Jump to content

canarybubbles

Members
  • Content Count

    1,035
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

canarybubbles last won the day on May 3

canarybubbles had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

592 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. The problem with your argument is that we excelled in the Championship on the last two occasions we played there, with a team that was relatively low on physicality but high on good feet and good control. Your opinion seems to be that we should turn ourselves into a carbon copy of at least half the teams in the Championship, big on physicality, not so big on technical ball skills. IMO, that's a recipe for long-term Championship mediocrity.
  2. Perhaps a lot of this is explained by our current status as a yo-yo club. We develop promising young players but when we hit the PL, we can't afford to give them a run of games. So we loan them out, and often loans don't work (e.g. Gilmour - surely he can't be as bad as he looked for us last season), the young player starts to lose confidence, we have another, different promising young player by then and prefer him, get rid of last year's wonderboy, rinse and repeat.
  3. IMO, Martin showed more in those Championship games (and brief moments in the PL) than either Rowe or Springett have done at about the same age. If he's been out on loan, Dean Smith won't have had a chance to see him and evaluate him. So why not at least look? Is this yet another example of everything being decided on stats rather than on the eye test? This is not meant to be an attack on Rowe or Springett btw; more a comment that who we keep and who we don't seems more and more to have become a random process subject either to the opinion of a man who has yet to show that he deserves such trust in his judgement or to a spreadsheet.
  4. If you're right, I find this very depressing. It means there will never be an English Xavi or Iniesta or Messi because we're weeding out kids based on criteria such as height and muscle rather than ball skills. Since the PL has tended to be dominant in Europe for the last 5-10 years, it may seem that this tactic is working, but the dominance of the PL is largely based on importing foreign players who grew up in different regimes from the English one, basically because of all the money in the PL. And things will probably get worse, since Brexit will make it even harder for exchange of styles and ideas and personnel other than at the elite level.
  5. It's amazing how, after the Watford game, Sargent has gone from incompetent clown to potential superhero in so many fans' eyes. He had about 20 games to prove himself last season and, as an attacker, he was almost unceasingly, embarrassingly bad. I'll admit he does a lot of good harassing and pressing, but that should be a bonus in an attacker, not his one and only virtue.
  6. Martin going, Mumba going. There seems to be a pattern here. We have a skilful young player who's a bit light-weight physically, play him for a few games and he does well, then we loan him out and he's never heard of again until he's sold for peanuts. Physicality is the new God. Speed, strength, muscle. Pay a small fortune for someone like Sargent who can't do anything with a football while making no effort to develop technically gifted players because they're not tall/fast/muscled enough.
  7. 19/20 felt much better for me, too. At least we had a few games where we played very well and we only looked awful in the final run of games. Last season even the games we won were dour contests where we just got the better of teams who were almost as bad as we were.
  8. As someone who has probably been the most vocal of the 'anti-Smith' posters, I feel like I should say something here. I don't see how anyone can deny that the 27 games he had in charge last season were anything other than little patches of hoofball surrounded by a blancmange of random formations and shapeless, structureless football. Of course there were huge mitigating factors for this - he inherited a side low on confidence and used to losing, the recruitment had been totally unsuitable, we had one of the weakest midfields to ever grace the PL, etc. So I accept that most people do not agree with me about Smith and I think the general feeling is that he should be given a chance to show what he can do. Fair enough. But if we are 12 or 15 games into next season and there is no sign of any improvement or of any vision of the way forward, I am worried that we will do the usual Norwich thing of hanging onto a failing manager too long. I understand that he may have had a different style at Brentford, but he should be judged on his style here. You don't judge a player by how he played five years ago, and I don't think you should judge a manager in that way either. By then he will have had the equivalent of a whole season and if there is no sign of a Dean Smith identity, there probably never will be. I'm not arguing we need to be top of the league, but we must have some sign that the clueless, shapeless football of last season is going to become a thing of the past.
  9. He has credit in the bank but nowhere near as much as he had this time last year. And his attitude towards the fans and the local press has done him no favours. If he cares about how his period with NCFC is ultimately judged, he needs a Championship season close to the last one.
  10. Yes, but teams like Brugge and Feyenoord are not going to loan an unproven young player with a high reputation in Europe but who has effectively lost a season of his development and is now probably seen as a risk unless they have the option to buy. Otherwise, they're taking all the risk and NCFC would get the benefit if things go well. This isn't a big PL club loaning out to a Championship side - in this case, the loaning club is in a weak position.
  11. My reasoning is that IF the club are telling Smith that Pukki is 100% guaranteed to be here next season, then logically they cannot be considering offers for Pukki, and yet the comments from his agent and the Finnish journalist lead us to believe that this is not what has been said to them. Admittedly, those comments are a few days' old now, so further conversations may have taken place and Pukki has recognised that the club will not sell and has agreed to stay.
  12. This doesn't mean very much unless he has been given a categorical promise by Webber that Pukki will not be sold. And, if so, this suggests that the club is not being straightforward with Pukki. Or perhaps everyone is just being told what they want to hear, including the fans. If he's still here on 2 September, or if Pukki signs a new, longer contract before then, we can all relax. Not until.
  13. You may be making a mistake in assuming that Webber cares in the slightest what the fans think or want. He's out of here anyway as soon as he deigns to leave.
×
×
  • Create New...