shortfatb

While I don''t agree with Smudger being Chief Scout or whatever, he is right that the quality of the players we buy is a long way away from the players we brought in through the 80''s, 90''s and early 00''s. We used to buy players that other clubs wanted too, highly rated youngsters, excellent players at rival and higher clubs etc. Now everyone we buy is a speculative purchase. But that''s where we are and we have to accept it, there''s no coincidence that the majority of the clubs down with Norwich have been in the Prem a few years back and now have no money, or are clubs that have already fallen further than us and are trying to start again, like Notts Forest or never had any money like Barnsley.On the last 442 Rich List, Emile Heskey had about as much money as Delia and Michael and that was before the Villa move. The richer clubs like Sheff Utd and QPR are going to keep in the fight, clubs like us have to speculate with players and hope we get lucky or clever or both, like Burnley and Preston this year, but it''s a fact that the players we are buying and loaning aren''t that great, and in truth that those Roeder secured have probably been better. 

[quote user="nolegs"]Or get up for one![/quote]or be effective in the box

[quote user="shortfatb"]We won''t go into administration, we have no money, but the fact that we have sold Bell before getting any else in other than Carney, suggests that they are continuing to balance the books rather than speculate in any way. We are not trading insolvently.    [/quote]

We won''t go into administration, we have no may, but the fact that we have sold Bell before getting any else in other than Carney, suggests that they are continuing to balance the books rather than speculate in any way. We are not trading insolvently.   

[quote user="1st Wizard"][quote user="Neil_MacLeod"][quote user="1st Wizard"] Administration, I believe is very close now, how long before our entire team is made up of loans and youth players? Mind you, it would finish Smith![:D] [/quote] Wiz, may i ask what your profession is, accountant, Lawyer??? you seem to know so much about Finance and they way it works!   Macca [/quote] Retied.........in  accounts! [/quote]I assume you meant retired, although the idea of you being bound and gagged in an accounts departement or anywhere is appealing.

[quote user="Broken_hearted_canary"]Never that keen on the guy to be honest. Slow but could cross a ball in, although why you''d want a slow, right-footed, right-sided midfielder (he''s to slow to be catagorised a winger) on the left i don''t know. Even i could defend against that. We''re screwed if crofty does''nt sign a new deal though. [/quote]You could play Otsemebor in front of Owozusi or another, Seme''s no worse a crosser than Crofty.

How f***ing hard is it to spell Cullum?

[quote user="Sports Desk - Pete"]We''ve got money for a supposed winger who has less pace than me and wanted to leave....[/quote]Is that the first time you''ve ever really given your own opinion on here Pete? Brave, but you''re probably right.

16th on 51 points. Southampton, Charlton and Watford down. Ipswich in 9th.

I think they might play 4-4-1-1 if he get''s a bigger striker or Cort suddenly gets better. I would prefer this with Omozusi, Doherty, Grounds or Another, Bertrand, Croft or preferably Bell on the right, Clingan and Russell in the middle, Carney on the left, Hoolahan in the hole and a bigger striker up front, maybe Cody, Cort or someone else.This can be defensive when we don''t have the ball, offensive when we do with, all the midfield capable of getting in the box to support the front 2. We can revert back to 4-4-2 when Wes is knackered with Jamie or Lupoli coming on if we''re not winning or Pattison or Fozz coming into midfield if we''re winning.   

I thought that Bell is still carrying an injury, perhaps that''s why he''s not as energetic as one would hope for. He is definitely more of a class act than Croft and should be given a chance on the right.

[quote user="lappinitup"][quote user="1st Wizard"][quote user="lappinitup"][quote user="The Butler"] I realy think you are all taking this post to seriously. Looks like a dig at Wiz to me by another anonymous poster! Based on a "would we be better off if" type thread. Calm down all fans (until we score that all important first goal tonight) [/quote]Clearly, he''s jealous of CT Butler. He thinks if he makes childish comments that sound like CT''s childish comments which echo wiz''s childish comments then he can join da gang lol. [:D][/quote] Well he won''t mine..............if I had one![:S][/quote]You do seem to getting a cult following wiz! [;)] [/quote]Do you mean cult?

[quote user="singing canary"]i thought he was in the birmingham first  team most of the time , would they let him go to a rival on the cheap.? [/quote]We''re hardly rivals are we? Our rivals are Doncaster, Charlton, Saints etc. There''s are Reading, Wolves, Sheff Utd

I think they both make some highly valid and contructive points The c***s!

From my understanding of events, Gunn compiled and took his team of ex-City mates to the board to strengthen his claims for the job, as these people complemented his abilities and gave a level of coaching and managerial experience that he knew made him a weaker candidate. So whilst one can blame the board for picking Gunn and his team, it was Gunn who chose to construct his team from ex players, calculating that this would appeal to the baord and fans.   

[quote user="Saint Canary"][quote user="Binky"]The Board gets a lot of stick. But for making the decision to kick out Roeder when they did - and in appointing Gunn & Crook - I think they deserve a lot of praise.[/quote]In the same way it is wrong for people to be putting down Gunn it is equally wrong to proclaim that the board should be praised for appointing him.  People forget that this board have yet to apoint a manager that has taken the club forward.  Worthy and maybe to a small extent Roeder,  are the only managers to have any acheived anything yet they both left us in as bad a shape on the pitch as they found us.If at the end of the season we are still in the Championship, by all means praise the board but so far nothing has been acheived.[/quote]As the OP, I wasn''t praisng the board just recognising that they''ve changed the team at a minimal cost, pushed all the right buttons with regards to the fans and if we go down, yes, some  fans will be calling for the board to go, but they''ve been getting that for 2 years. It''s just quite a clever solution, low cost, gives the board and management breathing space and they can expect support from the majority of fans for the rest of the season. 

We have no money, they have picked 3 people who, even though Deehan was a poor manager, Norwich fans have affection and time for, and there will be total support at games from the home crowd. Yes they may take us down but any of the other potential appointees have failed recently and there was no guarantee that they would succeed any better than this trio, but at a greatly reduced cost. And, if they keep us up it will be happy days, It''s risk but a reasonably calculated one.

[quote user="ricardo"]Gunn,  Deehan, Crook[/quote]Heard this too.

12.45 Wednesday. I''m busy.

Yes, why not?

[quote user="tribes"]Has Gunny got any coaching qualifications?.[/quote]Yeah PSV

[quote user="Mr.Carrow"][quote user="BigFish"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"][quote user="BigFish"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"] There really does seem to be a lack of joined-up thinking on this thread.  Had Cullum not gone to the press we would not know ANYBODY has been interested in the club in recent times.  But as it happened it flushed out the admission that they had "several" approaches whilst they had been telling us that "nobody is interested in investing in loss-making championship clubs".  Now Cullum has been widely slated for de-stabilising the club (code for exposing how dishonest our board can be....), so who is to say that other interested parties have not noted this negative reaction and decided to keep their interest well under wraps? So we have a choice between sticking with a proven failed and clueless regime, or putting pressure on them to get out which MIGHT flush out interested parties particularly if the current shareholders become more receptive to compromise.  If pressure is applied and there is still no apparent interest then i guess we have to conclude we are stuck with them- but at least we will have let them know that we are not complete mugs, we care deeply about the club and we are not happy with the incompetant way they have run it. [/quote] Let''s face it your argument is...... "I don''t like them so they should go" [/quote] OMG, absolutely, totally unbelievable......of course you`re right, it`s got nothing to do with four seasons of decline, lots of expensive white elephants going up at the expense of the team, hanging on to Worthy too long (and now trying to get him back!!), big profits in the transfer market announced in each annual report whilst we are told "all money received is re-invested in the team, Grant, Roeder, "Lots of lovely investment".......it`s just that i personally don`t like them. However hard it is for you to accept, they have proved themselves incompetent and unfit to run our club.  The first step towards solving a problem is acknowledging that there is one and it`s about time you had the guts to do that. [/quote] Depends what you consider the problem is Mr C. For you (despite the cheap jibe I posted) it is very much about personalities and the arguments you make pick at descision making based on your antipathy to the board in question. For others it is easier to accept that while they have made catrostrophic football decisions the club itself may well be well run within an economic climate that makes it very difficult for Championship clubs many of which share the problems City have but do not have the Smiths. [/quote] BF, the vast majority of my posts have been about policy issues backed by my take on the accounts/public statements etc. not personalities.  For a long time i made a point of not mentioning board members by name as i felt the entire board had to take responsibility for their decisions, rather than victimising one or two people.  I think you may be referring to my post on another thread about how my friend was treated, and yes i think D and M have some "issues" which affect the running of the club, but i was hardly being nasty- i finished the post by stating "Maybe it`s a case of caring too much?". Now maybe we can focus on what is good for the club rather than two particular people?  Is their approach working?  Is our club moving forward?  How many "catastrophic football decisions" should we allow them before we, as a body of supporters, suggest that it isn`t working out and change at the top is absolutely necessary? [/quote]I think almost all on this tread want the same or similar things. Mr C you''re right that it''s more than D&M''s fault that poor decisions have been made and that if they could persuaded to admit their time is really up, someone may come forward. Let''s all hope so.

[quote user="cityangel"]He won''t need any luck tomorrow because he''ll have 24,000 Norwich fans behind him plus Arrdee will be smiling down on him.[/quote]True, but he will still have a pretty average bunch of players, however roused. I think he''ll need all the luck going, Barnsley won''t be doing us any favours and our potential forwards are Lupoli, CC and Jamie, unless you want to include Doherty or Russell!

[quote user="The Chirp"]try and i say ''try'' re read the article from a neutral perspective... i don''t think he is slagging off the protesters... a rabble of people of angry people isn''t a slight on them... [/quote]Yes but he is saying that he feels sorry for poor Glenn, his wife, his daughter, the Munby''s and MWJ because he is friends with them, which is OK, but I feel greater unrecorded tragedies are going on in the UK and the rest of the world without being recorded by Dennis''s treacly prose.

[quote user="Mr.Carrow"][quote user="BigFish"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"] There really does seem to be a lack of joined-up thinking on this thread.  Had Cullum not gone to the press we would not know ANYBODY has been interested in the club in recent times.  But as it happened it flushed out the admission that they had "several" approaches whilst they had been telling us that "nobody is interested in investing in loss-making championship clubs".  Now Cullum has been widely slated for de-stabilising the club (code for exposing how dishonest our board can be....), so who is to say that other interested parties have not noted this negative reaction and decided to keep their interest well under wraps? So we have a choice between sticking with a proven failed and clueless regime, or putting pressure on them to get out which MIGHT flush out interested parties particularly if the current shareholders become more receptive to compromise.  If pressure is applied and there is still no apparent interest then i guess we have to conclude we are stuck with them- but at least we will have let them know that we are not complete mugs, we care deeply about the club and we are not happy with the incompetant way they have run it. [/quote] Let''s face it your argument is...... "I don''t like them so they should go" [/quote] OMG, absolutely, totally unbelievable......of course you`re right, it`s got nothing to do with four seasons of decline, lots of expensive white elephants going up at the expense of the team, hanging on to Worthy too long (and now trying to get him back!!), big profits in the transfer market announced in each annual report whilst we are told "all money received is re-invested in the team, Grant, Roeder, "Lots of lovely investment".......it`s just that i personally don`t like them. However hard it is for you to accept, they have proved themselves incompetent and unfit to run our club.  The first step towards solving a problem is acknowledging that there is one and it`s about time you had the guts to do that. [/quote]I don''t think many actually disagree with you, it''s just that there seems no method other than driving them out and then seeing what happens. If you want to move house but can''t sell it only the criminal or insane would see the only option left as burning it down.