Jump to content

Jonny 5

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    162

  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

Posts posted by Jonny 5

  1. Posted

    I don''t think there is any real issue here.  Roeder seems pretty strict with the players and expects a lot from them, but if you look that Lee Clark and Stevenson (?) who have both worked with him in the past chose to come to Norwich, when then already had pretty good jobs, speaks volumes about Roeder.

    Huckerby himself has said there were no issues on a personal level, and there is no need for him to watch his words in the threat of detering potential clubs.

    I think everyone is looking for reasons why Hucks was shown the door, beyond the obvious he wasn''t worth offering another large contract to.

  2. Posted

    Law of averages says we must strike lucky at least once [:)]I trust Roeder''s judgement of players more than most of our previous managers and doubt he will sign players using videos sent to him by their agents a la Hamilton.I also think Norwich''s inability to sign decent foreign players has been one of our weaknesses.

  3. Posted

    [quote user="Stevie Wonder"]

    I agree with Roeder comments regarding a 3yr plan to get to the prem. It took Worthy 3 and a half years from a similar poor starting position!

    [/quote]It''s a shame Roeder won''t be given those 3 years though. A lot of fans expect/demand instant results, despite the facts. Roeder has made a good start and should be given the time to put together his 3 year plan

  4. Posted

    I very much doubt the board had anything to do with the Huckerby decision, I think it was soley down to Roeder and any advice he may have taken from his coaches.If Huckerby  had one more year on his contract, he would be staying for another year, it''s just a decision needed to be made on next season and Roeder made it, simple as that.Although Huckerby was playing, he wasn''t setting the pitch on fire like he has been known to do and for the wages Norwich were paying we need someone who rips teams apart. I doubt we will get a player in of the quality Hucks had 5 years ago, but finding a player of that quality for 750k is a rarity. What we can get is 2 or maybe 3 players who can perform at the level Huckerby has been this season.

  5. Posted

    [quote user="kick it off"][quote user="ipswichrscum"]very well said. everybody says people are being stupid complaining about Roeder as he performed miracles to keep us up. a couple of lucky one goal wins including one which was just down to a nice last minute strike from Darell Russell. All roeder has down is brought in players (evans and bertrans aside) that are not of good enough quality. And made to many mistakes, as you say. Doherty right back.. Recently i have been very annoyed with roeder and this just tops it off. So I agree, Roeder is not as good as alot of people think.[/quote]If Glenn had been in charge, with this poor squad assembled by Grant, from the start of the season, we would have finished in 10th place on 65 points. That is hardly a "slight improvement" is it? That is a bloody miracle.The players he has brought in have played their part in him achieving his objective this season, which was to stay up. He has brought in one permanent signing and loans as cover - hardly enough to spout off about his transfer prowess. So what if we won 1-0 with a last minute strike? are you telling me West Brom didn''t do that ONCE this season? Doc had to play RB sometimes as we DO NOT HAVE ANY COVER. Are you stupid? who do you suggest we put there when Semmy has to come off with a knock? He signed Velasco, who got injured leaving us with no-one. He did it through neccessity rather than a blinding desire to turn the Doc into a Right Back. Jesus, you children need to get over Huckerby, stop villainising Roeder, learn SOMETHING (please god, anything!) about the real world and learn to actually think about the reasons behind the actions.[/quote]Beautifully put!Can''t believe how crazy people are going over this whole thing. Big bad Mr Roeder won''t let Huckerby play anymore and the only reason is because he is jealous of his hair.

  6. Posted

    I think Lappin will go for a nominal to Motherwell or something and Gilks will only be allowed to go if a decent offer comes in. Just because he wants to go doesn''t mean he is going.I reckon there will be contract talks with Foz and Doc, but the club won''t bend over backwards to keep them I reckon.

  9. Posted

    I''m sure Roeder already knows how much money he has to spend this summer. I think your valuation of 1 million and 2.5 is a little over inflated, I know there is all this money knocking around at the moment, but there are also a lot of clubs in big money trouble. This can lead to some bargins, also add in 5 - 7 loan players who will cost little or nothing depending on the deals and if they are younger players wages won''t be that high either and on top of all that some cheap european players and we can get a decent squad together, providing Roeder can find some bargins out there. Of course it would be better if we had pots of cash and could compete with the high rollers of the Championship, but that has never been Norwich City.

  12. Posted

    Don''t most managers do badly at their clubs towards the end? Hence the reason why they are at the end of the time at the club.I think everyone is reading far to much into the situation. Maybe Hucks wasn''t offered a new contract is because Roeder doesn''t believe he is worth the money for another year and it can be better spend elsewhere.What would you of had Roeder do? Announce in the build up to are most important home game of the season that he won''t be giving Hucks a new contract so say goodbye now... Ohh and don''t forget that if we lose this game we''ll probably be relegated. If we had been safe earlier on we would of heard earlier on, but Roeder had to keep silent until the end of the season for the sake of the team. Remeber it is a team, not Huckerby and his band of merry men.

  13. Posted

    I don''t think we should let the whole Hucks thing turn us against Roeder. He has done very well in his first season, I''m not going to rave about him as others are, but he is doing a good job. I think it would of been a big, BIG mistake to announce Hucks was going before the QPR game that Hucks wasn''t getting another contract. That game was far to big to have things like that hanging over it.It sucks we can''t say "goodbye" to Hucks, but what would that actually entail? Singing a few songs? I''m pretty sure that was done against QPR and Sheff Wed.We can''t let the fact that an aging, former great player is leaving at the end of his contract cause fractions in the club. If he had been kicked out mid way through a contract, or sold off for cheap then we could get upset, but it''s a natural ending. Roeder is using his head not his heart (although Hucks wouldn''t actually mean that much to Roeder, but you know what I mean) to run the club, which is as it should be. This decision has taken a lot of guts, he knows it is unpopular, he could of given him another contract, used him as a sub every now and again and avoided all these problems but that would of been to the detriment of the club.

  15. Posted

    Here Here!It seems many people on this board are talking about the Hucks we knew and fell in love with 5 years ago, and that just isn''t the reality of Hucks today. If it was, there is no doubt he would be offered another contract.I think Hucks managed to avoid a lot of criticism simple because he was Hucks and could do no wrong, even when giving the ball away, or crossing as badly as Croft.Good luck and God Bless Huckerby, a true Norwich legend.

  16. Posted

    It''s a shame that Hucks has left Norwich City, but such is football. Players get older and move on and I think the time was right for Norwich and Huckerby to go their seperate ways and we can all remember him for being the player he was, rather than becoming a bit player at the club and a drain on funds. He hasn''t produced the magic he did in his first season here for quite sometime now and was finding it increasingly difficult to beat his man. Fewer and fewer clubs were doubling up on him and he was obviously lacking pace over longer distances.For him to stay one more season just to keep us fans happy would of been a bad decision by Roeder, he is in his job to make big decisions, even if it leaves a lump in fans throats. Yes, it could of been announced before Sunday, especially as it was a nothing game, although looking at the "heroes" press conference I think we all saw it coming.It is now time for Roeder to go out and get us some new heroes and hopefully the wages saved from Dublin and Huckerby going we can get 2 new strikers and a new, effective winger. English clubs aren''t allowed to announce new bosman signings until after the season has finished, i.e. FA Cup Final, but I wouldn''t be surprised if some players haven''t already been "tapped up".I can''t remember being this excitied by a summer for a long long time, including the summer after getting promoted.Also, I think some neagtive, never happy, moaning, grumpy fans are using this as yet another excuse to complain about Roeder/The Board/Sun spots/Orphans/Anything else they can think about.

  17. Posted

    [quote user="birdman"]Not wanting to point out the obvious but even Grays and Stevenage are in higher leagues than any "Local" oposition.[/quote]But we don''t play Grays or Stevenage, we play against Grays Reserves and Stevenage Reserves. Roeder mentions playing Kings Lynn first team.

  18. Posted

    Oh yeah, I forgot about that.Well, he was enjoying the shopping in Norwich today, I guess before going with the squad to Sheffield. Seems strange that he would play for Arsenal and still be involved with the Norwich squad. It does seem to hint at the fact he will be back next season, much to the disappointment of many I''m sure.

  19. Posted

    From the interview it sounds like Roeder wants less games rather than more. He does have a point if most of the reserves are youth players, who will be playing in their own league. Would also save the pitch at Carrow Road a little.

  21. Posted

    I saw Gibbs in Chapelfield today so doubt he has actually ever left Norwich. The lad is only 18 and obviously has great talent. He probably does need to strenghten up a bit, and Roeder said so himself.  If he was to come back on loan next season I think he could be a really useful player for us. At least he can hit a corner pretty well.

  22. Posted

    [quote user="GJP"]

    [quote user="Jonny 5"]

    I''m sure Scunthorpe would be open to offers, just been relegated and Patersons vaule now is much more than it will be come January and a quick sale now will bring in the most amount of revenue possible.

    [/quote]

    So if Paterson has scored 25 goals by January and Scunthorpe are chasing promotion he''d be available for less than he would this summer just after relegation?

    [/quote]Or he has scored 5 goals, Scunthorpe are struggling and is worth ten pounds.His value is high now, and Scunthorpe know it. It''s true he could go on and have a great beginning to the season and be worth as much, if not more, but that is a risk. He is Scunthorpe''s most sellable asset, so of course they are looking to sell him on, and at a nice profit.

  23. Posted

    I think he means he hasn''t spoken to Norwich recently.  Norwich made a move for him in the winter and I guess that is when he spoke to us. It does read a little strange, but I think that is mainly down to Sky Sports.I''m sure Scunthorpe would be open to offers, just been relegated and Patersons vaule now is much more than it will be come January and a quick sale now will bring in the most amount of revenue possible.I think he could be a good player for us, but it would be a big risk. He stuck out as one of the better players in a poor team, so it''s hard to tell if he was just better than Paul Haynes (not hard really) or actually a good player.

  24. Posted

    I didn''t say the youth team isn''t vital, just the players who are only there making up the numbers aren''t vital. And it is down to opinion who is and isn''t a decent player. I think a good youth setup is vital for the future of the club for providing players and revenue when we sell them on. I also think regular reserve games are needed, but playing once every 6 weeks against teams like Cambridge etc isn''t cutting it, we mights as well play youth vs reserves or even Easton College. At least though games could be regular.We certainly will be short of players next season, and I''m pretty sure there will be at least 5 loan players at Norwich at some point next season. I''d rather loan players than substanded youth players.

  25. Posted

    Seems like you are friends with everyone Yellowmad, players and agents. Every year youth players are cut, it is part and parcel of the youth system and maybe we should of been a bit more critical of some of our younger players in the past.I will trust the judgement of the Norwich City coaching staff for now, and it isn''t always the top performers at 15/16 who turn into great players. And if we are realasing players who will never go on to make the first team so what, I''d rather have a small acadamey of talented players who can get more time with coaches than a large one full of players just making up the numbers.It could work out well if we do drop out of the reserves league, as long as we can get regular friendlies. How many times have reserve games been cancelled this season? It seems like there have been several occasions without reserve games for a month or so and we need something better than that, and teams better than some of the ones we are playing.
×
×
  • Create New...