Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
thebigfeller

There's three main problems at Norwich City

Recommended Posts

[quote user="thebigfeller"][quote user="PurpleCanary"]
Not sure the owner of a club that lost £65m over its last two Championship seasons (which is probably more than Norwich City has lost in its entire history) is best placed to lecture us.[/quote]
Actually, I''d say he is. Are they in danger? No. He speculated to accumulate; he''s not in this to make money, but to succeed with his club. Which he''s doing. What do you do? You point to their losses off the park under someone who is nobody''s idea of a shyster instead of their success on it! Amazing.
There''s one other frustration I have with you PC, and it''s this. For want of a better phrase, huge numbers of your posts are either constant apologia for the board, or too green-and-yellow tinted by half. On The Guardian, after a summer in which we''d sold our best players and recruited utter mediocrity, there you were, extolling our virtues and tipping us to contend. There was zero reasoning behind this other than your own blind faith.
[/quote]
Damned right I point to losses "off the park". I love the way you are trying to marginalise and so diminish massive losses, as if they have no effect on how a club can perform, especially in the context of your desire for Norwich City to be taken over by someone whose modus operandi would almost certainly similarly be to flood the accounts with red ink.
As to my posts, probably best not to accuse me of pro-Smith and Jones partiality and blind faith when you splurged a hilariously one-eyed and highly dubious "record" of their failings. I certainly use balanced factual analysis (in sharp contrat to your incoherent bias) to defend S&J against the more extreme attacks. None of that remotely resembles apologia, except in the manichean universe you seem to inhabit, in which if you are not for us you must be against us.It is also clear you have quite mistakenly assumed from any specific defences I have made of them what my overall feelings are about S&J and what should happen in the future. I would be very surprised if you could accurately summarise them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, since this thread is (as usual) mostly about people dressing up opinions as ''facts'' here are some of mine re the match & concerning the pressing problems as of right now.

Something dreadfully wrong with Krul. I don''t believe his physical ability has deserted him, so it comes down to lack of self-belief leading to poor judgement (often the case with goalies). I''m not sure it''s fixable.

However he is being no protection whatsoever by Pinto - he''s not even playing as a wing back, more like an old fashioned winger. Only with no end product.

I didn''t realise Thompson was being played as RMF; WT actualF? His is the Tettey role, at which he may prove to be even better with his ability to drive forward when appropriate. He is NOT a right midfielder.

I am getting worried about Farke; he does seem to be trying to shoehorn players in to fit a system that just isn''t working. He''s clearly an intelligent guy, he''s not an egomaniac, so I wonder what is going on. It''s all a bit odd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have to agree with OP , I don''t like it , but this is the truth... many on here say that money doesn''t buy success and that is the truth, but you just NEED it to be competitive in English football... there is no denying that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="ron obvious"]I didn''t realise Thompson was being played as RMF; WT actualF?[/quote]Me either, I watched the whole game and couldn''t actually work out who was meant to be playing on the right of midfield, and wouldn''t have said Thompson at any point.
I also couldn''t understand why Trybull was kept on the pitch despite being totally anonymous, when in fact we could have brought Marshall or Buendia on and actually had someone to give us balance on the right rather than Pinto pushing up and supposedly Thompson being there (I''ll echo the WTF bit here).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="ron obvious"] ....... I am getting worried about Farke; he does seem to be trying to shoehorn players in to fit a system that just isn''t working. He''s clearly an intelligent guy, he''s not an egomaniac, so I wonder what is going on. It''s all a bit odd.[/quote] Maybe the answer is found in this extract from a Squawka analysis published when DF was first appointed:

"Clearly, Farke is a manager who makes his teams extremely hard to beat; Dortmund II lost just three of their 34 league games – the first of which came in March – while they had the best defensive record in the division, conceding just 25 goals.

Unlike Wagner, who is regarded as a tactical disciple of Jurgen Klopp, Farke isn’t quite cut from the same cloth, as his Dortmund side seem to be more methodical in their approach when compared to the Liverpool manager’s ‘heavy metal’ football.

Despite finishing 2nd in the table, Dortmund were only the division’s seventh-highest goalscorers which coupled with their miserly defensive record, suggests that Farke perhaps places a greater emphasis on defensive organisation than free-flowing attacking play."

In sum, Farke is being required to go against his grain by Carrow Road''s pathetically one-dimensional idea of entertaining football. He has said quite openly that the reason he keeps selecting a back four is because reverting to three at the back shifts the balance between defence and offence too far towards the former. "Too far" for what, or whose, predilections? 

I don''t see DF wanting to extend his contract; he will move on next summer to a club with a fan base more appreciative of his talent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don''t see DF wanting to extend his contract; he will move on next summer to a club with a fan base more appreciative of his talent.

Except he still hasn’t shown anything that suggests there is any talent there. He’s become the managerial equivalent of RVW among fans. Bizarrely highly rated without there being any logical reason why.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Indy_Bones"]
[quote user="ron obvious"]I didn''t realise Thompson was being played as RMF; WT actualF?[/quote]Me either, I watched the whole game and couldn''t actually work out who was meant to be playing on the right of midfield, and wouldn''t have said Thompson at any point.
I also couldn''t understand why Trybull was kept on the pitch despite being totally anonymous, when in fact we could have brought Marshall or Buendia on and actually had someone to give us balance on the right rather than Pinto pushing up and supposedly Thompson being there (I''ll echo the WTF bit here).
[/quote] Thompson wasn''t "being played as RMF". If people insist on pigeonholing players into notional positions in the media''s standard formations, we set up 4:2:3:1 with Thompson on the right of the 2 playing in a more advanced role than his partner Trybull, and Pukki on the right of the 3. If you want confirmation, look at the player heat maps for the game; far more accurate than assorted "impressions" based on what this or that disgruntled individual thought he was seeing. 
As for Trybull being "anonymous", on the contrary he put in the hardest shift of any Norwich player, winning more headers and making more tackles than anyone else and covering all across the pitch for colleagues who continually went AWOL. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We''ll smash Ipswich and everything will be lovely an'' cuddly an'' huggy kissy kissy at our well run, self-funding, ickle community club......again......

ON THE FALL CITY!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="westcoastcanary"]Thompson wasn''t "being played as RMF". If people insist on pigeonholing players into notional positions in the media''s standard formations, we set up 4:2:3:1 with Thompson on the right of the 2 playing in a more advanced role than his partner Trybull, and Pukki on the right of the 3. If you want confirmation, look at the player heat maps for the game; far more accurate than assorted "impressions" based on what this or that disgruntled individual thought he was seeing.[/quote]Steady on WCC, I''m not a disgruntled individual, I''ve been VERY supportive of the team both this and last season, but despite watching the full match, I couldn''t tell who was meant to be on the right, and if you''re saying it was Pukki based on heatmaps, then I simply don''t know how because I rarely saw him there, and instead it was almost always Pinto.
[quote]As for Trybull being "anonymous", on the contrary he put in the hardest shift of any Norwich player, winning more headers and making more tackles than anyone else and covering all across the pitch for colleagues who continually went AWOL. 
[/quote]Guess it''s another one where the fans couldn''t see that, and in fact I saw Thompson involved far more heavily and more effectively than Trybull.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fully agree with the OP here. The irony of course will be that by the time they now to the inevitable and abandon their current stance the “but who is there out there” may well have become a self fulfilling prophecy as we will no doubt have accumulated debts and be much less attractive than we have been at any time in the last decade. The time when we really should have been looking for investment and to kick on was when we weee a debt free premier league club, to build from a position of strength. That though would have required some foresight.

Agree also about the scare stories. All those clubs held up as “horror stories” are in truth either at the same level or not far behind us even after having endured the horrors of evil foreign owners. Probably only Cov and Portsmouth are the exception but at least Pompey fans got to see their side win the FA Cup, something I doubt I will ever get to experience!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
@Indy_Bones
Apologies I_B, my comment was prompted by the sentence you quoted ron_obvious quoting, not at either you or ron_obvious. It amazes me how many people can''t seem to think outside rigidly adhered to "formations", in which players are apparently as immobile on the pitch as those media-loved numbers are on the page or screen. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="thebigfeller"][quote user=" Badger"][quote user="thebigfeller"][quote user=" Badger"]The ones that really struggle are those that have "gone for it" and failed.
[/quote]
And yet despite this - despite all the horror stories we''re always told, the "be careful what you wish for" view which lies behind that - how many ''big clubs'' are currently operating well below where they naturally should be? One. Sunderland, two levels below their natural level, and extremely likely to bounce back into the Championship at the first time of asking....
Meaning that even the scare stories so often trotted out really don''t hold much water.[/quote]
Portsmouth, Sunderland and Coventry in League One.
Leeds, only showing signs of recovery MORE THAN 15 YEARS since their financial crisis - and I beleieve, without having spent a huge amount of money for their recent upswing.
Forest have been in th Championship for about 20 years despite years of over-spending leading to transfer embargoes etc.
Ipswich - still paying the price for over spending in their last period in the Premier League. They went into administration once, got bought up be Evans, who also "went for it" under Keene and now they seem to exist as some sort of Zombee club.
Sheffield Wednesday, over spent trying to get back into th premiership. Were relegated to league one, promoted back again, sold for a pound because of financial difficulties. Rumoured to be up agaist FFP atm.
QPR and Birmingham, are worse off as a result of their big spending; Derby have spent loads over the years and seem no better off, desperate to offload players no longer required as a drag on the club goings forwards.
I could go on... I''m a bit surprised that you don''t seem to know about some of these.
[/quote]
I know about all of them, thanks. Of the above group, only Derby, Sheff Wed and Forest could be argued to be ''natural'' top flight clubs; ...
Coventry are not a big club; last season, when they went up, they had gates of less than 10,000. 
How many of the above are ''nightmare scenarios''?
[/quote]
You say that you know but then demonstrate pretty comprehensively that you don''t. It seems that you do ot see the dangers becauseyour understanding of the histories of these lubs is so limited and youare therefore unable to recognise how they have been negatively affected by over-spending.
Leeds not a big club really?
Coventry? Well they had 32 consecutive years in the top flight and a stadium that is significantly bigger than ours.They were doing fine until they over-extended themselves. The reason that they struggle now is precisely because they did what you want to do, pile on debt. They along with the others that I have mentioned are good examplesof the difficulties, which you seem unable to recognise.
Leeds, Ipswich and Forest were all more successful clubs than Norwich and probably would have been again before now if not forthe very financial mismanagement that you want to encourage.
The evidence of the potential difficulties that we would face with "investors" rather than patrons is here for all to see if they have some understading of finance and a knowledge of the history of the game.
Your inability to recognise the dangers can only be due to a deliberate failure to recognie that which does not suit your case, or because you fail to understand the realities offinance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Who says anything about wanting to “pile on excessive debt.” The problem with this debate, like so many these days, is that any nuance becomes lost as the issue is not black and white.

Fulham, Watford, Bournemouth, Brighton, Leicester, Southampton, Cardiff, Wolves all examples the other way.

The main point for me though is that clubs of the size of Norwich just don’t go bust and disappear so it’s really a case of do we want to continue to play it safe or take a bit of a chance knowing that the possible fallout could be a Portsmouth type spell in league 1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farke is not a great manager now. But in 5 years he will have learnd.

Ouer big problem is the Delia and co.

If there goal is to stay in this leage then I think they will be hapy with this season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can’t suggest alternative ownership, and or debt, Jim. Such change will lead the club to oblivion, notwithstanding the counter examples you provide. That sort of sense is strictly forbidden on this forum. Just remember we’re punching above our historic level which seems to be benchmarked around when we were seeking re-election to retain D3S status.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Highland Canary wrote the following post at 27/08/2018 5:39 PM:

Can’t suggest alternative ownership, and or debt, Jim. Such change will lead the club to oblivion, notwithstanding the counter examples you provide. That sort of sense is strictly forbidden on this forum. Just remember we’re punching above our historic level which seems to be benchmarked around when we were seeking re-election to retain D3S status.

Actually that myth was cleared up yesterday when an average over the last 50 years showed our average position to be 17th, which is a PL place and far higher than we are achieving now and for the majority of Smiths time

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="JF"]Highland Canary wrote the following post at 27/08/2018 5:39 PM:

Can’t suggest alternative ownership, and or debt, Jim. Such change will lead the club to oblivion, notwithstanding the counter examples you provide. That sort of sense is strictly forbidden on this forum. Just remember we’re punching above our historic level which seems to be benchmarked around when we were seeking re-election to retain D3S status.

Actually that myth was cleared up yesterday when an average over the last 50 years showed our average position to be 17th, which is a PL place and far higher than we are achieving now and for the majority of Smiths time[/quote]
The last 50 years included the best years of our history and the average was still not good enough for the PL. Who did your sums.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Jim Smith"]Who says anything about wanting to “pile on excessive debt.” The problem with this debate, like so many these days, is that any nuance becomes lost as the issue is not black and white.

Fulham, Watford, Bournemouth, Brighton, Leicester, Southampton, Cardiff, Wolves all examples the other way.

The main point for me though is that clubs of the size of Norwich just don’t go bust and disappear so it’s really a case of do we want to continue to play it safe or take a bit of a chance knowing that the possible fallout could be a Portsmouth type spell in league 1.[/quote]
So Jim, how much debt are you talking about when you talk about "taking a bit of a chance?"
The club may not disappear if they go bust, but they may well end up like Coventry, Ipswich, Leeds, Sheffield Wednesday, Forest etc, who end up spending far longer in the lower leagues, than they would have done if they hadn''t had a "sh*t or bust gamble."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Between 86/87 and 92/93 I bet we averaged a top ten position....just.....yet 11th for Hughton was a ducking fisaster (and apparently a false position; one based on an entire season of league fixtures and was only boosted by teams on the beach that then pumped Man U for 5 the next week) and we needed to “push on” without the clueless clown in a wig that was getting pushed round social media at the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The last 50 years included the best years of our history and the average was still not good enough for the PL. Who did your sums.....

Sky sports. 17th is a PL finish avoiding relegation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just to add, Pompey are now in league one but had a lovely trip to Division Four (old money) - we’d all lap that up if only we slung a few quid at Nico Krancjar or Yakubu.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="JF"]The last 50 years included the best years of our history and the average was still not good enough for the PL. Who did your sums.....

Sky sports. 17th is a PL finish avoiding relegation[/quote]

Is that the height of your ambition? Booooo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user=" Badger"]
You say that you know but then demonstrate pretty comprehensively that you don''t. It seems that you do ot see the dangers becauseyour understanding of the histories of these lubs is so limited and youare therefore unable to recognise how they have been negatively affected by over-spending.
Leeds not a big club really?
Coventry? Well they had 32 consecutive years in the top flight and a stadium that is significantly bigger than ours.They were doing fine until they over-extended themselves. The reason that they struggle now is precisely because they did what you want to do, pile on debt. They along with the others that I have mentioned are good examplesof the difficulties, which you seem unable to recognise.
Leeds, Ipswich and Forest were all more successful clubs than Norwich and probably would have been again before now if not forthe very financial mismanagement that you want to encourage.
The evidence of the potential difficulties that we would face with "investors" rather than patrons is here for all to see if they have some understading of finance and a knowledge of the history of the game.
Your inability to recognise the dangers can only be due to a deliberate failure to recognie that which does not suit your case, or because you fail to understand the realities offinance.
[/quote]
Goodness me.
The reason I left Leeds out of your group is because they''re going up. Leeds fans are in dreamland right now. Very soon, they''ll be right back where they should be. You reckon their supporters give the remotest damn about the past right now? You reckon their fans are unhappy about being owned by an Italian? Or are they doing cartwheels, rubbing their eyes in disbelief and looking forward to the future with huge excitement?
No, Coventry are not a big club. Their long period in the top flight was something of a freak, featuring all manner of crazy and, as we all know as Norwich fans, dubious escapes. That had to end at some point. Their real size is some sort of mezzanine level between the second and third tiers.
Amid all the scare stories, all your doomsaying about the apparent horror of debt, how many professional clubs have gone bust? Zero. None at all. Plenty, including us, have either flirted with or actually been in administration... and what happened? They all survived, and were invariably reborn under new ownership. Well that''s strange. I thought debt was supposed to mean the end of clubs our size? Apparently not.
Unlike you Badger, I''m not much interested in the past. I''m not going to sit here and console myself with "oh, but we run ourselves the right way" or "oh, but we finished 11th and 12th in the Prem not so long ago". What I''m concerned with is the present and the future. A present and future in which zero, none, of Watford, Bournemouth (notice how both have stayed up for longer than we did? Now why is that, please?), Leicester (good job they didn''t let evil foreign owners buy them, huh? Oh. Now tell me how Leicester''s potential when they were bought was in any way greater than our own - because it wasn''t), Palace, Fulham (remember them? Assumed to be in chaos a couple of years back? Now look at them), Brighton (boo hiss debt who do they think they are?), Wolves (look at them now - and they can only get better from here), Burnley or Huddersfield are in anything other than dreamland.
And in the league below, where Leeds are flying, a whole bunch of clubs are accumulating manageable levels of debt in order to compete. Those clubs won''t go bust; they''re doing what they have to do, but we can''t do (and even if we could, we''d refuse to). Even Villa, facing calamity in the summer, found new owners just like that.
What happens when some of those clubs come down? They''ll reorganise, restructure and start again... many of them under new owners again. What happened when we came down? Despite running ourselves "the right way", oh look: the exact same thing (minus the new owners, that is). So in sum: we penalise ourselves by not looking for new owners or new investment; our best achievements are, in consequence, less than those of many of our contemporaries; and then we fall, while they start anew.
Exactly what do we get for this approach? Next to nothing. Exactly what do others get when they push the boat out? In many cases, a heck of a lot more than nothing. But y''know, go us. We''re different. Everyone else should be learning from us... as opposed to, quite rightly, laughing at our unbelievable levels of self-regard and self-delusion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is that the height of your ambition? Booooo

No. I see the club as being capable of reaching far higher places. It’s a good place to start though, isn’t it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is that the height of your ambition? Booooo

I remember a club called Leicester just avoiding relegation one season, boooo. Can you remember what happened the season after??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="JF"]The last 50 years included the best years of our history and the average was still not good enough for the PL. Who did your sums.....

Sky sports. 17th is a PL finish avoiding relegation[/quote]
Well best you add them up again because we''ve only ever spent 25 seasons in the top flight. I thought I was the one who was known at school as "last boy"....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don’t need to add them up. Sky sports done it and printed it in a big table for all to see. If you wish to have an argument then I suggest you take it up with them. I’m sure you know more than they do

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...