Transfer Rumour Thread Season 2021/22

[king canary 7,580]

3 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

It just landed on the Norwich City FB page a matter of minutes after I typed the question, haha!!

Pity. But I hope he can get a new club in good time and that he's fully recovered from his illnesses. He should go with our fond wishes and especially for his performances in that 18/19 Championship-winning season. Not to mention some gloriously odd goal celebrations. And especially the one where he threw Leitner like a rag doll - think that was against Millwall.

It's a slightly odd one- I didn't expect him to feature a great deal this season but I also didn't expect us to feel like we needed to pay him up, certainly not this early on in the window. All I can imagine is that he requested it and has agreed to a lower pay out in order to make it happen.

[TheGunnShow 5,933]

Just now, king canary said:

It's a slightly odd one- I didn't expect him to feature a great deal this season but I also didn't expect us to feel like we needed to pay him up, certainly not this early on in the window. All I can imagine is that he requested it and has agreed to a lower pay out in order to make it happen.

He should find a Bundesliga 2 (or 3) team easily enough, I'd think. Hope so, I always quite liked him as a player - a low-maintenance grafter who could be relied upon to put a good shift in and be no problem in the dressing room. At the same time, I do suspect this may have more of being affected by long-term effects of Epstein-Barr and not be quite the player in physical terms that he was.

[king canary 7,580]

I also get the sense that with and Trybull we're seeing why we shouldn't have handed all these unproven in the top flight players new deals when we got promoted. I imagine both of their wages went back up this summer and they won't get close to that in the lower German leagues.

20/20 hindsight of course.

Edited June 30, 2021 by king canary

[Alex Moss 2,165]

Be interesting to see if there will be a replacement for Marco, getting a bit thin on the central attacking mids now...

[wcorkcanary 4,329]

31 minutes ago, FatCanary said:

I'm not sure it's fair to say I'm incorrigible, I've conceded plenty to others in debate on this forum, but I appreciate your manner of thinking all the same! I genuinely don't understand why Greavsy has it in for me, I don't believe this persona they've created (as am I as myself) has the capacity to be pleasant to anybody, however. I know that I do, and am glad of it.

We maybe have crossed wires on what I meant by incorrigible, I just meant your gonna carry on doing what you do. Which is fine by me, not that you need my permission.....or anyone elses, for that matter. Maybe I should check its actual meaning. As I didn't intend to offend.  

Edit. Meaning checked, it does in fact have negative connotations.  I apologise. I always thought it just meant unstoppable,  indefatigable etc.

Edited June 30, 2021 by wcorkcanary

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557]

21 minutes ago, king canary said:

I also get the sense that with and Trybull we're seeing why we shouldn't have handed all these unproven in the top flight players new deals when we got promoted. I imagine both of their wages went back up this summer and they won't get close to that in the lower German leagues.

20/20 hindsight of course.

Stiepermann maybe, Leitner and Trybull no. It seems they would only get promotion wage bonuses if they played a certain amount of games in promotion campaign. This also goes some way to explaining why Norwich may have struggled to make signings last time in the Prem - players don’t won’t relegation clauses and they certainly won’t want the promotion clauses being related to performance. 

[horsefly 4,287]

30 minutes ago, king canary said:

I also get the sense that with and Trybull we're seeing why we shouldn't have handed all these unproven in the top flight players new deals when we got promoted.

I think you will find it was considered the only affordable option that season. We're now much more financially secure and hence able to upgrade as Webber promised.

[YellowSubmarine 39]

1 hour ago, Uncle Fred said:

Is Soto is good enough for Porto he should be good enough for our first team . What a joke 

You’d moan if you where having a threesome that it wasn’t a foursome. 
 

Sometimes things don’t work out and a few goals in the Dutch second division doesn’t mean your ready to play PL football. 

[king canary 7,580]

1 minute ago, horsefly said:

I think you will find it was considered the only affordable option that season. We're now much more financially secure and hence able to upgrade as Webber promised.

That...doesn't make any sense.

It would have been affordable to have just not given everyone new contracts?

[Dr Greenthumb 746]

On 24/06/2021 at 08:56, Bethnal Yellow and Green said:

So he knew it was Rashica signing before the official announcement though? Or did he just say 'someone will be signing' (or words to that effect?)

Norwich pretty much always announcing signings at 4pm - 5pm so saying - "The club will announce a new signing at 4:30pm today" is a pretty safe bet when everyone was expecting Gunn to sign that day. It is the fine details that mark the difference between an educated guesser and a real 'ITK' and real 'ITKs' don't tend to last long as clubs are generally pretty good at shutting them down after a while.

He knew stiepermann was leaving at 9am today. I think he is quite ITK

[horsefly 4,287]

2 minutes ago, king canary said:

That...doesn't make any sense.

It would have been affordable to have just not given everyone new contracts?

And where would the money have come from to buy the upgraded replacements?  I'm afraid your reply makes no sense.

Edited June 30, 2021 by horsefly

[Christoph Stiepermann 1,131]

5 hours ago, FatCanary said:

I disagree that we got dominated in midfield in every game. It certainly happened, but a lot less frequently before the restart, where it definitely did happen every game but with a whole host of mitigating factors.

That said, we are still searching for another central midfielder and I expect someone with good feet for a big lad, so to speak.

Of course it didn't happen every game. But it happened against the teams we would need to beat to stay up. Brighton, Burnley, Watford, Palace, West Ham, Sheff Utd, and Newcastle away we looked like a team of small boys playing a men's team and those are the fixtures we need to get results from if we have a hope of staying up. 

We competed well and got some great results against the footballing sides and for me that was never the issue. Going into next year I have no doubt we'll have some great games and compete well against the good sides, but I'm extremely worried our rivals will just bully and out-pace and out fight us out of games and it's in those games that I would like to see a change of approach. 

Play our normal game v teams like Man City and Leicester and hope we pick up results, but against the lower teams I want to see us try to sit back and play a counter attacking game because otherwise they will just sit back, bully us off the ball and annihilate us on the counter and on set pieces and it's these games you don't want to lose if you want to stay up. 

 

[cambridgeshire canary 6,680]

Loving all the crying, anger, tears and screaming into the sky in pain about Billy coming here from all the pundits and twitter plastic fans.. 'yo yo club' 'career ruined and finished' 'backwards move'

 

Love to see it

Edited June 30, 2021 by cambridgeshire canary

[horsefly 4,287]

7 minutes ago, YellowSubmarine said:

You’d moan if you where having a threesome that it wasn’t a foursome. 
 

Sometimes things don’t work out and a few goals in the Dutch second division doesn’t mean your ready to play PL football. 

He seems very content just sticking to a onesome.

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557]

5 minutes ago, Dr Greenthumb said:

He knew stiepermann was leaving at 9am today. I think he is quite ITK

Yep, seems he got the same info that the press guys got. Wonder if he has links with someone on the media side of Norwich.

He got the Ajer stuff very wrong it seems, so maybe a mix of info and guess work. 

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557]

7 minutes ago, horsefly said:

And where would the money have come from to buy the upgraded replacements?  I'm afraid your reply makes no sense.

They didn’t have to give anyone a contract. It was a choice Norwich made and in hindsight it probably wasn’t the right choice with many of the players. I think Webber has pretty much said this in some interviews. 

[Dr Greenthumb 746]

2 minutes ago, Bethnal Yellow and Green said:

Yep, seems he got the same info that the press guys got. Wonder if he has links with someone on the media side of Norwich.

He got the Ajer stuff very wrong it seems, so maybe a mix of info and guess work. 

Tbf to him though, there his been absolutely nothing until late this afternoon. 
 

He definitely knows someone!

[king canary 7,580]

14 minutes ago, horsefly said:

And where would the money have come from to buy the upgraded replacements?  I'm afraid your reply makes no sense.

I never suggested replacing them? 

Pretty much every player whose contract we extended that summer had more time to run. I think only Vrancic and Cantwell didn't. So not extending their contract didn't equal letting them go.

[horsefly 4,287]

Just now, Bethnal Yellow and Green said:

They didn’t have to give anyone a contract. It was a choice Norwich made and in hindsight it probably wasn’t the right choice with many of the players. I think Webber has pretty much said this in some interviews. 

The economics is not difficult to understand. We had to have a full squad to compete, and increasing the wages of current players by a relatively small amount (well below the PL average) was multi-millions cheaper than buying in superior talent on superior wages. At the time Webber didn't think he could take that economic risk (although subsequently he has said he could have done a little bit more than he did). Currently we are in a much better financial situation so can replace some of the less able talent with better players.

[chicken 2,604]

54 minutes ago, king canary said:

I also get the sense that with and Trybull we're seeing why we shouldn't have handed all these unproven in the top flight players new deals when we got promoted. I imagine both of their wages went back up this summer and they won't get close to that in the lower German leagues.

20/20 hindsight of course.

I thought it had been confirmed that they wouldn't by the club? Could be wrong.

Also, part of the problem we had was that they didn't have hugely long contracts in some cases in the first instance and the club wanted to protect their assets. To be fair, I don't think any of them were put on massive wages as they were well reported to be on pretty low wages in the first place.

You have to tie down squads, and last time round it was more or less to ensure we had a good squad still in place no matter the outcome of the premier league campaign as it was unlikely we would have loads of cash to splash on relegation. It was the right strategy. With Leitner something went wrong behind the scenes it would appear. With Stiepermann, I really feel for him, Corona Virus and E-B really curtailed a season which could have seen him regain his form.

Though, lets be honest, he probably went a season before he would have done anyway. At 30, with the set up we have, you need to be utterly indispensable to be kept on masses past 30 in an outfield position. Tettey clearly gave us something different that we still don't really have and Pukki who undeniable has goals in him are the only exceptions at the moment. Oh, and Rupp who is 30. Obviously Klose is on the way out anyway.

Then there are a few 28-29 year olds. Hanley, Gibson, Zimmermann, McLean, Hernandez and if you want to count him, Drmic.

[chicken 2,604]

13 minutes ago, horsefly said:

The economics is not difficult to understand. We had to have a full squad to compete, and increasing the wages of current players by a relatively small amount (well below the PL average) was multi-millions cheaper than buying in superior talent on superior wages. At the time Webber didn't think he could take that economic risk (although subsequently he has said he could have done a little bit more than he did). Currently we are in a much better financial situation so can replace some of the less able talent with better players.

I'm not sure Webber said he could have spent more... just that the recruitment that summer/season wasn't good enough. I wonder if they feel they should have sold one of the gems we had then, to gamble and bring in a bit more squad depth. That extra CB could have meant a world of difference last time out.

[king canary 7,580]

Just now, chicken said:

I thought it had been confirmed that they wouldn't by the club? Could be wrong.

Also, part of the problem we had was that they didn't have hugely long contracts in some cases in the first instance and the club wanted to protect their assets. To be fair, I don't think any of them were put on massive wages as they were well reported to be on pretty low wages in the first place.

You have to tie down squads, and last time round it was more or less to ensure we had a good squad still in place no matter the outcome of the premier league campaign as it was unlikely we would have loads of cash to splash on relegation. It was the right strategy. With Leitner something went wrong behind the scenes it would appear. With Stiepermann, I really feel for him, Corona Virus and E-B really curtailed a season which could have seen him regain his form.

Though, lets be honest, he probably went a season before he would have done anyway. At 30, with the set up we have, you need to be utterly indispensable to be kept on masses past 30 in an outfield position. Tettey clearly gave us something different that we still don't really have and Pukki who undeniable has goals in him are the only exceptions at the moment. Oh, and Rupp who is 30. Obviously Klose is on the way out anyway.

Then there are a few 28-29 year olds. Hanley, Gibson, Zimmermann, McLean, Hernandez and if you want to count him, Drmic.

I understand tying down your big assets- new contracts for Aarons, Buendia, Pukki all made total sense. Less so to give long deals to players like Trybull and Steiperman when they hadn't proven that they could cut it at the top level. Maybe wait 3 months to see if they look like making the step up? 

All 20/20 hindsight though. 

However we gave new deals 

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557]

1 minute ago, horsefly said:

The economics is not difficult to understand. We had to have a full squad to compete, and increasing the wages of current players by a relatively small amount (well below the PL average) was multi-millions cheaper than buying in superior talent on superior wages. At the time Webber didn't think he could take that economic risk (although subsequently he has said he could have done a little bit more than he did). Currently we are in a much better financial situation so can replace some of the less able talent with better players.

Trybull and Stiepermann were on contracts - they weren’t expiring that summer. Trybull had 2 years left on his deal in the summer of 2019 and Marco had a year left on his. 

Norwich did not have to extend their contracts on larger wages, the most financially prudent thing to have done was to have left them on the contracts they all had at the time and see if they could step up before making such a decision. I think Norwich gave out 15 new contracts that summer, it was a big increase in the wage budget. 

Webber wanted to make sure that it those players had great seasons the value was locked in, it was gamble that didn’t pay off in the case of Stiepermann and Trybull. 

[horsefly 4,287]

1 minute ago, Bethnal Yellow and Green said:

Trybull and Stiepermann were on contracts - they weren’t expiring that summer. Trybull had 2 years left on his deal in the summer of 2019 and Marco had a year left on his. 

Norwich did not have to extend their contracts on larger wages, the most financially prudent thing to have done was to have left them on the contracts they all had at the time and see if they could step up before making such a decision. I think Norwich gave out 15 new contracts that summer, it was a big increase in the wage budget. 

Webber wanted to make sure that it those players had great seasons the value was locked in, it was gamble that didn’t pay off in the case of Stiepermann and Trybull. 

I'm sure they would have been delighted to see fellow players get improved deals while they recieved nothing. I think Webber paid astute attention to squad harmony and the future of the club. Can't remember too many people objecting to those renewed contracts at the time.

[king canary 7,580]

15 minutes ago, horsefly said:

I'm sure they would have been delighted to see fellow players get improved deals while they recieved nothing. I think Webber paid astute attention to squad harmony and the future of the club. Can't remember too many people objecting to those renewed contracts at the time.

Players getting new contracts while others don't is what happens at every football club all the time. Handing out as many new contracts as we did that summer was highly unusual. 

[horsefly 4,287]

1 minute ago, king canary said:

Players getting new contracts while others don't is what happens at every football club all the time. Handing out as many new contracts as we did that summer was highly unusual. 

And I still can't remember people complaining at the time.

[chicken 2,604]

13 minutes ago, Bethnal Yellow and Green said:

Trybull and Stiepermann were on contracts - they weren’t expiring that summer. Trybull had 2 years left on his deal in the summer of 2019 and Marco had a year left on his. 

Norwich did not have to extend their contracts on larger wages, the most financially prudent thing to have done was to have left them on the contracts they all had at the time and see if they could step up before making such a decision. I think Norwich gave out 15 new contracts that summer, it was a big increase in the wage budget. 

Webber wanted to make sure that it those players had great seasons the value was locked in, it was gamble that didn’t pay off in the case of Stiepermann and Trybull. 

This is great as hindsight but utterly illogical otherwise.

That squad, as a whole, took on a league which included teams made up of players costing tens of millions. Remember Villa signed the majority of that squad they had on loan in a summer that totalled over £100m in transfer fees.

We didn't have a lot of money to spend so we had to plan properly. All of those contracts given to the likes of Stiepermann had relegation clauses in them which means we were unlikely to be paying them masses more than they were on before. That is called hedging your bets.

In otherwords we secured them into cheap for PL standard contracts knowing that if they were a roaring success we'd have to pay more or sell them to someone who'd offer better wages. The relegation clause meant that if they didn't cut the mustard then we also weren't paying them huge chunks.

Here's the bit you missed out - they were already very good championship players. Knowing that we were going to be up against it that season, you are not just looking to secure the players in case they become good, but also because they were good enough for the level below AND you need a squad. In other words, had Stiepermann not been unwell last season you could bet your bottom dollar he'd have played more and he would have contributed to another promotion. Had we not given him a new contract, last summer he would have been out of contract and able to talk to anyone he liked from the January before.

You need a squad and having a dozen players that have done it before is good. Cantwell was relatively unproven even after our promotion season. There were still Norwich fans (ok, there still are) suggesting he wasn't good enough.

You're not just securing one future in our position, you have to secure more than one. It hasn't worked out for some but it clearly has for others. And the ones it has worked with, have been proven to vastly outweigh those it hasn't. That's how it works. It costs A LOT more to recruit new players, we know that.

This discussion is altogether rather futile tbh. Hindsight is an amazing ability that everyone has in abundance. Not considering all of the planning that goes into building a squad? Well, that's just short-sighted IMHO.

[chicken 2,604]

2 minutes ago, horsefly said:

And I still can't remember people complaining at the time.

No one was. Most were keen to see what Leitner could do on that stage, whether Onel could rip up turf in the Prem and Pukki be the goal getter to keep us up there.

[horsefly 4,287]

1 minute ago, chicken said:

This is great as hindsight but utterly illogical otherwise.

That squad, as a whole, took on a league which included teams made up of players costing tens of millions. Remember Villa signed the majority of that squad they had on loan in a summer that totalled over £100m in transfer fees.

We didn't have a lot of money to spend so we had to plan properly. All of those contracts given to the likes of Stiepermann had relegation clauses in them which means we were unlikely to be paying them masses more than they were on before. That is called hedging your bets.

In otherwords we secured them into cheap for PL standard contracts knowing that if they were a roaring success we'd have to pay more or sell them to someone who'd offer better wages. The relegation clause meant that if they didn't cut the mustard then we also weren't paying them huge chunks.

Here's the bit you missed out - they were already very good championship players. Knowing that we were going to be up against it that season, you are not just looking to secure the players in case they become good, but also because they were good enough for the level below AND you need a squad. In other words, had Stiepermann not been unwell last season you could bet your bottom dollar he'd have played more and he would have contributed to another promotion. Had we not given him a new contract, last summer he would have been out of contract and able to talk to anyone he liked from the January before.

You need a squad and having a dozen players that have done it before is good. Cantwell was relatively unproven even after our promotion season. There were still Norwich fans (ok, there still are) suggesting he wasn't good enough.

You're not just securing one future in our position, you have to secure more than one. It hasn't worked out for some but it clearly has for others. And the ones it has worked with, have been proven to vastly outweigh those it hasn't. That's how it works. It costs A LOT more to recruit new players, we know that.

This discussion is altogether rather futile tbh. Hindsight is an amazing ability that everyone has in abundance. Not considering all of the planning that goes into building a squad? Well, that's just short-sighted IMHO.

Spot on Chicken!

[Petriix 2,834]

2 hours ago, king canary said:

Oh christ, if Villa steal our two best midfielders we may as well give up.

If we get another £40m for him then it's more good business.