Are we approaching another Windass moment?

[BlyBlyBabes 0]

Excellent manager. Difference in valuation over a key player we desire.

Manager believes he has been misled over extent of availability of transfer funds.

Manager frustrated.

Manager courted.

Manager leaves.

We''re up sh*t street again.

Just asking.

[6]

OTBC

 

[Icecream Snow 761]

I doubt it, for a start he''s just raised £800,000 selling players, and at the rate he''s shipping players out he needs replacements.

[Hog 0]

Windass moment, Martin O''Neill moment....

 

I really hope not!!!

[Mister Chops 7]

Sky falls.

Everyone dies.

[Saint Canary 0]

[quote user="Mister Chops"]

Sky falls.

Everyone dies.

[/quote]

and thats the best case scenario.

[First Wizard 0]

In answer to this question................I bloody hope not![:O]

[blahblahblah 2]

The difference between this and the Chase / O''Neill situation is that the valuation was made by Roeder.  The difference in valuation is not between our board / chairman and our manager, it''s between our manager and Karen Brady.  I have absolutely no doubt that Roeder has the contacts and expertise to find a more than adequate replacement with the money we''ve offered for Taylor.  He''s also not the type to throw his toys out of the pram, and in any case he probably feels a hell of a lot more support from the current board than O'' Neill did from Chase.Why are you so keen to find fault, Bly ? 3-1 win away not good enough for you ?

[judderman 0]

Quite right blahblahblah.Roeder has said himself that HE has made a valuation of Taylor based on his judgement, and has offered THAT amount. He''s also said he''s not prepared to offer more than that because he doesn''t think the player is worth it. This implies A: that he thinks he could get other players as good as Taylor for £750k, so he isn''t going to go above that, and B: that he does in fact have the means to offer more, he just doesn''t want to, so the board have backed him. (that''s a bit presumptious, but nonetheless I see absolutely no reason to read a conflict into this).

[Foggo_on_the wing 0]

I really can''t believe that anybody bothered answering this

 

[BlyBlyBabes 0]

As soon as he got the job Taylor was the first player Glenn went for - and decisively.

Taylor subsequently put in a string of excellent performances whilst here.

Everybody knows we need another good central defender.

It is better to keep the pressure on the NCFC board and try and avoid another manager being given a six for a nine.

If this is not the case, then fine. But the record of the board hardly fills one with confidence. Once bitten, twice shy.

One also hopes that it''s not a case of personality conflicts with the Brum folks stopping us from doing good business.

We''ll see what is what by 30th January. Not long to go.

OTBC

[Mr.Carrow 376]

Judging by Roeders` comments today it seems Bly might have been on to something.......hope not.

[jetstream 0]

Could equally be describing MacLeish at Brum:

Excellent manager. Difference in valuation over a key player he desires from Hibs - and his Club''s unwillingness to drop their price on out of favour centre half so he can get the player he actually wants.

Manager believes he has been misled over extent of availability of transfer funds.

Manager frustrated.

Manager courted.

Manager leaves.

Just saying.

[BlyBlyBabes 0]

[quote user="Foggo_on_the wing"]

I really can''t believe that anybody bothered answering this

[/quote]

I expect you''ll bother reading this as well Foggy. It''s a quote from Glenn Roeder:

"By letting them go it forces your hand - you have to get players in. And if those players hadn''t moved out the desire, motivation and determination to get players in through the door - and I mean from everyone at the club - might not have been strong enough. Now it has to be strong, and we have to find a way to get them in."

Speaks for itself I would have thought.

The strong implication is that either the NCFC board is baulking on providing ''adequate funds'' in this transfer window or Neil Doncaster is falling down on the job.

OTBC

 

 

[blahblahblah 2]

[quote user="Mr.Carrow"]Judging by Roeders` comments today it seems Bly might have been on to something.......hope not.[/quote]On what basis ?  My understanding of what Roeder said was that if he held onto the deadwood, people at the club might have been less focussed on bringing players in.  That''s not even close to a Windass moment, that''s ensuring that everybodys'' eye is on the ball during the transfer window, and in my opinion, good management.

[Cheerio 0]

Roeder set the valuation not the board. the money is there.

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

[quote user="BlyBlyBabes"]

Excellent manager. Difference in valuation over a key player we desire.

[/quote]

The issue with O''Neill and Chase wasn''t a difference in valuation

but the lack of funding to complete the signing of  Windass for £400k.  Remember the document received by Hull City arrearing in the local press?

Interesting that NCFC borrowed £2m (short term) for that first season down and we spent £650,000 on Fleck,  £300,000 for Matthew Rush and kept our squad together for a promotion push. We were top of the table when O''Neill resigned.

[BigFish 1,988]

[quote user="blahblahblah"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"]Judging by Roeders` comments today it seems Bly might have been on to something.......hope not.[/quote]

On what basis ?  My understanding of what Roeder said was that if he held onto the deadwood, people at the club might have been less focussed on bringing players in.  That''s not even close to a Windass moment, that''s ensuring that everybodys'' eye is on the ball during the transfer window, and in my opinion, good management.
[/quote]

Agreed, too many people on the thread picking over every nuance in everthing said in order to back up arguments too shaky to stand alone.

The Great Glenda has identified the big problem, for too long the squad have been padded out with players no up to it, just making up the numbers leaving an average first 11 with no competition and no back up for injuries/suspensions. So he is going to ship these out whether this is popular (Brellier, Brown, Dave S) or unpopular (Lewis, 2 x Jarvis?, Martin). This means everyone needs to be focussed on getting quality players in (it doesn''t have to be the board od Doncaster, could equally be aimed at geeing up himself and his own management team.

But then that doesn''t feed the trolls

[lucky green trainers 0]

i think you can take roeder''s ''my valuation'' quote with a pinch of salt.  worthy pre-season in the prem said he wouldn''t pay silly prices for players, but ended up paying £3.5m for dean ashton the following jan, once watling had left us a nice wedge in his will!!! shame he fell out with svennson after 2 games and went with the doc up front - no wonder only n.ireland would touch him after us, although fair play - he kept leicester up.  of course any manager wants to bring the best players in he can afford - because by definition that increases his chance of success.  so if he says ''won''t pay silly prices'' or ''above my valuation'' its simply cos the budget won''t allow it.  £1m for a good champs central defender looks to be the going price this jan window - so brum are spot on, its cos we''ve got a tight budget that we won''t meet it.i can''t see roeder wearing a paper thin squad - he''ll soon learn as worthy did, that you have to kick the bottom of the ivory tower the board live in to get anywhere.  he played too often by their rules and constaints and it did for him.  roedy won''t be going down this path, make no mistake!!!

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

[quote user="lucky green trainers"]

  worthy pre-season in the prem said he wouldn''t pay silly prices for players, but ended up paying £3.5m for dean ashton the following jan, once watling had left us a nice wedge in his will!!!
[/quote]

The first part of Ashton''s basic fee was funded by the money that B Preference shares opted to leave in the club rather than be redeemed.

 

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

[quote user="lucky green trainers"]i think you can take roeder''s ''my valuation'' quote with a pinch of salt.  worthy pre-season in the prem said he wouldn''t pay silly prices for players, but ended up paying £3.5m for dean ashton the following jan,

[/quote]

There was a piece in the Daily Telegraph some time ago that Worthington wanted to sign Ashton pre our Prem. season but there wasn''t enough money available.

 

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

[quote user="lucky green trainers"]

of course any manager wants to bring the best players in he can afford - because by definition that increases his chance of success.  so if he says ''won''t pay silly prices'' or ''above my valuation'' its simply cos the budget won''t allow it. 

£1m for a good champs central defender looks to be the going price this jan window - so brum are spot on, its cos we''ve got a tight budget that we won''t meet it.

i can''t see roeder wearing a paper thin squad - he''ll soon learn as worthy did, that you have to kick the bottom of the ivory tower the board live in to get anywhere.  he played too often by their rules and constaints and it did for him.  roedy won''t be going down this path, make no mistake!!!


[/quote]

Agreed.

The NCFC board should realise what a good manager they have. He''s digging them out of a black hole!

[Dicky 0]

Mishief making from Bly - what are the chances of that?  Very boring though.

[arrdee 2]

[quote user="Mr.Carrow"]Judging by Roeders` comments today it seems Bly might have been on to something.......hope not.[/quote]

That''s It,  that''s it,  Go on "Bly" Go on "Bly" There''s  your opening  Go for It my "Babes"  Start a new thread . Go on what are you waiting for ?  Now''s your chance [;)] arrdee. 

[sxcanaree 0]

Sorry I''m bored with this. -

From what is available in the media:

In Roy Waller''s programme before the Wolves game he asked Roger Mumby the direct question of whether the board would stump up the cash for Taylor - his careful reply was along the lines of "Yes, if it became necessary the funds would be available but we are not trading slaves here - Martin Taylor wants to come to Norwich and not QPR - these things take time to work out"

 Karren Brady advised in her column in the Sun on Saturday that she had spoken to Glen Roeder last Monday.

Glen Roeder specifically mentioned in his column in the EDP issues over "the Martin Taylor transfer" and Birmingham having a defensive crisis hence his being on the bench on Saturday against Arsenal.

I would guess therefore that we are in a similar situation to a housing chain - Once Birmingham have a replacement (or the window is about to close) Matty can go and they have an agreement to sell to us, we in turn will let Ian Murray go and Hibs want him.

Therefore I would respectfully suggest that we are about as far away as possible from a Windass/Chase moment - We have a manager who is financially astute and has the backing of the board - Glen Roeder''s concerns have been about getting the quality for the right price not that he doesn''t have the cash available and if that is what it takes then let time take its course.

OTBC

.

[Hog 0]

It is worrying that Roeder seems to be saying very very similar things as PG and NW, that its not easy, how things can change in an instance,  http://norwichcity.myfootballwriter.com/full_article.asp?i=2416

 

I just hope Roeder can prise the cash out of the Board. Wouldn''t it be amazing if we suddenly signed a decent CB and Ameobi!

Now it looks like Didier Deschamps is the new Newcastle manager I wonder if they can open that one up again.

 

I just hope and pray! that the Board back him as we all know they could.

[BlyBlyBabes 0]

[quote user="arrdee"]

[quote user="Mr.Carrow"]Judging by Roeders` comments today it seems Bly might have been on to something.......hope not.[/quote]

That''s It,  that''s it,  Go on "Bly" Go on "Bly" There''s  your opening  Go for It my "Babes"  Start a new thread . Go on what are you waiting for ?  Now''s your chance [;)] arrdee. 

[/quote]

Took my chances long ago RD.

Have you seen Roeder''s comments.

[:-*]

OTBC

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[BlyBlyBabes 0]

[quote user="sxcanaree"]

Sorry I''m bored with this. -

From what is available in the media:

In Roy Waller''s programme before the Wolves game he asked Roger Mumby the direct question of whether the board would stump up the cash for Taylor - his careful reply was along the lines of "Yes, if it became necessary the funds would be available but we are not trading slaves here - Martin Taylor wants to come to Norwich and not QPR - these things take time to work out"

 Karren Brady advised in her column in the Sun on Saturday that she had spoken to Glen Roeder last Monday.

Glen Roeder specifically mentioned in his column in the EDP issues over "the Martin Taylor transfer" and Birmingham having a defensive crisis hence his being on the bench on Saturday against Arsenal.

I would guess therefore that we are in a similar situation to a housing chain - Once Birmingham have a replacement (or the window is about to close) Matty can go and they have an agreement to sell to us, we in turn will let Ian Murray go and Hibs want him.

Therefore I would respectfully suggest that we are about as far away as possible from a Windass/Chase moment - We have a manager who is financially astute and has the backing of the board - Glen Roeder''s concerns have been about getting the quality for the right price not that he doesn''t have the cash available and if that is what it takes then let time take its course.

OTBC

.[/quote]

Wrong. He has to take the quality available that fits his pocket.

Still bored?

OTBC

 

[Mello Yello 2,296]

[quote user="Attack Barclay 2nd Half FFS"]Roeder set the valuation not the board. the money is there.
[/quote]

Evidence?

[Mr.Carrow 376]

[quote user="Mello Yello"]

[quote user="Attack Barclay 2nd Half FFS"]Roeder set the valuation not the board. the money is there.
[/quote]

Evidence?

[/quote]

Blind faith.......

[Mr.Carrow 376]

[quote user="BlyBlyBabes"][quote user="Foggo_on_the wing"]

I really can''t believe that anybody bothered answering this

[/quote]

I expect you''ll bother reading this as well Foggy. It''s a quote from Glenn Roeder:

"By letting them go it forces your hand - you have to get players in. And if those players hadn''t moved out the desire, motivation and determination to get players in through the door - and I mean from everyone at the club - might not have been strong enough. Now it has to be strong, and we have to find a way to get them in."

Speaks for itself I would have thought.

The strong implication is that either the NCFC board is baulking on providing ''adequate funds'' in this transfer window or Neil Doncaster is falling down on the job.

OTBC

 

 

[/quote]

Blah and Bigfish, i think you are capable of reading between the lines with the above statement. It is basically a better phrased and more polite version of Walkers` "loosen the pursestrings" and Worthingtons` "City must pay the going rate". I`m sure there is an O`Niell equivalent too but i can`t remember it......Roeder has made two big points to the board in one day to my mind- the statement above and the line-up at Bury. Only a few weeks to go and we`ll see what affect it has had. Are you feeling confident.....?[^o)]