Short term or long term

[Bill 1,788]

unless that wider opinion stretches about 40 mile south

[westcoastcanary 173]

[quote user="morty"][quote user="westcoastcanary"][quote user="hogesar"]Problem is, it''s nice to think long term but we don''t have the finance to do that.

Yes, we have some very promising young players...the Murphy''s, Godfrey, Thompson, Pritchard, Madison...

But without the premier league money being able to keep a category one academy on top of being able to turn down bids from low prem clubs for these players is pretty slim.[/quote]

Just as important as finance, the question for me is whether the club''s supporters are actually capable of getting behind such a longer term project. As Parma says, the strategy is one that 25,000 Carrow Road faithful should be able to buy into. But is there enough backbone in the boardroom to stand firm if they don''t?

[/quote]I think still having 25k in league one answers that question.[/quote]

No, my question is how you reconcile adopting a strategy involving stability of management with allowing "Carrow Road" to determine how long any manager survives. 

[morty 0]

[quote user="Indy"]Surely finances will dictate our future?

Parma great post, but as said if we run up debt over the next few seasons and no investment then short term and long term will be structured to financial restructuring and restraints?

It''s pretty clear we really need to go up in the next two seasons or we will be looking to sell off assets in young players and possibly realignment of our youth facilities.[/quote]Difference is though we have a fantastic starting point. Debt free, a few good saleable assets in the squad, and youth coming through that will be also. A balance can be struck with selling a few players, if there is a solid base beneath everything.

[morty 0]

[quote user="westcoastcanary"][quote user="morty"][quote user="westcoastcanary"][quote user="hogesar"]Problem is, it''s nice to think long term but we don''t have the finance to do that.

Yes, we have some very promising young players...the Murphy''s, Godfrey, Thompson, Pritchard, Madison...

But without the premier league money being able to keep a category one academy on top of being able to turn down bids from low prem clubs for these players is pretty slim.[/quote]

Just as important as finance, the question for me is whether the club''s supporters are actually capable of getting behind such a longer term project. As Parma says, the strategy is one that 25,000 Carrow Road faithful should be able to buy into. But is there enough backbone in the boardroom to stand firm if they don''t?

[/quote]I think still having 25k in league one answers that question.[/quote]

No, my question is how you reconcile adopting a strategy involving stability of management with allowing "Carrow Road" to determine how long any manager survives. 

[/quote]Obviously there is a limit to fans patience, I''m not really sure what you expect me to say, other than that.

[Indy 3,296]

That''s true for the time being Mory, but as highlighted we will be looking at a 8-12 million debt come end of this season and I doubt we as a club will gamble next season if we don''t get up this year?

Yep this could be a big year in our future Morty, but agree we do have potential in our team and we are in a good place to move forward, let''s hope we can take our chance.

[morty 0]

[quote user="Indy"]That''s true for the time being Mory, but as highlighted we will be looking at a 8-12 million debt come end of this season and I doubt we as a club will gamble next season if we don''t get up this year?

Yep this could be a big year in our future Morty, but agree we do have potential in our team and we are in a good place to move forward, let''s hope we can take our chance.[/quote]It wouldn''t be out of the question to generate player sales of 15m in January though, if we wanted to.Also I seem to remember a lot of fans wanting us to generate a sustainable debt not so long ago.Who knows, maybe Ed will put his hand in his pocket.

[Faded Jaded Semi Plastic SOB 1,023]

Looking at the bigger picture has to include the need for us to get promoted either this season or next, it is the fundamental foundation of everything else that has been talked about on this thread. The Board have said that "Promotion, promotion, promotion" is the aim, so I think it reasonable they are judged on that. Whilst I agree with most of the positive elements mentioned on this thread, I am of the opinion that Alex Neil is not the man to get us promoted, my fear is he has reached a plateau in his development as a manager. My main concern is his inability to positively influence the results of games through substitutions and/or a change of tactics.

[nutty nigel 7,527]

Not sure we''re looking at 8-12m debt this season. Think that''s the suggested loss.

[93vintage 16]

Longer term the big challenge in the event that we don''t get promoted this year is replacing the older players in our squad.Successive seasons of lack of investment has left the club in an almightly mess. We''re in a huge hole.The board have already indicated that investment in infrastructure is dependent upon promotion, and this is on top of investing in youth players. Yet when we were promoted we seemed to overprioritise staying in the PL at the expense of such investment.Both of our last PL campaigns have seen the club gamble and lose, albeit we managed to offset some of the loses by getting promoted last season. My point is that the money spent on gambling on staying in the PL would have been better spent on sustainable development. The odds on staying up were too poor to justify such a large outlay.I think the board needs to get a better balance between potentially conflicting aims, ie the longer term aim of sustainability versus the shorter term aim of PL membership. We''ve attempted to do both, and ended up doing both badly.We should have aimed at sustainability, ie investment in youth and younger players, playing quality as opposed to ''survival football'', and seen where that took us.

[westcoastcanary 173]

[quote user="93vintage"]Longer term the big challenge in the event that we don''t get promoted this year is replacing the older players in our squad.Successive seasons of lack of investment has left the club in an almightly mess. We''re in a huge hole.The board have already indicated that investment in infrastructure is dependent upon promotion, and this is on top of investing in youth players. Yet when we were promoted we seemed to overprioritise staying in the PL at the expense of such investment.Both of our last PL campaigns have seen the club gamble and lose, albeit we managed to offset some of the loses by getting promoted last season. My point is that the money spent on gambling on staying in the PL would have been better spent on sustainable development. The odds on staying up were too poor to justify such a large outlay.I think the board needs to get a better balance between potentially conflicting aims, ie the longer term aim of sustainability versus the shorter term aim of PL membership. We''ve attempted to do both, and ended up doing both badly.We should have aimed at sustainability, ie investment in youth and younger players, playing quality as opposed to ''survival football'', and seen where that took us.[/quote]

[Y] Agree with this. Hughton''s success in keeping us up in his first season, finishing 11th, relieving us of the external debt and thus putting the club in its best ever financial position, blinded people to the on- and off-field realities and the poison in the chalice of our meteoric rise through the divisions under Lambert. Not helped, of course, by the delusion that the top tier is somehow our rightful place. That was the time when the board should have focussed on just how ill-equipped we were in terms of squad quality and infrastructure and prioritised the longer term over EPL- survival-at-all-costs. That said, hindsight is a wonderful thing; apologies if I''m wrong but I don''t think even you were sharing your current opinions with us as far back as that. It was the Groundhog Day experience of last season under a different manager that drove the point home.

[westcoastcanary 173]

@morty

"Obviously there is a limit to fans patience, I''m not really sure what you expect me to say, other than that."

A rhetorical question doesn''t invite an answer [:D]

[Bagster 101]

[quote user="93vintage"]Longer term the big challenge in the event that we don''t get promoted this year is replacing the older players in our squad.Successive seasons of lack of investment has left the club in an almightly mess. We''re in a huge hole.The board have already indicated that investment in infrastructure is dependent upon promotion, and this is on top of investing in youth players. Yet when we were promoted we seemed to overprioritise staying in the PL at the expense of such investment.Both of our last PL campaigns have seen the club gamble and lose, albeit we managed to offset some of the

loses by getting promoted last season. My point is that the money

spent on gambling on staying in the PL would have been better spent on sustainable development. The odds on staying up were too poor to justify such a large outlay.I think the board needs to get a better balance between potentially conflicting aims, ie the longer term aim of sustainability versus the shorter term aim of PL membership. We''ve attempted to do both, and ended up

doing both badly.We should have aimed at sustainability, ie investment in youth and younger players, playing quality as opposed to ''survival football'', and seen where that took us.[/quote]

This could be the reason why the board felt Mcnally should go

[Bagster 101]

Barney the point I am trying to make is this.

If our new model is based on youth then we must be prepared to play them an immediate return to the premiership would hinder their chances in this respect.

So when we came down last time maybe it would''ve been better to accept it and let the likes of klose naismith and brady go, this would''ve saved a fair amount in wages over the season and brought in a fair amount of money, thus hopefully enabling us to spread the parachute payments over three years instead of two.

The point I made about loaning players out is that you will not build a team or any loyalty from them by doing this. If you read the Maddison intreview before the cup final with Aberdeen he spoke more about Coventry than Norwich because he doesn''t have an attachment here.

[SwindonCanary 455]

Maybe we should promote the young players to the first team Murphy''s, Godfrey, Thompson, Pritchard, Madison could all be regular first teamers 

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="SwindonCanary"]Maybe we should promote the young players to the first team Murphy''s, Godfrey, Thompson, Pritchard, Madison could all be regular first teamers  [/quote]

This surely has to be a good plan - long term. If promotion eludes us this season, sell off the premier league wannabes and let us concentrate on building a young team which is full of talent  and has no fear.     I have to admit I am getting rather bored of the money oriented way football is approached these days. The reason to get in the premier league no longer seems to be about us playing against top players/teams and is more like an exercise in survival and making money.  I think it would be refreshing to have a young team, not with the view of instant promotion, but with the view of playing entertaining football and that if things build well over a period of time, promotion may come as a result.  This clamour for instant promotion is unnecessary imo and makes it hard to build anything sustainable and longer lasting.  I believe Swansea built their way of playing over a period of years, not demanding instant promotion, but actually building something worthwhile that eventually led to promotion - and in the process meant they did better once they got there. The only reason we seem to struggle half the time is that the clamour, or pressure, to he promoted is too great.  Expectations are too high for a club that is trying to be self-sustaining financially.   We are historicaly a yo yo club - might as well accept and enjoy that, rather than always wish to be elsewhere.   Once we accepted we were in League 1, that season was one of the best I can remember.  The season after that one was enjoyable too, even before we started to look like promotion candidates.  Enjoying football for what it is has been replaced by the media led hype that says unless you are in the premier league you are failing as a club.   If for once we took a longer term view and stepped back from the idea that we must get promoted at all costs, we might find the football improves and we start to get a better looking way of playing and enjoying our football.  Money isn''t everything and if we accept that we are going to live within our means - which is obviousy the plan long term - then we might get stand a better chance of getting a footballing team and ethos that lasts for years AND leads to promotion and longer term success at the top level.

[Parma Ham's gone mouldy 2,219]

It may be that there is some truth in all views.

The club were comparatively hugely ambitious with the c£30m outlay on Naismith, Klose and Pinto (inc wages)

These players were not designed to play in the Championship.

Dropping into the Championship from the Premier will generate losses without immediate promotion.

Relegated Premier players are not always well suited or (re)hardened to the Championship.

Deep disappointment takes time to recover from, days may be high or low, leading to psychological inconsistency.

To stay in the top League you have throw every penny at the playing squad

Promotion to the top league provides the finance to restructure the club from the ground up

The last 2 points don''t match.

Younger players get more chance at a lower level.

Selling your ''better'' players creates room for younger players.

The above is de-facto a cheaper option.

Fans like young players coming through.

Fans like winning.

The last 2 points may not consistently go together.

Parma

[Old Shuck 183]

Best thread and posts on this site for ages.

Agree with LDC above.

Thanks all, great read to start the day...

[morty 0]

[quote user="lake district canary"][quote user="SwindonCanary"]Maybe we should promote the young players to the first team Murphy''s, Godfrey, Thompson, Pritchard, Madison could all be regular first teamers  [/quote]

This surely has to be a good plan - long term. If promotion eludes us this season, sell off the premier league wannabes and let us concentrate on building a young team which is full of talent  and has no fear.     I have to admit I am getting rather bored of the money oriented way football is approached these days. The reason to get in the premier league no longer seems to be about us playing against top players/teams and is more like an exercise in survival and making money.  I think it would be refreshing to have a young team, not with the view of instant promotion, but with the view of playing entertaining football and that if things build well over a period of time, promotion may come as a result.  This clamour for instant promotion is unnecessary imo and makes it hard to build anything sustainable and longer lasting.  I believe Swansea built their way of playing over a period of years, not demanding instant promotion, but actually building something worthwhile that eventually led to promotion - and in the process meant they did better once they got there. The only reason we seem to struggle half the time is that the clamour, or pressure, to he promoted is too great.  Expectations are too high for a club that is trying to be self-sustaining financially.   We are historicaly a yo yo club - might as well accept and enjoy that, rather than always wish to be elsewhere.   Once we accepted we were in League 1, that season was one of the best I can remember.  The season after that one was enjoyable too, even before we started to look like promotion candidates.  Enjoying football for what it is has been replaced by the media led hype that says unless you are in the premier league you are failing as a club.   If for once we took a longer term view and stepped back from the idea that we must get promoted at all costs, we might find the football improves and we start to get a better looking way of playing and enjoying our football.  Money isn''t everything and if we accept that we are going to live within our means - which is obviousy the plan long term - then we might get stand a better chance of getting a footballing team and ethos that lasts for years AND leads to promotion and longer term success at the top level.

[/quote]Whilst I don''t disagree, there is a glaring example of why we need to get promoted, and it has to be about finances, just down the A140.Our promotion and paying off of debt has meant we have a category one academy, which is absolutely key to future self sustainability.

[Bill 1,788]

You forget that our impoverished neirbours have a Cat 1 academy... in all but nameInvestment, facilities, coaching staff, league status.... and reality

What it is t be wealthy

[morty 0]

[quote user="Barney Rabble"]You forget that our impoverished neirbours have a Cat 1 academy... in all but nameInvestment, facilities, coaching staff, league status.... and reality

What it is t be wealthy[/quote]I thought they failed in their bid, and ended up with a category 2?http://www.itfc.co.uk/news/article/category-one-academy-bid-ipswich-town-2509668.aspx

[Bagster 101]

The premiership has become a reflection of our society. Everything at the top table and everyone struggling beneath. It''s a very unhealthy model.

It has done nothing for the national team and at some point enough has to be enough.

Every time sky gives more money to the clubs players value seem to magically double which then spreads down the leagues and puts more and more clubs in financial distress.

Whatever people think of the board in my opinion they are on the right track with the academy now maybe they need the fans backing.

Tell me honestly what would you prefer a foreign billionaire with no attachment with players with similarly no attachment or a young mainly homegrown squad with homegrown owners playing for the fans.

In my view it''s time for the kids:)

[Bill 1,788]

[quote user="morty"][quote user="Barney Rabble"]You forget that our impoverished neirbours have a Cat 1 academy... in all but nameInvestment, facilities, coaching staff, league status.... and reality

What it is t be wealthy[/quote]I thought they failed in their bid, and ended up with a category 2?http://www.itfc.co.uk/news/article/category-one-academy-bid-ipswich-town-2509668.aspx[/quote]

They did but the club reassured the suffolk simpletons that the ever benevolent Mr Evan (an hinvestor) was funding the academy as a Cat 1 enterprise.The more cynically minded might wonder why that funding was not in place before their application. But that would mean actually having to use a small amount of reasoned thought. Not something the pitchfork jugglers are too blessed with.So what they have is Cat 2 - with the dimwits unable to grasp that is all it is (as pointed out above).It should also be noted that nowhere in the accounts does this supposed extra funding appear - perhaps Mr Evans is using Mr ''readdies'' Redknap to pay it in cash via an account in Monaco.

[Nuff Said 5,108]

One other aspect to this I don''t think I''ve seen mentioned is that may be Alex Neil is better suited to managing a team of promising youngsters, possibly with some seasoned pros with something to prove, than a group of established players with an over-inflated view of their value? Viz his success at Hamilton.

[It's Character Forming 1,160]

[quote user="Faded Jaded Semi Plastic SOB"]Looking at the bigger picture has to include the need for us to get promoted either this season or next, it is the fundamental foundation of everything else that has been talked about on this thread. The Board have said that "Promotion, promotion, promotion" is the aim, so I think it reasonable they are judged on that. Whilst I agree with most of the positive elements mentioned on this thread, I am of the opinion that Alex Neil is not the man to get us promoted, my fear is he has reached a plateau in his development as a manager. My main concern is his inability to positively influence the results of games through substitutions and/or a change of tactics.[/quote]

 

This hits the nail on the head... Yes, there are long-term positives but we still have a big problem with the current manager IMO.  I agree with your concerns about his inability to influence the game via substitutions or changes of tactics, but I''d add to that list that he doesn''t seem to be able to organise the defence, make sure the midfield players support the attack while covering sensibly, get players to move off the ball or close down the opposition when we don''t have it, or get the best out of our players in attack. 

 

In fact, if I tried to do a list of what I think AN is doing well as a manager at the moment (i.e. the last couple of months, or actually looking at most of of 2016) it would be a very short list. 

[westcoastcanary 173]

ICF wrote: "I agree with your concerns about his [AN''s} inability to influence the game via substitutions or changes of tactics, but I''d add to that list that he doesn''t seem to be able to organise the defence, make sure the midfield players support the attack while covering sensibly, get players to move off the ball or close down the opposition when we don''t have it, or get the best out of our players in attack. "

I too would agree with this if you qualified it with "currently" or "for the best part of a year now".  As you yourself have often pointed out, the Play Off Final was pretty much faultless in all those respects, and there are other examples such as West Ham and Man City away last season which give the lie to any blanket "AN is incapable of ........" criticism. The interesting question -- and IMO there is a curious parallel here with Hughton -- is how to account for this deterioration. Putting it down simply to managerial ineptitude surely isn;t the whole story any more than with Hughton?