scraping the barrel

[Bill 1,788]

[quote user="Mello Yello"]If Ed Balls is so fandabidozy and has the qualities of a supreme demi-god........Why then, didn''t the electorate vote and re-elect him as an MP......?[/quote]err, maybe because the LinDems were promising no tuition g=fees and Ed Balls was in as Student constituencyit does happen you knowask the chap in Canterbury who lost his seat one that had been Tory for over 100 years..... you know, the electionwhen you got the have a ride in that nice shiney car

[Tetteys Jig 830]

Dunno why anyone thought this summer would be any different. I had hoped we could have kept howson but whatever.

Yes we are going to see less proven players come in. the ones they are replacing (bar howson) were hardly roaring successes were they recently?

Ruddy and bassong and co were all on wages reflecting their abilities before they went stale and it would be foolish to spend silly money on replacements when there are no guarantees in this league. look at villa and their spending last season!

As for this fella coming in at left back, it''s a clever signing on the face of it. he''s clearly capable at this level, is £1m which will hardly be a massive dent if he doesn''t live up and it gives toffolo realistic hope that he can challenge/share the left back slot with Husband.

I doubt he will be on massive wages and if he does turn out to be a good left back, his value as a young English player will skyrocket. Hopefully the coaching staff have seen some potential to develop him from a steady option to a key player.

We still have Pritchard who is a cut above as is pretty much all our attack and hopefully maddison and Josh and maybe even wildschut who was a standout champs performer when we bought him can crack on.

Time to spend the howson money on a beastly centre back hopefully!

[The Judge 0]

As I have been reading this thread (and numerous others over the summer) it''s interesting to see that a large number of supporters use the argument of having to spend and buy players within our means and within the financial constraints of our owners.

Appreciate going off at a bit of a tangent but I wonder if those same people agree with the austerity politics over the past few years which is clearly based on spending within your means?

Clearly Delia, Ed Balls are hard line socialists who are currently spouting the line of enough is enough and we need to spend our way out of trouble - interesting she / they are not prepared to do that with the football club they own and run......

[Yorkshire Canary 118]

Often the best buys are the cheap ones

[ROBFLECK 132]

Good point Yorkshire...we''ve seen some unknown players rise to the task over the years at NCFC haven''t we?

Like Ricardo said in the thread, we have to wait until there''s some points to be won first, because these are such unknown quantities... I feel the Vrancic signing really is a good one and I think Gunn will turn out to be top too...but these are assumptions , no more... But we just HAVE to sign some central defenders , otherwise we will be fighting relegation rather than challenging for promotion... I''m afraid

[Herman 9,717]

[quote user="The Judge"]As I have been reading this thread (and numerous others over the summer) it''s interesting to see that a large number of supporters use the argument of having to spend and buy players within our means and within the financial constraints of our owners.

Appreciate going off at a bit of a tangent but I wonder if those same people agree with the austerity politics over the past few years which is clearly based on spending within your means?

Clearly Delia, Ed Balls are hard line socialists who are currently spouting the line of enough is enough and we need to spend our way out of trouble - interesting she / they are not prepared to do that with the football club they own and run......[/quote]I don''t think you''ve been payiing attention to what''s been going on. The current Norwich City way; Less money coming in so readjustments needed, meaning the underperformig, highly paid players get moved on, a new company structure is emplaced and the fans aren''t punished by the failings of the people above. Money is still invested in the players, the stadium and the youth structure, stuff we do need.The idealogical, austerity, conservative Norwich City way; The board doesn''t readjust anything at the top. The underperforming players stay and get a big pay rise with bonuses. The fans are punished with big ticket price rises etc to pay for the upper echelons pay rises and bonuses. The youth academy is scrapped to save a few quid and the stadium is sold off to a third party to raise some cash, which we then hand back in rent.

[TCCANARY 263]

[quote user="The Judge"]As I have been reading this thread (and numerous others over the summer) it''s interesting to see that a large number of supporters use the argument of having to spend and buy players within our means and within the financial constraints of our owners.

Appreciate going off at a bit of a tangent but I wonder if those same people agree with the austerity politics over the past few years which is clearly based on spending within your means?

Clearly Delia, Ed Balls are hard line socialists who are currently spouting the line of enough is enough and we need to spend our way out of trouble - interesting she / they are not prepared to do that with the football club they own and run......[/quote]Go and stand in ''Stupid Corner'' with the others.

[YankeeCanary 0]

[quote user="Mello Yello"]Oh dear Mello, I thought Paul Moy was the only idiot who thinks there is a correlation between ruining the country and ruining a football club........

There, changed it.......Now you can just STFU......[/quote]

Now, that is amusing Mello.....drawing from your "old self". Let''s have more please.

[Bill 1,788]

[quote user="Herman"][quote user="The Judge"]As I have been reading this thread (and numerous others over the summer) it''s interesting to see that a large number of supporters use the argument of having to spend and buy players within our means and within the financial constraints of our owners.

Appreciate going off at a bit of a tangent but I wonder if those same people agree with the austerity politics over the past few years which is clearly based on spending within your means?

Clearly Delia, Ed Balls are hard line socialists who are currently spouting the line of enough is enough and we need to spend our way out of trouble - interesting she / they are not prepared to do that with the football club they own and run......[/quote]I don''t think you''ve been payiing attention to what''s been going on. The current Norwich City way; Less money coming in so readjustments needed, meaning the underperformig, highly paid players get moved on, a new company structure is emplaced and the fans aren''t punished by the failings of the people above. Money is still invested in the players, the stadium and the youth structure, stuff we do need.The idealogical, austerity, conservative Norwich City way; The board doesn''t readjust anything at the top. The underperforming players stay and get a big pay rise with bonuses. The fans are punished with big ticket price rises etc to pay for the upper echelons pay rises and bonuses. The youth academy is scrapped to save a few quid and the stadium is sold off to a third party to raise some cash, which we then hand back in rent.

[/quote]unfortunately the poor fellow sounds like he is a brexiteer so anything that suggests a reasoned and fact based argument is like salt to a slughe is probably hissing as he recoils at this very moment

[PurpleCanary 5,554]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="norfolkngood"]Well purple we have to agree to disagree ( i can not say anymore on subject )

my side came from someone who was in the room maybe even someone we are discussing told me directly i can not names as you will understand

it is the right way for club and that''s all that matters[/quote]

[/quote]

Norfolk, in the absence of any new info, I am afraid I certainly believe my version (which tallies with what Bethnal has posted), based on everything in the public domain and what I have been told happened.Which is that Balls, true to his word, had spent a year investigating a new method of running the club, speaking to clubs around the country (I think including Southampton) and certainly, as that lengthy EDP piece shows, he had  been told very clearly by Comolli that the way forward was a sporting director controlling everything to do with football, and a head coach. Which in effect meant downgrading the job of CEO/And when circumstances aligned, with Moxey doing something dumb that prompted his sacking, and Neil also getting the push, Balls recommended to the board that adopt this new system.It would seem perverse and unlikely in the extreme that, having arrived at this perfect opportunity, the board scrapped the new-fangled idea and asked Stone to be an old-fashioned CEO in the Doncaster, McNally and Moxey mould, with an old-fashioned manager.And that this  keeping of the old-fashioned way was only abandoned, and the new method implemented after all, only because Stone said (which could hardly have come as a surprise the board) that he didn''t know enough about the football side. It really doesn''t make sense.My information, on the contrary. is that a full week after Moxey was sacked Stone told people he had applied for the job of CEO (so he hadn''t immediately been offered it, as you thought) in effect as it existed, ie including responsibility for football. He hardly would have done that if he didn''t think he could cope with that vital side of the business! But, Stone went on to say, he understood the board was meeting that evening to discuss a possible restructuring, so the job might not be the same. Again, the board would hardly have offered Stone the job as soon as Moxey was sacked if they were thinking of changing the whole system. As indeed they did. Presumably that evening the board approved Balls'' plans and started headhunting Webber. And eventually offered Stone the offered the downgraded football-less job. All of which fits with the known facts and makes sense.

[norfolkngood 1,086]

Sorry purple i will PM you tomorrow did not have time

My information, on the contrary. is that a full week after Moxey was sacked Stone told people he had applied for the job of CEO (so he hadn''t immediately been offered it, as you thought) in effect as it existed, ie including responsibility for football. He hardly would have done that if he didn''t think he could cope with that vital side of the business!

that is not correct i do not know who told you that but it was not a member of the present board will clear that up tomorrow

But, Stone went on to say, he understood the board was meeting that evening to discuss a possible restructuring, so the job might not be the same. Again, the board would hardly have offered Stone the job as soon as Moxey was sacked if they were thinking of changing the whole system. As indeed they did. Presumably that evening the board approved Balls'' plans and started headhunting Webber. And eventually offered Stone the offered the downgraded football-less job. All of which fits with the known facts and makes sense.

again nearly right but Stone was part of the reason the Restructuring happened as it did

again i will clear that up

Regards Norfolk

[norfolkngood 1,086]

02/02/2017, 10:23 PM

norfolkngood is not online. Last active: 31/05/2017 08:16:15 norfolkngood

Top 500 Posts

Joined on 25/04/2010

Posts 2,088

Re: moxey

yes he told me Stone had got the job but i don''t know anything else as he is still with them now so should at least get some good info on this one !!

check the date this PM was sent telling a poster via PM stone had the job the night Moxey left !

AN was still in a job and no sign of restructuring

[PurpleCanary 5,554]

[quote user="norfolkngood"]Sorry purple i will PM you tomorrow did not have time

My information, on the contrary. is that a full week after Moxey was sacked Stone told people he had applied for the job of CEO (so he hadn''t immediately been offered it, as you thought) in effect as it existed, ie including responsibility for football. He hardly would have done that if he didn''t think he could cope with that vital side of the business!

that is not correct i do not know who told you that but it was not a member of the present board will clear that up tomorrow

But, Stone went on to say, he understood the board was meeting that evening to discuss a possible restructuring, so the job might not be the same. Again, the board would hardly have offered Stone the job as soon as Moxey was sacked if they were thinking of changing the whole system. As indeed they did. Presumably that evening the board approved Balls'' plans and started headhunting Webber. And eventually offered Stone the offered the downgraded football-less job. All of which fits with the known facts and makes sense.

again nearly right but Stone was part of the reason the Restructuring happened as it did

again i will clear that up

Regards Norfolk[/quote]Norfolk, I think that is a good idea, for various reasons, and we can carry this on in public later if need be.

[Parma Ham's gone mouldy 2,219]

Norfolk,

Multiple views may be held within the same room, listening to the same conversation. Views may be subsequently expressed for a variety of reasons, some of which may involve self-interest.

Ed Balls had a significant impact on arrival and introduced and explored some new strategic thinking. From end 2015 at Norwich (in with) he had a vision of a similar model to the one now in operation. Note the date on the following:

05/01/2016, 12:10 AM

Parma Ham''s gone mouldy is not online. Last active: 12/07/2017 22:45:35 Parma Ham''s gone mouldy

Re: Bowkett et al

Yes that is what I meant. It is now happening for good strategic reasons, as much to do with the changing landscape of football as with any overriding philosophy change at the club (though in effect an outsider might say that it amounts to the same thing).

It would wrong to suggest that there was a pre-vision of the hugely significant levels of competitive this season at Premier League level. However there was a widespread understanding and a wind of Change that blew through many club boardrooms as the realities of the upsurge in finance became apparent to middle-tier (and lower) clubs.

The air of impermeability of the top few mega clubs was a direct consequence of superior finance, resources and structure and had a direct corollary on the pitch as the difference in wages paid, fees afforded and calibre of star created tiers within tiers, even at the top level.

As the explosion of finances available to English top tier clubs outstripped even the largest of European rivals something dramatic happened strategically at club corporate level. Much like the finest wines, the very best Petrus might be £20k, but a very fine version just a fraction below that level from the same maker and grower might command a quarter of the price. The top clubs still fight for the Messi''s and the Neymars, but the very next tier (and the tier below it) are now available to the West Hams of the world and they are suddenly ahead of the Borussia Dortmunds, the Athletico Madrids and even the Inters of this world. The fear factor of playing the top teams has been eroded by tumble-down cash and the influx of European coaches of my own schooling have shown that tactics does make a difference and can be used to thoroughly good and effective effect against even the richest sides who are "obliged" to come and attack you and dominate you on heir way to their ''rightful'' three points...Parma''s guerilla tactics are undoing years of fiscal dominance (for now).

Now, this brings us full circle back to the present, Norwich and Bowkett. What is the change and why?

Alan Bowkett was brought in at a time when the finances were in dire need of restructuring and their were institutions that needed both talking to in their own language and somebidy who understood the rules of the game and how to best apply them to the club''s benefit. Alan Bowkett had good contacts, good knowledge of the job at hand and a clear brief to fulfil. That job has been more or less completed with the virtual elimination of external debt and even the reduction of the rather small (and flexible) internal debt.

The first return to the Premier League, the relatively modest spending and the reasonably shallow quality squad depth also helped to even the keel naturally, though it must be noted that the structural reforms were achieved by Bowkett et al in advance of this.

We can characterise the overriding strategy hitherto as one "of live within our means, invest whatever we can in the football, though retain a reasonable offset cushion to amortise the sharp drop in revenues suffered upon relegation".

This is very sensible on paper, though recent developments, changing models elsewhere and the reality on grass of last year provided a realpolitik wake up call that the "stable, but yo-yoing" model might not be fit for purpose.

The Watford and Bournemouth models have to some degree contributed to this revision. They are both smaller clubs with richer owners, who crucially are prepared to ignore wage ceilings, embrace marquee signings where available and -most importantly - use their wealth to amortise losses when in the Championship. This is different from the ''glory hunter'' investors or the ''undervalued asset'' investors. It is owners who don''t and perhaps can''t make a club huge overnight, but who can tip the odds in their favour by taking (not quite) free hits at scenarios that Norwich cannot afford to risk with a ''cover the worst case scenario with real cash'' model.

This is not the only factor however. Neil Adams will not get the credit he deserves from the media and the terraces, but at boardroom level there is a clear recognition of what he did and why it was important. Not least it foreshadowed the reality of what might had been and the fragility and lack of backbone in the yo-yoing model that had previously been aspired to and believed in: uponn relegation the players were a shell of what they were and turmoil abounded in terms of possible playing turnover, plans abc and d in terms of final playing squad and psychological impact on the he troops was deep and turbulent. An enthusiastic club man, who was able to recreate a sense of purpose of playing for Norwich, that it meant something and was able to regenerate a sense of attacking verve, having been beaten regularly and totally lacking the belief and confidence to dominate games and win regularly was a significant feat.

It also showed the board that the ongoing retention of too good for the championship, not perhaps good enough for the Premier, lose the minimum number of your best players coming down, add higher quality ones on your return was a good theory, but rather tumultuous in practice. It was expensive, it didn''t provide the continuity that should have lead to stability, it was very expensive and would have dramatic consequences for playing staff if it lasted more than one year.

This the safety option was rather unmasked as not being that safe. The risk of the defensive strategy were suddenly shown to be rather greater than believed and all at the same time as the gains from success were growing exponentially to levels that genuinely allowed for life-changing , club-changing possibilities within even a single survival year.

This brings us on to now. We have a fan as Chairman, but the question he asks had already largely been thought of..."what are we here for? What is our raison d''etre?"

There are reasonably sound economic arguments that the relatively low-risk defensive strategy sensibly employed by the board hitherto was now no such thing.

We have arguably the best manager the club has ever had [the retained belief at the time - somewhat understandably given the dramatic initial impact], learning everyday and fast, we have no debt, we are in the richest league in the world and we stand to gain more money than we have almost ever dreamt of. Our squad is deeper, stronger and better paid than they have ever been, incentivised by the knowledge that failure this year would mean a significant restructuring for many of them as double-failures.

If now is not the time to invest then it is hard to envisage more appropriate circumstances for it to occur - and this is where the fan takes over from financier - what is the point of amortising against downside risk if this mitigates so heavily against the upside being achieved in even the most favourable of circumstances? It is ultimately a football club, where linear growth is not a given despite the continual improvement in much of the controllable business.

The huge finances rewards now on offer, and the fact that many stars have aligned for the club, give us an opportunity to take a carefully calculated gamble at a point in our history where the opportunity of having the opportunity to gamble again cannot be expected even with a so-called stable model...in this way yo-yo becomes simply yo and the downside - far from being offset - is very much the status quo and a rather negative glass ceiling has become the de-facto limit onwards into the future..

The rewards on offer are truly huge both financially and strategically and are really well within our grasp. Some careful investment could see excellent returns. There is no need to be fearful of success and indeed one must calculate today''s odds, not slay yesterday''s dead demons.

Parma ''

The gamble has been had. The vision and new model has now been introduced out of necessity, rather than proctor-hoc by design.

Revisionist viewpoints - however primary or of noble origin - are exactly that. We are where we are.

Parma

[Bill 1,788]

"We are where we are."A stunning observation.

[norfolkngood 1,086]

Thanks Parma i have PM ''ed Purple as many items were a bit to private for forum

we are discuss what each other were told and knows in a adult fashion without any fallings out the way the forum should be !

[hogesar 9,618]

[quote user="Captain Haddock"]"We are where we are."A stunning observation.[/quote]

I can understand why you''d take a cheap shot against Parma, considering you''re dim enough to think formations are completely irrelevant or, even better, non existent.

[If wed only kept Howie.. 3]

shouldn''t that be scraping the bottom of the barrel?

not sure that simply scraping a barrel is a bad thing... and even scraping the bottom of the barrel might not be bad - depends what was in the barrel...

[Coq au vin 0]

"I can understand why you''d take a cheap shot against Parma, considering you''re dim enough to think formations are completely irrelevant or, even better, non existent."

This. I gave up trying to make sensible posts about formations because of the remarks from Captain Sensible

[hogesar 9,618]

Yeah, just have to persevere Morgan.

People complain about Morty but City 1st is genuinely just a troll from what I can make out. Although interestingly when he was his original City 1st he was actually alright, just consistently came up with new ways to laugh at Ipswich which was always worth a go.

[nutty nigel 7,513]

[quote user="hogesar"]Yeah, just have to persevere Morgan.

People complain about Morty but City 1st is genuinely just a troll from what I can make out. Although interestingly when he was his original City 1st he was actually alright, just consistently came up with new ways to laugh at Ipswich which was always worth a go.[/quote]

Saw Morty tonight. He''s got a new shirt and he''s a top man[Y]

[Bill 1,788]

[quote user="hogesar"][quote user="Captain Haddock"]"We are where we are."A stunning observation.[/quote]

I can understand why you''d take a cheap shot against Parma, considering you''re dim enough to think formations are completely irrelevant or, even better, non existent.

[/quote]simply watch a game after it has kicked off and you will see what I mean

[Bill 1,788]

[quote user="hogesar"]Yeah, just have to persevere Morgan.

People complain about Morty but City 1st is genuinely just a troll from what I can make out. Although interestingly when he was his original City 1st he was actually alright, just consistently came up with new ways to laugh at Ipswich which was always worth a go.[/quote]I am still hepoking fun out of the po faced and the piousand well able to see when others are doing it alsothough possibly with a good deal more subtlety than my good selfps you can get off your high horse now

[Mello Yello 2,281]

You just keep on poking around here Captain Small(ock and continue attempting to take the pious.......Yeah, just you keep on poking an'' takin'' those cacophonic cheap shots........Something will come of it......eventually......Very much less than the male average 10cc amount, I''d guess?......And probably containing a miniscule amount of mutant bog-eyed tailless tadpoles, floundering and directionless in an ultra small droplet of brine.......and certainly not worth the catch......cloth......