate additional revenue to fund players as gate receipts are insuffecient. Providing your return exceeds the cost of money they benefit the club . That is how all businesses and football clubs work. The likes of Watford and Crststal Palance are suffering from lack of investment in infrastructure - ManU and Arsenal are benefiting from the investment in infrastructure. They is obviously a balance between long term and short term expenditure but I''m afraid the argument demonstrates an amazing lack of basic business and financial knowledge rather than a valid criticism of the board. [/quote] These activities may well generate a return T, but when you take in to consideration the amount of money spent to put these things in place - when are they going to make a profit over the initial investments ??- a damn long time I bet you. I haven''t seen the accounts so can''t comment specifically but I understand the catering side of things generated a sizeable 5 figure sum last year, however it cost millions to set up the various catering activities at the club in the first place. Similarly how much are they recieving in rent for the office space ? - how long will it take to recoup the circa £1m it took to refurbish them in the first place last year etc etc..you rightly state that these things were "primarily" financed by loans which would only be available for infrastructure - but these loans need to be paid back (long term or short term) yes they may become self financing in the future but until that time the loans have to paid from other incomes...   So as for lack of basic business and financial knowledge - i don''t profess to be an expert but I do understand that you need to take into consideration the set up costs of any activity before you can truely acknowledge the value they have bought to the club. and as I said - no-one disagrees that these things are nice to have and in the future will generate some addtional revenue, but as you have acknowledged yourself this in my view has happened too quickly, the board have been obsessed with off field investment (admitted by Mumby last year) at expense of the team. No team or lack of success of the team and the all the "nice to have" off-field activities will suffer accordingly. Comparing us to Man Utd and Arsenal is taking it abit far - they have successful teams so its only natural that associated off field activities will rake in the cash. People naturally want to be associated with success - having a corporate day out (with associated meal drinks etc) at Man Utd has far greater appeal to Joe Public than one at Carrow Road at the moment.  So I stand by what I said - the board have chosen this strategy and are blame for the state of our squad. However what they have done is by putting all the infrastucture in place have made the club a very attractive proposition for someone wanting to buy into a Championship football club - thanks to them for that but now its time for them to move aside and someone to take the football side of the club onwards and upwards.    

I''d be happy if they 2 people walking around with a wooden score board like they used to if it meant we could buy some better players !! Surely you can see Stevie (or perhaps you can''t) that although most us see the benefit of all these nice new restaurants, score boards, stands, offices, roads, land, hotels etc etc etc - we didn''t and don''t want our money to be spent on these things rather than the team - it is them after all what we go to watch every week !! Season after season over the past 10 years we have spent more money on "tangible fixed assets" rather than the team - and that strategy is exactly why we are in the position we are now. Even after the crap season we had 2 years ago the board merrily continued with this strategy by spending another £1m on "fixed assets" last season whilst we still made a trading profit on player sales and purchases.....can you not see this strategy has been doomed to failure for a number of years. The tradegy is that even a little as one season ago they still could see it.......amazing incompetent in my view Some people argue that Delia''s only crime is that she is not rich enough - Boll*#ks - we have had the money over the past 5 seasons to be in a much better competitive position on the pitch and in less debt off it - its just our board have chosen in their wisdom to take the path they have and therefore they are totally at fault for the position we find ourselves now.  

Sorry for bringing this up again but Waghorn''s last anti Cullum article question the value of his last £20m offer - well want do you think the clubs worth at the moment then Rick ??. 

Well done Neil - you fully deserve your £180k+ salary.... Lets not forget Doomcaster is basically painting this "rosy" picture because that is basically what he is paid to do - manage the finances of the club. If he were to say the club is in a financial mess - he is basically saying he hasn''t done his job properly - which as we all know from our lovable Neil is very unlikely. His comments relating to wealthy people wanting to invest in the playing side doesn''t sound too encouraging in terms of getting a new wealthy OWNER either..seems they are still looking for people to give them money for nothing in return... 

Another anti Cullum article on his site today. In answer to the main question in his article "is the club worth more today than it was this time last year ?" - No I personally don''t think it is, why does league position in the championship make a difference to what a club is worth ? Yes the owners may have been more willing to sell last year for a lower price because of the league position they were in - but that does impact on the value of the club. You could actually argue quite strongly the club is worth alot less this year due to; financial market conditions, depreciation in land and property values, fewer permanent playing staff, the fact the debt of the club hasn''t dramatically reduced balanced against lower revenues, and 2 directors would could provide future investment and security against some of the debt have walked away. Why does Waghorn want to paint such a negative picture of the life of modern football club ownership ?? - yes it is different to the way the club has been managed by Delia, but it is the way football is going, like it or not, things change. You can either accept it and move forwards or resist it and run the risk of disappearing into oblivion. Personally I want success for my club and for me thats Premiership / top championship - for others that may be lower. If success means the club being owned by someone who wants to manage in a different way to Delia - then bring it on...