B.Johnson

[he 0]

Bradley Johnson should have been in the team. A big big mistake to let him go to Derby. Would have been better than all midfielders in the squad together with Tettey.

[Paul101 93]

and then under a different name

you would run him down week after week

Waveney

[Row D Seat 7 0]

Selling him was an error.

[unique 434]

The way he has been playing for Derby County recently, their fans would probably happily return him at half the price they paid for him.

[Well b back 3,182]

lol

Derby fans wished we had kept him as well.

[MyGodWeArePoorToWatch 0]

Well i wish we had kept him as well.

About the only player with any fire, him and Holt.

They simply were never replaced.

What they lacked in Talent they made up for in desire and HEART.

[Donkey dangler 0]

Selling Johnson was not an error.

Johnson does not have the discipline to play as a defensive midfield player and playing him on the left was the right thing to do. Furthermore he is not premiership class.

[Fiery Zac 1,066]

Brilliant piece of business. Amazed we got £6m for him and is showing precisely why we were right to sell as has been awful.

[Making Plans 936]

[quote user="Kurious Oranj"]Brilliant piece of business. Amazed we got £6m for him and is showing precisely why we were right to sell as has been awful.[/quote]It would have been a brilliant piece of businiess if we had spent the £6m wisely and in the same window as we sold him.He wasn''t replaced then & we failed to get anybody in who was better, especially in terms of energy, desire or commitment.The whole purpose of selling players is to use the money received to improve the squad - we didn''t.

[AJ 1,218]

I''m sorry making plans but I disagree. Whilst we should still have strengthened in other areas, selling BJ who was by no means ever going to be a PL left winger and bringing in Brady and Jarvis for an additional 2.5m is great business. 1 of which is greatly PL experienced and one who''s a young exciting talent who can also double up as a LB. Selling BJ and bringing in those two was the only good thing we did in the summer aside of bringing in Mbokani, sadly our current situation is down to the fact we didn''t spend what we have in January when we needed to in the summer

[he 0]

It was especially the way he broke up the opplsitions play and the softened them up with his tackling. Now there is a big gap in central midfield. And he also scored lot of goals last season as a bonus!

Our midfield was a lot stronger in the Championship with Johnson in it than it is in the Premier League. The defense got a lot of critics, but I think the major problem is in the lack of quality in the midfield. There is a lack of cover and commitment and lot of players not good enough for the Premier League. These are maybe good in a few games but never over long periods like Jonny Howson, Mulumbu, Gary O''Neil, Wes Hoolahan, Cameron Jerome (striker), Nathan Redmond, Matty Jarvis to name a few.

[Barclay seats 4849 the 3rd 0]

Jarvis ...... Great bit of business ?? Really ?

[ron obvious 1,495]

His unshakable self confidence would have been useful. That''s about all though.

[Making Plans 936]

[quote user="AJ"]bringing in Brady and Jarvis for an additional 2.5m is great business. 1 of which is greatly PL experienced and one who''s a young exciting talent who can also double up as a LB. [/quote]I agree that Brady is good aquisition. However he has not had a good game since AN decided to play him at LB. So him "doubling up as a LB" has been a negative rather than a positive & whilst playing in that position he has been responsible for several goals - the Liverpool winner and at least one at Bournemouth to name but two.If we bought in Brady because it was in our plans to ship out Johnson then Brady should play in the same position as Johnson & not get his head messed up playing out of position. If we wanted a new LB then we should have bought one or given Toffolo a run.RM was a good RB until we tried, and failed, to make him a CB and the same thing is happening to Brady.But I doubt that at the time we bought Brady it was never in our plans to ship out Johnson. It was a last minute panic sale brought on by non footballing activities.As for Jarvis I remain to be convinced that he has been a good aquisition or that he was worth anything like £2.5m

[ZLF 271]

would rather have Boris Johnson.

[daly 499]

Donkey Dangler wrote

Furthermore he is not premiership class.

Well if he came back he would be in good company with AN''s squad

[Donkey dangler 0]

[quote user="Making Plans"][quote user="Kurious Oranj"]Brilliant piece of business. Amazed we got £6m for him and is showing precisely why we were right to sell as has been awful.[/quote]It would have been a brilliant piece of businiess if we had spent the £6m wisely and in the same window as we sold him.He wasn''t replaced then & we failed to get anybody in who was better, especially in terms of energy, desire or commitment.The whole purpose of selling players is to use the money received to improve the squad - we didn''t.[/quote]

So Brady is not an upgrade on Johnson?

[Donkey dangler 0]

[quote user="daly"]Donkey Dangler wrote

Furthermore he is not premiership class.

Well if he came back he would be in good company with AN''s squad[/quote]

Yes we do need at least another eight premiership class players and thats why we need owners with more money than Delia and her husband.

[Hairy Canary 668]

We have brought in better yes, but what we are missing is Johnson''s drive and guts.

Bit of a sad state of affairs as that is the least you would expect from everyone.

[93vintage 16]

The amount of money flowing round football, even at Championship level, means that we''re playing in a casino and need a strategy to at least avoid crashing out with big losses.The bigger the loses the more likely we are to lose competetiveness. This would be especially harmful as we''re a small fish in the Premier League pond and many Championship teams could potentially take our place.Selling Johnson was a good move. The caveat to this is that any profit on Johnson is likely to be gobbled up by several losses elsewhere, especially given that we''ve bought a lot of older players and are hence less likely to see a return on our investment.Burnley seem to have a different transfer strategy to us. Although a fair few older heads came in when they went up under Dyche, most were cheap or free transfers. Many criticised their lack of investment, not giving themselves much of a chance etc. It was almost like they took the money and ran.This season they have bought mainly younger players and aren''t doing too badly in the Championship. Norwich by contrast were last season wasting money on dubious older defenders instead of rebuilding their defence, and generally going for ''proven'' players to add to an already aging squad.I saw Burnley away at Brentford recently and they were excellent, nothing

like the direct hoofball I was expecting. Maybe it''s early days, but it''ll certainly be

interesting to see how they do in the next couple of years.Many fans on here seem to criticise player sales, the poor quality of buys, and the competence of the manager. Perhaps more should step back and compare our transfer strategy to Burnley''s, plus their decision to stick with a ''failed'' manager.

[Bannana Boy 30]

@93Vintage - I don''t know if you caught it, but Sean Dyche was on 5 Live on Monday evening and spoke for a little while about Burnley''s transfer/spending policy.

Basically he said that even with their parachute payments they can''t compete - sustainably - with the ''big boys'' of the Championship (''boro, Derby etc) and so the owners have taken a more long-term view with the aim of being sustainable should the worst happen and Burnley not be promoted before the parachute payments cease.

It''s worth a listen on iPlayer if you didn''t catch it.

"Perhaps more should step back and compare our transfer strategy to Burnley''s, plus their decision to stick with a ''failed'' manager." - I couldn''t agree more.

[E.L.F. 0]

Hairy Canary wrote the following post at 11 Feb 2016 9:08 AM:

We have brought in better yes, but what we are missing is Johnson''s drive and guts.

Bit of a sad state of affairs as that is the least you would expect from everyone.

Drive and guts only gets you so far when you''re short on skill. Not all players have huge extroverted characteristics on the pitch but if you are looking for one then I think that Naismith is more than a step up from Bradley.

[Loyal Canary 0]

[quote user="ZippersLeftFoot"]would rather have Boris Johnson.[/quote]

Couldn''t disagree more the problem started when we got shot of him.

Worst bit of business since the purchase of the wolf

[Crabbycanary3 994]

So, are people saying that we got the right price for BJ, as he is a class (and worth it) player?

If so, did we seriously underpay for Naismith, and got an absolute bargain?

[93vintage 16]

[quote user="Level 14 Binslayer"]@93Vintage - I don''t know if you caught it, but Sean Dyche was on 5 Live on Monday evening and spoke for a little while about Burnley''s transfer/spending policy.

Basically he said that even with their parachute payments they can''t compete - sustainably - with the ''big boys'' of the Championship (''boro, Derby etc) and so the owners have taken a more long-term view with the aim of being sustainable should the worst happen and Burnley not be promoted before the parachute payments cease.

It''s worth a listen on iPlayer if you didn''t catch it.

"Perhaps more should step back and compare our transfer strategy to Burnley''s, plus their decision to stick with a ''failed'' manager." - I couldn''t agree more.[/quote]Many thanks for the pointer! I managed to track it down on iPlayer and will have a listen when I get a chance.

[Norfolk Mustard 94]

So BJ was sold for ''non-footballing reasons''? What were they then? Something to do with Grabban''s strop maybe?

[daly 499]

Oh dear the sex lives of NCFC footballers no wonder we flag in the last 15 minutes

Don''t blame it on the Bogie

Blame it on the Viagra