Where did Webber think the goals were going to come from...

[lake district canary 4,531]

4 minutes ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

Is that why you had a big wobble because it took Webber more than 6 days to replace Farke? 

 

 

And what happened to your hope here

 

Donut.

 

Wow. You really got nothing better to do?  So you caught me on an occasional downer. You know it's ok to get down about things occasionally, right?  But my preferences are still what I said - hope, loyalty and belief in people - and I believed in what we had in place. Since Farke left, we've seen a slight bounce in improved results and then back to frankly, pretty poor, so yes, I'm feeling a bit like "what was the point". 

Now you could turn that round into saying that Webber got the wrong players and then sacked Farke when it was really his (Webber's) fault all along, but that doesn't wash with me - my hope comes from what I said earlier in this thread - that the players, in time, will come good. 

[TheGunnShow 5,933]

3 hours ago, HazzaJet said:

I think he was expecting Rashica, Sargent, and Cantwell to get a few. We were also never expecting Cantwell’s attitude to turn out like this either - although he had a bit of a problem last Autumn, he did ok last time in the PL and well in the Championship last season.

Some of us, including me thought that Idah should have gone for a Championship loan this season considering he didn’t get much game time last season. There’s been some talk about Hugill being recalled and Idah sent out next month

Partially this, and also would say that the acquisitions of Gilmour and Normann were probably put together with the aim of picking out wide players from deeper positions, such as Rashica and Tzolis at pace to send in more crosses, or indeed to create space for a more central midfielder (or even a number 10 if we had gone 4-2-3-1) haring in late.

Would basically say the aim was to spread the goals across the team instead of thinking in terms of a "reserve" for Pukki. Sargent and Idah are our more physical sorts, Sargent especially, Rashica and Tzolis are more typical wingers, whilst not forgetting that Placheta's looked like he's up for the fight and hits some decent crosses and set pieces himself.

I don't think anyone expected Cantwell to be so far off the boil, or indeed for our team to be even more severely wracked with Covid in pre-season compared to the rest of the top flight. Throw in the sale of Buendia and Skipp's departure and you've got the incredibly rare combination of the team needing a rebuild whilst having got promoted into a very tough league.

[hogesar 9,618]

I think we were expecting a usual output from Pukki, a similar output from Cantwell as last time, Rashica to contribute with both goals and assists, Sargent to grab a few, Tzolis to grab a couple, and the midfield players and defenders to contribute as happens in most teams.

Webber has done a great job at NCFC and I wouldn't be surprised if even upon relegation we've evolved the club further on with a stronger squad in 12 months time with significant value in our players.

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

46 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

nce Farke left, we've seen a slight bounce in improved results and then back to frankly, pretty poor, so yes, I'm feeling a bit like "what was the point". 

Now you could turn that round into saying that Webber got the wrong players and then sacked Farke when it was really his (Webber's) fault all along, but that doesn't wash with me - my hope comes from what I said earlier in this thread - that the players, in time, will come good. 

You literally started a thread 6 days after Farke was sacked suggesting that Delia Smith intervene because Webber had failed to bring in an instant replacement, and now you are lecturing me on hope and loyalty. 

Farke failed with his own players, if we assume he got to ratify signings before they got a contract shoved in front of them. 

Smith is failing with somebody else's players, that he had no say on.

That's a crucial difference to me.

 

Edited December 21, 2021 by TeemuVanBasten

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

11 minutes ago, hogesar said:

I think we were expecting a usual output from Pukki, a similar output from Cantwell as last time, Rashica to contribute with both goals and assists, Sargent to grab a few, Tzolis to grab a couple, and the midfield players and defenders to contribute as happens in most teams.

Webber has done a great job at NCFC and I wouldn't be surprised if even upon relegation we've evolved the club further on with a stronger squad in 12 months time with significant value in our players.

Pukki scored 11 in this league last time, and he's got 5 half way through the season this time, so it is his usual output? And he's managed that with Buendia being flogged and Cantwell deciding that he can't be ars*d anymore. 

Pukki is definitely not part of the problem, thank f*ck we've at least got him.

[Danke bitte 965]

1 hour ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

Is that why you had a big wobble because it took Webber more than 6 days to replace Farke? 

 

 

And what happened to your hope here

 

Donut.

 

I’ll let you have my “this is fine” meme I pushed on Lakey in that thread as it’s Xmas… 😊

[lake district canary 4,531]

15 minutes ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

You literally started a thread 6 days after Farke was sacked suggesting that Delia Smith intervene because Webber had failed to bring in an instant replacement,

You'll have to show me that one, as I don't recall bringing Delia into it.

Edited December 21, 2021 by lake district canary

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

44 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

You'll have to show me that one, as I don't recall bringing Delia into it.

Is she not on the board? 

 

[Dean Coneys boots 1,398]

Webber has a budget and wage structure to work within- it’s insufficient to buy goals at this level so he had to take a punt. If you pay peanuts….

all focus should be on the budget set and reasons for the low wages- all else is white noise 

[Canaries north 151]

I don't think we have paid peanut's even by the standards of the other clubs around us. What we have done is what we always do, we buy players for future resale value rather than to keep us in the premier League. Yes it still comes down to finance. We signed 9 or 10 players, i forget, but how many games had they played in the premier League. I hate to use them as an example as they are nearly as bad as us and my friend supports them but Watford for the less money than we paid for either Sargent or Tzolis signed Dennis, Sissoko and King. Dennis was a gamble but Sissoko and King have so much premiership experience. Our owners will not look at a player unless they think they can either raise or at least get back any money paid. 

[Besthorpe-48 102]

Just wonder teemu what's the answer then?  Very simple to say we need a striker er who ?

What is your hope for the club top 4 or 6 or 8 or 17 or 26.

You have a nice line in identifying the problem and being scathing about anyone with a contrary opinion. But how about a realistic and specific solution 

Bring us answers not problems.

 

 

 

[Kenny Foggo 1,116]

7 hours ago, lake district canary said:

I'm with corkio. You're like a bull in a china shop that keeps knocking over the same piece of china. 

For what it's worth, there is still time in the season for people to step up and show they can score at this level. Rashica and Tzolis both have goals in them, as does Idah and even Sargent, who often gets in good positions. Nil desperandum, there is yet time!

Lakey is back..... totally disagree that Sargent or Idah have ANY goals in them at all.... we will 100% go down without a chance in personnel upfront and in attacking midfield.

[hogesar 9,618]

5 hours ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

Pukki scored 11 in this league last time, and he's got 5 half way through the season this time, so it is his usual output? And he's managed that with Buendia being flogged and Cantwell deciding that he can't be ars*d anymore. 

Pukki is definitely not part of the problem, thank f*ck we've at least got him.

Yeah, I'm not saying otherwise. I'm saying Pukkis output was part of our expectation. 

[Ken Hairy 3,760]

8 hours ago, lake district canary said:

Rashica and Tzolis both have goals in them, as does Idah and even Sargent

Evidence of this please? 

[HazzaJet 252]

9 minutes ago, Ken Hairy said:

Evidence of this please? 

Very well said. Although I do believe Rashica has some goals in him this season as he’s been playing quite well, I think Idah, Sargent and Tzolis need get some Championship experience before they’re ready for this level. I think Tzolis is overrated, mainly because of how well he did on his first team debut. What we must remember though is that was against the Bournemouth reserves. Made a start in the league this season, but got subbed at half time 

[Canary dwarf 221]

11 hours ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

To keep us up? 

He said Farke had the tools required this time, but this is a team which lacks goals throughout, I suppose he might have expected a few this seasn from Rashica. but we know that Rupp can't score, Normann's CV tells us he doesn't score many, Kenny McLean scored 1 goal in this division last time, Gilmour has never scored a goal for club or country, and we know that Idah and Sargent have yet to find their goalscoring boots in weaker leagues.

We don't even have a player with a track record of scoring from free-kicks on the edge of the box, Dowell the closest to that I suspect but we clearly didn't go into this season with plans to play a number 10 and that is, quite simply, Dowell's position. He doesn't have the pace for the wide areas.

How did Webber ever expect this team to be able to conjure up a sufficient number of goals to stay in this league, and what exactly is the plan B when Pukki gets an injury and misses 4 or 5 games, as he has in the past two seasons?

I still think it was right for Farke to go, and I still think Dean Smith is more likely to get us putting up a fight as the players just seemed to need the change in impetus, but the tool set hasn't changed has it? 

Yeah some very good points made , I think we thought tzolis was gonna rip this league apart , and sargent although a work in progress was gonna kick on , sadly neither of these things look like happening anytime soon.😚

[Ken Hairy 3,760]

Tzolis to me looks like he needs to get into shape before he stands any chance of making it in this league or any other in the English top 4.

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

6 hours ago, Dean Coneys boots said:

Webber has a budget and wage structure to work within- it’s insufficient to buy goals at this level so he had to take a punt. If you pay peanuts….

all focus should be on the budget set and reasons for the low wages- all else is white noise 

Josh King was said to want £40k from us, and we were unwilling to pay it.

But we were willing to pay £8.8m for Josh Sargent, allegedly.

Now £40k x 52 x 4, and we could have paid to have Josh King for 4 years instead of signing Sargent, and that's before you consider whether King was willing to have a wage cut if relegated + before we consider Sargents wages on top of that £8.8m transfer fee.

I wonder if the maths would also work for Dennis, who they paid just £3.6m for? 

I'm afraid I can't fully buy into the idea that this is all down to budget, I feel that we've also paid good money for player who aren't ready for senior football at this level and may never be. 

[Parma Ham's gone mouldy 2,219]

TvB is right to question Webber. So much of the issues that Smith now faces were active strategic choices. Some were deliberately taken in contravention of the kind of realpolitik top level football purchase activity and pragmatic game management allowing inferior teams to stay in games that Smith clearly understands and operates. It is not about one’s druthers, it is what must be done in today’s Premier as an inferior side (both in a sporting and financial operation). Buying ‘tomorrow assets’ is not compatible with this - other than as a luxury adjunct strategy, not a primary one.

Parma Ham's gone mouldy     627

•  
  •  

Posted October 28

   On 28/10/2021 at 16:33,  PurpleCanary said: 

Parma, I understand the argument. My point is that while the other teams you mentioned could hold onto their weapon players, because they had reasonable squads that didn't need that much improving, at least in the crucial sense of your argument that they were able to make the calculation that keeping the weapon was worth more than the potential additions, we could not do likewise because of the gaping holes in the squad.

According to the EDP we had £15m to spend without selling anyone, with anyone in effect being Buendia. Bailey apparently talked about £20m-£30m. Say it was as much as £25m. Buy a mid-20s player with EPL experience able to play nearly as well in the EPL as Skipp did in the Championship, and that is the transfer budget used up.

A few loan deals are possible even though they cost, and you have a spine of the team something like this:

A perhaps showing his age Krul, McGovern, Badern.

Gibson, Hanley and Omabamidele.

A Pukki who does look like he is ageing, Hugill and Idah.

Hernandez as the one winger, who is clearly not near EPL class.

As you say we’ll have to agree to disagree. 

Weapons are always key at the top level. There is any amount of evidence that this is true in the relative strategies of our competition. 

I did not believe that upgrading Gibson and Giannoulis after 6 months was ‘crucial’.

I believed keeping the few weapons we had was key and the rest would have to step up. Which is why they fought so hard to get promoted and prove themselves after all. 

To make the point even more clearly Webber himself said that we were intending ‘to improve the first eleven’ rather than spreading our resources thinly across 20 players, which is a strategy only the really rich can employ - not least because keeping that many top level players happy is very difficult. 

At some point we decided we would not , or could not do this. We sold Buendia upon promotion. I don’t think many fans could definitely pick our best eleven this season. Nor would they hate our second eleven. 

As my father wisely says about business ‘you can make any decision you like, you just have to accept the cost’ 

Webber himself did not originally endorse the strategy we subsequently embarked on. 

Two of our major, record signings were wingers. Few clubs - even at the top level - play with wingers. For a team destined to mostly defend, it is an odd approach. 4411 with a Pukki at 9 and a Buendia at 10 would already be enough for a weaker Italian side. The rest compact and functional. 

None of this is hindsight. As @Petriix pointed out, I commended our ‘build for tomorrow’ defensive resilience strategy during our ascent to the premier. We deliberately DIDN’T beat teams 5-0, we trained for tomorrow. Good management. Good planning. 

It has nothing to do with how long we are, were or were not in the Premier. We chose the route we have taken. It hasn’t worked. I don’t think any studious coach thought it would or could at this level. Any analyst of our form, points, pattern of play over the last 18 months without Buendia (and Buendia plus Pukki) would  have trembled at any attempt to broaden the skill base by trading the peaks.

It was the peaks that brought the success. Such weapons are not easily replaceable. We made a choice. We wanted to be different. We got a bit heady on ‘change’ and self-blindness made us justify a rather suicidal move.

Parma 

—————————

Smith has also commented - in football speak - that our squad is too large and much-of-a-muchness. In the end - due to covid and injuries - this has worked out, though even Mourinho would prefer to work with a smaller squad. Disharmony spreads quickly when you have ‘too good’ players at numbers 18 and upwards. A team like Norwich being able to field more-or-less two fairly equal first teams indicates a flawed strategy give the limited finances available. It is conversely a negative and expensive approach likely leading to a lack of true weapons (even on paper). It has certainly worked out that way on grass. 

Edited December 21, 2021 by Parma Ham's gone mouldy

[wcorkcanary 4,329]

11 hours ago, Parma Ham's gone mouldy said:

TvB is right to question Webber. So much of the issues that Smith now faces were active strategic choices. Some were deliberately taken in contravention of the kind of realpolitik top level football purchase activity and pragmatic game management allowing inferior teams to stay in games that Smith clearly understands and operates. It is not about one’s druthers, it is what must be done in today’s Premier as an inferior side (both in a sporting and financial operation). Buying ‘tomorrow assets’ is not compatible with this - other than as a luxury adjunct strategy, not a primary one.

Parma Ham's gone mouldy     627

•  
  •  

Posted October 28

   On 28/10/2021 at 16:33,  PurpleCanary said: 

Parma, I understand the argument. My point is that while the other teams you mentioned could hold onto their weapon players, because they had reasonable squads that didn't need that much improving, at least in the crucial sense of your argument that they were able to make the calculation that keeping the weapon was worth more than the potential additions, we could not do likewise because of the gaping holes in the squad.

According to the EDP we had £15m to spend without selling anyone, with anyone in effect being Buendia. Bailey apparently talked about £20m-£30m. Say it was as much as £25m. Buy a mid-20s player with EPL experience able to play nearly as well in the EPL as Skipp did in the Championship, and that is the transfer budget used up.

A few loan deals are possible even though they cost, and you have a spine of the team something like this:

A perhaps showing his age Krul, McGovern, Badern.

Gibson, Hanley and Omabamidele.

A Pukki who does look like he is ageing, Hugill and Idah.

Hernandez as the one winger, who is clearly not near EPL class.

As you say we’ll have to agree to disagree. 

Weapons are always key at the top level. There is any amount of evidence that this is true in the relative strategies of our competition. 

I did not believe that upgrading Gibson and Giannoulis after 6 months was ‘crucial’.

I believed keeping the few weapons we had was key and the rest would have to step up. Which is why they fought so hard to get promoted and prove themselves after all. 

To make the point even more clearly Webber himself said that we were intending ‘to improve the first eleven’ rather than spreading our resources thinly across 20 players, which is a strategy only the really rich can employ - not least because keeping that many top level players happy is very difficult. 

At some point we decided we would not , or could not do this. We sold Buendia upon promotion. I don’t think many fans could definitely pick our best eleven this season. Nor would they hate our second eleven. 

As my father wisely says about business ‘you can make any decision you like, you just have to accept the cost’ 

Webber himself did not originally endorse the strategy we subsequently embarked on. 

Two of our major, record signings were wingers. Few clubs - even at the top level - play with wingers. For a team destined to mostly defend, it is an odd approach. 4411 with a Pukki at 9 and a Buendia at 10 would already be enough for a weaker Italian side. The rest compact and functional. 

None of this is hindsight. As @Petriix pointed out, I commended our ‘build for tomorrow’ defensive resilience strategy during our ascent to the premier. We deliberately DIDN’T beat teams 5-0, we trained for tomorrow. Good management. Good planning. 

It has nothing to do with how long we are, were or were not in the Premier. We chose the route we have taken. It hasn’t worked. I don’t think any studious coach thought it would or could at this level. Any analyst of our form, points, pattern of play over the last 18 months without Buendia (and Buendia plus Pukki) would  have trembled at any attempt to broaden the skill base by trading the peaks.

It was the peaks that brought the success. Such weapons are not easily replaceable. We made a choice. We wanted to be different. We got a bit heady on ‘change’ and self-blindness made us justify a rather suicidal move.

Parma 

—————————

Smith has also commented - in football speak - that our squad is too large and much-of-a-muchness. In the end - due to covid and injuries - this has worked out, though even Mourinho would prefer to work with a smaller squad. Disharmony spreads quickly when you have ‘too good’ players at numbers 18 and upwards. A team like Norwich being able to field more-or-less two fairly equal first teams indicates a flawed strategy give the limited finances available. It is conversely a negative and expensive approach likely leading to a lack of true weapons (even on paper). It has certainly worked out that way on grass. 

Nice to read an appraisal that doesn't  seek to 'blame ' someone. 

Fair play Mouldyo.

[mannings bandy legs 385]

13 hours ago, Ken Hairy said:

Evidence of this please? 

Idah has 3 goals in 54 1st team games. R of I and city. He's league one at best.

[Dean Coneys boots 1,398]

I would wager that Idah will never be an established premiership striker but will roll around mid championship to L1

i think Sargent will eventually end up a big fish in a minor league in Europe 

I think Pukki will lose his legs in the next 12 -24 months. 

this is what needs solving but we lack the cash to do so

[hogesar 9,618]

9 minutes ago, Dean Coneys boots said:

I would wager that Idah will never be an established premiership striker but will roll around mid championship to L1

i think Sargent will eventually end up a big fish in a minor league in Europe 

I think Pukki will lose his legs in the next 12 -24 months. 

this is what needs solving but we lack the cash to do so

Merry Christmas everyone!

[lake district canary 4,531]

14 hours ago, Ken Hairy said:

23 hours ago, lake district canary said:

Rashica and Tzolis both have goals in them, as does Idah and even Sargent

Evidence of this please? 

They all have good potential. I'd put good money on all of them scoring goals this season.

[PurpleCanary 5,554]

44 minutes ago, Dean Coneys boots said:

I would wager that Idah will never be an established premiership striker but will roll around mid championship to L1

i think Sargent will eventually end up a big fish in a minor league in Europe 

I think Pukki will lose his legs in the next 12 -24 months. 

this is what needs solving but we lack the cash to do so

Well, this is a first. I agree with all three of those points...

But we will not lack the cash to provide the solution. Of course all those Canary fans who voted for Brexit have made finding the right player or players harder, but not impossible, even under our budgetary constraints.

[Disco Dales Jockstrap 1,891]

38 minutes ago, hogesar said:

Merry Christmas everyone!

As lacking as DCB might well be in Christmas cheer, I'm not sure even Baby Jesus would disagree with this 3 points.

OTBC

[hertfordyellow 460]

In hindsight, it would have been better to have combined the Tzolis / Sargent money and bought someone more matured in their career and ready to contribute goals straight away.

Webber said that Tzolis is one for the future and Sargent hasn't really scored goals regularly to be an alternative to Pukki.

I think he thought that the main goals would come from Pukki, Rashica and Cantwell with others chipping in along the way.

Truth is Pukki is the best free transfer in our history and he has maximised his potential, but he needs too many chances to score for him to be a 20 goal man at this level. It's not his fault, it's just his level. The difference between him and Ings for example is that chances to goals ratio.

 

 

[ged in the onion bag 854]

12 hours ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

Josh King was said to want £40k from us, and we were unwilling to pay it.

But we were willing to pay £8.8m for Josh Sargent, allegedly.

Now £40k x 52 x 4, and we could have paid to have Josh King for 4 years instead of signing Sargent, and that's before you consider whether King was willing to have a wage cut if relegated + before we consider Sargents wages on top of that £8.8m transfer fee.

I wonder if the maths would also work for Dennis, who they paid just £3.6m for? 

I'm afraid I can't fully buy into the idea that this is all down to budget, I feel that we've also paid good money for player who aren't ready for senior football at this level and may never be. 

Take your point but both King and Dennis need to get the ball delivered in and around the opponents box first and sadly, that seems to be quite the problem.   We have no midfield in any attacking sense without Normann and he's supposed to be the anchor!  

King doesn't quite fit the brief (whatever that is at the moment) but Dennis seems too!    Problem is the players we brought in are a year too late, needed last season in the Championship to prepare / develop...    This league is too brutal for learning in teams that struggle.

What should be happening in the Championship is some proper preparation, Idah (admittedly he was injured for too much of it) should be getting more game time either with or instead of Pukki or loaned out, so he has experience, we shouldn't be signing or playing players who aren't capable of competitive EPL football for us, (Hugill, Quintila, McLean and others) and we shouldn't be preparing players to play for Tottenham or anyone else.   There's no long-term benefit with loan players and consequently we have Sorensen who has hardly played any professional football.    As a result, we were never prepared for the step up, floundered in the transfer market (the signings all seems a tad desperate right now) and so we were never ready.    If we aren't going to be ready / good enough with what we can buy or produce then we will find our place....  The likes of Skipp only offer false hope and expectation.

 

[king canary 7,580]

13 hours ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

Josh King was said to want £40k from us, and we were unwilling to pay it.

But we were willing to pay £8.8m for Josh Sargent, allegedly.

Now £40k x 52 x 4, and we could have paid to have Josh King for 4 years instead of signing Sargent, and that's before you consider whether King was willing to have a wage cut if relegated + before we consider Sargents wages on top of that £8.8m transfer fee.

I wonder if the maths would also work for Dennis, who they paid just £3.6m for? 

I'm afraid I can't fully buy into the idea that this is all down to budget, I feel that we've also paid good money for player who aren't ready for senior football at this level and may never be. 

Obviously none of us know for sure but I seem to remember King was rumoured to be looking for £60k p/w. No idea what he signed for with Watford though.

The wage cut part is also key.

I think anyone wondering why we didn't sign Dennis is getting into 20/20 hindsight territory. He scored 0 league goals last season across two clubs and was bombed out of FC Koln due to massive attitude issues (apparently he once refused to get on the team coach because someone else was sat in his favoured seat!). He's obviously worked out well for Watford but he was a huge gamble and I can totally understand why many clubs, including us, wouldn't have wanted him.

[Disco Dales Jockstrap 1,891]

29 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

They all have good potential. I'd put good money on all of them scoring goals this season.

Good money ay? How much is that? £10? £100? £1000? I'll bet you a bag of Mini Cheddars that they won't total 10 goals between them. And I love Mini Cheddars so that is stellar money for me.

But how many goals do you think they'll get Lakey? Come on, be brave, put some numbers on it. I'll have a go to get you started:

Premier League goals only:

Rashica: 3

Tzolis: 1

Idah: 0

Sargent: 3

🎶All I want for Christmas is top four.🎶

OTBC