Sustaining the future

[hogesar 9,686]

[quote user="lake district canary"]So I get all the club shrinking and the fact that we are going to be one of the few have nots of the top two divisions, but that doesn''t detract us from being a club that can compete.  Money cannot buy you a team - it can only buy expensive players who you hope will be a team.  Clubs with a good togetherness can often achieve much more than the sum of their parts and compete against clubs with way more resources.  [/quote]

It can though. Ask Man City, Chelsea, Man Utd. Look at the Premiership winners in the last 15 years. Leicester have won it once, which shows how likely your hope clubs with a ''togetherness'' can achieve things and even then they''re owned by a multi billion company.

[BroadstairsR 2,178]

It''s not just the ability to compete in the market though is it, or even of overcoming the financial handicap that we will inevitably carry by careful management, youth and team spirit.

No amount of pre-Agincourt style stances will distract from the obvious consequence that unless overheads are trimmed to the bone the club loses money by being in the Championship. We''ve been through the bare bones existence both in the recent and in times in the past when poverty almost seemed the norm. It''s not much fun.

Now that the club finally battled it''s way to a modicum of Premier League credibility by means of a long arduous up and down process that began with Ron Saunders''s supermen taking on the slopes of Mousehold, carried on with Big-time Bondy, with the shrewdness of Stringer and with the peaks of the Walker era and then onto Paul Lambert''s inspirational leadership it all means that by now we have tasted life at the Top Table we want more for it was never easy getting there. It was never automatic. A decent sized tree gradually grew from a small acorn, often against all the odds. East Anglia doesn''t figure much in the early and middle history of the English professional game after all.

In sum, the club has clawed it''s way to becoming a team that has at least an aura of Premier League about it, with it''s recent history, it''s support and it''s valuable squad. There remains some little justification for us supporters to hold on to a glimmer of entitlement because of this.

I do not want to see these proud achievements evaporate in record time because of the monopoly of a pot less, out-dated diva who seems to think she knows what''s best for the club and it''s loyal support.

My stance remains the same. I will give it one more throw of the dice with this brave (but really over-cooked and premature) experiment.

No promotion this season, or at least good signs that it can be achieved the next and I will join this forum''s dissidents and want a change at the top, for what it''s worth.

[king canary 7,609]

I''m trying to be diplomatic here but that post is a load of old horseshite LDC.

Money matters and it can be seen in the table every season. There is a strong correlation between wage spend and final league position and just acting like money doesn''t matter doesn''t make it so.

[Hoola Han Solo 448]

Money matters in football whether you like it or not and if you don''t think that you''re either incredibly naive or living in cloud cuckoo land.

[westcoastcanary 173]

[quote user="king canary"]I''m trying to be diplomatic here but that post is a load of old horseshite LDC.

Money matters and it can be seen in the table every season. There is a strong correlation between wage spend and final league position and just acting like money doesn''t matter doesn''t make it so.[/quote]Whether, and to what extent, money matters is a question of what one considers the necessities of life -- or in this case life as a supporter of NCFC. Is a (moderately) realistic hope of becoming an established EPL club one of life''s necessities? For some it appears to be (though the proof of the pudding, if and when the time comes, would be surrender of their season tickets and a final farewell to the Barclay or wherever), while others would, ricardo-like, acknowledge that no, there remains satisfaction in supporting NCFC even without such an aspiration (much as those of us who populated the terraces season after season pre-Saunders enjoyed ourselves with never a real thought of ever playing in the First Division). 

Diogenes thought that a drinking bowl was the only essential possession, until he saw a boy drink water from a fountain by cupping his hands, whereupon Diogenes threw away his bowl. All over the country there are supporters of football clubs drinking from the football fountain by cupping their hands, with hardly a thought of possessing a bowl, never mind the Holy EPL Grail. 

[Len 74]

LDC is one of the few on this thread who is talking sense.

[lake district canary 4,536]

I''m not saying money doesn''t matter, just that it is not necessary to have squillions of it to be competitive.  We have always been underdogs in the scheme of things and that includes cup runs, our years in the top division pre 1993 and in the PL in recent years.  In all that time, or most of it, we have been competitive.  The times we have not been competitive is when money has been so tight we couldn''t afford to pay a tea lady, let alone good players.  We can now afford to pay good players and we have a stable club for the long term, as long as business sense prevails.  The only kind of investment that would do any good, is finding someone who can pump at least £100m in each season to pay for big wages and big transfer fees and the chances of finding a Norwich supporting squillionare is pretty much zilch.  Even if DS/MJW took the view that getting a non-Norwich supporting investor was ok, then we would be letting ourselves in for trouble somewhere down the line.  Plenty of examples out there of knackered clubs through the wrong investor somewhere down the line after their original investor sold up.  So we are where we are.  So we do what we''re good at as a club and have always been good at - competing against the odds.  If that means it will be harder to get out of the championship, so be it.  I still think that the money side of things is overstated and that belief and a strong togetherness can overcome most odds - money tends to corrupt - players mercenary with over inflated ideas of their abiility - clubs/fans  getting frustrated their big money investors aren''t getting them the success they think they should be getting and so on. The only investor that can make a real difference in this ever increasing money based era, is one who can elevate your club into the top six or seven in the PL.  The rest are just also rans, anyone of the bottom half of the PL can get relegated in any season, but only three out of the championship with all it''s investors can get promoted.  I''ve said my say on this now, but personally, I''m happy we''re not going down the stupid money route. We will always be a good sized club even without huge amounts of money, we''ll always be competitive and will keep the characer of the club intact.  Selling out to some huge investor is for clubs that want to buy success.  We need money to function, but we don''t need to sell out to do that. As for promotion, I would rather get promotion against the odds through good footballing and an ethical approach, than buy it with some rich kid''s pocket money.

[It's Character Forming 1,161]

We can afford to pay good players this season while we have the last season of parachute payments.

 

Next season our player wage budget will drop by a huge amount, if we''re not promoted.  People need to understand that there will need to be another clear-out exercise if we don''t get promoted.

[Jim Smith 2,322]

The above.

LDC - "we can now afford to pay good players"

For one more season we can. Everything coming out of the club tells you that we will not be able to afford to pay good players (at this level) after this season unless they are up and coming youngsters who we get for a season or so before they expect big money.

In wage terms we will probably be in the bottom 3 or 4 clubs in the division in terms of the wages we can offer if we do not go up. the impact on our competitiveness will be even greater if we still have wastes of space like Naismith and Jarvis on the wage bill who between them will probably be using up the wages of 6 or 7 players under our new structure.

Anyone "good" at championship level will expect to get paid more than we can pay them which is the point that you seem to be ignoring. We will therefore be entirely reliant on moulding teams that are greater than the sum of their parts a bit like McCarthy at the scum.

[Fuzzar 1,702]

Lakey, I''ve recently enjoyed the brevity of some of your recent posts but you now appear to be reverting to type....

And you''re soooo wrong by the way.

[Jim Smith 2,322]

I really don''t think some people get that point ICF.

I think they believe that this summer''s sales have bought us breathing space (which they really should have done in my opinion given the amount we have sold players for since january) but everything coming out of Webber and Stone suggests otherwise. No promotion this season and Oliveria, Pritchard, Klose, Murphy and possibly Madison will be sold. Maybe Jerome and Pinto as well to get their wages off the books. Tettey released. No chance of signing Reed or Gunn.

Still at least we will have Captian Marvel, Naismith and Jarvis clogging up the wage bill!

[lake district canary 4,536]

[quote user="Fuzzar"]Lakey, I''ve recently enjoyed the brevity of some of your recent posts but you now appear to be reverting to type....

And you''re soooo wrong by the way.[/quote][:)] I''ve never really changed, if it''s a subject I believe in.  The future of the club is there for all to see, we are apparently not getting huge investment any time soon and I would far rather try and find some positives in that. I may well be wrong that we can be competitve once all the books have been balanced, but if we don''t get promoted this season (and I wouldn''t discount that at this stage) then next season we will see how we get on. I get the sense that the championship is going to be a league of rich wannabes and hardly any of them will succeed, each one that doesn''t pining because they can''t get what they want despite having loads of money.  We will be different from the rest in that sense, with a more grounded and healthier and progressive approach. Bring it on.  

[hogesar 9,686]

Im not massively fussed about the prem, although seeing us mix it at carrow road with the worlds best players isnt something to sniff at.

All im actually interested in is watching good, entertaining football. The fear is obviously that selling all our best players makes it more and more difficult to play that way.

I dont think lack of money suddenly makes us uncompetitive it just makes it more difficult. Recruitment cant afford the 50% success rate weve probably had overall in our prem years. Hopefully Webber will give us a higher success % with lower investment. Difficult, though.

But Middlesbrough have spent crazily, and have an awesome team on paper. They even got in an experienced proven manager. Theyre currently 9th.

We can still be competitive it just requires being a bit smarter and tactful than others. Difficult but not impossible.

[Parma Ham's gone mouldy 2,220]

LDC 3,

''.... I get all the club shrinking and the fact that we are going to be one of the few have nots of the top two divisions, but that doesn''t detract us from being a club that can compete...''

Yes it does I''m afraid LDC.

You love Norwich and automatically ''defend'' any perceived negativity. This is not negativity, it is odds probability given clear parameters (including money, wages, drop in revenue, necessary financial adjustments).

Read the Steve Stone article again. He is sensibly dampening expectations and clearly preparing the fans for the likely rocky road ahead. The odds are so overwhelming that he himself feels the need to state it.

You are not helping the cause with (often welcome) blind positivity in this case. It is precisely artificially raised expectations that cause an issue as Ricardo has repeated pointed out. The high expectations cannot in all likelihood now be met, so we must return to being faithful supporters of our team, in hope rather than expectation.

The unlikely may occur, though even the unlikely will need a bit of time to become possible.

Parma

[Parma Ham's gone mouldy 2,220]

I''ll be at the Birmingham game. I hope that at least 25k will continue to for years to come, supporting regardless.

Parma

[hogesar 9,686]

Great posts, Parma.

[Horse Renoir 1]

The academy is absolutely key here then isn''t it? Produce another couple of Jacob Murphy''s (Far, far easier said than done!) and we will have the cash for a while to compete. I think that''s where most of the Jacob money has gone, into securing the cat 1 status for 5/6 years.

We absolutely have to get it producing players and to be successful and be in with a shot of staying in the PL for a while we''ll need it running about as good as the Southampton academy has been. One thing though, i do wonder why we''re employing the likes of Gill/Hucks etc, I know they have a connection to the club but wouldn''t it be more worthwhile to bring in the best coaches we can instead of jobs for the boys?

Anyway, even though Delia won''t sell I get the feeling Tom would if things don''t go to plan. Either this model is a success or eventually we get new owners who will hopefully be able to potentially raise the glass ceiling.

Either way I''m relaxed about it. If it works, great, if it doesn''t I don''t see Tom clinging on holding the club he obviously loves back and we get a change.

[Len 74]

The next couple of seasons might be rocky, but it''s the fact that the club is finally being steered in the right direction that makes me positive. As I said before, we''ve come full circle after 20 years of under-achievement.I''m hoping we''ll be better placed for when this period of exponential growth in fees and wages comes to an end. It can''t go on for ever.

[lake district canary 4,536]

[quote user="Parma Hams gone mouldy"]LDC 3,

''.... I get all the club shrinking and the fact that we are going to be one of the few have nots of the top two divisions, but that doesn''t detract us from being a club that can compete...''

Yes it does I''m afraid LDC.

You love Norwich and automatically ''defend'' any perceived negativity. This is not negativity, it is odds probability given clear parameters (including money, wages, drop in revenue, necessary financial adjustments).

Read the Steve Stone article again. He is sensibly dampening expectations and clearly preparing the fans for the likely rocky road ahead. The odds are so overwhelming that he himself feels the need to state it.

You are not helping the cause with (often welcome) blind positivity in this case. It is precisely artificially raised expectations that cause an issue as Ricardo has repeated pointed out. The high expectations cannot in all likelihood now be met, so we must return to being faithful supporters of our team, in hope rather than expectation.

The unlikely may occur, though even the unlikely will need a bit of time to become possible.

Parma[/quote]

But I am not trying to raise expectations, Parma, all I am trying to do is see positives in the situation.  My expectations never change - I want to see the club and it''s fans do the best they can - and as you say, hope that we achieve our goals in the process - whether we have 50p in the bank or £500m.  We simply do the best with what we have.  It seems as if it is others who have too high expectations - expectations that an investor would magically change everything for the better. I simply don''t agree with that for reasons I''ve mentioned before.  Money talks, but it talks a language that will lead to frustration imo - too many rich clubs all fighting for the same thing.  I also understand the analysis and the statistics, I just don''t believe that everything is pre-ordained simply because of them and I''m actually looking forwards to seeing how we do as the dust settles and we develop along sustainable lines against the backdrop of watching other clubs struggle to justify the vast amounts they are spending.   We are going down the route we are and we need to embrace it imo. That is not raising expectations, it is accepting the situation and trying to make the best of it.

[ricardo 7,395]

LDC, your thesis flies in the face of all logic. Yes, there are things we can do by being smarter than other clubs in various areas but things don''t stand still and other clubs will also be exploring those same avenues. Those with the deepest pockets will inevitably be able to afford the better players. We have already seen the effects of this reality with our own sales and purchases this season.Recognising these facts is an exercise in reality not negativity. Many are like me and will continue to support through thick and thin and quite plainly if this final season of parachute payments doesn''t go well we will likely be in for an extended period of thin. There is also another less committed group who will waver in their allegiance when the glory days and their memory gradually fade away. Again, a glance down the A140 and our own history tells us all we need to know.Anyone who thinks our relative poverty in this league has some kind of bizarre equalizing effect, either has a distorted view of economic reality or is living in a dream world.

[Hoola Han Solo 448]

Would a rich owner or investor guarantee success? No. Would it give us a better chance of being successful? Without a doubt.

[Essjayess 307]

Parma, ricardo...i understand what both of you are saying, i also understand, and by the way so does Lakey if you read his replies, that maybe in the present day climate, and in the  near future, the odds  seem, justifiably so, that we will find it harder to compete for a place in the Prem, maybe even top end of the Champs, but as Lakey rightly says, its not pre ordained, not in any way.Lakey has nowhere said he expects the new model to definitely work, hes admits to knowing the statistics etc etc, but i, like him, accept the reality  of the new set up at NCFC, and as a fan, hope it really does bring rewards. If it does or does not, time will tell, but  a huge amount of work has gone into the last few months and i for one applaud  whats happened  to the club and embrace it wholeheartedly. To compete, all you need is 11 v 11 on the pitch and there you go, its a relatively simple concept. As with Lakey, while i would want to see us do well, get in the Prem  and the rest, i would be a fan of City no matter what division they were in. Im not scared of NCFC becoming a smaller club in a bigger crazier football world, but i would be upset and annoyed  if they took to bigger risks than they can ill afford, when they have worked so so hard to be a sustainable club.

[lake district canary 4,536]

[Y]

[nutty nigel 7,539]

[quote user="westcoastcanary"][quote user="king canary"]I''m trying to be diplomatic here but that post is a load of old horseshite LDC.

Money matters and it can be seen in the table every season. There is a strong correlation between wage spend and final league position and just acting like money doesn''t matter doesn''t make it so.[/quote]Whether, and to what extent, money matters is a question of what one considers the necessities of life -- or in this case life as a supporter of NCFC. Is a (moderately) realistic hope of becoming an established EPL club one of life''s necessities? For some it appears to be (though the proof of the pudding, if and when the time comes, would be surrender of their season tickets and a final farewell to the Barclay or wherever), while others would, ricardo-like, acknowledge that no, there remains satisfaction in supporting NCFC even without such an aspiration (much as those of us who populated the terraces season after season pre-Saunders enjoyed ourselves with never a real thought of ever playing in the First Division). 

Diogenes thought that a drinking bowl was the only essential possession, until he saw a boy drink water from a fountain by cupping his hands, whereupon Diogenes threw away his bowl. All over the country there are supporters of football clubs drinking from the football fountain by cupping their hands, with hardly a thought of possessing a bowl, never mind the Holy EPL Grail. 

[/quote]

This is a great post Westy and at least I don''t feel like I''m ploughing a lone furrow.

But even this doesn''t ask a further question which could be "what''s the downside?"

If you buy in totally to the mantra tha money is the total god of football then surely someone with more money owning the club is a no brainer. 

But is there a downside? Why do people who accept that the richest clubs will will rise to the top still want us to keep what we''ve got? I personally know a fan who was nearly in tears asking Delia not to sell the club. But they didn''t mean don''t sell because it''s Delia. They meant don''t lose the community club we have become. When I mention this on here I get glib comments like "so what if a new owner wouldn''t come and play jenga with fans". And I agree with them. It would be daft to turn away investment just because the new owner didn''t want to play jenga with the fans. But you must live in Norfolk with your eyes closed not to see the benefit to the community of the football club''s partnership with the CSF. You''d have to attend Carrow Road with your eyes closed not to see the supporters benefits of the football club''s partnership with the CSF.

Seasons come and seasons go, some are successful and some aren''t. Despite all the tantrums on here we haven''t suffered through being a community club. It''s been part of our identity throughout the good times and the bad. This latest bout of entitleitis is based on what the future is projected to be rather than what the past has been. 

In a post further up it says Tom might be more likely to sell. I assume they mean sell with no regard except money. But that isn''t going to happen anytime soon because their shares are going to be put in trust and although Tom is the long term recipient he cannot sell on a whim. He could only sell if the trustees think it''s right and proper. All this is in that Times interview but I doubt many have read it. Most that I see on here is just quotes taken out in isolation.

So does anybody else have anything they''d not like to lose about our football club? or is it just me?

[Jim Smith 2,322]

Nutty

I don''t think anyone would deny that the CSF is a very good thing that all of us would wish to see continue to grow and prosper. However you seem determined to link it to Delia and the current ownership of the Club and seem to suggest that it wouldn''t continue if we had new ownership. I''m slightly at a loss as to why you think that would inevitably be the case?

The CSF was formed before Delia and MWJ''s time (in fact possibly under the hated Robert Chase in its original guise)and as I understand whilst it is linked to the club it is a separate charity in its own right and as far as I can ascertain (apologies if I am wrong on this) is not bankrolled by the club to any great degree. I don''t therefore see why you continue to imply that any new owner would simply scrap the CSF if they came in nor indeed seek to engage with the community, particularly as it doesn''t appear to me that it would save the club any significant sum of money?

I agree with you that I wouldn''t want to lose the community feel that the club has but frankly I would be amazed if any prudent new owner would want to do so either given that it helps to prop up our support base at the level it has remained.

[Jim Smith 2,322]

sorry that should say "not seek to engage with the community..." in the penultimate paragraph.

[nutty nigel 7,539]

[quote user="Jim Smith"]Nutty

I don''t think anyone would deny that the CSF is a very good thing that all of us would wish to see continue to grow and prosper. However you seem determined to link it to Delia and the current ownership of the Club and seem to suggest that it wouldn''t continue if we had new ownership. I''m slightly at a loss as to why you think that would inevitably be the case?

The CSF was formed before Delia and MWJ''s time (in fact possibly under the hated Robert Chase in its original guise)and as I understand whilst it is linked to the club it is a separate charity in its own right and as far as I can ascertain (apologies if I am wrong on this) is not bankrolled by the club to any great degree. I don''t therefore see why you continue to imply that any new owner would simply scrap the CSF if they came in nor indeed seek to engage with the community, particularly as it doesn''t appear to me that it would save the club any significant sum of money?

I agree with you that I wouldn''t want to lose the community feel that the club has but frankly I would be amazed if any prudent new owner would want to do so either given that it helps to prop up our support base at the level it has remained.[/quote]

It''s not bankrolled by the club Jimbo. It''s financially independent although there are huge benefits to both sides with the partnership. And football in the community did start during the Chase years. The rest of your post rather suggests you''d put conditions on any sale. That can''t be right can it? Before long you''ll be in agreement with the owners.

[Jim Smith 2,322]

Of course I would expect them to do some basic due diligence to establish that the new owners are not fly by night cowboys and share the same aspirations for the club.

I could also accept reasonable conditions if they wished to impose them. What is not reasonable is either simply not listening to offers or imposing such conditions as effectively render any sale impossible.

[PurpleCanary 5,562]

[quote user="Indy Bones"]There are numerous factors to consider in the whole debate, one of which is that regardless of whether or not your clubs owner is extremely wealthy, there''s no guarantee that they''re going to put that wealth into the club - and even if they do, it might still equate to very little in success terms.Since 2009, Sunderland have been owned by Ellis Short who has a personal wealth of approx 2.9 billion, they''ve spent over 210 million during his ownership (so approx 24 million per season), yet their highest league finish in this period has been 10th (way back in 10/11), and they''ve spent the past 4 years avoiding relegation by as little as 2-5 points each season until the inevitable happened and they came down this year.Since 2006, Villa have been owned by both Randy Lerner (est 1.1 billion), and Dr Tony Xia (est 1.2 billion), and they''ve spent over 330 million during both ownerships (approx 28 million per season), they had a good spell between 07/08 - 09/10 with 3 consecutive 6th place finishes, then the wheels started to come off, and their decline was even worse than Sunderland''s (despite spending more) and they went down in the 15/16 season and finished merely mid-table last year in the Champs.WBA were bought in 2014 by Guochuan Lai (est 6.2 billion), and yet despite the much higher wealth of their owner, they''ve ''only'' spent just over 100 million so far (approx 25 million per season), which has got them a 13th, 14th and 10th placed set of finishes.Stoke have twice been owned by Peter Coates and the Coates Family (est 3.1 billion), most recently taking back over in 2006, since then they (like Sunderland) have spent over 200 million on players (approx 17 million per season) , with 3 consecutive 9th place finishes in the past 4 seasons.We''ve been owned by Delia and MWJ since 1996 (est 25 million), spending approx 123 million on players (approx 5.5 million per season), with our 11/12 and 12/13 seasons giving us 11th and 12th place PL finishes, and even more interestingly, it was when we started spending big on players that it all seemed to come crashing down, as 89 million out of the 123 total spent has been over the past 5 seasons!What this illustrates to me is that we have 4 sets of billionaires, all of whom have sanctioned (or paid themselves), significant transfer funds, yet bizarrely it''s the two clubs that have spent the lowest out of the 4 that are not only still in the PL, but have had far more consistent success than the other 2 during these ownership periods. Villa''s excellent set of 6th place finishes went down the drain, and despite an incredibly high amount being spent after this, they still got relegated and didn''t look close to coming back up last season either.So where does that leave us with our owners, who aren''t even near the 50 million mark, never mind 1+ billion? It''s clear they can''t compete financially with many of their contemporaries, yet if Villa or Sunderland were the examples of owners spending good money and not being ''cheap'' owners (as some fans suggest our owners are), you only have to laugh at how little it''s actually done for them in reality, and if people think we''ve thrown our golden premier league money down the toilet - WTF have these guys done then???I also see now that Portsmouth have been bought out by Michael Eisner (est 1 billion), back in August this year, yet so far they''ve spent virtually nothing...good to see that having such a wealthy investor has meant big transfer spending for them...[/quote]

Too many excellent posts and particular points to keep up with. I have only picked this one, with its excellent research, because it illustrates a crucial argument about money - and the effect of our lack thereof - that, for reasons of length, didn''t make the final cut of my OP.Which is what might be called the "If only... Fallacy". If only we had bought this player sooner, or not at all, or sacked that manager sooner, or later, or not at all...we could have stayed up, or got back, and even established ourselves in the Premier League.Possibly, but probably not, certainly as far as the last aim is concerned. The reality is that pauper clubs such as ours are always at the mercy of one mistake. Relegation or failing to get promoted are just a single bad choice away. Whereas rich clubs, such as those mentioned by Indy B, can get away with duff decisions. The money goes a long way for a long time to insulate those owners from their own stupidity.Indy B suggests all the millions and millions that, for example, Aston Vila and Sunderland spent didn''t do anything for them. With respect, I think that is the wrong lesson to take. That money kept those clubs, which were making at least as many bad decisions as Smith and Jones and almost certainly quite a few more, from relegation for several seasons.A few years ago, when Villa were still in the PL,  I had an exchange online with a fan who had complained that all Lerner''s millions had not improved the club. On the contrary, I said,, if it hadn''t been for his largesse Villa would by then have been down in the Championship. Ditto with Sunderland.

[It's Character Forming 1,161]

For me, having followed City for about 25 years, the best times have been when we''ve been a yo-yo club between 2nd tier and Prem.  I missed the spell when we nearly won the Prem itself.

The 2nd tier is the most fun as a league to play in, especially when you have a realistic bid for promotion. 

The Prem is fun until the novelty wears off but has plenty of downsides.  The journey getting there is far more fun than arriving.

Being stuck in the 2nd tier, with no real chance of going up, but not that likely to go down - well, there are worse things, but it did start to get dull after a time to be honest (I''m thinking of the late 90s here).

 

The 3rd tier was great fun for a single season but I wouldn''t want to make a habit of it.

 

Unfortunately with our current owners, if we don''t go up this season, it''s going to get tougher to compete for promotion because we''ll become an average Championship side if not worse.  And someone who could give us that extra topup to get us back in the promotion whirl, without relying on another Lambert piece of fortune, would be well worth thinking about.