Would missing out on promotion be a failure for Norwich City?

[Feedthewolf 4,846]

Some good discussion on this!I''d say Zimmermann looks much more than a ''do a job'' player, he looks like natural captaincy material. Stiepermann is versatile, reliable and physically strong, and should get even better. Points taken about Gunn and Reed, but Reed is far from irreplaceable. Replacing Gunn will be  a challenge, as I believe he is outstanding and will become an England international. Hopefully we can get another year from him.Franke must be seen as a disappointment so far, but if he is the only expensive flop at £3m then we''re moving in the right direction. He might yet come good, he didn''t look out of his depth apart from at Millwall. Vrancic would be better in a deep-lying role, I agree, but at the moment Farke seems to favour two more solid players in the deeper pairing (Trybull/Tettey/Reed). Watkins came on a free, and to be frank I don''t see anything in him at all and feel he''s way below the standard required.Regarding Wagner/Webber, interesting ideas there. Of course we can''t be sure at this point, but irrespective of whether Webber is a ''magic wand'', the point is that he''s put in place an overarching philosophy at the football club that is bigger than any one man. It''s a more progressive setup than we''ve tried before, and has the potential to bring us success in the same way that Swansea and Southampton have done. Much rather that than building a ''cult of personality'' around a traditional manager – Alex Neil had way too much influence for one so inexperienced, and that has really cost us.Even if Webber leaves or turns out to be a busted flush, I genuinely believe that the board have invested in this model for the long term, and without the prospect of significant investment I think it''s our best chance of success.

[pete 319]

Missing out on promotion this season will be both a failure and a disaster. However given our current playing resources not so much a failure as we are strictly limited see the results especially at home. We need a new striker can we afford a proven one probably not given what Webber stated re buying Hanley so look for gem in lower leagues. But even then promotion unlikely.

But it will be a disaster because no parachute payments and rely on self funding business which means funds the club can generate itself. Gate receipts, catering, sponsorship etc. and small TV revenue will not exceed £20m which is clearly not enough to build and retain a squad for promotion. Be prepared for many years outside PL. Championship football so beloved by some will become less so after 9/10 seasons outside the big league.

We are a club heading for oblivion and that''s not considering we could fall out of the Championship which of course happened before.

[king canary 7,605]

I realise I''m not as sold on Zimmerman as most. I can see a lot of good elements to him but he has put in some shocking performances too (Villa away being the most obvious one) and recently has been directly at fault for a couple of goals we''ve conceded. I certainly don''t think he''s bad but I''m not convinced he''s any more than a decent squad player. I''d ideally like to see us give Hanley and Klose a run together.

Completely agree about the philosophy part though- our last few managerial appointments zig-zagged from attacking to defensive too drastically and I hope an overarching playing style will reduce the need for huge player churn.

Unfortunatly I also believe that for this model to work in the shorter term (this season and the next) it will need some further investment. Right now Webber is having to cut the wage bill, sell some very good players and replace them on the cheap. It is very difficult to do.

[FenwayFrank 2,459]

Good to see Pete concentrating on the positives 😂

[lappinitup 629]

[quote user="pete"]Gate receipts, catering, sponsorship etc. and small TV revenue will not exceed £20m.....[/quote]In our last season in the Championship (2010-11), revenue was £23.1m, so with inflation and improved TV money, I would expect it to be around £30m. But don''t let facts spoil your misery pete........

[ricardo 7,385]

Enough to sustain mid table mediocrity, but we knew that already.

I hope for something better but it''s panning out much as I expected.

[Bill 1,788]

[quote user="pete"]

We are a club heading for oblivion and that''s not considering we could fall out of the Championship which of course happened before.[/quote]Whereas you are an old git heading for oblivion who could yet fall out of bedwhere perhaps a bump on the head might right things a little

[king canary 7,605]

I do think those talking about oblivion and life sentences are over selling it somewhat. As a club I''m sure we''ll continue on just fine, just I''d significantly reduce our odds of going back up.

[Rogue Baboon 0]

I see many people attacking Pete for, well, being Pete.

But what in his post do people actually disagree with?

Its not that far from what a lot of people are expecting. or is just a case of being easier to attack a poster instead of actually facing the reality of what he posted?

[king canary 7,605]

I don''t agree with ''heading towards oblivion.''

Apart from that, it all sounds ds about right.

[FenwayFrank 2,459]

Rogue, do you think we’re heading for oblivion or does that to be just a touch melodramatic?

[Rogue Baboon 0]

Its one piece of hyperbole. Does that discredit an entire post?

What is oblivion though? To some, its any extended period away from the Premier League - Ipswich for example - yet some of the more respected posters suggest thats where we are headed.

[king canary 7,605]

I think you''d struggle to call that oblivion. Irrelevance maybe...

[Lessingham Canary 99]

Could be that Wolves were heading towards oblivion (or obscurity) prior to this season...... Huddersfield until last season were bordering on being a non entity in football terms, 2 different models with these examples, which would you prefer for our club ? i know which i prefer.............

[Rogue Baboon 0]

But Wolves have just been brought out and are possibly the most well-off club in terms of owner wealth in British football, probably just under PSGs wealth? So not sure of the point about them, unless you think we will suddenly get brought out to turn us around to Wolves position?

I would argue Huddersfield started with a lot leveller playing field in terms of finances having been an almost non-entity. They werent faced with losing a large source of income, openly admitting to having to sell better players in order to buy etc

[Parma Ham's gone mouldy 2,219]

Rogue’s defence of Pete is reasonable. There is ample empirical evidence - current financial position, Sporting results, board declarations of future operational restructuring - that doing better with less is harder and less likely to succeed than the alternative. The fact that we failed last year with more simply does not equate to being able to do more with less now. Sadly both can not work sufficiently.

Lessingham’s contention that Huddersfield’s route is preferably to Wolves’ in a Sporting sense is fine, though should not be interpreted as a binary choice. We may well be neither.

Huddersfield’s rise is Lambertian (Wagnerian), though the owners’ wealth is vastly more than ours (c£350m), so romantic presentation of a rags-to-riches tale (as ours was) is entirely wide of the mark.

Mark Rivers remembers his time at Crewe Alexandra fondly and he would identify the self-sustaining future - if that is what actually occurs - is better framed through that prism. In old world money we are hugely better off than Crewe, in a self-sustaining Championship season we may have revenues of £25m-£30m versus a nominal self-sustaining competitor with lower gates and commercial revenue at (say) £10m. Sadly such old world advantages are dwarfed by new world money and TV income. Heavily mitigating against this self-sustaining league table is also the huge failure-underwriting benefit of richer owners. Being able to take ‘free’ hits at ‘good risks’ (like Huddersfield) is very different to having to amortise every deal against failure, as a true self-sustaining model will have to do. In short we will have genuinely budget for nearly all negative ‘what if’ scenarios in a way that other competing clubs will not have to - or they can do so more ‘positively’, allowing for more rational gambles. Nothing is sport comes with a guarantee, so being better able to withstand errors or risks has an enormous impact over the middle term.

To regard the above as Kipling-esque impostors to be treated the same; to regard sporting loss, promotion, relegation, losing money, making money as all part of life’s Buddhist journey, equal in outcome for the learning they bring, as LDC can do, is either a noble or Pollyanna attitude depending on your viewpoint.

Football is generally considered a somewhat harsher mistress than that and success is typically viewed through the prism of sporting or financial success. One can be also proud of the philosophy, the style of play and the development of youth and view that as success. Crewe may well still do.

Parma

[Nuff Said 5,131]

[quote user="Rogue Baboon"]I see many people attacking Pete for, well, being Pete.

But what in his post do people actually disagree with?

Its not that far from what a lot of people are expecting. or is just a case of being easier to attack a poster instead of actually facing the reality of what he posted?[/quote]

What do I disagree with? Pretty much all of it. At the risk of repeating what others have said:

"Missing out on promotion this season will be both a failure and a disaster. However given our current playing resources not so much a failure as we are strictly limited see the results especially at home. We need a new striker can we afford a proven one probably not given what Webber stated re buying Hanley so look for gem in lower leagues. But even then promotion unlikely. "

So based on our current playing resources, not gaining promotion wouldn''t be a failure, even Pete is disagreeing with himself. We don''t *need* a new striker, we need Nelson to get over his injury issues. It might help, but it could be wasted in the same way it appears the money spent on the panic buy of Hanley may have been.

"But it will be a disaster because no parachute payments and rely on self funding business which means funds the club can generate itself."

And this is exactly what the club have been preparing for. A disaster would be going bankrupt - not achieving promotion but keeping on an even financial footing in the Championship is NOT a disaster (unless you have a massively over-inflated sense of entitlement about what our club is).

"Gate receipts, catering, sponsorship etc. and small TV revenue will not exceed £20m which is clearly not enough to build and retain a squad for promotion."

Lappin has pointed out the flaws here. Also, I''m sure it is possible to find examples of clubs who have achieved promotion on smaller budgets than £20 million (which is actually higher for us), but my lunch break is nearly over.

"Be prepared for many years outside PL. Championship football so beloved by some will become less so after 9/10 seasons outside the big league. "

Pete clearly has fortune-reading abilities here that us lesser mortals don''t share, but I''ll try and remember in 9-10 years time to check how much I''m enjoying the Championship. The reason some of us have said it''s in many ways a better league to be in include the ability to win or lose to anyone on the day, a genuinely competitive league, the lack of over-hyped clubs with attendant glory hunters and matches at (more) reasonable prices and times. I can''t see that changing much.

"We are a club heading for oblivion and that''s not considering we could fall out of the Championship which of course happened before."

Again, others have already pointed this out, oblivion is ceasing to exist. The club are already sensibly ensuring that is not a risk. And last time we fell out of the Championship we coped didn''t we?

So, in answer to your question, I don''t agree with any of it, it''s the usual slanted, pant-wetting drivel Pete posts when we''ve lost a couple of games and the climate suits his depressing ability to revel in misery.

[FenwayFrank 2,459]

👍

[Bill 1,788]

[quote user="Nuff Said"]

So, in answer to your question, I don''t agree with any of it, it''s the usual slanted, pant-wetting drivel Pete posts when we''ve lost a couple of games and the climate suits his depressing ability to revel in misery.[/quote]is Pete the new wiz (gawd rest his soul) ?

[Guest]

Forget any expectancy from the Board. They need to be realistic. It will only be a failure if the majority of supporters and more especially season ticket holders, think they have failed to be entertained.

That entertainment could be a top six spot which would surely satisfy even the most dour supporter or from now on, really good passing and attacking football that is pleasing on the eye.

Perhaps you could add that if we don''t bring in another striker, somehow, in January, then Webber has been a failure.