squad size debate

[Rossi 0]

there are lots of postings relating to this, but instead of replying to each one, I saved time by starting a new thread - sorry.

for me it''s a relatively easy answer - it''s called player wages (especially Deano) Allow me to explain. At the start of the season, amid transfer links with Ashton, Norwich offered Deano a new contract that he signed. If anyone out there thinks it was on the same terms, think again. Now, no-one would know outside of the club, but you can bet your bottom dollar he''s on close to what he would have been on as a prem player. They are massive wages for this division, and probably about 10 times what he was getting at Crewe. Take Green and Huckerby, you can bet that their ''reduced wages'' arent really that reduced at all. As a complete stab int he dark i would think that them three together probably cost £40k a week, that''s somewhere around £2m a year. The loan arrivals of Davenport  Lisbie and Wright would have also have cost a fair bit.

The money is there for a big squad, but not when we pay so much for so few players. If there was ever a wage league by player and club, i would predict an uproar.

Yes I know it''s based on a few what if''s and maybe, but I''d love the club to show me I''m talking nonsense.

[a1canary 0]

This was exactly my point in the other threads on this. If we want the

players you refer to above, and to keep hold of them, we''re going to

have to pay big wages, which in turn means we''ll have to keep the squad

small to afford it.

Whether that''s wise or not is another matter, but we know what the

reactions would be if we''d have really sliced wages and seen the top

players leave as a result. We can''t have these players AND have a squad

of 38 or more.

The "big players-big wages-small squad" tactic worked a dream in 2003/04. Not so far this year.