Transfer windows and budgets for yo-yo clubs.

[morty 0]

Interesting discussion in the pub, post game last night on this subject. Credit to NN for some of the points I shall put forward here.A lot seems to be made of how many  transfer windows, and budget, the manager has had at his disposal, and yet the squad still seems unbalanced, and lacking in certain departments. Is it all Alex Neil''s fault? A few people seem to try and say so.Norwich City, pretty much every season start with 2 budgets, and 2 plans.If we are in the Premiership, then there will be a budget/plan for us staying up, and one for us being relegated, because, honestly, there are only maybe 6 or 8 teams that you would deem virtually relegation proof, so it is prudent we plan for the eventuality.When in the Championship there will also be 2 budgets/plans also.Both situations are extremely fluid, and very much depend on a best guess as to how the season is panning out, and in some cases it could flip-flop within the space of a few results.Also a factor is the dreaded window, and what players fancy leaving / what players we would like to get rid of.I''m surprised our, allegedly incompetent, board actually get it as right as much as they do.

[city-till-i-die 7]

AN has spent a good amount of money since his instalment as Norwich Manager and we still are no further on in holding a spot in the Prem consistently. Our position and last 15 results in the championship backs that point up.

Imho the board has gone VERY VERY stale and are still running a football club like it was the 90s.

It''s only my option and many may not agree but for NCFC to move forward we need a fresh look from the very very top.

AN should of gone a while back NO other manager would last with those results with the money he''s spent (for a championship club) but the board are clueless and it seems they are going to stick with him no matter the results.

Hope I''m proved wrong and we get promotion via the playoffs, but I really can''t see it

[morty 0]

I think the whole "amount of money" is also a bit of a red herring.Mainly because every single club in the Premiership has exactly the same money to spend, with, in most cases, a bit more.The main thrust of my OP is that its a very difficult balancing act, obviously limited by our financial constraints.I think most people just want richer owners, and they don''t mind who.

[Nuff Said 5,969]

Sorry, but that''s yellow and green blinkered vision CTID. What about Fulham, QPR, Cardiff.... There are no guarantees, no matter how many seasons you spend in the PL.

[king canary 8,758]

Our board have actually backed Alex Neil pretty well since he''s been here. We could easily have offloaded Brady and Klose too but instead we made a conscious decision to keep this squad together, while also spending more than we made from sales.

The problem however stems from how it has been spent- what it has been spent on and what it hasn''t been spent on.

Last season we failed to address our key weaknesses in the summer than had to spend big in January to address them. This summer we had money but used most of it to address positions we''re already strong in.

I think if you asked most fans when AN took over which area of the team needed most investment they''d say the defence. I think if you asked them again today the answer wouldn''t have changed. Yet despite £50m being spent we''ve only added Klose and Pinto to the defence, meaning we''ve still had to give significant game time to Bassong, Bennett and Martin.

We''ve also signed three new goalkeepers, none of whom have been better than the one we already had. We''ve also signed four (four!) number 10 type players- Pritchard, Naismith, Andreu and Maddison yet Wes still holds that role.

Since Lambert left the transfer strategy has been muddled to say the least.

Under Hughton we seemed to want to step up in quality- laudable but the scouting was off, leaving us with £13m spent on two strikers who didn''t remotely fit the way we wanted to play.

Under Adams we seemed to go quantity over quality, which led to a couple of successes (Jerome and Grabban) but some real duds (VOO, Miquel, Lafferty).

Under Neil we went from one extreme to the other- a ridiculously cautious summer followed by a crazy splurge in the winter to try and catch up.

If by saying our board ''get it right'' in signing the right players then I''d strongly disagree- I would say we''ve not had a successful window (ie signing good players who truly improve our squad) since Hughton''s first summer.

[norfolkngood 1,174]

Morty i have been telling this for months !

football is a sliding scale if we were top 2 and playing well i am sure the gamble would be less and more money would be made available

but we are championship and got to budget for championship next season in case we are here

the short fall in income HAS to be taken into account otherwise when that comes round we can not reach under the bed for the money

so olsson has gone Alex Neil has Confirmed what i have been saying one more to go then we can spend

if we had the money and not worried about short fall in income why do we have to sell one more before we spend ?

AN has been told to trim the wages so sell someone on say 25k and sign someone on 10 k thats what we need to do and thats what is happening

[Lessingham Canary 108]

This is a huge and subjective subject, with many rights and wrongs, so without all the facts where does the finger point ? Board, recruitment policy, manager or budgets ?

The manager takes largest portion of the credit / blame imo, as the one who usually carries the can for results.

Someone said once that when a manager takes over a club, he must make changes to the playing squad and put his mark on it, by his 3rd window he has the squad he deserves, by that he has agreed to signings even if they were not his recommendation, if others are making decisions that effect his staff that he doesn''t agree with then he has to shout and tell the board where he stands and why. So for me its all about the manager.

[OldRobert 38]

[quote user="morty"]I think the whole "amount of money" is also a bit of a red herring.Mainly because every single club in the Premiership has exactly the same money to spend, with, in most cases, a bit more.The main thrust of my OP is that its a very difficult balancing act, obviously limited by our financial constraints.I think most people just want richer owners, and they don''t mind who.[/quote]Morty you''re going to have to explain your post a bit to thicko here:Mainly because every single club in the Premiership has exactly the same money to spend, with, in most cases, a bit more.I must be misunderstanding this, you can''t be saying that Hull for example have the same size transfer  pot as Man City or Arsenal etc.?  It''s also certainly more than ''a bit more''.If you meant the Championship, Rotherham for example compared to say Derby or Newcastle, it''s no contest.The main thrust of my OP is that its a very difficult balancing act, obviously limited by our financial constraints.Surely this contradicts what you just said, if we all have pretty much the same to spend, why have we got financial constraints which don''t seem to affect many others.I think most people just want richer owners, and they don''t mind who.The ''don''t mind who'' part of that sentence is completely wrong.  You read this forum all the time.  You know perfectly well that as soon as new owners are mentioned there is a flurry of posts saying that they don''t want foreign owners who don''t care about the club, and if that was the case they would rather maintain the status quo.If I''ve got your post completely wrong I apologise............just giving my view for what it''s worth.

[morty 0]

Because our owners have less money than, probably, every single other owner in the Premiership Bob?Does that answer your question?

[king canary 8,758]

@Morty

Yes in some ways the amount of money is red herring. But it means we as a club have to be ultra careful when we spend big on one player as we can''t afford to just right it off and this is where we''ve struggled.

Our top 5 biggest signings are...

Klose

RVW

Pritchard

Brady

Naismith

Have any of those been real successes? Klose looks good but spent half this season on the bench? Naismith looks fine in a midtable Championship team but you expect a bit more than that for £8m. Pritchard barely features, RVW was a dumpster fire and Brady blows hot and cold (but should at least be sold for a solid profit).

[city-till-i-die 7]

[quote user="Nuff Said"]Sorry, but that''s yellow and green blinkered vision CTID. What about Fulham, QPR, Cardiff.... There are no guarantees, no matter how many seasons you spend in the PL.[/quote]

I know there are no guarantees when it comes to football

What about ..... stoke, Swansea, West Brom, Leicester. They seem to be doing "ok" and most started on "a budget"

As I''ve said it''s just my opinion. Because you don''t agree doesn''t make it wrong m8.

[norfolkngood 1,174]

A lot of income of the rich clubs money come from sponsors

we have struggled in this area

[OldRobert 38]

[quote user="morty"]Because our owners have less money than, probably, every single other owner in the Premiership Bob?Does that answer your question?[/quote]Totally accept that bit, but if, and it''s a big if, we want to become an established PL club I don''t believe we can do it with the current owners, do you?  If you agree with that, then we are back to the apparent reluctance of the current owners to consider either new owners, or huge investment.

[morty 0]

[quote user="king canary"]@Morty

Yes in some ways the amount of money is red herring. But it means we as a club have to be ultra careful when we spend big on one player as we can''t afford to just right it off and this is where we''ve struggled.

Our top 5 biggest signings are...

Klose

RVW

Pritchard

Brady

Naismith

Have any of those been real successes? Klose looks good but spent half this season on the bench? Naismith looks fine in a midtable Championship team but you expect a bit more than that for £8m. Pritchard barely features, RVW was a dumpster fire and Brady blows hot and cold (but should at least be sold for a solid profit).[/quote]Thing is, figures for players can also be misleading.If Man Utd had spent 8 million on a player, and he flopped, would their fans be crying about it?We shop in the bargain basement, which brings considerable more risk. Sometimes we''ll get it right, sometimes we won''t.From your list above, I''d say that only RvW is the complete flop, and that situation was compounded by the fact that either we couldn''t offload him, or he was quite happy taking our wages, until last season.

[city-till-i-die 7]

I''m not saying in anyway shape or form "just bring in a rich owners" they have to be the right owners.

I would just love NCFC to have the backing to push us in to the next level (staying in the prem) not ripping up trees but solid in that league. Then we progress from there.

I think we need a change from the very top to push the club on again only my opinion.

If you''ve enjoyed the last 15-20 games and the football we''ve played And don''t think we need to freshen it up , i think you may have blinkers on.

One love #OTBC

[morty 0]

[quote user="OldRobert"][quote user="morty"]Because our owners have less money than, probably, every single other owner in the Premiership Bob?Does that answer your question?[/quote]Totally accept that bit, but if, and it''s a big if, we want to become an established PL club I don''t believe we can do it with the current owners, do you?  If you agree with that, then we are back to the apparent reluctance of the current owners to consider either new owners, or huge investment.[/quote]So that circles back to my earlier point that people don''t just want new owners, they just want richer ones.

[morty 0]

[quote user="city-till-i-die"]I''m not saying in anyway shape or form "just bring in a rich owners" they have to be the right owners.

I would just love NCFC to have the backing to push us in to the next level (staying in the prem) not ripping up trees but solid in that league. Then we progress from there.

I think we need a change from the very top to push the club on again only my opinion.

If you''ve enjoyed the last 15-20 games and the football we''ve played And don''t think we need to freshen it up , i think you may have blinkers on.

One love #OTBC[/quote]I see what you''re saying, I really do.But the bit I bolded really is the tricky bit.Delia and Michael are the right owners.Just not rich enough.

[Barclay seats 4849 the 3rd 0]

A complicated subject , somewhat simplified to fit a personal point of view/ agenda.

While a lot of truth in what he says , a competent board , and a manager with any sort of intelligence would not have the club in the situation we find ourselves . i. e. League position , lack of finance, unbalanced squad , disconnect with support base etc .

Having said all of that , I just completed the fan survey , and of course I will continue to renew my season tickets and attend every game possible, but left much the same comments on there , suppose that means I won''t be winning the end of season dinner tickets ? 😳

[PurpleCanary 6,386]

The Guardian''s Jacob Steinberg, who is a West Ham fan, did an apposite piece recently on unbalanced squads. Since Gold and Sullivan took over seven years ago the Hammers have signed 32 strikers who have scored 128 goals in 643 games, or one every five games. And that is a club with the attractive advantages of having money and being in London.As to Norwich City, the basic point about  a yo-yo club finding it harder than a settled Premier League (or Championship) club is solid. There are some specifc factors, though, that apply to us. Finance is an obvious one - Newcastle United have twice in recent times been in the Championship but have had the money to buy their way out.We cannot afford to overspend on transfers and particularly wages. Whenever we have been in the PL we have always been in the bottom four or five clubs in terms of wages, and usually in the bottom three. And that limits our targets, irrespective of what the manager wants although, within those limits, the board has backed all the managers, from Lambert on, even when we have gone down. In the summer of 2014 we spent much of and possibly all the money we got for Snodgrass, Fer etc, and this last summer we overspent.I suspect that what has seemed like a revolving door in the scouting department over the last five or six years ( we seem to have had more chief scouts than managers...) can hardly have helped, along with different managers having different tactical approaches (contrast Hughton with Lambert) and wanting different kinds of players. There was also specifically the flawed high-risk strategy, which had to have been recommended to the board by McNally, of going for a really top-notch central defender in the summer of 2015 rather than making sure we got in some who was at least a reasonable upgrade.

[city-till-i-die 7]

[quote user="morty"][quote user="city-till-i-die"]I''m not saying in anyway shape or form "just bring in a rich owners" they have to be the right owners.

I would just love NCFC to have the backing to push us in to the next level (staying in the prem) not ripping up trees but solid in that league. Then we progress from there.

I think we need a change from the very top to push the club on again only my opinion.

If you''ve enjoyed the last 15-20 games and the football we''ve played And don''t think we need to freshen it up , i think you may have blinkers on.

One love #OTBC[/quote]I see what you''re saying, I really do.But the bit I bolded really is the tricky bit.Delia and Michael are the right owners.Just not rich enough.[/quote]

I don''t think they are the right owners for NCFC now.

When they came in and what they did people should never forget but Football and the club has outgrown them.

I''m sure they are not the only 2 people in the world that would fit our club (that''s impossible) we have a nice stadium (that could do with expanding) the support is second to nine week in week out, this must be an attractive investment for someone.

Unless there has been interest and delia and co just won''t let go of their toy. Who knows.

I as you just want to see us doing well on the pitch first and foremost, then the rest falls into place.

[Rogue Baboon 0]

The big issue for me when it comes to Neil is no what we have and haven''t got to spend - if we don''t have the money to spend we shouldn''t spend it

It comes down to what we have spent and if we have spent well.

Paying 8mil for Pritchard, In a position where we weee already strong, was a poor decision when we needed strengthening in over key areas, especially considering we now have to sell to buy.

Also did we get lucky in replacing Redmond with Murphy?

[OldRobert 38]

[quote user="morty"][quote user="city-till-i-die"]I''m not saying in anyway shape or form "just bring in a rich owners" they have to be the right owners.

I would just love NCFC to have the backing to push us in to the next level (staying in the prem) not ripping up trees but solid in that league. Then we progress from there.

I think we need a change from the very top to push the club on again only my opinion.

If you''ve enjoyed the last 15-20 games and the football we''ve played And don''t think we need to freshen it up , i think you may have blinkers on.

One love #OTBC[/quote]I see what you''re saying, I really do.But the bit I bolded really is the tricky bit.Delia and Michael are the right owners.Just not rich enough.[/quote]And my point following on from city-till-i-die''s wish to become an established PL side, means as they are''nt rich enough to achieve that, then they aren''t the right owners.

[Alfie54 83]

Surely the problem is that we simply haven''t strenghtened the defence and got another forward, rather than sticking with Bassong/Bennett/Jerome. We had the money to spend but haven''t improved the areas we all can see so clearly.

[Indy 3,471]

So the OP said our incompetent board actually get it right as much as they do, one question springs to mind!

Why did you not think that in 96 when Chase was in charge, saying how hard it is a club our size and to get it right is hard for a board, do you think the same for Chase now? 9 consecutive seasons at the top, European footy and pushing to win the title!

Just seeing if you''re being genuine in considering running a football club our size is about.

[hogesar 10,766]

I actually think the board have done all that could have been expected in the last 2 windows. Before this season in the summer we kept hold of the majority of our squad, we didn''t cash in. January in the prem we spent a lot of money on Klose, Naismith and Pinto.

The only criticism would be we didn''t get enough deals over the line in the summer before our Prem season. But we had a decent enough points total I think, heading into January.

The real criticism lies with Alex Neil who couldn''t get the team performing with any kind of consistency in the second half of that prem season and it''s managed to continue to our detriment this season!

[king canary 8,758]

Neil has bought in 14 players since he arrived so can''t claim to have not been backed. He''s just consistently bought the wrong players/failed to get them playing well together.

Here is an XI of AN signings...

McGovern

Pinto - Klose - Brady

Canos - Mulumbu - Dorrans - Pritchard

Andreu

Naismith - Nelson

How many of those have really improved our first XI? Nelson and Pinto definitely, Klose and Brady probably. The rest of them? Not so much.

[Daz Sparks 1,558]

[quote user="king canary"]Neil has bought in 14 players since he arrived so can''t claim to have not been backed. He''s just consistently bought the wrong players/failed to get them playing well together.

Here is an XI of AN signings...

McGovern

Pinto - Klose - Brady

Canos - Mulumbu - Dorrans - Pritchard

Andreu

Naismith - Nelson

How many of those have really improved our first XI? Nelson and Pinto definitely, Klose and Brady probably. The rest of them? Not so much.[/quote]

I don''t know so much King, the only real lemon in there is Andreu.

[king canary 8,758]

Really?

Mulumbu?

Canos?

McGovern?

[FenwayFrank 2,717]

Mulumbu and canos are good players, for different reasons we haven''t seen that from them

[westcoastcanary 0]

Agree with Daz. Re. Mulumbu, Canos and McGovern, only Mulumbu of those three was a first team signing; McGovern is an acceptable No.2, comparable to Bunn; Canos has been signed for what I call our "team-in-waiting". Mulumbu certainly strengthens the bench but the injury he suffered early on last season  unfortunately limited his first team appearances in the EPL when we really needed him (quality player; remember how good he looked before that happened? Still good enough to be captaining his country in the ANC.)