We've heard it all before Mr Munby!

[Rudolph Hucker 0]

Sadly, the Board backed Grant far too well in the summer and in sacking him and clearing out most of what he brought in plus signing Roeder and who Roeder wanted as staff spent a tidy sum I suspect.

It seems to me Roeder has his pot, he wasn''t prepared to overspend on Taylor and has surely saved significant sums in wages while bringing in some transfer monies since arriving and is keeping his powder dry until the summer.

Of course, we are not out of the promotion scene just yet and if a miracle did happen Roeder would need to find a different type of player although I also suspect he is looking to pick up young talent capable of being groomed to Premiership class.

[nutty nigel 7,533]

[quote user="1st Wizard"]

I have waited for every summer since Mike Walker II mate, and still this board hasn''t really backed any manager, let alone Glen  Roeder, cry wolf indeed.

As soon as City have sold their season tickets, out will come Mr Doncaster explaining why we must be prudent.

Its as certain as night follows day.[:|]

[/quote]

I thought you were at least as old as me Wiz. I go back to the mid 60''s and don''t remember summers any different. In fact the great benchmarking summer of 1972, as we prepared for our first ever go in the top flight, there were no signings at all.

 

[Rudolph Hucker 0]

In addition, I honestly do not believe Roeder sees his future long term as a Championship manager. He wants to be in the Premier League and in taking the managers job at Norwich surely had a plan as to how he could acheive this. For me, as i have said before, this means bringing in bright young talent, because, very few players come through their Club youth ranks and make a career at those Clubs., most move on, even those of the quality of Bentley.

In Norwich terms this has happened in the career development of Joe Lewis, occasionally we unearth a top talent we sell for serious money but, if you are a top Premiership side, like Arsenal, unless you are turning out a truly exceptional player you move him on. For this reason, Roeder may be providing the stepping stone for young players sold on our Club by being here. I find this approach very exciting.

[Trent Canary 0]

[quote user="Barry Brockes"]And maybe it is just a co-incidence that the day after we read that the Board will be fully supporting the Manager in the summer lo and behold there''s an article in the EDP reminding people that the closing date for obtaining a discount on season tickets is upon us. Well, well, well.[/quote]

Agreed. But its just basic marketing strategies, I would be worried if they werent trying them.

Lets just hope Roeder does get the money, and for once im actually optimistic about it. I think with Roeders reputation fully intact, he would not hesitate to look elsewhere if he was not given the funds here,

[Arthur Whittle 0]

More club spin to lure in season ticket holders to renew.

[Boot 0]

[quote user="Arthur Whittle"]More club spin to lure in season ticket holders to renew.[/quote]

And this is a problem how exactly?

Sorry to blind you with economic science but the more season tickets sold the greater the amount of money available for players. If people believe that we are going to sign large numbers of top quality players (or indeed any top quality players) in the summer they are deluded, there is no way it can happen - there I said it!

What may happen is that we might keep a couple of the loan signings on a permanent deal and buy two or three good (but not exceptional)players to strengthen the squad.  There may even be some more capital investment in the ground (shock horror!).  In short exactly the same as every other year in the past and exactly the same as every other year going forward. 

[First Wizard 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="1st Wizard"]

I have waited for every summer since Mike Walker II mate, and still this board hasn''t really backed any manager, let alone Glen  Roeder, cry wolf indeed.

As soon as City have sold their season tickets, out will come Mr Doncaster explaining why we must be prudent.

Its as certain as night follows day.[:|]

[/quote]

I thought you were at least as old as me Wiz. I go back to the mid 60''s and don''t remember summers any different. In fact the great benchmarking summer of 1972, as we prepared for our first ever go in the top flight, there were no signings at all.

 

[/quote]

I am Nutty mate. My first City game was in 1957.

I just used Mike mark II as a reference point. I know Chase messed up big time, but in his early days we,did seem able to hold our own with the best.

Unlike with the present shower![:(]

[BigFish 1,986]

[quote user="Arthur Whittle"]More club spin to lure in season ticket holders to renew.[/quote]

Whats wrong with that, Arthur?

[WeAreYellows49 0]

[quote user="Sing up the river end "]

Oh you must be the greatest supporter in the world.Actualy I sit in one of the most vocal areas of the ground and always join in backing the team.It is the way the club is run for off field activitys and no money is spent on the team that i am not renewing.This is a football club where the football doesn''t  come first sadly.

[/quote]

 

I can''t say I blame you for feeling how you do, at one point or another I am sure each fan has felt the way you feel right now about NCFC, and some still do.  I personally don''t go to support the board, they don''t run on the pitch (apart from queen delia-la-la) when she''s has far too much fizzy stuff, it''s the players I go to support.  Not only that it''s the social aspect of it too, meeting up with mates before the game for a few drinks and something to eat.

We were debating in December if we should renew, after all it''s a lot of dosh for two adults.  We gave GR until Jan and he has proved that he''s got nothing but NC at heart and making the team a success, he''s worked wonders really all things considered, and who knows what will happen next season.  Hand on heart I am yella n green to the core, and it would have to be bad at the club for me to say a definate no Im not renewing.

I said recently, if you don''t renew, and NC have a good season next year, we head towards PO''s, wouldn''t you be kicking yourself if you couldn''t get a ticket for a match?  I know I would, but thats each individuals choice and their right.

I had to wait years for a season ticket, then purely by luck a fellow fan who we knew didnt go anymore (under the thumb syndrome), so he sold his ticket to me.

Of course there is always the option of becoming a member and getting so many matches a season, which if I were in your position would be doing.

 

[Trent Canary 0]

[quote user="Arthur Whittle"]More club spin to lure in season ticket holders to renew.[/quote]

Again, just basic marketing techniques. And seeing as though we have one of the best supported clubs in the championship id suggest we are doing something right.

[Arthur Whittle 0]

[quote user="Boot"]

[quote user="Arthur Whittle"]More club spin to lure in season ticket holders to renew.[/quote]

And this is a problem how exactly?

Sorry to blind you with economic science but the more season tickets sold the greater the amount of money available for players. If people believe that we are going to sign large numbers of top quality players (or indeed any top quality players) in the summer they are deluded, there is no way it can happen - there I said it!

What may happen is that we might keep a couple of the loan signings on a permanent deal and buy two or three good (but not exceptional)players to strengthen the squad.  There may even be some more capital investment in the ground (shock horror!).  In short exactly the same as every other year in the past and exactly the same as every other year going forward. 

[/quote]

I agree,the more season tickets sold the more spent on players in theroy but explain to me how clubs like Stoke manage to spend more on players than we do? Kind of proves a point about ambition. Why have we the most season ticket holders in the league and yet we still spend less than many clubs.

[Boot 0]

[quote user="Arthur Whittle"][quote user="Boot"]

[quote user="Arthur Whittle"]More club spin to lure in season ticket holders to renew.[/quote]

And this is a problem how exactly?

Sorry to blind you with economic science but the more season tickets sold the greater the amount of money available for players. If people believe that we are going to sign large numbers of top quality players (or indeed any top quality players) in the summer they are deluded, there is no way it can happen - there I said it!

What may happen is that we might keep a couple of the loan signings on a permanent deal and buy two or three good (but not exceptional)players to strengthen the squad.  There may even be some more capital investment in the ground (shock horror!).  In short exactly the same as every other year in the past and exactly the same as every other year going forward. 

[/quote]

I agree,the more season tickets sold the more spent on players in theroy but explain to me how clubs like Stoke manage to spend more on players than we do? Kind of proves a point about ambition. Why have we the most season ticket holders in the league and yet we still spend less than many clubs.

[/quote]

It would certainly be a good point if Stoke did indeed spend more on players than Norwich over a given time period.  We have been getting decent crowds for about the last 5 years or so - maybe a bit longer, and I have no idea how much Stoke have spent on players over the last 5 years but I would be more than surprised if we hadn''t spent more during the same time - which would kind of prove my point not yours don''t you thnk?

[Old Shuck 183]

Isn''t one of the Stoke owners one of the wealthiest men in Europe? I am sure someone from Stoke was in the 442 "Rich List" not so long back, and in the top 10 or thereabouts-with Delia and Michael floundering back at about No.80!

I think Stoke have at least two very wealthy backers on their Board.

The argument that it is "our football club" doesn''t really sit with the great and good at most clubs now-to them, its only "your club" if you are a shareholder, someone who, to them, ''just'' comes to games, week in, week out, is no more able to say the club is theirs, than I am to say Esso are my company because I fill my car up with their petrol. Sad but true.

Agree with most posters on here really-lets see what happens in the Summer. The Board are on a bit of a high with their recruitment of Roeder and his subsequent success in getting us out of the mire, and, however hopefully, talking about play off''s. But, in doing so, the expectations are shooting up again-for the fans AND the Manager and players. I don''t think they''ll be able to get away with backtracking too much on what Munby has said this time around, I suspect they know that, which is why I don''t think he would have said it if it wasn''t going to happen. Lets see-but we will need quite a few new players, it isn''t so much 1 or 2 just to boost up the squad, its a whole rebuilding exercise-which may put the play off''s off for another year anyway. Will they get stick if that happens, or, if we do get 6,7,8 plus players in, will people accept it as being a likely scenario and consequence of so much change?

 

[First Wizard 0]

[quote user="BigFish"][quote user="1st Wizard"]

[quote user="BigFish"]

 Munby has said this and there is little reason to doubt him, even if he is talking up season ticket sales. [/quote]

Eh?

And they call me potty!.[:D]

[/quote]

Quoting out of context now, Wiz. Nice[:P]. The point was that there is no reason to doubt they will do what they feel they can, but if they do it still will not be enough for the Nancys like yourself.

[/quote]

The difference is though Big Fish, if I''m wrong in the summer, then I will apologise.

[Arthur Whittle 0]

[quote user="Boot"][quote user="Arthur Whittle"][quote user="Boot"]

[quote user="Arthur Whittle"]More club spin to lure in season ticket holders to renew.[/quote]

And this is a problem how exactly?

Sorry to blind you with economic science but the more season tickets sold the greater the amount of money available for players. If people believe that we are going to sign large numbers of top quality players (or indeed any top quality players) in the summer they are deluded, there is no way it can happen - there I said it!

What may happen is that we might keep a couple of the loan signings on a permanent deal and buy two or three good (but not exceptional)players to strengthen the squad.  There may even be some more capital investment in the ground (shock horror!).  In short exactly the same as every other year in the past and exactly the same as every other year going forward. 

[/quote]

I agree,the more season tickets sold the more spent on players in theroy but explain to me how clubs like Stoke manage to spend more on players than we do? Kind of proves a point about ambition. Why have we the most season ticket holders in the league and yet we still spend less than many clubs.

[/quote]

It would certainly be a good point if Stoke did indeed spend more on players than Norwich over a given time period.  We have been getting decent crowds for about the last 5 years or so - maybe a bit longer, and I have no idea how much Stoke have spent on players over the last 5 years but I would be more than surprised if we hadn''t spent more during the same time - which would kind of prove my point not yours don''t you thnk?

[/quote]

Ok i''m not sure who''s spent more so we''ll put into perspective. Prem money+ Parachute payments+Gate recepts etc etc for NCFC compared to Stoke.........Errrrr none of the mentioned! Now i bet the gulf is bugger all really is it,but i bet they''ve spent a few quid in wage''s,transfers,loans......? Maybe someone would like to prove me wrong and i''ll hold my hands up.

[Boyo 0]

[quote user="Nuff Said"][quote user="Boyo"]We probably wont get the backing he is saying he will give but last year Grant got a little bit of money to spend apart from all the players he got were rubbish (apart from Russel.)  And this season if he does give the backing im sure Roeder will spend it well.[/quote]

So Marshall, Otsemobor, Cureton, Chadwick and Fotheringham are rubbish are they? Grant may have been guilty of several things, but let''s not get carried away eh?
[/quote]

mmmmm... forgot about them but I am not a big Marshall, semmy, cureton and fozzy fan so I am just speaking for my self!

[ricardo 7,385]

[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="1st Wizard"]

I have waited for every summer since Mike Walker II mate, and still this board hasn''t really backed any manager, let alone Glen  Roeder, cry wolf indeed.

As soon as City have sold their season tickets, out will come Mr Doncaster explaining why we must be prudent.

Its as certain as night follows day.[:|]

[/quote]

I thought you were at least as old as me Wiz. I go back to the mid 60''s and don''t remember summers any different. In fact the great benchmarking summer of 1972, as we prepared for our first ever go in the top flight, there were no signings at all.

 

[/quote]

Hardly comparable Nutty.

In those days things were much more even financially between the (then) divisions 1 and 2.

Nowadays even the Championship is going to become more uncompetetive because of the higher parachute payments.

[7rew 0]

[quote user="Trent Canary"]

[quote user="Arthur Whittle"]More club spin to lure in season ticket holders to renew.[/quote]

Again, just basic marketing techniques. And seeing as though we have one of the best supported clubs in the championship id suggest we are doing something right.

[/quote]I mean, if we didn''t do this, I would be severly worried by the press department! They have to earn their money somehow. (And yes this department probably does contribute more than it costs, but proving it will be difficult as the income stream will not be direct.)Remember, if you don''t take gullible peoples money, someone else will.

[kdncfc 0]

[quote user="Old Shuck"]

Isn''t one of the Stoke owners one of the wealthiest men in Europe? I am sure someone from Stoke was in the 442 "Rich List" not so long back, and in the top 10 or thereabouts-with Delia and Michael floundering back at about No.80!

I think Stoke have at least two very wealthy backers on their Board.

The argument that it is "our football club" doesn''t really sit with the great and good at most clubs now-to them, its only "your club" if you are a shareholder, someone who, to them, ''just'' comes to games, week in, week out, is no more able to say the club is theirs, than I am to say Esso are my company because I fill my car up with their petrol. Sad but true.

Agree with most posters on here really-lets see what happens in the Summer. The Board are on a bit of a high with their recruitment of Roeder and his subsequent success in getting us out of the mire, and, however hopefully, talking about play off''s. But, in doing so, the expectations are shooting up again-for the fans AND the Manager and players. I don''t think they''ll be able to get away with backtracking too much on what Munby has said this time around, I suspect they know that, which is why I don''t think he would have said it if it wasn''t going to happen. Lets see-but we will need quite a few new players, it isn''t so much 1 or 2 just to boost up the squad, its a whole rebuilding exercise-which may put the play off''s off for another year anyway. Will they get stick if that happens, or, if we do get 6,7,8 plus players in, will people accept it as being a likely scenario and consequence of so much change?

 

[/quote]

The Turners are not to far behind him in the rich list but the only contribution we''ve had from them so far is a bloody loan to put us even deeper in debt, we do have some wealthy board members but it seems that unlike some other clubs ours aren''t so keen on putting their hands in their pockets.

[ricky knight 0]

[quote user="kdncfc"][quote user="Old Shuck"]

Isn''t one of the Stoke owners one of the wealthiest men in Europe? I am sure someone from Stoke was in the 442 "Rich List" not so long back, and in the top 10 or thereabouts-with Delia and Michael floundering back at about No.80!

I think Stoke have at least two very wealthy backers on their Board.

The argument that it is "our football club" doesn''t really sit with the great and good at most clubs now-to them, its only "your club" if you are a shareholder, someone who, to them, ''just'' comes to games, week in, week out, is no more able to say the club is theirs, than I am to say Esso are my company because I fill my car up with their petrol. Sad but true.

Agree with most posters on here really-lets see what happens in the Summer. The Board are on a bit of a high with their recruitment of Roeder and his subsequent success in getting us out of the mire, and, however hopefully, talking about play off''s. But, in doing so, the expectations are shooting up again-for the fans AND the Manager and players. I don''t think they''ll be able to get away with backtracking too much on what Munby has said this time around, I suspect they know that, which is why I don''t think he would have said it if it wasn''t going to happen. Lets see-but we will need quite a few new players, it isn''t so much 1 or 2 just to boost up the squad, its a whole rebuilding exercise-which may put the play off''s off for another year anyway. Will they get stick if that happens, or, if we do get 6,7,8 plus players in, will people accept it as being a likely scenario and consequence of so much change?

 

[/quote]

The Turners are not to far behind him in the rich list but the only contribution we''ve had from them so far is a bloody loan to put us even deeper in debt, we do have some wealthy board members but it seems that unlike some other clubs ours aren''t so keen on putting their hands in their pockets.

[/quote]

Our lot would not give a door a bang.

[nutty nigel 7,533]

[quote user="ricardo"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

I thought you were at least as old as me Wiz. I go back to the mid 60''s and don''t remember summers any different. In fact the great benchmarking summer of 1972, as we prepared for our first ever go in the top flight, there were no signings at all.

 

[/quote]

Hardly comparable Nutty.

In those days things were much more even financially between the (then) divisions 1 and 2.

Nowadays even the Championship is going to become more uncompetetive because of the higher parachute payments.

[/quote]

Not quite sure about the Championship being uncompetetive Ricardo. The top two at present have no parachute payments, in fact three of the top six don''t.

But I do wholeheartedly agree that the Premiership is nothing like the  old First Division. It''s not at all competetive anymore and that''s why it''s impossible to compare our achievements in years gone by with where we are now. Could you imagine getting promoted now with that 1972 side and not signing another player until the end of February?!?!

 

 

[BlyBlyBabes 0]

[quote user="The voice of the Thorpe Area"]

This board bashing, until we see some evidence in the summer, has got to stop, it''s stupid. They can''t win can they- moaned at for staying quiet, moaned at for saying we will have money, god knows what the reaction would be if Munby had said there wasn''t a penny to spend.

Stop moaning!

[/quote]

Do you read your posts before sending them?

OTBC

 

[Mr.Carrow 376]

[quote user="Boot"][quote user="Arthur Whittle"][quote user="Boot"]

[quote user="Arthur Whittle"]More club spin to lure in season ticket holders to renew.[/quote]

And this is a problem how exactly?

Sorry to blind you with economic science but the more season tickets sold the greater the amount of money available for players. If people believe that we are going to sign large numbers of top quality players (or indeed any top quality players) in the summer they are deluded, there is no way it can happen - there I said it!

What may happen is that we might keep a couple of the loan signings on a permanent deal and buy two or three good (but not exceptional)players to strengthen the squad.  There may even be some more capital investment in the ground (shock horror!).  In short exactly the same as every other year in the past and exactly the same as every other year going forward. 

[/quote]

I agree,the more season tickets sold the more spent on players in theroy but explain to me how clubs like Stoke manage to spend more on players than we do? Kind of proves a point about ambition. Why have we the most season ticket holders in the league and yet we still spend less than many clubs.

[/quote]

It would certainly be a good point if Stoke did indeed spend more on players than Norwich over a given time period.  We have been getting decent crowds for about the last 5 years or so - maybe a bit longer, and I have no idea how much Stoke have spent on players over the last 5 years but I would be more than surprised if we hadn''t spent more during the same time - which would kind of prove my point not yours don''t you thnk?

[/quote]

Stoke haven`t had millions in share issues, a £6.2m land sale, £34m Sky income, they have half our crowds and i can`t recall any big players leaving Stoke for millions. We have sold £18m worth since relegation. I don`t think anyones going to bother doing a pound by pound comparison of money spent but i don`t think there would be a great deal of difference, do you? When they had a top central defender on loan they snapped him up for £1m at the first opportunity whilst we dithered over a few £100k and lost our man.

[First Wizard 0]

[quote user="Mr.Carrow"][quote user="Boot"][quote user="Arthur Whittle"][quote user="Boot"]

[quote user="Arthur Whittle"]More club spin to lure in season ticket holders to renew.[/quote]

And this is a problem how exactly?

Sorry to blind you with economic science but the more season tickets sold the greater the amount of money available for players. If people believe that we are going to sign large numbers of top quality players (or indeed any top quality players) in the summer they are deluded, there is no way it can happen - there I said it!

What may happen is that we might keep a couple of the loan signings on a permanent deal and buy two or three good (but not exceptional)players to strengthen the squad.  There may even be some more capital investment in the ground (shock horror!).  In short exactly the same as every other year in the past and exactly the same as every other year going forward. 

[/quote]

I agree,the more season tickets sold the more spent on players in theroy but explain to me how clubs like Stoke manage to spend more on players than we do? Kind of proves a point about ambition. Why have we the most season ticket holders in the league and yet we still spend less than many clubs.

[/quote]

It would certainly be a good point if Stoke did indeed spend more on players than Norwich over a given time period.  We have been getting decent crowds for about the last 5 years or so - maybe a bit longer, and I have no idea how much Stoke have spent on players over the last 5 years but I would be more than surprised if we hadn''t spent more during the same time - which would kind of prove my point not yours don''t you thnk?

[/quote]

Stoke haven`t had millions in share issues, a £6.2m land sale, £34m Sky income, they have half our crowds and i can`t recall any big players leaving Stoke for millions. We have sold £18m worth since relegation. I don`t think anyones going to bother doing a pound by pound comparison of money spent but i don`t think there would be a great deal of difference, do you? When they had a top central defender on loan they snapped him up for £1m at the first opportunity whilst we dithered over a few £100k and lost our man.

[/quote]

Why can''t the hand-wringing apologists on here see this Mr Carrow? to me, its as clear as day itself!.

[Boot 0]

[quote user="1st Wizard"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"][quote user="Boot"][quote user="Arthur Whittle"][quote user="Boot"]

[quote user="Arthur Whittle"]More club spin to lure in season ticket holders to renew.[/quote]

And this is a problem how exactly?

Sorry to blind you with economic science but the more season tickets sold the greater the amount of money available for players. If people believe that we are going to sign large numbers of top quality players (or indeed any top quality players) in the summer they are deluded, there is no way it can happen - there I said it!

What may happen is that we might keep a couple of the loan signings on a permanent deal and buy two or three good (but not exceptional)players to strengthen the squad.  There may even be some more capital investment in the ground (shock horror!).  In short exactly the same as every other year in the past and exactly the same as every other year going forward. 

[/quote]

I agree,the more season tickets sold the more spent on players in theroy but explain to me how clubs like Stoke manage to spend more on players than we do? Kind of proves a point about ambition. Why have we the most season ticket holders in the league and yet we still spend less than many clubs.

[/quote]

It would certainly be a good point if Stoke did indeed spend more on players than Norwich over a given time period.  We have been getting decent crowds for about the last 5 years or so - maybe a bit longer, and I have no idea how much Stoke have spent on players over the last 5 years but I would be more than surprised if we hadn''t spent more during the same time - which would kind of prove my point not yours don''t you thnk?

[/quote]

Stoke haven`t had millions in share issues, a £6.2m land sale, £34m Sky income, they have half our crowds and i can`t recall any big players leaving Stoke for millions. We have sold £18m worth since relegation. I don`t think anyones going to bother doing a pound by pound comparison of money spent but i don`t think there would be a great deal of difference, do you? When they had a top central defender on loan they snapped him up for £1m at the first opportunity whilst we dithered over a few £100k and lost our man.

[/quote]

Why can''t the hand-wringing apologists on here see this Mr Carrow? to me, its as clear as day itself!.

[/quote]

It''s not about hand wringing, apologising or anything else of that sort - it''s just about trying to be fair. It never ceases to amaze me that the 15 or so usual suspects on here shout (too loudly in my opinion) about lack of funds and lack of ambition when things are going less than perfectly yet miraculously when we do get promotion, make a good appointment or get a decent player into the squad (as has happened recently) the board have nothing to do with it - the words "hiding" and "to nothing" spring to mind.

The appointment of Grant was ridiculous in the extreme (and I said so at the time) but other than that I can''t honestly look back and say that I would have done much different with the information available at the time.  The simple and lazy argument is always to spend spend spend and to hell with the consequenses but I wonder how many people would be so free and easy gambling (because it is a gamble) with promotion if it were their money.  How easy it is to snipe from the sidelines whilst never having to take responsibility for a decision or have to take the consequenses of an action, just wait for things to be less than perfect and have a go!  "We should spend more, we should invest less in the ground (to hell with safety audits and alternative revenue streams) we have a divine right to be in the top division."

Until someone who CARES as much for this club as I do and has a larger pot of money to spend comes along this board are doing a good enough job to be given some credit.  Not a hand wringing apologist - there is very little to apologise for!

[BBFF 0]

[quote user="Boot"][quote user="1st Wizard"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"][quote user="Boot"][quote user="Arthur Whittle"][quote user="Boot"]

[quote user="Arthur Whittle"]More club spin to lure in season ticket holders to renew.[/quote]

And this is a problem how exactly?

Sorry to blind you with economic science but the more season tickets sold the greater the amount of money available for players. If people believe that we are going to sign large numbers of top quality players (or indeed any top quality players) in the summer they are deluded, there is no way it can happen - there I said it!

What may happen is that we might keep a couple of the loan signings on a permanent deal and buy two or three good (but not exceptional)players to strengthen the squad.  There may even be some more capital investment in the ground (shock horror!).  In short exactly the same as every other year in the past and exactly the same as every other year going forward. 

[/quote]

I agree,the more season tickets sold the more spent on players in theroy but explain to me how clubs like Stoke manage to spend more on players than we do? Kind of proves a point about ambition. Why have we the most season ticket holders in the league and yet we still spend less than many clubs.

[/quote]

It would certainly be a good point if Stoke did indeed spend more on players than Norwich over a given time period.  We have been getting decent crowds for about the last 5 years or so - maybe a bit longer, and I have no idea how much Stoke have spent on players over the last 5 years but I would be more than surprised if we hadn''t spent more during the same time - which would kind of prove my point not yours don''t you thnk?

[/quote]

Stoke haven`t had millions in share issues, a £6.2m land sale, £34m Sky income, they have half our crowds and i can`t recall any big players leaving Stoke for millions. We have sold £18m worth since relegation. I don`t think anyones going to bother doing a pound by pound comparison of money spent but i don`t think there would be a great deal of difference, do you? When they had a top central defender on loan they snapped him up for £1m at the first opportunity whilst we dithered over a few £100k and lost our man.

[/quote]

Why can''t the hand-wringing apologists on here see this Mr Carrow? to me, its as clear as day itself!.

[/quote]

It''s not about hand wringing, apologising or anything else of that sort - it''s just about trying to be fair. It never ceases to amaze me that the 15 or so usual suspects on here shout (too loudly in my opinion) about lack of funds and lack of ambition when things are going less than perfectly yet miraculously when we do get promotion, make a good appointment or get a decent player into the squad (as has happened recently) the board have nothing to do with it - the words "hiding" and "to nothing" spring to mind.

The appointment of Grant was ridiculous in the extreme (and I said so at the time) but other than that I can''t honestly look back and say that I would have done much different with the information available at the time.  The simple and lazy argument is always to spend spend spend and to hell with the consequenses but I wonder how many people would be so free and easy gambling (because it is a gamble) with promotion if it were their money.  How easy it is to snipe from the sidelines whilst never having to take responsibility for a decision or have to take the consequenses of an action, just wait for things to be less than perfect and have a go!  "We should spend more, we should invest less in the ground (to hell with safety audits and alternative revenue streams) we have a divine right to be in the top division."

Until someone who CARES as much for this club as I do and has a larger pot of money to spend comes along this board are doing a good enough job to be given some credit.  Not a hand wringing apologist - there is very little to apologise for!

[/quote]

You know Wiz what I think of our present board, but Munby has said the backing will be there in the summer, I know he has said it all before and let us down before but this time he knows Roeder would be off to a club with real ambitious if the board treated him like they have other managers in the past.

As for what that backing would cost? Backing for a real promotion push would mean at least 4/5 quality permanent signings, totalling something about £5mil or more as well as any loans Roader can bring in.

So lets just wait and see what the summer brings because I will applaud Munby for keeping his word and really backing our manager if the money is really there but if Munby has just spun us his normal bull**** line I for one will be banging on Carrow Roads front door call for his head and others. 

 

FOOTBALL MUST COME FIRST

[ricardo 7,385]

[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="ricardo"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

I thought you were at least as old as me Wiz. I go back to the mid 60''s and don''t remember summers any different. In fact the great benchmarking summer of 1972, as we prepared for our first ever go in the top flight, there were no signings at all.

 

[/quote]

Hardly comparable Nutty.

In those days things were much more even financially between the (then) divisions 1 and 2.

Nowadays even the Championship is going to become more uncompetetive because of the higher parachute payments.

[/quote]

Not quite sure about the Championship being uncompetetive Ricardo. The top two at present have no parachute payments, in fact three of the top six don''t.

But I do wholeheartedly agree that the Premiership is nothing like the  old First Division. It''s not at all competetive anymore and that''s why it''s impossible to compare our achievements in years gone by with where we are now. Could you imagine getting promoted now with that 1972 side and not signing another player until the end of February?!?!

 

 

[/quote]

No mate, those days have long gone.

It''s my biggest gripe with the way modern day football is regulated. I just wonder how much longer it will be before fans get fed up with watching an uncompetitive league.

I take your point about the top of the Championship at the present moment. However I fear our league will very soon be distorted by the parachute payments now on offer. That''s why I believe that if we don''t get out of it soon, we may never have the financial muscle to mount another challenge.

[BlyBlyBabes 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="1st Wizard"]

I have waited for every summer since Mike Walker II mate, and still this board hasn''t really backed any manager, let alone Glen  Roeder, cry wolf indeed.

As soon as City have sold their season tickets, out will come Mr Doncaster explaining why we must be prudent.

Its as certain as night follows day.[:|]

[/quote]

I thought you were at least as old as me Wiz. I go back to the mid 60''s and don''t remember summers any different. In fact the great benchmarking summer of 1972, as we prepared for our first ever go in the top flight, there were no signings at all.

[/quote]

But did we spend to get into the top flight?

That''s the present situation that faces us.

And I hardly think it helps to be rather limply sarcastic about the 1971-73 episode when contrasting with the present.

OTBC

 

[nutty nigel 7,533]

[quote user="ricardo"]

No mate, those days have long gone.

It''s my biggest gripe with the way modern day football is regulated. I just wonder how much longer it will be before fans get fed up with watching an uncompetitive league.

I take your point about the top of the Championship at the present moment. However I fear our league will very soon be distorted by the parachute payments now on offer. That''s why I believe that if we don''t get out of it soon, we may never have the financial muscle to mount another challenge.

[/quote]

I believe you are right Ricardo. The parachute payments are a pacifier to the clubs, us included, who from time to time make up the numbers at the top table. All this is a million miles away from the competetive 1st tier I remember from the 70''s, 80''s and early 90''s. The present day Premier League is all about the big clubs and is pretty much ''Football for TV". I record Match Of The Day to watch when I get home and if Blackburn are playing Reading or Bolton are playing Middlesboro you can bet I''m asleep before they come on. It''s all about the top four who are so predictable now there is no competition.

In the last 10 years only 6 different clubs(Man.U., Chelsea, Liverpool, Arsenal, Newcastle and Leeds) have managed to finish in the top 3 of the top division. This was so different when it was competetive because in the previous 10 years 12 clubs managed it including Norwich City, Sheffield Wednesday and Crystal Palace. And to prove a point in the 10 years before that 12 clubs also managed it including Watford, Southampton, Ipswich and West Brom.

 

[Mello Yello 2,291]

The ''Neville Chamberlain Lookey Likey'' Chairman, appears in the centre circle of Carra........"In my hands I have a piece of paper......Mr Doncaster assures me categorically.......that he will give us tons of dosh to purchase players!"........