The Great Mass Debater

Concerns me that everyone thinks we no longer need Holt. Been our main goalscorer for the last four seasons, a proven goalscorer and its far too easy to believe that simply because Holt and the team scored fewer goals last season that Holt is past it. Holt and the team scored fewer as Hughton''s priority last season was to tighten up at the back and defend as a team, whereas Lambert was gung-ho and attack in numbers. Holts scoring record was always going to suffer with a change in approach. To have still scored 8 goals equates to a similar output as his 15 goal season previously IMO. Its lazy to not be able to look past the numbers. Holt has been written off every season. What more does the guy need to do to prove himself? What concerns me is that everyone is assuming RVW will be an overnight success and will automatically score 20 goals a season. Yes he is a great signing and a great signal of intent - but look how many strikers prolific in other leagues have failed to transfer this to another. RVW may be a flop, he might never cut it in the league, or he may need a season to adapt. People are just throwing his name around like we have 20 goals guaranteed next season. Holt is a proven Premiership goalscorer. So he''s not youthful, but who cares? His game was never built on pace, and players like Sheringham have proved that if pace was never your game you can go on for years. If Hughton brings in the players we hope can help the club go up a level and not need to play 10 men behind the ball, then Holt, provided with a similar amount of chances as in the first Premier League season, could easily score a similar amount. Dont write the guy off (as has been done every season - do some people never learn?) and dont be fooled into thinking we dont need him anymore because we have such high hopes for RVW. 2m for Holt is ridiculous. He has no book value (we signed him for 600,000) so we dont need our investment back, and what would we do with such a paltry sum? He is worth far more to us than anyone else would be willing to pay. He will be an important part of our season this year, I have no doubt, and shame on those who are ready to forget what he has achieved with this club!

Considering the poor coverage we get on MOTD and the derision we receive from certain pundits Im amazed most football fans even know we exist! I thought we were practially invisible, and only exist as a joke in the minds of most media darlings (with their oh so funny farming and cookery scoffs)

[quote user="Hackedoff"]As a former defender himself. I think i trust Hughton''s judgement if he thinks Tierney is a good defender. Seems he knows his players.[/quote] Whilst I understand this logic, might I counter that Peter Grant signed Julian Brellier, and Bryan Gunn signed Theoklitos!

Does a transfer fee break a player? Liverpool have a history of ruining top strikers (or at least seeing many go off the boil), but I wonder, has the transfer fee affected Carroll. As has been said, its not his fault. Both he and Torres have fallen well short of what was hoped for them. Similar names such as Shevchenko, Ibrahimovic come to mind, where great players have failed to live up to their price-tags. How much is the pressure of the fee? How much is simply the change in circumstances that comes with a move?   I feel sorry for Carroll (not that sorry considering the money aspect) but I really wonder if he''d have performed so much better and still be thought of highly rather than a waste of money/flop if he''d carried on playing for the toon. Plenty of players have resisted the big money moves. Wisdom there I feel

Am I the only one who thought Tierney was great last season before he got injured? I thought he was arguably our best player first half of the season and seemed instantly effective in the Premiership. It may well be that his performances were due to momentum, and players punching above their weight (ie performances Lambert could get from him that perhaps Hughton couldnt), maybe he was never going to be able to sustain his performances, but for me thats all a massive assumption. I (and admittedly I missed the Fulham debacle) really cannot ever remember him having a bad game. heard he was poor in the cup, but missed that too. My perception of him was that he seemed to be the player that revelled in the step up the most at first, was impressive from day one in the premiership, steamed towards xmas, when ROI call-ups were mentioned, and then got injured. Never really made it back into the team and then cast aside by Hughton in Fox-like fashion. Im surprised to hear so many say he was average or not up to the Premiership. I just don think we ever saw enough evidence of that. I really think we''ve missed a trick by letting him go on a free. Wouldnt be surprised if he does really well at Bolton. Didnt think much of him before the Premiership season but he was one of those who I thought wouldnt step up, but found myself being proved wrong week after week. If we''d seen him have bad game after bad game I might understand it, but a few below par performances and he''s history. All very cloak and dagger. I dont understand the Tierney situation or the Fox situation. Must just be that Hughton didnt fancy them. Iv always questioned when managers freeze certain players out inexplicably - Simon Lappin and Glenn Roeder springs to mind

Everything seems to have been said already but I found this quite poor journalism. Invented quotes, plenty of supposition and very critical about someone whom very little is known. Pretty typical journalism really, which I why I have little time for journos in general. With regards to Holtamania, if this is the holtamania who used to do the match reports on the website of the same name, then I am very much a fan and would love to see you have a column on the pinkun

Muslims arent supposed to drink alcohol either (though I know a few who do), I wonder if alcohol would create a similar dilemma and how muslim players reacted when alcohol was heavily involved in football. It was the Carling Premiership for a long time and several lager brands used to be shirt sponsors. Think during this period there were fewer muslim players in the english leagues though. I asked a muslim friend once why alcohol was forbidden. He said it was because intoxication could interfere with the ability to pray regularly. Unusual to find some logic in religion

I suppose my question was ''Is he a faded talent''? Not so sure myself, but not too many positive comments about him on here! Wasnt suggesting for a minute he would want to play for us, Im just surprised noone else in the premiership is interested

Found myself asking why he is playing in the MLS. Only 32, still knows where the back of the net is. I know LA Galaxy found tonnes of money to throw at Becks, is money and the chance to live in the USA the only reasons. I think Keane could still be a real force in the Premiership, surprised he isnt interested in coming back, or that someone isnt willing to try and sign him. Still think he would be way out of our league, but if it were possible I think he could be a great asset. Anyone know or understand why he''s there?

I think RvW will clearly see a club of Norwich''s stature as a stepping stone to a bigger club. I dont think there is anything wrong with that. Nicolas Anelka played for Bolton - he played well and still retained an affection to the club after he left. I think his hope will be that he proves his ability at Premier League level, and a bigger club becoomes interested (like when West Ham had Tevez and Mascherano). This doesnt mean he will be a mercenary, and indeed once he''s here he may value regular football over warming a big clubs bench. But you dont move to a club of our stature from a club like Sporting Lisbon without seeing it as a positive career step - and that for him is surely to impress the big boys. But I dont see whats wrong with that, he has clearly demonstrated with the way he has continued to play for and respect Sporting that he is a respectful chap.

Portsmouths Jobsite was always a funny one for me, mainly because at first glance I always thought it said Gobsh*te...

Anything which makes the club look cheap or functional would be poor.  I remember Leeds used to have an asbestos removal company sponsor their shirts once Burger King or poundstretcher would be highly embarrassing...

Absolute pie in the sky in my opinion... Do we want to sell? Probably not.   Would we take a big fee for him? Probably.   Are we going to get one from an Australian A-League team? No.  Does Holt want to leave? Maybe.  Does he want to uproot his family after just settling them in Carlisle? No.  Does he want to be without them? Probably not, though Hucks did it.  Will an Australian side match his wages? Unlikely.  Can he still cut it in the Premier League and can he still be an important part of our squad and our season? Absolutely yes. Cant see at all how this one could be a go-er

With regards to the ''Do we develop the ground at the expense of the playing squad?'' connundrum, the Wolves scenario scares the hell out of me and should serve as a dire warning. We need to learn from the mistakes of others. QPR, Wolves etc. Im all for ground development, but its never worth risking becoming Wolves for... (what is?)

Anyone think that the players we released or allowed to go for free this season with a few other signings wouldnt be far off being a bad side in the championship? Camp Francomb Ward xx Tierney xx Smith Adeyemi Lappin Jackson Martin Add possibly Barney, Fox, Vaughan, Surman, Ayala to the mix, think that team would do pretty well, and as they''ve played together already wouldnt need time to gel

When and why did the dissent rule disappear. I thought the rule that if a player showed dissent then the free-kick got advanced 10 yards was a great idea. Meant misbehaving players would not only have pressure from the authorities to clean their act up, but also their team-mates and manager. Didnt really notice when they removed that rule though or why

What struck me most about Snodgrass in the final 8 or so games of the season was that he actually started to cross with his right - and to be honest I thought they were decent crosses. Far too much of this season he frustrated by cutting in and not getting the cross in. Snoddy has done a lot of good this season, but I think the strikers suffered from the lack of right footed crosses - its harder to attack an inswinger from the right with the left foot than a cross directly from the byline. Snodgrass appears to have been addressing that deficiency (perhaps as a response to being played on the left, where he is clearly ineffective), which I think is great. Either good coaching, or a sign of a player who wants to develop, or both. Next season if he can offer a right-footed cross and a left footed threat he could be sensational. Great signs

No, but theres a point at which window shopping becomes actual shopping. When admiring a girl across the floor of a disco becomes approaching her and asking her out. We may have been looking lustfully at other players for months or years. My question was really, at what point do clubs decide to act on this and make a move?

I think Barney represents the type of player we need to upgrade on if we are to progress. IMO Barney is too one-dimensional for this league. To use Football Manager speak, I wouldsee him as a ''Limited Defender'', in that he is very good at what he does, which is good enough for most leagues, but if we really want to get better, we need to be looking at players who are also better footballers. What I mean by that is that Barnett tackles strongly, his physical game is good, good in the air. All good attributes for a CB, but unfortunately the other areas of his game are poor. Poor passer, poor distribution. I remember reading a match analysis by Holtamania which highlighted something interesting about Barnett. When Barnett played with Fox, Fox was always there as an outlet for him, consequently a huge number of his passes were to him. Barnett won the ball, instantly laid it off to Fox. However, when Fox was absent from the team, Barnett didnt seem to know what to do with the ball (ie he had no real outlet) which often led to him booting it up the pitch or playing a sloppy pass and losing possession. Similarly it has been commented on numerous times how much better he played alongside Bassong. He has weaknesses in his game that other players need to compensate for, and which affect the team if this doesnt happen (in the Fox example possession). Barney did a great job for us, but he is a prime example of someone we should try to get an upgrade on. Someone who doesnt exclusively have attributes needed for their position. Someone who can do what Barney does, but can also pass, is comfortable on the ball. By shoring up these little deficiencies throughout the squad, and bringing the general all round ability of our players up, the squad can move forward. Bassong is better than Barney for these reasons. Is he better than Barney at what Barney does well? Probably not. But thats the difference. Similarly this is why I also feel we should be looking to upgrade on BJ. BJ does what he does well. But the other sides of his game? Because he is too limited, too one-dimensional (ie he can destroy and foul well but little else), the team overall has suffered. In the past 2 seasons we''ve been forced to chose between either defending (Hughton) or attacking (Lambert) because the players, particularly the central midfielders are incapable of doing both. For me two central midfielders have to be the priority this season. A single player that has the defensive and physical attributes of BJ, but whom also has the attacking talents of a Hoolahan. Again, a general better all-round player. I love the talents of our players and what they can do, but I think we need to be lloking at functions in the team which are currently being performed by two players (ie BJ and Hoolahan to provide solidity and creativity) and see if we can find a player who can do both. Someone who can not only win a ball, but then have the ability to play a pass once they have. A difficult task, but one we should be taking on. Only this way can we move forward. And for that reason Barney has to go for me. Interestingly I was reading Hucks'' book on the train yesterday, and he was talking about Dean Ashton. he was talking about players who didnt have all their attributes in one area. he highlighted him as a rare example of a striker who made others around him better and brought others into play whilst also being a goal threat (he cited Chris Brown and Earnie as polar opposites in this respect). I find this interesting because he also cited Grant Holt as another rare example of a player who can do this. Something that should be remembered by those hankering for his exit this season.

Granted scouting is a continual process, and the transfer window doesnt open until July 1st, but when do people think clubs start thinking about targets? Staff have to have a holiday, which I imagine most of them are on now, so guessing most people are happy to have a real break and want to put transfers on the back burner in general. However, two weeks later, feeling refreshed? To me it would seem logical that transfers and squad rebuilding would begin to be foremost in the mind after holidays, so Im guessing that would be in about a week? Obviously some players have been released already and their agents will be ringing around but in terms of players you would pay money for? Im guessing Hughton and co have a list of targets already, with probably some new names to appear in the coming months, but I think in terms of going out and pursuing them that this wouldnt begin to happen for another week? Many clubs are managerless at the moment so could also make recruitment more difficult. Does anyone have any insight into the timetables clubs have for looking at these sorts of things other than my musings? Or are managers on the phone the second the season is over?

Didnt our first Errea kit win best shirt of the season? (Although Im not sure how official that award was). I personally dont like the new kit, can make my peace with the design but the fit looks awful, especially the shorts. Least it makes Holty look trimmer though! Completely agree with the comment that the shirts should make an attempt to be different to previous seasons (else it is simply a rip off) so for that alone it has my respect

Just a pity that when we first see him in a Norwich shirt it''ll be the new one. Seriously, does ANYONE like the new kit? I havent seen anyone be positive about it. For me its too green and the shorts are far too baggy, reminds me of the awful shorts we had in the late 90''s

[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="The Great Mass Debater"] I too am hoping Purple will have some interesting insight into all this.   Now all is said and done, what I would really like to know is how this leaves the overall finances of the club. From things I''ve seen before, all external debt should now be paid off, and we''re left with one of the most efficiently run clubs in the league (in terms of how self-sufficient the club is, percentage of wages vs turnover etc, as we''re still a business and not a sugar-daddy''s play thing) Interestingly I remember Sam Allardyce complaining that West Ham would not be allowed to sign Andy Carroll under the new Financial Fair Play rules, and of course the need for a certain amount of British players in the squad will also have the big boys worrying. Debt-free, youth-cup winners and the ability to realistically offer a chance of first team football to budding stars, Academy 1 status, No financial fair play restrictions, relatively low wages currently, high percentage of British-based players already. It would seem we have far fewer restrictions than some of our rivals, plenty to offer and perhaps the fewest financial restricitons the club has ever had. All seems very rosey doesnt it.   Id be really interested if someone (Purple) could give us a brief overview of the clubs finances and potential war-chest for next season based on prior knowledge known and this current information. [/quote]   For what it is worth I was planning to post one of my interminable pieces in  a few days'' time. Probably at the weekend. We are in an interesting and generally good position, but there are some counter-points to be made, to provide some perspective. [/quote]   I look forward to reading that  :)

With the change in finances, do we now change our recruitment strategy?   It was always ''young and hungry'' before. Is this something we maintain? Hasnt served us badly before, and perhaps we can now look at better quality of young and hungry.   Malouda certainly doesnt fit into that category. QPR took the opposite approach and look what happened to them

I too am hoping Purple will have some interesting insight into all this.   Now all is said and done, what I would really like to know is how this leaves the overall finances of the club. From things I''ve seen before, all external debt should now be paid off, and we''re left with one of the most efficiently run clubs in the league (in terms of how self-sufficient the club is, percentage of wages vs turnover etc, as we''re still a business and not a sugar-daddy''s play thing) Interestingly I remember Sam Allardyce complaining that West Ham would not be allowed to sign Andy Carroll under the new Financial Fair Play rules, and of course the need for a certain amount of British players in the squad will also have the big boys worrying. Debt-free, youth-cup winners and the ability to realistically offer a chance of first team football to budding stars, Academy 1 status, No financial fair play restrictions, relatively low wages currently, high percentage of British-based players already. It would seem we have far fewer restrictions than some of our rivals, plenty to offer and perhaps the fewest financial restricitons the club has ever had. All seems very rosey doesnt it.   Id be really interested if someone (Purple) could give us a brief overview of the clubs finances and potential war-chest for next season based on prior knowledge known and this current information.