It is happening again

[king canary 7,578]

1 hour ago, Badger said:

He played for them all season and the move didn't take place until after they were promoted, so they started the new season without (by far) their best player.

You are right to the extent, that like Southampton and Alex Oxlaide-Chamberlain, they were not as ambitious as us and sold their brightest star before getting promoted. Would it have been better if we had sold Buendia last year?

That is such an laughably one eyed view of things, have you considered a career in politics?

Yes Southampton sold AOC that season. They also kept Lallana and Lambert both of whom were key stars of the squad at that point. We sold Godfrey and Lewis but kept Buendia and Cantwell. 

So in reality neither team was more ambitious, we both sold certain players and kept certain others.

[Hank shoots Skyler 2,094]

7 minutes ago, BigFish said:

It is clearly not a "humbling indictment", the club's position in the footballing ladder is what it is, and however much you want it to change it is not going to. That pretty much is the point. We can hope for good seasons and regret bad ones but the fundementals don't change.

We are still making progress, yes, but its saddening to see that we can't progress at the same rate as our top players too. That is not a criticism of anyone by the way.

Agree pretty much with this but it is not saddening, again it is what it is.

What irritates is that weeks later, after the deal is long gone posters on here just can't let it go, keep throwing up hypotheticals with no evidence, keep posting their Christmas wishes with zero liklihood of them comin to fruition.

I don't think we are too far apart to be honest, if you aren't disappointed by it then that's totally fair enough.

I agree 'it is what it is', but it still sucks, I don't personally think there is anything wrong with being a bit disappointed or questioning such a transfer given the very obscure nature of it - and given Buendia was my all-time favourite NCFC player at that too. 

We are the first premier league side to auction off our best player post promotion from the championship. It is what it is... but I do find it to be a bit of a humbling, sorry! 

We have to hope it will prove to again be for the long-term greater good, which we have seen in the past, but it feels like we are having to do everything with the odds so far against us compared to other clubs.

It means Webber and Farke deserve enormous credit for continually having us punch FAR above our weight, but at the same time it does feel like we are on a timeline, how long can we keep selling our best players and outperforming our rivals in the transfer market whilst underspending and underpaying on wages before something goes wrong?  

[horsefly 4,287]

3 minutes ago, Hank shoots Skyler said:

We are the first premier league side to auction off our best player post promotion from the championship. It is what it is... but I do find it to be a bit of a humbling, sorry!

A genuine question; do you think they would have sold Buendia if he had said he definitely wanted to stay?

[king canary 7,578]

35 minutes ago, BigFish said:

What irritates is that weeks later, after the deal is long gone posters on here just can't let it go, keep throwing up hypotheticals with no evidence, keep posting their Christmas wishes with zero liklihood of them comin to fruition.

For me personally, one of the reasons I'm struggling to 'let it go' so to speak, is that on the other side certain people seem to be unwilling to acknowledge how very unusual it is. 

[chicken 2,604]

1 minute ago, king canary said:

For me personally, one of the reasons I'm struggling to 'let it go' so to speak, is that on the other side certain people seem to be unwilling to acknowledge how very unusual it is. 

The sale of Buendia is "unusual"?

[hogesar 9,618]

3 minutes ago, chicken said:

The sale of Buendia is "unusual"?

The reason @king canary etc say it's unusual is because we sold him upon promotion to the Premier League. Historically, that is a little unusual.

However with context, the primary reason it's unusual is that we kept hold of him for a year longer than I think most would have. Hank said above he'd have accepted it more readily if we'd sold at the start of last season! I don't agree with that personally because with hindsight he was key to getting promoted again.

[PurpleCanary 5,554]

I am a bit baffled by why some posters are baffled by this. I thought it was by now understood that we are a club owned by geriatric paupers who prefer to spend their money buying artwork for Yellows rather than putting it into a transfer fund already damagingly depleted because of their priggish sense of morality.🤓

[chicken 2,604]

18 minutes ago, hogesar said:

The reason @king canary etc say it's unusual is because we sold him upon promotion to the Premier League. Historically, that is a little unusual.

However with context, the primary reason it's unusual is that we kept hold of him for a year longer than I think most would have. Hank said above he'd have accepted it more readily if we'd sold at the start of last season! I don't agree with that personally because with hindsight he was key to getting promoted again.

So the "when" is "unusual"... heh. Well, maybe to us. But then, prior to Webber and Farke the usual was pretty rubbish to be fair. And everything they have done has been unusual for us.

Having a sporting director and a head coach set up is unusual for us. Having an actual plan that doesn't rely on signing three players the manager likes was unusual. Doing much of the leg work prior to the transfer window is unusual. Signing a potential replacement in the following days is unusual. Selling players to generate money back into the playing squad is unusual.

As you correctly say. Keeping hold of a player after relegation, actually several players, to ensure promotion is certainly unusual for us.

Unusual in itself though, means nothing. You have to know what the usual is and how unusual relates to it to see if it is positive or negative or indifferent.

It's a bit of a "meh".

[Badger 2,405]

54 minutes ago, king canary said:

So in reality neither team was more ambitious, we both sold certain players and kept certain others.

But we are constantly being told that Norwich are uniquely unambitious and the only club to sell our best players - I am merely trying to point out that we are not. It is the reality of modern football, even if you have "an investor." (swoon 😍🤩🤑)

[Dr Greenthumb 746]

36 minutes ago, hogesar said:

The reason @king canary etc say it's unusual is because we sold him upon promotion to the Premier League. Historically, that is a little unusual.

However with context, the primary reason it's unusual is that we kept hold of him for a year longer than I think most would have. Hank said above he'd have accepted it more readily if we'd sold at the start of last season! I don't agree with that personally because with hindsight he was key to getting promoted again.

I found it baffling how we managed to keep him in the championship! Kudos to Webber and co

[king canary 7,578]

29 minutes ago, chicken said:

The sale of Buendia is "unusual"?

Yes, as Hoegsar outlined below, it is highly unusual for a newly promoted team to sell a key player. I honestly can't think of an example, the closest is what Badger suggested with Zaha but that was a deal agreed before promotion. Generally a newly promoted team is focused on building around their key players to maximise chances of staying up.

What I do understand is that the model we operate under is relatively unique so as fans we may need to learn to 'expect the unexpected' as we'll be doing things a bit differently to  most. However it is still quite jarring when it happens like this, so I'm not surprised people haven't just moved on as @BigFish seems to want.

 

[chicken 2,604]

3 minutes ago, Dr Greenthumb said:

I found it baffling how we managed to keep him them in the championship! Kudos to Webber and co

Not just him to be fair.

[Dr Greenthumb 746]

Just now, chicken said:

Not just him to be fair.

Buendia was certainly the one though for me. I do agree on Aaron’s and Cantwell (I’m guessing that’s who you had in mind). 

[Badger 2,405]

1 hour ago, Hank shoots Skyler said:

It means Webber and Farke deserve enormous credit for continually having us punch FAR above our weight,

This simply isn't true. We are not punching "far above out weight." You need to get rid of this "little old Norwich mentality." In terms of our attendance we are certainly bigger than several other premier clubs + even more so with the commercial operation taken into account. We should expect to be in the Premier league or challenging for it by dint of our size.

The question is becoming "established" - if such a concept exists for clubs outside the top 8 to 10. This is the challenge - a sit tends to involve fast evolution of the playing squad (with consequent cots). There are two approaches:

1. Gamble - get all the money you can get (and more that you can afford) and "put it all on red." 

2. Build sustainably and become progressively stronger.

But the idea that we in some way "punching above our weight" is just total nonsense and to say that we are doing it is "far above our weight" is egregious.

[chicken 2,604]

1 minute ago, king canary said:

Yes, as Hoegsar outlined below, it is highly unusual for a newly promoted team to sell a key player. I honestly can't think of an example, the closest is what Badger suggested with Zaha but that was a deal agreed before promotion. Generally a newly promoted team is focused on building around their key players to maximise chances of staying up.

What I do understand is that the model we operate under is relatively unique so as fans we may need to learn to 'expect the unexpected' as we'll be doing things a bit differently to  most. However it is still quite jarring when it happens like this, so I'm not surprised people haven't just moved on as @BigFish seems to want.

 

I think it is safe to say that the deal for Buendia wasn't sorted over a couple of weeks of post season... we just appear to do things on the hush a bit. As a lot of people have been pointing out, including you at times I believe, Webber and Farke had both changed how they spoke about the prospect of losing one of our stars back before the end of the season.

However I will also point out that as hogesar says, it was more highly unusual that we didn't lose more of our talented players on relegation or in the following transfer window in January.

It depends upon money as well. I think there are more examples but perhaps less high profile. We sold Johnson on promotion - arguably one of our best performing players that season. It also depends on whether we have players people want... 

In recent history, the majority of players we gain promotion with still need to convince people of their ability to play in the PL. I'm thinking of the Lambert promotion era and under Alex Neil. Did we have any players in those squads who teams would have looked to purchase upon our promotion? Probably not. At least not with such attractive numbers, making it easier to knock back. Many never went on to bigger and better things either.

Which I suppose shows us that we are, it would seem, attracting and nurturing through a better quality of player that other teams are able to genuinely identify as quality.

[chicken 2,604]

13 minutes ago, Dr Greenthumb said:

Buendia was certainly the one though for me. I do agree on Aaron’s and Cantwell (I’m guessing that’s who you had in mind). 

Yes, though worth noting both Pukki and Krul also had interest in them, and as older players, there is always a temptation to cash in whilst you still can... "usually".

[chicken 2,604]

11 minutes ago, Badger said:

This simply isn't true. We are not punching "far above out weight." You need to get rid of this "little old Norwich mentality." In terms of our attendance we are certainly bigger than several other premier clubs + even more so with the commercial operation taken into account. We should expect to be in the Premier league or challenging for it by dint of our size.

The question is becoming "established" - if such a concept exists for clubs outside the top 8 to 10. This is the challenge - a sit tends to involve fast evolution of the playing squad (with consequent cots). There are two approaches:

1. Gamble - get all the money you can get (and more that you can afford) and "put it all on red." 

2. Build sustainably and become progressively stronger.

But the idea that we in some way "punching above our weight" is just total nonsense and to say that we are doing it is "far above our weight" is egregious.

Promotion last time was ahead of schedule. Farke got more out of that squad than was expected he would. Ergo it could be argued we punched above our weight to gain automatic promotion as champions that season...

That's not to belittle the club at all, but to measure the state of the squad at that point in time. That's a fair and realistic comment.

Not that I disagree with you either. We're not a massive club, but when you look at the bigger picture, we are a bigger club than the vast majority of EFL clubs and a number of EPL clubs.

[Badger 2,405]

Just now, chicken said:

Not that I disagree with you either. We're not a massive club, but when you look at the bigger picture, we are a bigger club than the vast majority of EFL clubs and a number of EPL clubs.

👍

Yes, I understand your point now, sorry.

[Hank shoots Skyler 2,094]

15 minutes ago, Badger said:

This simply isn't true. We are not punching "far above out weight." You need to get rid of this "little old Norwich mentality." In terms of our attendance we are certainly bigger than several other premier clubs + even more so with the commercial operation taken into account. We should expect to be in the Premier league or challenging for it by dint of our size.

But the idea that we in some way "punching above our weight" is just total nonsense and to say that we are doing it is "far above our weight" is egregious.

When I say we punch above our weight, I am talking about our wage bill and transfer budget, rather than home attendances... I would find this to be more indicative?!

I agree we are lovely sized club with a super fanbase which would be dead at home as a premier league side, and a pleasant / likeable addition to the league too. 

But our finances as they are are probably sufficient to compete at the upper-end of the championship, and prior to 19/20 we were probably one of the poorest sides in the championship. So yes Webber and Farke have had us clearly punching above our weight since 18/19! 

Why is that such an insult to you?

[Hank shoots Skyler 2,094]

1 hour ago, horsefly said:

A genuine question; do you think they would have sold Buendia if he had said he definitely wanted to stay?

Probably not, no. But that doesn't make it impossible for us to keep hold of him, either...

[TheGunnShow 5,932]

2 hours ago, Hank shoots Skyler said:

I don't understand how any could be anything other than 'unhappy' about the sale really. 

Yes you can justify, yes you can understand the club's decision to do it, yes you can applaud the incredible piece of transfer business to make £5mil into £33+ million etc etc. 

But does that mean you should be happy about losing our out-and-out best player? I don't think so.

Whichever way you cut it its always disappointing to lose your best player, it is a humbling indictment of the position of our club in the footballing ladder and we are still clearly a long way off being competitive in premier league terms - despite already sacrificing a premier league season for the 'greater good'.

We are still making progress, yes, but its saddening to see that we can't progress at the same rate as our top players too. That is not a criticism of anyone by the way. 

It's just a **** one!

I would have chucked a similar tanty a few years ago, but then became far more relaxed about matters when it dawned on me that progress is not linear. If progress were indeed linear, you wouldn't get so many demotivated sorts complaining about lack of progress in all manner of life endeavours, whether it be health kicks, business success, etc.

Or, to use a hackneyed phrase, sometimes you have to go backwards to go forwards. Emi's sale has meant we're now sniffing in the market for Greek wonderkids and have already bought a guy who was on Bayern and Leipzig's radar. Four years ago, the whole notion of our doing that, with our finances in such a parlous state as they were, I'd guarantee that you and me both would probably have struggled to stifle a chuckle.

There's very little doubt in my mind that Emi is the best player in my lifetime to don yellow and green. But you can't build a club on one player. If we have a stronger depth to our team, even if our best player is not quite in Emi's league, we could well be far better for it. I, for one, remain optimistic.

[Hank shoots Skyler 2,094]

1 hour ago, hogesar said:

Hank said above he'd have accepted it more readily if we'd sold at the start of last season! I don't agree with that personally because with hindsight he was key to getting promoted again.

I said 'I would have found it easier to swallow at the time'. Forget about hindsight and what followed after we kept him last season. That's a totally moot point! 

Its a completely fair comment for me to make as we were only offering Buendia championship football with fairly modest wages (even for the championship).

This season however he would've had the premier league football he desired, and we could've offered him wages much closer to what Villa are now than in the champs (admittedly still miles off but we probably could've bumped him up to £50k - what Drmic was on 2 seasons ago!). 

This is why, as you agree, it is most unusual to see the transfer happen the way round in which it did. 

Again, I think it probably comes down to the fact that we budgeted for the sale of Buendia or Cantwell last year, so needed to make the sale at the start of this window to bridge the gap. 

[Badger 2,405]

8 minutes ago, Hank shoots Skyler said:

When I say we punch above our weight, I am talking about our wage bill and transfer budget, rather than home attendances... I would find this to be more indicative?!

I agree we are lovely sized club with a super fanbase which would be dead at home as a premier league side, and a pleasant / likeable addition to the league too. 

But our finances as they are are probably sufficient to compete at the upper-end of the championship, and prior to 19/20 we were probably one of the poorest sides in the championship. So yes Webber and Farke have had us clearly punching above our weight since 18/19! 

This just isn't true. Our attendances and commercial operation is better than several other premier league clubs, let alone the championship. We also benefit from not having to pay large sums in interest and big director salaries. It is a challenge of transition as I have explained above - most clubs that are newly promoted are one of the favourites to be relegated first season.

[wcorkcanary 4,329]

2 hours ago, Hank shoots Skyler said:

I don't understand how any could be anything other than 'unhappy' about the sale really. 

Yes you can justify, yes you can understand the club's decision to do it, yes you can applaud the incredible piece of transfer business to make £5mil into £33+ million etc etc. 

But does that mean you should be happy about losing our out-and-out best player? I don't think so.

Whichever way you cut it its always disappointing to lose your best player, it is a humbling indictment of the position of our club in the footballing ladder and we are still clearly a long way off being competitive in premier league terms - despite already sacrificing a premier league season for the 'greater good'.

We are still making progress, yes, but its saddening to see that we can't progress at the same rate as our top players too. That is not a criticism of anyone by the way. 

It's just a **** one!

Liverpool sold Coutinho who was pretty much their Emi. They didn't want to, he wanted to go, doesn't matter where, once the Clubs valuation is met and the player wants it, fans are more powerless   than ever....our role as supporters  requires us to support,  by definition. I don't think anyone was ' happy" about Emi leaving ,, but some are more prepared than others to accept that there is a bigger picture.

In his twilight years  George Best played for the now defunct  Cork Hibernian ...or was it Cork Celtic, can't remember.  What I do remember was that  he was by miles the most skilful player on the pitch, fans loved him being there and attendances rocketed, results however  were not so great.... yet they had their superstar. Whoopee do!!²

I believe  that this season our approach will be more pragmatic, maybe more defensive, possibly dull. ... but I do think we have a much better chance of survival this time round.

Edited July 29, 2021 by wcorkcanary

[king canary 7,578]

3 minutes ago, Badger said:

This just isn't true. Our attendances and commercial operation is better than several other premier league clubs, let alone the championship. We also benefit from not having to pay large sums in interest and big director salaries. It is a challenge of transition as I have explained above - most clubs that are newly promoted are one of the favourites to be relegated first season.

Wage bill maybe not but its very tough to argue that our transfer budget is equal to any other team in the Premier League. The commercial stuff is all very nice but on the pitch our budgets are always going to put us at a disadvantage.

[Hank shoots Skyler 2,094]

4 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

I would have chucked a similar tanty a few years ago, but then became far more relaxed about matters when it dawned on me that progress is not linear. If progress were indeed linear, you wouldn't get so many demotivated sorts complaining about lack of progress in all manner of life endeavours, whether it be health kicks, business success, etc.

Or, to use a hackneyed phrase, sometimes you have to go backwards to go forwards. Emi's sale has meant we're now sniffing in the market for Greek wonderkids and have already bought a guy who was on Bayern and Leipzig's radar. Four years ago, the whole notion of our doing that, with our finances in such a parlous state as they were, I'd guarantee that you and me both would probably have struggled to stifle a chuckle.

There's very little doubt in my mind that Emi is the best player in my lifetime to don yellow and green. But you can't build a club on one player. If we have a stronger depth to our team, even if our best player is not quite in Emi's league, we could well be far better for it. I, for one, remain optimistic.

''Tanty definition: a childish fit of rage ; outburst of bad temper ''

Its not how I personally would've described my posts...

But yes agree with the rest of your post, I agree it could be that we are just taking a step back to take a step forwards. 

But at the same time I don't think there is anything wrong with being a tad sceptical about the way in which we conducted ourselves over the sale. You just need to look at how other clubs issue 'hands-off' warnings about their star players, and generally take note of other newly promoted sides to see that such a sale is extremely rare (as in never done by a newly promoted prem side before). 

I also don't think there is anything wrong with generally being a bit disappointed that we have lost our best in our lifetimes - as you also put it. 

I think the niggle I have is that it would've been much easier to swallow if we had visibly fought tooth and nail to keep him, as no one can begrudge him going to better things, but from the outside looking in it feels like both the club and the player were totally complicit. 

And yes I appreciate there's not conclusive evidence to go by, but what we do know is Webber's words in the press, the fee he set 'it starts with a 3...', the willingness to do business for our players, etc etc. The evidence points towards a club wanting to get a good fee for a star player at the start of a window - I think we can all see that can't we?

Did Buendia want to go? Well clearly yes. But did we do everything we could to stop the transfer happening and try to keep him at NCFC? In my opinion, no. In fact we did closer to the opposite. 

I just don't think our hands were anything like as forced as everyone seems to be making it out, certainly not at the time in the window.

I'm not throwing my toys out of the pram about it, or criticising anyone, just trying to debate how I saw the transfer compared to other posters on here. 

[wcorkcanary 4,329]

2 minutes ago, king canary said:

Wage bill maybe not but its very tough to argue that our transfer budget is equal to any other team in the Premier League. The commercial stuff is all very nice but on the pitch our budgets are always going to put us at a disadvantage.

Yep. There always  someone better off than you, unless you are the richest in the world.  This is about as insightful as declaring that if we had more money we'd be more competitive in transfers, we don't, so we're  not , so we do things a bit differently.....and given our success since 4 years ago, I'd say we'll  stay in this tack for a while yet. I too would enjoy spending more , but I'm quite pleased with what we're doing.

 

[1902 1,167]

2 minutes ago, king canary said:

Wage bill maybe not but its very tough to argue that our transfer budget is equal to any other team in the Premier League. The commercial stuff is all very nice but on the pitch our budgets are always going to put us at a disadvantage.

Yes and no. The reality is that some organisations react to adversity through creativity. The very fact that we have limited budget is why we have developed a strong academy, a strong scouting network and a particular approach to squad cohesion. 

This kind of slightly out of the box approach, essentially forced on us, has in the past created good sporting sides. It will be interesting to see if this approach is effective, we wont know until the end of the season. Partially because it's clear we will play in a completely different way this time around.

[Hank shoots Skyler 2,094]

8 minutes ago, Badger said:

This just isn't true. Our attendances and commercial operation is better than several other premier league clubs, let alone the championship. We also benefit from not having to pay large sums in interest and big director salaries. It is a challenge of transition as I have explained above - most clubs that are newly promoted are one of the favourites to be relegated first season.

Why do you keep talking about attendances and commercial operation? I completely agree we are a very run club with a great fanbase worth of the PL? 

Again, when I say 'punching above our weight' I am talking about our financial competitiveness. Are you deliberately not trying to understand my point of view?

Just look at where we were in 18/19, how did our wage bill and transfer budget compare to championship clubs then? We had just finished 14th in the championship and had a budget which more closely resembled a newly promoted league 1 side than it would a relegated prem side. We punched WAY above our weight that season! 

[Hank shoots Skyler 2,094]

10 minutes ago, wcorkcanary said:

Liverpool sold Coutinho who was pretty much their Emi. They didn't want to, he wanted to go, doesn't matter where, once the Clubs valuation is met and the player wants it, fans are more powerless   than ever....our role as supporters  requires us to support,  by definition. I don't think anyone was ' happy" about Emi leaving ,, but some are more prepared than others to accept that there is a bigger picture.

Appreciate that comparison, but I had stated about this above. 

Liverpool dug their heels in for as long as they could over Coutinho and then reluctantly agreed when they had nowhere left to go. 

Whereas we went public with our willingness to do business at the start of the window, and set a price 'it starts with a 3...' with a view to drumming up interest rather than putting clubs off. 

That's the difference here. I don't have any issue with us losing our best players, my niggle is that we actively engaged in and encouraged the transfer to get over the line as quickly as possible.