Dads army

[Dean Coneys boots 1,400]

With games coming thick and fast until Christmas the age of our team, coupled with the quality of our wider squad, has to be a concern.8/11 players today were over 30 - and that was the oldest average age team since 1980. 

I think  this has been a factor in our demise. Few players are hungry to prove themselves, most on final pay check seasons. How did we go from such young and hungry team to this so quickly? It doesn’t bode well for future either with so little resale value. Knapper has very little to work with 

 

[BroadstairsR 2,173]

Throw in the financial limitations the club has, and we have to hope that the academy produces the goods sooner rather than later.

If we find ourselves having to sell Rowe and Sara, then things could get worse.

 

[Dean Coneys boots 1,400]

Yes- this summer hasn’t helped us. Three year contract for Duffy looks awful business. I fear we might end up with another season like Roeder’s when we can’t afford signings and have to go for substandard loans. I do fear that relegation in next two seasons is a real possibility unless we hit on a couple of gems coming through from the youth ranks 

[KiwiScot 1,446]

I don't buy this aged squad being the reason. Before we were filling the squad with young, cheap unknowns and we were screaming out for some known, experienced, physical, marque signings. Well we got them. We are still adding from our youth team who we at least signed 7 players for this season. It's just the same reason as before that we don''t have the money to buy anything other than risks. Duffy in the example is just a big disappointment, but seemed a good idea at the time.

It's more the natural fallout from being a Yoyo club readjusting the squad for the up, then for the down and having the best bits picked away.

 

[lake district canary 4,531]

1 hour ago, Dean Coneys boots said:

With games coming thick and fast until Christmas the age of our team, coupled with the quality of our wider squad, has to be a concern.8/11 players today were over 30 - and that was the oldest average age team since 1980.

That's astonishing, I hadn't realised........and Wagner's Huddersfield success was down to a huge reliance on youth and athleticism.

So much for bringing through young players, which was supposed to be the plan and a big part of our strategy. Watching the decision making and the way things have gone has been quite surreal - and the folly of sacking Farke looks ever more stark. We had a plan and it has gone pear shaped so quickly it's bizzarre - and it needn't have been.

No doubt we will come good again at some point, there will be another rebuild, another plan, but the paucity of what we have now is so unnecessary. "Naive" is the word that comes to mind. We had something good, a plan, an ethic and just....well....threw it away.

Young players should be at the forefront of the team and to have 8 of the 11 over 30 in this day and age of youth and atleticism just highlights the point of where we are. Where are all the young hopefuls?

[littleyellowbirdie 2,551]

 How on Earth is there a thread like this a day after three points and a clean sheet? I could understand disenchantment with the quality of the football, but criticising the work effort and hunger is absurd.

Edited November 26, 2023 by littleyellowbirdie

[littleyellowbirdie 2,551]

12 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

That's astonishing, I hadn't realised........and Wagner's Huddersfield success was down to a huge reliance on youth and athleticism.

So much for bringing through young players, which was supposed to be the plan and a big part of our strategy. Watching the decision making and the way things have gone has been quite surreal - and the folly of sacking Farke looks ever more stark. We had a plan and it has gone pear shaped so quickly it's bizzarre - and it needn't have been.

No doubt we will come good again at some point, there will be another rebuild, another plan, but the paucity of what we have now is so unnecessary. "Naive" is the word that comes to mind. We had something good, a plan, an ethic and just....well....threw it away.

Young players should be at the forefront of the team and to have 8 of the 11 over 30 in this day and age of youth and atleticism just highlights the point of where we are. Where are all the young hopefuls?

You really did have a f**king nerve telling me to 'move on from Dean Smith'.

[Canary Jedi 579]

2 hours ago, Dean Coneys boots said:

With games coming thick and fast until Christmas the age of our team, coupled with the quality of our wider squad, has to be a concern.8/11 players today were over 30 - and that was the oldest average age team since 1980. 

I think  this has been a factor in our demise. Few players are hungry to prove themselves, most on final pay check seasons. How did we go from such young and hungry team to this so quickly? It doesn’t bode well for future either with so little resale value. Knapper has very little to work with 

 

In the spirit of the thread title…

[lake district canary 4,531]

30 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

You really did have a f**king nerve telling me to 'move on from Dean Smith'.

Nope. My admiration for a manager who had achieved so much with us, despite the lack of resources and an SD who couldn't get him the players he needed is different to your fetish with Smith who was clearly wrong for us from day one, dismantled anything that was good from the previous era and was clearly leading us nowhere. 

[Robert N. LiM 4,365]

42 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

 How on Earth is there a thread like this a day after three points and a clean sheet? I could understand disenchantment with the quality of the football, but criticising the work effort and hunger is absurd.

Your first time with DCB?

[cambridgeshire canary 6,722]

It is funny how we used to complain about how our players were too young and inexperienced only to now start moaning about the opposite

[Indy 3,300]

As always it’s all or nothing with our manager! Rowe has proven that game time is needed to develop youngster, to fill our starting. 11 with journeymen stifles the likes of Fisher, Gibbs & Warner.

I’m all for adding experience as needed but we really didn’t add any quality but filled out the squad with free released signings.

Agreed as said above we have indeed added to our youth system too and I had hoped we would see more balanced first 11, utilising Sainz now he’s fit, Idah, Warner and Fisher all of whom are as good as the current 11 in their position and have the potential to improve! They’re not going to do it sitting on their ****!

We can write off this season and build for the future and you can’t do that fielding 9 old pros which by all accounts scraped a win against a bottom 3 side!

[norfolkngood 1,087]

22 minutes ago, Indy said:

As always it’s all or nothing with our manager! Rowe has proven that game time is needed to develop youngster, to fill our starting. 11 with journeymen stifles the likes of Fisher, Gibbs & Warner.

I’m all for adding experience as needed but we really didn’t add any quality but filled out the squad with free released signings.

Agreed as said above we have indeed added to our youth system too and I had hoped we would see more balanced first 11, utilising Sainz now he’s fit, Idah, Warner and Fisher all of whom are as good as the current 11 in their position and have the potential to improve! They’re not going to do it sitting on their ****!

We can write off this season and build for the future and you can’t do that fielding 9 old pros which by all accounts scraped a win against a bottom 3 side!

We need to go for Younger players like we said yesterday hungry to move up and progress ,

it will take years to rebuild a team again 3/4 Transfer windows to get rid if we can of older players ,

Sara and Rowe are the only ones worth keeping really and Sarge IF ( you never know how serious injuries effects players )  he ever gets back to how he was before his injury ,

Barnes is the older Experience every time needs like Barkley at Luton 

The rest do we really get our Money's worth out of ? 

 

 

 

[Branston Pickle 3,660]

I have to say this idea that players are washed up/don’t give a crap when they reach 30 is a new one on me…and definitely not an argument I ever saw when we had the likes of Pukki, Hucks, Wes, Grant et al playing for us well into their 30s.

Some just want to make up a new argument/stick to beat the club with every day, and it is ridiculous. There were few complaints when we started the season well, and on other threads they are talking about how well Batth played, but in this one his age is used against him. It’s just weird.

[lake district canary 4,531]

2 minutes ago, Branston Pickle said:

I have to say this idea that players are washed up/don’t give a crap when they reach 30 is a new one on me…and definitely not an argument I ever saw when we had the likes of Pukki, Hucks, Wes, Grant et al playing for us well into their 30s.

Some just want to make up a new argument/stick to beat the club with every day, and it is ridiculous. There were few complaints when we started the season well, and on other threads they are talking about how well Batth played, but in this one his age is used against him. It’s just weird.

Surely to have 8 players over 30 in a starting line up is worthy of discussion?  It's not just about Batth - and having so many older players certainly doesn't stack up against the supposed policy of having plenty of young players coming through.

[Indy 3,300]

9 minutes ago, Branston Pickle said:

I have to say this idea that players are washed up/don’t give a crap when they reach 30 is a new one on me…and definitely not an argument I ever saw when we had the likes of Pukki, Hucks, Wes, Grant et al playing for us well into their 30s.

Some just want to make up a new argument/stick to beat the club with every day, and it is ridiculous. There were few complaints when we started the season well, and on other threads they are talking about how well Batth played, but in this one his age is used against him. It’s just weird.

Only you have said they’re washed up or crap the rest are debating the fact we have so many in the starting line up with little improvement and as said we go from one extreme to the other! If they were a serious improvement on those youngsters we have seen them I’d have little complaint but they’re really not and will hamper our development of building for the future. Just a discussion!

[Branston Pickle 3,660]

6 minutes ago, Indy said:

Only you have said they’re washed up or crap the rest are debating the fact we have so many in the starting line up with little improvement and as said we go from one extreme to the other! If they were a serious improvement on those youngsters we have seen them I’d have little complaint but they’re really not and will hamper our development of building for the future. Just a discussion!

Oh really.  I must have misread the comment “Few players are hungry to prove themselves, most on final pay check season”

It is just another excuse for the OP to have a whinge - by all means a discussion point but I wasn’t aware there was suddenly a massive drop off when you hit 30.  Particularly when considering that some of our recent best players are firmly in that age range.

Of course, the ideal is to have a mix, but when some of your better younger players - Rowe, Sargent, Nunez, Sainz, Gunn (younger than Long) - either aren’t fit/ready to start, it is sometimes going to be different.  It is what it is. 

Edited November 26, 2023 by Branston Pickle

[Indy 3,300]

5 minutes ago, Branston Pickle said:

Oh really.  I must have misread the comment “Few players are hungry to prove themselves, most on final pay check season”

It is just another excuse for the OP to have a whinge - by all means a discussion point but I wasn’t aware there was suddenly a massive drop off when you hit 30. 

And that’s pretty true, most players over 30 don’t have the hunger they just play! None of our will improve their game as they get to the end of their playing days! Very few carry on and that’s proven by the fact very few teams have 8 over 30’s starting.

[Midlands Yellow 3,986]

Could Theo Walcott be the wide player with skill and end product City fans covet? Recently retired so no fee for a possible play as you pay option. Only 34 too so fits in with our current purchasing model. 

 

 

 

[Branston Pickle 3,660]

17 minutes ago, Indy said:

And that’s pretty true, most players over 30 don’t have the hunger they just play! None of our will improve their game as they get to the end of their playing days! Very few carry on and that’s proven by the fact very few teams have 8 over 30’s starting.

I simply don’t agree that players are disinterested or just looking for their psycheque just because they are 30.  Particularly when you consider some of our best recent players.

But the point is that we don’t usually play with 8 over 30, either - it was more than likely a one-off.  When Gunn is fit he replaces Long; when Sargent is fit he replaces Hwang (or Barnes), when Sainz is up to speed he replaces Onel (hopefully), maybe Fisher will replace Stacey, McCallum for Dimi, Gibbs/Nunez for Kenny.  [If 30 is the yardstick, the main concern is that our main cb’s are all pretty much there].

For those who are complaining, what is the “acceptable” number of 30+ players?  I just wasn’t aware it was a ‘thing’.  We seem to have moved on from complaining about poor injury records to moaning about the age of players. 

Edited November 26, 2023 by Branston Pickle

[hogesar 9,676]

Duffy has had an awful season and I really don't rate him but he's certainly not a last-paycheque kind of guy!

Certainly criticise the quality but this thread seems to be criticising the older signings for a lack of care and effort yet the likes of Duffy, Baath, Stacey, Barnes and McLean seem to be the ones who care and drive the team the most.

 

[hogesar 9,676]

17 minutes ago, Branston Pickle said:

I simply don’t agree that players are disinterested or just looking for their psycheque just because they are 30.

But the point is that we don’t usually play with 8 over 30, either - it was more than likely a one-off.  When Gunn is fit he replaces Long; when Sargent is fit he replaces Hwang (or Barnes), when Sainz is up to speed he replaces Onel (hopefully), maybe Fisher will replace Stacey, McCallum for Dimi, Nunez for Kenny.

For those who are complaining, what is the “acceptable” number of 30+ players?  I just wasn’t aware it was a ‘thing’.  I’d much prefer to lay our better players that are fit than worry about such things.

Yes normally Gunn, Sargent, Rowe and possibly Sainz all start alongside either Gibson or Hanley who are both younger than our current CBs. Which then makes us the average for this division.

[Branston Pickle 3,660]

6 minutes ago, hogesar said:

Yes normally Gunn, Sargent, Rowe and possibly Sainz all start alongside either Gibson or Hanley who are both younger than our current CBs. Which then makes us the average for this division.

It is an interesting one, though - for the cb’s we have been waiting on Hanley to return to fitness,  but he is well in that 30+ bracket (having recently turned 32) but still one of our quickest players.

Edited November 26, 2023 by Branston Pickle

[littleyellowbirdie 2,551]

2 hours ago, lake district canary said:

Nope. My admiration for a manager who had achieved so much with us, despite the lack of resources and an SD who couldn't get him the players he needed is different to your fetish with Smith who was clearly wrong for us from day one, dismantled anything that was good from the previous era and was clearly leading us nowhere. 

Sorry, I don't think about Dean Smith at all. It's you who has fetishised Farke to a ridiculous extent. He was great in the championship and dire in the premier League. I mean really awful. Record-breakingly awful. For Christ's sake shut up about Farke or start supporting Leeds.

You can make excuses about investment all you want, but Lambert had virtually no investment, but managed to survive with 12th on promotion. And overall, we can see there was really nothing that special about Lambert himself, but he was flexible and pragmatic in his approach, which Farke wasn't, and that was the big difference.  It has probably got harder to survive since then, but even so, Farke's entire season at Premier League level was absolutely absystmal with two all-time Norwich greats in the squad in Pukki and Buendia.

Edited November 26, 2023 by littleyellowbirdie

[Dean Coneys boots 1,400]

2 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

 How on Earth is there a thread like this a day after three points and a clean sheet? I could understand disenchantment with the quality of the football, but criticising the work effort and hunger is absurd.

Did you actually watch the game. We huffed and puffed and just edged a game against one the most plodding and toothless sides to come to Carrow road in years. I saw very little quality to suggest a renaissance is incoming and I do worry about a packed schedule with such an aged first xi (in terms of elite sport) 

[Gordon Bennett 784]

3 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

 How on Earth is there a thread like this a day after three points and a clean sheet? I could understand disenchantment with the quality of the football, but criticising the work effort and hunger is absurd.

Yep, I just wish people would enjoy the wins when they come rather than bleating all weekend. The next defeat will no doubt be just round the corner, moan then!

[littleyellowbirdie 2,551]

13 minutes ago, Dean Coneys boots said:

Did you actually watch the game. We huffed and puffed and just edged a game against one the most plodding and toothless sides to come to Carrow road in years. I saw very little quality to suggest a renaissance is incoming and I do worry about a packed schedule with such an aged first xi (in terms of elite sport) 

It's three points. It's a clean sheet. It's two wins on the trot. We're mid season and the club is in a big transition. All I'm interested in is getting through the season and seeing what Knapper does in the summer. And seeing us win games.

Incidentally, Farke's premier League season was our worst points tally since 1903.

Edited November 26, 2023 by littleyellowbirdie

[Indy 3,300]

1 hour ago, Branston Pickle said:

I simply don’t agree that players are disinterested or just looking for their psycheque just because they are 30.  Particularly when you consider some of our best recent players.

But the point is that we don’t usually play with 8 over 30, either - it was more than likely a one-off.  When Gunn is fit he replaces Long; when Sargent is fit he replaces Hwang (or Barnes), when Sainz is up to speed he replaces Onel (hopefully), maybe Fisher will replace Stacey, McCallum for Dimi, Gibbs/Nunez for Kenny.  [If 30 is the yardstick, the main concern is that our main cb’s are all pretty much there].

For those who are complaining, what is the “acceptable” number of 30+ players?  I just wasn’t aware it was a ‘thing’.  We seem to have moved on from complaining about poor injury records to moaning about the age of players. 

Yet again you go on about it as though we’re having a moan, what’s being discussed is there’s little improvement in playing the older players, Duffy shouldn’t be anywhere near the starting 11 and Warner should be there in my opinion, if not starting certainly on the bench, same for Fisher and Gibbs. If the old pros play and deserve their spot so be it, but by filling the match day squad with old journeymen who in two seasons will be struggling to play league 2 we’re not developing the youth players! 
As I said a balance is required, we didn’t see it and when Hanley comes back then we’re going to have 4 30+ CB stifling Warners development.

My view and I stand by all the other seasons especially in the early mid 2000’s when we kept going down this route and not developing. All opinions my friends, load of 30+ old journeymen released on free by others at our level isn’t a great summer in terms of signings!

[Branston Pickle 3,660]

16 minutes ago, Indy said:

Yet again you go on about it as though we’re having a moan, what’s being discussed is there’s little improvement in playing the older players, Duffy shouldn’t be anywhere near the starting 11 and Warner should be there in my opinion, if not starting certainly on the bench, same for Fisher and Gibbs. If the old pros play and deserve their spot so be it, but by filling the match day squad with old journeymen who in two seasons will be struggling to play league 2 we’re not developing the youth players! 
As I said a balance is required, we didn’t see it and when Hanley comes back then we’re going to have 4 30+ CB stifling Warners development.

My view and I stand by all the other seasons especially in the early mid 2000’s when we kept going down this route and not developing. All opinions my friends, load of 30+ old journeymen released on free by others at our level isn’t a great summer in terms of signings!

I’m not ‘going on about’ anything - just giving my opinion that differs to yours (and replying to replies). Neither is necessarily right or wrong, but it is odd to complain about 30+ ‘journeymen’ when this category of player includes some of the best we have seen.  And I have already said cb is probably the main area of concern if we are looking at the age of players.

Clearly in an ideal world we’d have a mix of youth/experience, but we don’t live in an ideal world and will occasionally have a young side out (maybe not often with our current squad!) or an older one.  I just don’t think it’s that big a big deal as long as the players are good enough.

Edited November 26, 2023 by Branston Pickle

[littleyellowbirdie 2,551]

3 minutes ago, Branston Pickle said:

I’m not ‘going on about’ anything - just giving my opinion that differs to yours. Neither is necessarily right or wrong, but it is odd to complain about 30+ ‘journeymen’ when this category of player includes some of the best we have seen.

Clearly in an ideal world we’d have a mix of youth/experience, but we don’t live in an ideal world and will occasionally have a very young side out (maybe not often with our current squad) or an older one.  I just don’t think it’s that big a big deal as long as the players are good enough.

Plus, if we've over-compensated in the direction of older and experienced (I'm not convinced we've gone too far), that only creates a better environment for our younger academy products to come through and have the chance to learn faster in the first team.

Edited November 26, 2023 by littleyellowbirdie