So what's with Naismith

[ZLF 274]

i agree the whole structure doesnt need to go; was really talking about whats the most we can pay for our best player. I

[Tumbleweed 106]

Indeed Zipper. We are now in the position though where we need game chnagers (ie category 5 in my list) so we have to be able to pay what we need. 1-3 plus some 4 will more than ever mean we''ll be at best a yo-yo club and PL seasons will be 1 in 3 or 4 rather than the norm. The days of surviving in the top league with a team of journeyman pros have long gone............

[morty 0]

[quote user="ZippersLeftFoot"]i agree the whole structure doesnt need to go; was really talking about whats the most we can pay for our best player. I[/quote]Theres a common sense middle ground opinion to be had here.We know we have limitations, we know we don''t have a sugar daddy to help us break the bank, we know that doesn''t always work anyway, we know that it can be destabilising to a group if someone is suddenly earning far more than everyone else, but if he is clearly worth it, and the difference between success and failure ( ie a Hucks) then players should accept it, after all everyone earns more money if we stay in the division.But we need a step up in class, and we need to start acting Premier league, instead of scrimping our way through each season.

[ZLF 274]

i agree tumbleweed.

we need that touch of standout quality that the squad is missing; occassionally but far more rarely than most fans state there is a player worth "breaking the bank" for (hucks situation) but mainly it will be pushing the ceiling slowly but surely up..

My question is really whether naismith is enough of an improvement to take a substantial step with - I am not convinced is is a step improvement of wes say he is so wouldnt pay over the odds for him; if the club feel different I will be happy to have him here at the cost agreed .

I would be happy paying top dollar for a cb or striker though as thats where we really need that injection of quality.

Same investment stance - opinion based on who or where its best spent.

[Ivan Easter 0]

I cant see Naismith coming to Norwich we need to move on,hope AN has something better lined up sooner than later ???

[nutty nigel 7,530]

So I assume your saying our board has no common sense Morty. I credit them with a lot more than that. Do you really think they are that incompetent?

[PurpleCanary 5,557]

[quote user="morty"][quote user="ZippersLeftFoot"]we can easily scrap our wage ceiling; however moving up from £40k does not mean that we will start paying villa like sums of £75k pw for the likes of adama traore.

we will still have a limit to what we can pay or value him at. i have no idea what naismith is on or wants - with swansea interest i suspect he may feel he is worth more; but do i really think he is worth north of say £50k pw to us? absolutely not; if he wants more than our talks will stall. paying over the odds remain unaffordable and unsettling on the remaining squad (along with costly with rumoured pay matching clauses in place)

Any new player will have a value to us worth paying; it is as easy for the player / agent to price themselves our of the deal as a club.[/quote]Good stuff[Y]But really if we can only afford to shop in Morrissons, why are we even looking in Waitrose? The board must have had some idea of what sort of wages Naismith is on, and would be prepared to move for surely?I''m all for showing ambition, and wanting to improve the squad, but being unrealistic really isn''t helping anything. People can moan on about other factors than money, but if you offer a player enough, he''ll be here like a shot.[/quote]I have seen nothing to suggest wages are the problem with Naismith. He will have known from early on roughly what we were willing to pay him, and things would not have progressed as far as they seemed to (according to Bethnal he had a medical with us) if he had been unhappy with that aspect. It seems far more likely Everton are now suggesting he has more of a chance of  getting into their team, or he just doesn''t want to move right now. As Bethnal says:If Naismith is staying at Everton, it means that it isn''t due to Norwich being outbid, or anyone offering more wages - there were at least 2, most likely 3, Premier League clubs interested in signing him this window. He has turned them all down to stay at Everton. If his wife is heavily pregnant this might not even be a footballing decision, but a practical one of not uprooting his family at an already hectic time. Naismith was realistic as he said he wanted to leave Everton but seems to have had a change of heart.

[morty 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]So I assume your saying our board has no common sense Morty. I credit them with a lot more than that. Do you really think they are that incompetent?[/quote]Did I say they are incompetent?

[norfolkngood 1,086]

Theres a common sense middle ground opinion to be had here.

We know we have limitations, we know we don''t have a sugar daddy to help us break the bank, we know that doesn''t always work anyway, we know that it can be destabilising to a group if someone is suddenly earning far more than everyone else, but if he is clearly worth it, and the difference between success and failure ( ie a Hucks) then players should accept it, after all everyone earns more money if we stay in the division.

But we need a step up in class, and we need to start acting Premier league, instead of scrimping our way through each season.

I agree morty better players get better money no one in that side could moan hucks was on more money than them because he did it on the pitch and carried the team

[morty 0]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="morty"][quote user="ZippersLeftFoot"]we can easily scrap our wage ceiling; however moving up from £40k does not mean that we will start paying villa like sums of £75k pw for the likes of adama traore.

we will still have a limit to what we can pay or value him at. i have no idea what naismith is on or wants - with swansea interest i suspect he may feel he is worth more; but do i really think he is worth north of say £50k pw to us? absolutely not; if he wants more than our talks will stall. paying over the odds remain unaffordable and unsettling on the remaining squad (along with costly with rumoured pay matching clauses in place)

Any new player will have a value to us worth paying; it is as easy for the player / agent to price themselves our of the deal as a club.[/quote]Good stuff[Y]But really if we can only afford to shop in Morrissons, why are we even looking in Waitrose? The board must have had some idea of what sort of wages Naismith is on, and would be prepared to move for surely?I''m all for showing ambition, and wanting to improve the squad, but being unrealistic really isn''t helping anything. People can moan on about other factors than money, but if you offer a player enough, he''ll be here like a shot.[/quote]I have seen nothing to suggest wages are the problem with Naismith. He will have known from early on roughly what we were willing to pay him, and things would not have progressed as far as they seemed to (according to Bethnal he had a medical with us) if he had been unhappy with that aspect. It seems far more likely Everton are now suggesting he has more of a chance of  getting into their team, or he just doesn''t want to move right now. As Bethnal says:If Naismith is staying at Everton, it means that it isn''t due to Norwich being outbid, or anyone offering more wages - there were at least 2, most likely 3, Premier League clubs interested in signing him this window. He has turned them all down to stay at Everton. If his wife is heavily pregnant this might not even be a footballing decision, but a practical one of not uprooting his family at an already hectic time. Naismith was realistic as he said he wanted to leave Everton but seems to have had a change of heart.[/quote]If the money is right, any player will come, and all other concerns will just melt away.How I feel about this very much depends on whether he actually stays at Everton, or moves to another club, ie Swansea.

[Van wink 2,994]

Morty " But we need to step up in class and we need to start acting Premier league , instead of scrimping our way through each season"

Absolutely. "Tin pot" needs to go and we should start to behave like a club that deserves and wishes to maintain its place in the Premier League.

Our recruitment policy should reflect this and in that way we will be more attractive to prospective signings.

We must stop making excuses and get on with it IMO.

[nutty nigel 7,530]

I didn''t say you did Morty. Read it again. I asked if you thought that because you seemed to be saying they have no common sense.

[morty 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]I didn''t say you did Morty. Read it again. I asked if you thought that because you seemed to be saying they have no common sense.[/quote]Did I say they have no common sense?

[Wilfred Grimsdale 0]

If what Bethnal is saying is correct that he has been to the club had a medical and talks and we still haven''t converted him you know something is wrong!

[nutty nigel 7,530]

No. You said there was common sense middle ground which I assumed to mean they weren''t on it. Which would make them incompetent.

[morty 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]No. You said there was common sense middle ground which I assumed to mean they weren''t on it. Which would make them incompetent.[/quote]Wow, thats a pretty fantastic leap!The "common sense" line referred to my opinion, which sits in the middle between "Oh stop moaning its only the 13th January, it''ll be fine" and "Sack the board, they are clearly incompetent"Obviously all will become clearer at the end of January, but if we get there and the line "We bid on players and they didn''t want to com" gets trotted out, then, yes, I will be questioning their policies.

[nutty nigel 7,530]

OK. It''s kind of your version of having a realistic opinion.

Truth is none of us know what''s happening. Bournemouth have got players in early. If we''d made those signings this place would be in an even worse frenzy. But the fact that Bournemouth see our reserves as a step up shows the quality we already have. We are not competing with Bournemouth for players. We are competing with more established clubs if we are to improve the quality of our squad. If we can''t get those players I''m not of the opinion that we should reduce the quality in order to spend money.

[GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary 1,748]

the breaking the "wage structure" thing is always an interesting one.

one of the main arguments is that it would disrupt club harmony to have players on significantly larger wages than others.

that may of course be the case if that player is seen by others to not be pulling their weight, but if an individual can come in and make a difference .i.e Huckerby ,there can be no argument?

If Naismith came in and scored goals that kept us up......and prevented all the other players in the squad from having to take a significant pay cut next season upon relegation, I''m sure all would be accepting of it??

[morty 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]OK. It''s kind of your version of having a realistic opinion.

Truth is none of us know what''s happening. Bournemouth have got players in early. If we''d made those signings this place would be in an even worse frenzy. But the fact that Bournemouth see our reserves as a step up shows the quality we already have. We are not competing with Bournemouth for players. We are competing with more established clubs if we are to improve the quality of our squad. If we can''t get those players I''m not of the opinion that we should reduce the quality in order to spend money.[/quote]No, it is my opinion, sorry if it doesn''t fit in with yours.There is actually a sensible middle ground between "slavering keyboard bashing moron" and "The board can do no wrong"Overall, I am a fan of our board, they get most things right, but not everything. I understand the constraints a club of our resources has to operate under. I also understand that we have to get the right players in to improve the group, and there is no point in signing just for the sake of it. I wouldn''t even be that disappointed if we didn''t sign anyone else and went with what we have, but I feel we would be taking a big, big risk.We were fortunate last season that it worked out how it did, had Alex Neil not worked out as well as he had then things could be a lot different.The board failed to back Hughton in the January transfer window ( and yes, I can understand why) and we saw what happened. They rolled the dice hoping we would have enough to stay up, and they got it wrong.I understand the whole thing is hugely complex and full of risk, and I understand throwing money at it doesn''t guarantee success, but all I ask of the board is that if they do make a mistake, they learn from it.And, as I said, if we get to the end of January and the line of "We bid on players and they didn''t want to come" appears again, then I don''t think it would be unfair to ask why?Last year set our development back, if we can have a sustained run in the Premier league we can take our great club to the next level. We can do the work that needs done at Colney, and who knows, maybe even think seriously about that stadium expansion. I recognise there will always be a ceiling of what we can achieve, but if you''re not moving forward, you''re standing still. And before you know it, you''re in your fifteenth season in the Championship.

[Katie Borkins 1]

"But the fact that Bournemouth see our reserves as a step up shows the quality we already have."

That is an astonishing thing to claim. Stalin himself would blush.

[Tumbleweed 106]

I''m 100% with Morty on this.

I also see Zipper''s perspective and the difference of opinion on the worth of Naismith.

My own view is that Naismith is the sort of proven step up in class that we should target. One or two "reassuringly [for us] expensive" acquisitions to slowly bring up the quality of the squad. The Board seem to agree and the approach was made. As I said before if Naismith or Everton have changed their minds then fair enough, but they said the deal has stalled. That suggests a financial complication which I hope is not us scrimping when we have decided that we want this player.

[It's Character Forming 1,160]

[quote user="morty"][quote user="nutty nigel"]OK. It''s kind of your version of having a realistic opinion. Truth is none of us know what''s happening. Bournemouth have got players in early. If we''d made those signings this place would be in an even worse frenzy. But the fact that Bournemouth see our reserves as a step up shows the quality we already have. We are not competing with Bournemouth for players. We are competing with more established clubs if we are to improve the quality of our squad. If we can''t get those players I''m not of the opinion that we should reduce the quality in order to spend money.[/quote]

No, it is my opinion, sorry if it doesn''t fit in with yours.

There is actually a sensible middle ground between "slavering keyboard bashing moron" and "The board can do no wrong"

Overall, I am a fan of our board, they get most things right, but not everything. I understand the constraints a club of our resources has to operate under. I also understand that we have to get the right players in to improve the group, and there is no point in signing just for the sake of it. I wouldn''t even be that disappointed if we didn''t sign anyone else and went with what we have, but I feel we would be taking a big, big risk.

We were fortunate last season that it worked out how it did, had Alex Neil not worked out as well as he had then things could be a lot different.

The board failed to back Hughton in the January transfer window ( and yes, I can understand why) and we saw what happened. They rolled the dice hoping we would have enough to stay up, and they got it wrong.

I understand the whole thing is hugely complex and full of risk, and I understand throwing money at it doesn''t guarantee success, but all I ask of the board is that if they do make a mistake, they learn from it.

And, as I said, if we get to the end of January and the line of "We bid on players and they didn''t want to come" appears again, then I don''t think it would be unfair to ask why?

Last year set our development back, if we can have a sustained run in the Premier league we can take our great club to the next level. We can do the work that needs done at Colney, and who knows, maybe even think seriously about that stadium expansion. I recognise there will always be a ceiling of what we can achieve, but if you''re not moving forward, you''re standing still. And before you know it, you''re in your fifteenth season in the Championship.
[/quote]

 

Very true.  With Hughton by January they''d decided they were getting rid of him at the end of the season so didn''t give him any more money (presumably thinking it would be wasted) but didn''t change the manager either.  Which was a mistake in hindsight (and plenty said so at the time), they should have done one or the other.  Now we have a manager that looks to be settling in to the Prem and we need to back him.  It''s a couple of weeks into the window and we have plenty of time to play with but the club need to be working sensibly on transfers and we have at least one key position to fill (CB) and a nice-to-have (up front in some shape or form) IMO, we should be able to land credible players for both.

 

From the last transfer window it sounds like we were close to signing Walters from Stoke for a fee which didn''t break the bank, but came up just a little bit short.  If it turns out something similar is going on with Naismith and we don''t have a good alternative we can turn to, then it will be very disappointing.

 

As for the idea that Bournemouth view our reserves as a step up, that''s ridiculous - he''s a player who came from them and clearly their manager feels he can get more out of him than he''s been showing recently for us, nothing unusual there.

[Bury Yellow 2]

Ha Ha Absolutely brilliant Nutty.

Totally agree with Morty

[morty 0]

Charlie Wyett tweeted "Unless Naismith gets a massive wage offer it looks like he will stay at Everton till the summer"Take from that what you will....

[cornish sam 951]

But part of the problem with paying that step up in class player the wages they might warrant is if we have some players who are on a ''match the highest earner'' contract as has been suggested. That would mean that we would be paying the players who are currently deemed not to be in that category the same as those that are and that way would lie disharmony or a lot of contract renegotiations....

[morty 0]

[quote user="cornish sam"]But part of the problem with paying that step up in class player the wages they might warrant is if we have some players who are on a ''match the highest earner'' contract as has been suggested. That would mean that we would be paying the players who are currently deemed not to be in that category the same as those that are and that way would lie disharmony or a lot of contract renegotiations....[/quote]Seriously?For a club that is looking to establish in the Premier league, that would be pretty stupid.

[It's Character Forming 1,160]

[quote user="morty"]Charlie Wyett tweeted "Unless Naismith gets a massive wage offer it looks like he will stay at Everton till the summer"

Take from that what you will....
[/quote]

 

So I wonder if that means he''s decided he won''t move to us unless we offer silly-money wages ?

[morty 0]

[quote user="Its Character Forming"]

[quote user="morty"]Charlie Wyett tweeted "Unless Naismith gets a massive wage offer it looks like he will stay at Everton till the summer"Take from that what you will....[/quote]

 

So I wonder if that means he''s decided he won''t move to us unless we offer silly-money wages ?

[/quote]That would certainly be one interpretation.....

[cornish sam 951]

[quote user="morty"][quote user="cornish sam"]But part of the problem with paying that step up in class player the wages they might warrant is if we have some players who are on a ''match the highest earner'' contract as has been suggested. That would mean that we would be paying the players who are currently deemed not to be in that category the same as those that are and that way would lie disharmony or a lot of contract renegotiations....[/quote]Seriously?For a club that is looking to establish in the Premier league, that would be pretty stupid.[/quote]

I agree, it would be pretty dumb, but, it wasn''t me that suggested they existed, it was Zipper on page 14. Despite the idiocy of it though it is something that we''ve apparently had before, it''s something that other teams allegedly use and it wouldn''t totally surprise me if we had given Bassong that clause to get him in.

[Chip20 69]

[quote user="GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary"]the breaking the "wage structure" thing is always an interesting one.

one of the main arguments is that it would disrupt club harmony to have players on significantly larger wages than others.

that may of course be the case if that player is seen by others to not be pulling their weight, but if an individual can come in and make a difference .i.e Huckerby ,there can be no argument?

If Naismith came in and scored goals that kept us up......and prevented all the other players in the squad from having to take a significant pay cut next season upon relegation, I''m sure all would be accepting of it??[/quote]

But what if said player comes in and doesn''t make a difference or doesn''t score the goals that kept  us up? With Hucks we had him on loan first so he had proven his value to our particular club by the time he agreed a permanent contract. We don''t have those assurances with potential ''marquee'' signings at present. By way of an example, would your contention still hold water if we have/had bust through the wages glass ceiling to sign RVW?