Form Table

[Norwich R Us 59]

Last 8 games:http://stats.football365.com/dom/ENG/D1/oform.html

There has been plenty of "the end is nigh" type response on this board since last weeks drubbing so I urge everyone to check out the above link, it''s nothing short of outstanding and really puts the Leicester result back into perspective.Well done boys.

[Trent Canary 0]

Over 2 points a game, having scored only 9 goals in 8 games. What a turnaround.

[Branston Pickle 3,654]

We''ve hardly been banging the goals in freely in our recent run but are still managing 2pts a game since the Plymouth debacle - an 18 game span rather than the 8 that are on the form table - so even more impressive, if anything.  We had 9pts from 16 games, and now have 45 from 34 (with 10 wins 6 draws 2 defeats in that period). 

In that 18 match run we''ve only scored 23 goals, though.  It really does go to show that it is almost always sides with the stingiest defences that get out of this division, not necessarily the best nor the one that scores the most - if you can keep a clean sheet you know you have a minimum of 1 point and can easily nick all 3... 

[we8wba 0]

oh boy just look at the team 20th

swwwwwweeeeeettttttttt

watching the albion bodge up promotion AGAIN, and see them crying at wemberly in fa cup semis AGAIN is priceless

[london Canary 0]

That is very enjoyable reading.....good post!!

This season still burns alive!!!

[Scottlarock 3]

Great figures and testament to our revival. However look at the ''run in'' section close to the bottom of the page. Not so nice and skewed by our very poor start - we will really need some teams to underperform (like yesterday) consistently until the end of the season to enable us to convert the form figures into a top six finish. Here''s hoping though.

[Norwich R Us 59]

[quote user="we8wba"]

oh boy just look at the team 20th

swwwwwweeeeeettttttttt

watching the albion bodge up promotion AGAIN, and see them crying at wemberly in fa cup semis AGAIN is priceless

[/quote]We are talking about Norwich''s form on a Norwich message board. NOBODY else cares about WBA or Wolves so why do you waste so much of your time on here?

[Delias Tasty Nibblets 0]

Can anyone work out where we''d be in the table if we replicated this form again over the next 8 games? Weve gained at least 5 points on most of the playoff teams in this period. With 4 games left the table would look very interesting..

[chicken 0]

[quote user="we8wba"]

oh boy just look at the team 20th

swwwwwweeeeeettttttttt

watching the albion bodge up promotion AGAIN, and see them crying at wemberly in fa cup semis AGAIN is priceless

[/quote]I think the biggest laugh has to go to Wolves - multi-million-pound, mid-table, blank-firing strike force! Admittedly our strikeforce isn''t firing in goals by the bucket load but then again the most expencive was £750k - thats about half as much as your cheapest!

[we8wba 0]

[quote user="chicken"][quote user="we8wba"]

oh boy just look at the team 20th

swwwwwweeeeeettttttttt

watching the albion bodge up promotion AGAIN, and see them crying at wemberly in fa cup semis AGAIN is priceless

[/quote]

I think the biggest laugh has to go to Wolves - multi-million-pound, mid-table, blank-firing strike force! Admittedly our strikeforce isn''t firing in goals by the bucket load but then again the most expencive was £750k - thats about half as much as your cheapest!
[/quote]

our average age in the squad is 24 so what if he doesnt go right this season, we team for future

admitingly you could say same about norwich you still spent couple million in the summer on marshall breiller strikhava russell cureton

so you hardly made signings of the year - pot calling kettle black

[Buncey 1]

[quote user="we8wba"][quote user="chicken"][quote user="we8wba"]

oh boy just look at the team 20th

swwwwwweeeeeettttttttt

watching the albion bodge up promotion AGAIN, and see them crying at wemberly in fa cup semis AGAIN is priceless

[/quote]I think the biggest laugh has to go to Wolves - multi-million-pound, mid-table, blank-firing strike force! Admittedly our strikeforce isn''t firing in goals by the bucket load but then again the most expencive was £750k - thats about half as much as your cheapest![/quote]

our average age in the squad is 24 so what if he doesnt go right this season, we team for future

admitingly you could say same about norwich you still spent couple million in the summer on marshall breiller strikhava russell cureton

so you hardly made signings of the year - pot calling kettle black

[/quote]Marshall - 1millionBrellier - FreeStrihavka - 250kRussell - 400kCureton - 750kAdds up to £2.4 million. Not even as much as we sold earnshaw for. Let alone etuhu and Safri. Don''t try to make things up that you don''t even know about.

[we8wba 0]

you still spent 2.4m

bristol c spent less and above both of us

how am i making things up? i said norwich spent couple millions is that correct? not saying net cost etc... norwich spent a couple of million

[Boyo 0]

[quote user="we8wba"]

oh boy just look at the team 20th

swwwwwweeeeeettttttttt

watching the albion bodge up promotion AGAIN, and see them crying at wemberly in fa cup semis AGAIN is priceless

[/quote]

Yeh but look at the team in second!!!!!

[Buncey 1]

[quote user="we8wba"]

you still spent 2.4m

bristol c spent less and above both of us

how am i making things up? i said norwich spent couple millions is that correct? not saying net cost etc... norwich spent a couple of million

[/quote]1. We spent £2.4 million in replacing £6 million pounds worth of players. £2.4m is an average spend for a ccc side, let alone if they sell their 3 best players...2. Bristol City spent about £2million. Let alone the numerous amounts of free-transfers they got. So infact on the face of things their transfer outflow is significantly greater than norwich''s3. Well you seem to be making things up. You had no idea how much we have spent this season. You declared "pot calling kettle black" when infact we have spent almost nothing compared to wolves. Turns out we spent as much on all our players we brought in than you did on one player. Hmmm, but of course lets not get facts in the way of opinions. Good stuff, keep up the daft posts mate!

[we8wba 0]

[quote user="Fellas"][quote user="we8wba"]

you still spent 2.4m

bristol c spent less and above both of us

how am i making things up? i said norwich spent couple millions is that correct? not saying net cost etc... norwich spent a couple of million

[/quote]

1. We spent £2.4 million in replacing £6 million pounds worth of players. £2.4m is an average spend for a ccc side, let alone if they sell their 3 best players...
2. Bristol City spent about £2million. Let alone the numerous amounts of free-transfers they got. So infact on the face of things their transfer outflow is significantly greater than norwich''s
3. Well you seem to be making things up. You had no idea how much we have spent this season. You declared "pot calling kettle black" when infact we have spent almost nothing compared to wolves. Turns out we spent as much on all our players we brought in than you did on one player. Hmmm, but of course lets not get facts in the way of opinions. Good stuff, keep up the daft posts mate!
[/quote]

you not read my last post?? NOT net costs

but the actual transfers fee''s norwich have spent more, you may say free etc... but you do know not all loans are free dont you?

[chicken 0]

[quote user="we8wba"][quote user="Fellas"][quote user="we8wba"]

you still spent 2.4m

bristol c spent less and above both of us

how am i making things up? i said norwich spent couple millions is that correct? not saying net cost etc... norwich spent a couple of million

[/quote]1. We spent £2.4 million in replacing £6 million pounds worth of players. £2.4m is an average spend for a ccc side, let alone if they sell their 3 best players...2. Bristol City spent about £2million. Let alone the numerous amounts of free-transfers they got. So infact on the face of things their transfer outflow is significantly greater than norwich''s3. Well you seem to be making things up. You had no idea how much we have spent this season. You declared "pot calling kettle black" when infact we have spent almost nothing compared to wolves. Turns out we spent as much on all our players we brought in than you did on one player. Hmmm, but of course lets not get facts in the way of opinions. Good stuff, keep up the daft posts mate![/quote]

you not read my last post?? NOT net costs

but the actual transfers fee''s norwich have spent more, you may say free etc... but you do know not all loans are free dont you?

[/quote]Ok well throw into that then that Norwich are one of the lowest spenders on agents fees. Loans are not all free but I don''t think we would be paying much for guys that have not seen first team action before do you?When I was talking about your strike force - I wasn''t merely refering to last summer or January''s signings, I was talking about all of them excluding your home grown youngsters:Jay Bothroyd - freeAndy Keogh - £600,000 initialKevin Kyle - loan Stephen Ward - Undisclosed.Stephen Elliot - £750,000 + Ebanks Blake - £1.5millionEastwood - £1.5millionFor an attacking force that cost you £4.25million at the very least how many more goals have you got? All I am trying to say buddy is that if I was a Wolves fan I would be a bit worried. Most of those players were signed by McCarthy and that doesn''t include any other positions around the team and yet you could hardly claim that Wolves are doing much better than Norwich whose entire strike force cost £750k plus loan and signing on fees which is not going to come above £1million. Wolves have 33 players recorded as being in their first team squad of which 3 are loans and 6 are 21 or younger (for the purpose of this exercise we will call them youth team players or inexperienced).Norwich in turn have 31 players 6 are loand players (7 if you include Bates who has returned to Middlesborough through injury), and a further 11 players that are 21 or younger - in most cases youth accadamy players that are yet to even hit 20. David Marshall - although costing us an initial £750,000 is only 22 - an absolute bargin when you compare it to the cost of other keepers around. Our average age is pushed up by one or two experienced players such as Dublin, Huckerby and Cureton.As I said originally - on paper Wolves have a better squad which has cost them more money to assemble. I wouldn''t be that chuffed to see them only a couple of points above Norwich. Arguably marginally better - which for all of that money I would expect a team to be in at least the play-offs.I don''t think our squad cost as much to assemble as your strike force.And I hasten to add this is not personal - I am just trying to point out to you that you are probably quite right to say that as Wolves are two points and two places above Norwich that at this moment in time they are better in every aspect appart from one - who is better value for money? I think you would find that hard to argue. Wolves have either paid over the odds for some of these players or the players have something going on that is stopping them from scoring?!!

[we8wba 0]

good points chicken i like it when people come back with well thought out responses instead of one liners such as wolves crap haha

our current first team i would say fairly cheap when considering teams like wba and sheffutd but to yours agreed ours is a bit more spent on, not alot i must say but it is.

our agents fees were lower than yours just to let you know, but its not competition we both under the average and credit to both clubs i would say with amount of in and outs in last 12months

our strikers arent really the problem to be honest its the service to them, without kightly we are nothing creative.

amount of times our strikers have to generate there own chances are unbelieble think count number one on one we had on one hand which is poor

we have lowest age squad i think or one lowest

only craddock, ward, breen, gray are aged above 26 which is credit to us as yes we spending money but not on 30-31yr olds we did when we went up. so our team may need few years

looks like norwich maybe trying to do the same, if you look at their loaness, instead of loaning experience players roeder is giving the youth a chance and credit to him for doing that

with wolves i dont mind if they lose if they give 100% when youngsters, its just im not seeing 100% in currently, but hopefully that will change

good luck chicken

[Buncey 1]

[quote user="we8wba"][quote user="Fellas"][quote user="we8wba"]

you still spent 2.4m

bristol c spent less and above both of us

how am i making things up? i said norwich spent couple millions is that correct? not saying net cost etc... norwich spent a couple of million

[/quote]1. We spent £2.4 million in replacing £6 million pounds worth of players. £2.4m is an average spend for a ccc side, let alone if they sell their 3 best players...2. Bristol City spent about £2million. Let alone the numerous amounts of free-transfers they got. So infact on the face of things their transfer outflow is significantly greater than norwich''s3. Well you seem to be making things up. You had no idea how much we have spent this season. You declared "pot calling kettle black" when infact we have spent almost nothing compared to wolves. Turns out we spent as much on all our players we brought in than you did on one player. Hmmm, but of course lets not get facts in the way of opinions. Good stuff, keep up the daft posts mate![/quote]

you not read my last post?? NOT net costs

but the actual transfers fee''s norwich have spent more, you may say free etc... but you do know not all loans are free dont you?

[/quote]welove wba. You still seem to misunderstand my point.Both wolves, nowich and bristol city, spent money on the squad. Howeve both bristol city and wolves did not sell most of their key players, their players were brought in too improve the side and in doing so wolves spent well over the average amount spent by a ccc team and bristol city an average amount. They spent in excess of £2million let alone their free signings and their loan players. So infact Bristol city and Norwich have spent a similar amount of money. However! we must take into account the fact that norwich have sold more players for more money than they have brought in, so in effect we have built a team for -£3 million. Which on the face of things isn''t bad, seems like pretty good value to me.Now, this is where you and I really do seem to lose track. You say that both norwich and wolves have spent "a couple of million" and bristol city have spent less. I have already proved bristol city have not, so we will scrub that out. Now you are effectively saying that Norwich and wolves have spent the same, and if not the same a similar amount. After all you can''t vary the value of a couple of million by more than say a million.After adding up Chicken''s figures we see that wolves have infact spent over £5 million pounds in players, where norwich have in my estimated (and uppoer bounded figures) a total of £2.4 million. One is double the other, this is where my problem with your interpretation of the figures lies.

In addition, another fine post chicken.