Jump to content

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, ged in the onion bag said:

They probably havent the money and they haven't bought any of those players (only replaced one).     Unless that is sorted out then they have a problem coming like we did.    So yes, they helped them get to the EPL now what?    Will they be happy with the experience we just had?    I doubt it.     Not like they didn't get to the EPL with a great deal of help from that final referee was it.    Are they ready, I doubt that too. 

   

So you are actually suggesting they shouldn't have taken those players on loan that proved crucial in getting them promotion? Like it or not, for clubs like us and Forest getting promotion to the PL is essential to obtain the revenue in order to improve the quality of the playing squad. That's just the reality of where we are. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CANARYKING said:

No rumours, just nothing happening, is Webber back in the city yet ?

Lee Dunn is Head of Recruitment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, horsefly said:

Just about every fan for the last 2 years has been decrying the need for a strong central defensive midfielder. We now have one who has proven his value in the PL (see Newcastle fan comments). Perhaps you would like to identify the "one of our own" who you think we should risk developing instead. 

And I am one of those but have always argued we need 3 of them.... He is a start but I would rather see us develop our own or bring in lads to develop.   He is a start but I don't agree with the loan option for the reasons stated.   If we don't get promoted, then we've wasted a year playing someone else's player and not developing our own, something I don't think our philosophy and lack of funds can sustain.     It needs the scouts to do the due diligence and find these players.  They are out there.     If we do get promoted, I am not convinced he will be particularly effective in the EPL, he can do a cover job but he's always operated at the bottom end of the table.     

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, Jim Smith said:

I don't want to "avoid loans" per se but i do want to avoid loaning in players who we have no prospect of signing to play in positions where we are already reasonably well stocked.

Hayden is a good example of a good loan (assuming he's not rubbish) in that it improves a part of the squad where we do not have our own options and we know we can buy him if we get promoted.

Assuming Leeds will not give us an option to buy on someone like Cresswell it really would not make sense in the same way. 

I think most people would prefer to grow our own or sign players ‘properly’, but most sides do have loans of one type or another. Loans give access to players you can’t afford and whilst it’s allowed all sides will use them as an option.  Ultimately, the short term goal is to get promoted, so we should do what we can to achieve that.

Edited by Branston Pickle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ged in the onion bag said:

And I am one of those but have always argued we need 3 of them.... He is a start but I would rather see us develop our own or bring in lads to develop.   He is a start but I don't agree with the loan option for the reasons stated.   If we don't get promoted, then we've wasted a year playing someone else's player and not developing our own, something I don't think our philosophy and lack of funds can sustain.     It needs the scouts to do the due diligence and find these players.  They are out there.     If we do get promoted, I am not convinced he will be particularly effective in the EPL, he can do a cover job but he's always operated at the bottom end of the table.     

 

So you can't think of any of the current squad who would definitely be good enough to start in that position (as Hayden most surely will), but think we should risk not getting promoted by developing "one of our own". Have you seen what happens to teams like ours that fail to get promoted again? Their squads get depleted, and they tend to languish for many seasons (see Stoke, Blackburn Middlesbrough, OPR, etc etc.). Forest languished for over 20-years, judicious use of the loan system has paid off handsomely. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Badger said:

Loans are a way of obtaining players that might not consider a transfer to a championship club. It worked OK for Forest last year:

Keinan Davis, James Garner, Djed Spence, Philip Zinckernagel were some of their key players.

We would be crazy to ignore the loans market just because we got it wrong last year.

 

I understand that from a short term perspective, just not long term.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, ged in the onion bag said:

And I am one of those but have always argued we need 3 of them.... He is a start but I would rather see us develop our own or bring in lads to develop.   He is a start but I don't agree with the loan option for the reasons stated.   If we don't get promoted, then we've wasted a year playing someone else's player and not developing our own, something I don't think our philosophy and lack of funds can sustain.     It needs the scouts to do the due diligence and find these players.  They are out there.     If we do get promoted, I am not convinced he will be particularly effective in the EPL, he can do a cover job but he's always operated at the bottom end of the table.     

 

The way the obligation to buy was worded "specific performance-related criteria be met throughout the 2022/23 season." makes me think that this is more based on player performance, games played post injury etc, rather than based on us getting promoted.  I could be wrong, but if he is successful i see him being a Norwich player next season, regardless of promotion.  Anyone else see it like this, or am i reading too much into the wording?  Im sure previous obligations stated 'subject to remaining in the premier league' or similar.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean I'm sure most of us can agree that while yes many in our squad have proved themselves at the level we are now at the fact we are sticking with the exact same players and have only brought in one player who's on loan when we are less than a week until pre season starts is a bit of a **** take

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Newtopia said:

I understand that from a short term perspective, just not long term.

Indeed! But as far as loans go: a standard loan = short-term, loan to buy = long-term. There is effectively no difference between buying a player outright and getting someone like Hayden on a loan to buy. The big advantage is that we could not have afforded someone of his quality if we had been forced to buy him outright. This way we bring in a better quality player but get to return him if he doesn't perform well enough to help the team gain promotion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

I mean I'm sure most of us can agree that while yes many in our squad have proved themselves at the level we are now at the fact we are sticking with the exact same players and have only brought in one player who's on loan when we are less than a week until pre season starts is a bit of a **** take

Are you sure about that? Remind me when the transfer window closes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Birmingham - 0

Barnsley - 2 

Blackburn - 1

Blackpool - 0

Bristol - 3

Burnley - 1

Cardiff - 9

Coventry - 1

Huddersfield - 1

Hull - 0

Luton - 3

Boro - 3

Millwall - 1

Us - 1

Preston 1

QPR - 2

Reading - 2

Rotherham - 3

Sheffield Utd - 0

Stoke - 3

Sunderland - 1

Swansea - 4

Watford - 0

West Brom - 3

Wigan  - 1

 

Without looking through each transfer I would imagine at least a handful of these are youth signings and a lot were free transfers.

 

You could say it's just been a slow start to the window in general or I suppose we could sack the board and set the stadium on fire.

 

 

Edited by KeiranShikari
  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Branston Pickle said:

How dare you point out the massively obvious flaw in the argument!

Considering everyone seems to think our loans last season were all rubbish, surely we should be glad we didn’t actually buy any of them?!

That's why the ideal loan for the club bringing the player in is a loan with the option to buy, or possibly an obligation depending on certain criteria being met (such as appearances or promotion/survival). If I'm not mistaken, I think there was an option/obligation on Normann and Kabak last season, but because they didn't quite work out we didn't take up our option and/or the obligation wasn't triggered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
48 minutes ago, ged in the onion bag said:

And I am one of those but have always argued we need 3 of them.... He is a start but I would rather see us develop our own or bring in lads to develop.   He is a start but I don't agree with the loan option for the reasons stated.   If we don't get promoted, then we've wasted a year playing someone else's player and not developing our own, something I don't think our philosophy and lack of funds can sustain.     It needs the scouts to do the due diligence and find these players.  They are out there.     If we do get promoted, I am not convinced he will be particularly effective in the EPL, he can do a cover job but he's always operated at the bottom end of the table.     

 

What do you think they’re doing? Sitting on their **** watching Homes under the Hammer? This is the flaw in your argument. If we had youth players who were capable of making the step up into the Championship first team ,and then making the step up into the PL, we would all be in favour of using them. But we don’t and finding them isn’t just a case of doing “due diligence”. Every single football club is watching out for potential future stars so it is going to be incredibly competitive and we will probably sign more duds than successes. And “developing” them is no guarantee that they will become good enough.
 

Given that, the practical answer is that our team will have to be a sensible mix of youth players who we think are ready (even not quite ready but will develop if we throw them into the deep end), former youth players who’ve already proved themselves, younger players we’ve recruited from elsewhere and older, experienced players who can provide a bit of nous. Sometimes we can buy these, sometimes we will loan them when it makes sense, like with Hayden.

Edited by Nuff Said
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
26 minutes ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

I mean I'm sure most of us can agree that while yes many in our squad have proved themselves at the level we are now at the fact we are sticking with the exact same players and have only brought in one player who's on loan when we are less than a week until pre season starts is a bit of a **** take

Agreed. There is a lot of faith being placed in some players that massively underperformed last season, to come good this season. And they are not Smith's players - none of them. 

As I've stated on here before, I wouldn't be surprised if the net spend was zero or less - which isn't acceptable for a team that is allegedly serious about promotion. Where is the parachute money going, other than to keep the doomed self funding model afloat? 

If Smith walked, he would have my full respect. 

Edited by komakino
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man said:

That's why the ideal loan for the club bringing the player in is a loan with the option to buy, or possibly an obligation depending on certain criteria being met (such as appearances or promotion/survival). If I'm not mistaken, I think there was an option/obligation on Normann and Kabak last season, but because they didn't quite work out we didn't take up our option and/or the obligation wasn't triggered.

An obligation is just that - we’d have had to but them so you could argue we dodged a bullet with relegation for those two, but to be fair to them we rarely saw the best of them. 

Edited by Branston Pickle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Branston Pickle said:

An obligation is just that - we’d have had to but them so you could argue we dodged a bullet with relegation for those two, but to be fair to them we rarely saw the best of them. 

But as a hypothetical, had we survived and they made enough appearances, we probably would've wanted to keep them (assuming there was an obligation in the first place). Even if there was, and we had survived, Kabak probably wouldn't have made enough appearances to trigger the obligation and Normann may have been pushing it after his three-month layoff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

I mean I'm sure most of us can agree that while yes many in our squad have proved themselves at the level we are now at the fact we are sticking with the exact same players and have only brought in one player who's on loan when we are less than a week until pre season starts is a bit of a **** take

Yet year after year after year the majority of deals across the country happen towards the end of the window rather than in its early stages. Same principle for those players who will leave but haven't done so yet.

Folk whittling in June also happens every year 🤔

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do get that it’s a slow transfer window so far. My concern is the when Smith took over the excuse for us being continuously poor was ‘it’s not his team’. To make it his team he need fresh players, to get said fresh players we need to sell…no one wants our players as none have the greatest CV from last season( Pukki apart). That’s the conundrum, we may still start this season with the same stale squad, plus Hayden. I don’t believe promotion will be as easy as the bookmakers make out.?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Gordon Bennett said:

Yet year after year after year the majority of deals across the country happen towards the end of the window rather than in its early stages. Same principle for those players who will leave but haven't done so yet.

Folk whittling in June also happens every year 🤔

 

Webber always used to bang on about getting deals 'done early'. So either his mantra has changed or the club has no intention of buying anyone. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, komakino said:

Webber always used to bang on about getting deals 'done early'. So either his mantra has changed or the club has no intention of buying anyone. 

Don't you people read? 

Just today on Pink Un +, why city fans might have to be patient. Just after Hayden signing, from the Athletic - City chasing one more, but need to sell to buy more. I understand those are both behind pay walls, but the athletic article was extensively discussed here.

And what isn't behind a paywall is Stuart Webber's interview in which he said we would do one or two things. 

This isn't difficult stuff guys. It's everywhere across NCFC media what the intention this summer is - one or two incomings but the rest depending on selling to buy. 

Business across the championship is now starting to pick up. Five clubs have done nothing. Most have signed one or two at most.

Edited by Terminally Yellow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, komakino said:

Agreed. There is a lot of faith being placed in some players that massively underperformed last season, to come good this season. And they are not Smith's players - none of them. 

As I've stated on here before, I wouldn't be surprised if the net spend was zero or less - which isn't acceptable for a team that is allegedly serious about promotion. Where is the parachute money going, other than to keep the doomed self funding model afloat? 

If Smith walked, he would have my full respect. 

Really? I doubt there is a single player in our first team squad who wouldn't be welcomed into any of the other teams in the Championship. That would suggest the squad is already good enough to challenge for promotion. But, of course, that doesn't mean it's guaranteed promotion and can't be improved; does anyone really want to contest the idea that the Hayden signing has improved our prospects? The players have been back for a single day and you're lamenting the fact we haven't bought in hordes of new signings (who has?). If you know already that the club has decided to bring no further players into the team then please share your source, otherwise why not show a little patience.

Just a technicality, but of course the parachute money is helping keep the "self-funding" model afloat; that's why it's called a "self-funding" model. The club have never said anything different. Rather that than become the next Portsmouth, Bolton, etc etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

I mean I'm sure most of us can agree that while yes many in our squad have proved themselves at the level we are now at the fact we are sticking with the exact same players and have only brought in one player who's on loan when we are less than a week until pre season starts is a bit of a **** take

So the answer is to buy a whole new team then? All that upheaval in 5 weeks? With what money exactly are we to buy a first 11 with ability to step up to Premiership? Why turn our backs on Championship winners, when we want to... win the Championship?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, BSEYELLOW said:

The way the obligation to buy was worded "specific performance-related criteria be met throughout the 2022/23 season." makes me think that this is more based on player performance, games played post injury etc, rather than based on us getting promoted.  I could be wrong, but if he is successful i see him being a Norwich player next season, regardless of promotion.  Anyone else see it like this, or am i reading too much into the wording?  Im sure previous obligations stated 'subject to remaining in the premier league' or similar.

A bit vague isn't it but it definitely doesn't say 'appearance'. Not clear if it's Hayden's 'performance' or the club's that is the criteria. Throughout the 2022/3 season is a bit strange term and implies that if he's injured for half of it then the criteria won't be met.

https://www.nufc.co.uk/news/latest-news/isaac-hayden-joins-norwich-city-on-loan/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Terminally Yellow said:

Don't you people read? 

Just today on Pink Un +, why city fans might have to be patient. Just after Hayden signing, from the Athletic - City chasing one more, but need to sell to buy more. I understand those are both behind pay walls, but the athletic article was extensively discussed here.

And what isn't behind a paywall is Stuart Webber's interview in which he said we would do one or two things. 

This isn't difficult stuff guys. It's everywhere across NCFC media what the intention this summer is - one or two incomings but the rest depending on selling to buy. 

Business across the championship is now starting to pick up. Five clubs have done nothing. Most have signed one or two at most.

We're paying the price for Webber's appalling recruitment of last season. How many of those really want to stay and rough it out in the second tier? Even if they did, doesn't mean they would be any good. 

Although we cannot force clubs to buy our players, to in effect only spend when we've sold is a pathetic response given we have parachute money and nearly all the others do not. 

Smith needs he own squad, but he still has Farke's squad bar a sole loan signing. He deserves better, we all deserve better. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, komakino said:

We're paying the price for Webber's appalling recruitment of last season. How many of those really want to stay and rough it out in the second tier? Even if they did, doesn't mean they would be any good. 

Although we cannot force clubs to buy our players, to in effect only spend when we've sold is a pathetic response given we have parachute money and nearly all the others do not. 

Smith needs he own squad, but he still has Farke's squad bar a sole loan signing. He deserves better, we all deserve better. 

The parachute money will probably just about cover the wage bill (even with reductions in contracts) it’s not a magic pit of cash to spend on new players. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, komakino said:

As I've stated on here before, I wouldn't be surprised if the net spend was zero or less - which isn't acceptable for a team that is allegedly serious about promotion.

This is happens with almost every single relegated team. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, horsefly said:

So you are actually suggesting they shouldn't have taken those players on loan that proved crucial in getting them promotion? Like it or not, for clubs like us and Forest getting promotion to the PL is essential to obtain the revenue in order to improve the quality of the playing squad. That's just the reality of where we are. 

We dont seem to improve when we do go up though, we get told there is no money. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Nuff Said said:

What do you think they’re doing? Sitting on their **** watching Homes under the Hammer? This is the flaw in your argument. If we had youth players who were capable of making the step up into the Championship first team ,and then making the step up into the PL, we would all be in favour of using them. But we don’t and finding them isn’t just a case of doing “due diligence”. Every single football club is watching out for potential future stars so it is going to be incredibly competitive and we will probably sign more duds than successes. And “developing” them is no guarantee that they will become good enough.
 

Given that, the practical answer is that our team will have to be a sensible mix of youth players who we think are ready (even not quite ready but will develop if we throw them into the deep end), former youth players who’ve already proved themselves, younger players we’ve recruited from elsewhere and older, experienced players who can provide a bit of nous. Sometimes we can buy these, sometimes we will loan them when it makes sense, like with Hayden.

I don't know what the scouts are doing, I know what they did last summer though!   Our foundations are based on scouting good young players and yes, others are looking too but we have to be better and of course what we did offer over others was 'opportunity' which is supposed to entice players to Norfolk.    

My point is that the quality of our current squad is adequate for the Championship but nowhere near good enough for the EPL so in my view I would rather see us consolidate, gamble on a year or two of good development (like we did when we brought Farke in) then having another crack when (and if) we've developed a better squad.  Primarily because I personally would rather spend an extra season or two, or three, or five or even ten more in the Championship than experience that debacle of last season again which in my opinion is where we are headed and no one on here has addressed how on earth we would replace 8-10 players if we do get promoted which is what we would need to do.   My argument isn't flawed its just different to yours.  

We may have the players, but will never know that unless they are given opportunity which won't happen if we play other teams players and continue playing lads that can't step up like McLean, Platcheta and far too many more.  Of course, we have no right to promotion but it does come across as if everyone is expecting its inevitable!    

Our desperation for promotion and the finance the EPL provides will continue to be our undoing unless somehow we find some absolute gems which you can't argue have been few and far between since Teemu and Emi.   There is no evidence the money has helped so far.   That's now two promotions where we've come out of it with nothing left to spend and with a worse team.     And furthermore, what is the point of a loan to buy if the subject loanee isn't going to cut it in the EPL?   The teams already full of those! Our last two players signed in that system failed to step up in the EPL (Gibson and Giannoulis) which is what we signed them to do as did Normann and Kabak last season.     Would much rather we played Sorensen in the middle.    Would much rather we played Giannoulis than Williams also but clearly neither was at the level we needed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, ged in the onion bag said:

I don't know what the scouts are doing, I know what they did last summer though!   Our foundations are based on scouting good young players and yes, others are looking too but we have to be better and of course what we did offer over others was 'opportunity' which is supposed to entice players to Norfolk.    

My point is that the quality of our current squad is adequate for the Championship but nowhere near good enough for the EPL so in my view I would rather see us consolidate, gamble on a year or two of good development (like we did when we brought Farke in) then having another crack when (and if) we've developed a better squad.  Primarily because I personally would rather spend an extra season or two, or three, or five or even ten more in the Championship than experience that debacle of last season again which in my opinion is where we are headed and no one on here has addressed how on earth we would replace 8-10 players if we do get promoted which is what we would need to do.   My argument isn't flawed its just different to yours.  

We may have the players, but will never know that unless they are given opportunity which won't happen if we play other teams players and continue playing lads that can't step up like McLean, Platcheta and far too many more.  Of course, we have no right to promotion but it does come across as if everyone is expecting its inevitable!    

Our desperation for promotion and the finance the EPL provides will continue to be our undoing unless somehow we find some absolute gems which you can't argue have been few and far between since Teemu and Emi.   There is no evidence the money has helped so far.   That's now two promotions where we've come out of it with nothing left to spend and with a worse team.     And furthermore, what is the point of a loan to buy if the subject loanee isn't going to cut it in the EPL?   The teams already full of those! Our last two players signed in that system failed to step up in the EPL (Gibson and Giannoulis) which is what we signed them to do as did Normann and Kabak last season.     Would much rather we played Sorensen in the middle.    Would much rather we played Giannoulis than Williams also but clearly neither was at the level we needed. 

The issue you've raised is essentially that our owners are hopelessly and completely inadequate for top level football. They contribute nothing. And - currently at least - attract no outside investment either. So what the hell are they still doing here? Not in the interest of the club, that's for sure. 

Keeping in the Championship is not ideal - though the owners would arguably be much more comfortable - as the longer you're there, the harder it is to get back up. I have depressingly met some fans who either didn't want to go up last time and/or wanted to go down last season, which is almost unparalleled in football. Surely you want to make the most of getting back up - and staying there - because the austere way this club has been 'funded' over the last 20 years or so is not going with the tide and we've got to be careful we get washed back to League 1 until the majority shareholders realise football is does not exist for morality or community project purposes.  

  • Like 1

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

×
×
  • Create New...