The softening up has begun

[BBFF 0]

The softening up has begun. After all the boards words of backing Roeder in the summer when our season tickets were being renewed Mr Doncaster has started the annual softening up of us 20000+ mugs who allow this board to run our club with that well worn words, there is no money for football.

 

http://new.edp24.co.uk/content/commentary/NeilDoncaster.aspx

 

In Mr Doncaster''s EDP column "The Chief" the latest dirty word used by us supports is "ambition" but if only if its used in a football context, it looks to be ok to use the word if you are referring to "off the pitch" spending!

I wont go into all what he''s said just read it and form your own opinion but a couple of points I cant leave with out a word or two He says about the many players that the club brought here in recent months? Strange that one, after we got rid of what 9/10 players? with their wagers we bought 1 player Pattison, and got some loaners, did that break the bank? Bringing in another investor is now called "selling out"? And finally he will in a future article summarise how the moneys been spent over the last 10 years. Any one know a good fiction writer? I think Mr Doncaster will need a helping hand with that article.

 

FOOTBALL MUST COME FIRST

[First Wizard 0]

Using Gretna as an example is a bit rich, even for, him.

And the mugs will fall for it everytime!

[Joanna Grey 0]

I quite look forward to his ten year summarization - it should kill off a few arguments and opinions that have been touted around these parts.

[BigFish 1,986]

[quote user="BBFF"]

The softening up has begun. After all the boards words of backing Roeder in the summer when our season tickets were being renewed Mr Doncaster has started the annual softening up of us 20000+ mugs who allow this board to run our club with that well worn words, there is no money for football.

 

http://new.edp24.co.uk/content/commentary/NeilDoncaster.aspx

 

In Mr Doncaster''s EDP column "The Chief" the latest dirty word used by us supports is "ambition" but if only if its used in a football context, it looks to be ok to use the word if you are referring to "off the pitch" spending!

I wont go into all what he''s said just read it and form your own opinion but a couple of points I cant leave with out a word or two He says about the many players that the club brought here in recent months? Strange that one, after we got rid of what 9/10 players? with their wagers we bought 1 player Pattison, and got some loaners, did that break the bank? Bringing in another investor is now called "selling out"? And finally he will in a future article summarise how the moneys been spent over the last 10 years. Any one know a good fiction writer? I think Mr Doncaster will need a helping hand with that article.

 

FOOTBALL MUST COME FIRST

[/quote]

Oh do grow up. If Doomcaster says nothing he would get slated, if says something the bleating begins.

Where does the deconstruction of your post begin. Well, to begin with it totally ignores the comment about an average CCC club (by which the assumption is us) losing £2m per year so your ambition is to spend money the club doesn''t have on top of this. What is ambition to you, a £5m, £10m, £15m loss. How easy is it to spend someone else''s money. It is not going to be very much by this standard but it is clear if the money is there it will go on the team.

Your comment on ND providing background on where the money has gone is churlish. The club doesn''t have to do this and you can''t even give credit to them attempting it. It is clear from the accounts it has gone, so now your going to be told where which can only be good. Like Mr Carrow you may disagree on where it has been spent but you can''t question that being told where is a good thing. This wouldn''t happen at many other clubs.

Finally, selling out is exactly that. Perhaps you think having the club owned by someone like Mandaric ot a tax dodging gun runner would be a step in the right direction which is a point that ND refutes in the Gretna anology but it risk killing the many good things that come with the current regime.

 

[Trent Canary 0]

There is money in football, its just the players wages are at far too high a level. The wages to turnover ratios for clubs are at a dangerous rate (Bly posted a table with our figures, one year it was up around 80%!), and its no wonder so many teams go into admin.

[Ginja 26]

[quote user="BBFF"]

The softening up has begun. After all the boards words of backing Roeder in the summer when our season tickets were being renewed Mr Doncaster has started the annual softening up of us 20000+ mugs who allow this board to run our club with that well worn words, there is no money for football.

 

http://new.edp24.co.uk/content/commentary/NeilDoncaster.aspx

 

In Mr Doncaster''s EDP column "The Chief" the latest dirty word used by us supports is "ambition" but if only if its used in a football context, it looks to be ok to use the word if you are referring to "off the pitch" spending!

I wont go into all what he''s said just read it and form your own opinion but a couple of points I cant leave with out a word or two He says about the many players that the club brought here in recent months? Strange that one, after we got rid of what 9/10 players? with their wagers we bought 1 player Pattison, and got some loaners, did that break the bank? Bringing in another investor is now called "selling out"? And finally he will in a future article summarise how the moneys been spent over the last 10 years. Any one know a good fiction writer? I think Mr Doncaster will need a helping hand with that article.

 

FOOTBALL MUST COME FIRST

[/quote]

 

I think he makes a valid point about Gretna, they''ve played a dangerous game and it looks like they will have suffer the consequences of spending well above their means. I''m not sure what off-the-pitch spending your on about, I can only think of the hotel, which we did not pay a penny for. As for whether the recent players coming in are not costing much, you can''t really be sure of that, we probably have to cover most of their "Premiership" wages. Personally I would consider selling up to an American (or some other foriegn billionaire) Investor to be selling out. I would oppose any such investor, because at the end of the day they are simply about making a return on their investment and do not have the club''s interests at heart.

There''s a fine line between ambition and stupidity.

[Mr.Carrow 376]

So now we`ve got another ludicrous example of how not to do it for gullible mugs to cling to.  For years it`s been "we can`t do a Leeds", now it`s "we can`t do a Gretna"!!  I really don`t know whether to laugh or cry.  The thing is he completely contradicts himself by saying that Gretna haven`t got the support to back up such ambition and then waxes lyrical about how our own support gives us an advantage over other clubs.  There hasn`t been much evidence of that in recent years though has there Neil?  Still, don`t let a blatant contradiction put you off another piece of pathetic spin mate.

The finances article will be interesting, although i`m not suprised he`s giving himself plenty of time to prepare it......I wonder if he`ll mention the £30m+ spent on infrastructure in the last six years? The vast majority of that was non-essential so we can only speculate as to how much better off we would be if it had gone on the team.  Possibly £50m better off and in the Prem rather than desperately trying to avoid dropping to our lowest level in 40 years.

[astrodyne 0]

Plenty of words, very little action - just about sums up our club these days. The mention of gretna as an example of what may happen if ambitious, is pathetic. Anyone with half a brain cell could see what was going to happen to them.

It seems to me, that its all very well saying we have to be careful and that money is hard to come by in the championship, but finding a way around this, is the job of the likes of the author of that piece. Instead of harping on about the problem - perhaps he should find a solution?

After all, to phrase some past words - we have to be cleverer. Just when we start being that is anyone''s guess...........

[Syteanric 1]

[quote user="bunny"]I quite look forward to his ten year summarization - it should kill off a few arguments and opinions that have been touted around these parts.[/quote]

"all our efforts are now going into off the field activities" Boards words.. not mine....

these 10 year accounts wont materialise.

jas :)

[renegade tootsie 0]

Lets imagine for a minute Doncaster said '' next season we have 4 million to give Roeder''.  What do you think would happen? 

Engage brain...must engage brain.....

[quote user="BBFF"]

The softening up has begun. After all the boards words of backing Roeder in the summer when our season tickets were being renewed Mr Doncaster has started the annual softening up of us 20000+ mugs who allow this board to run our club with that well worn words, there is no money for football.

 

http://new.edp24.co.uk/content/commentary/NeilDoncaster.aspx

 

In Mr Doncaster''s EDP column "The Chief" the latest dirty word used by us supports is "ambition" but if only if its used in a football context, it looks to be ok to use the word if you are referring to "off the pitch" spending!

I wont go into all what he''s said just read it and form your own opinion but a couple of points I cant leave with out a word or two He says about the many players that the club brought here in recent months? Strange that one, after we got rid of what 9/10 players? with their wagers we bought 1 player Pattison, and got some loaners, did that break the bank? Bringing in another investor is now called "selling out"? And finally he will in a future article summarise how the moneys been spent over the last 10 years. Any one know a good fiction writer? I think Mr Doncaster will need a helping hand with that article.

 

FOOTBALL MUST COME FIRST

[/quote]

[YankeeCanary 0]

[quote user="Mr.Carrow"]

So now we`ve got another ludicrous example of how not to do it for gullible mugs to cling to.  For years it`s been "we can`t do a Leeds", now it`s "we can`t do a Gretna"!!  I really don`t know whether to laugh or cry.  The thing is he completely contradicts himself by saying that Gretna haven`t got the support to back up such ambition and then waxes lyrical about how our own support gives us an advantage over other clubs.  There hasn`t been much evidence of that in recent years though has there Neil?  Still, don`t let a blatant contradiction put you off another piece of pathetic spin mate.

The finances article will be interesting, although i`m not suprised he`s giving himself plenty of time to prepare it......I wonder if he`ll mention the £30m+ spent on infrastructure in the last six years? The vast majority of that was non-essential so we can only speculate as to how much better off we would be if it had gone on the team.  Possibly £50m better off and in the Prem rather than desperately trying to avoid dropping to our lowest level in 40 years.

[/quote]

Mr. Carrow, I believe that Neil Doncaster and the present Norwich Board are operating in the best interest of the club. I also believe that your critical offerings in their direction are well intentioned, albeit often lacking in balance and objectivity. However, in this particular Neil Doncaster article, I have to say that I agree with you and others. If I were responsible for giving Neil advice I would have counselled against allocating so much reference to Gretna as an example. I also think that Neil does himself no favours by the use of loose presumptions in his rhetoric. For example, after citing Gretna, he goes on to state, "This isn''t some random story north of the border, which has no relevance to Norwich City however. It goes to the heart of what a football club is all about. In the Premier League there are a number of clubs who are owned by individuals who are presumably interested in football simply to make a return on their investment - something that, with all the SKY money now sloshing around, shouldn''t exactly be rocket science, even despite recent huge inflation in players'' wages."

I think it''s also quite likely there are some Premiership clubs who are owned and managed by some people who love their club and want to do the best for their fans while, hopefully, making a little money at the same time. All worthwhile objectives. These are the aspirations that I think you and others like you Mr. Carrow want to see Norwich City aspire to. It''s obviously a difficult challenge to face up to unless the pockets are deep but, nevertheless,  I would like to see Mr. Doncaster choose his words and examples a little more carefully.

[First Wizard 0]

[quote user="JC"]

Lets imagine for a minute Doncaster said '' next season we have 4 million to give Roeder''.  What do you think would happen? 

Engage brain...must engage brain.....

[quote user="BBFF"]

The softening up has begun. After all the boards words of backing Roeder in the summer when our season tickets were being renewed Mr Doncaster has started the annual softening up of us 20000+ mugs who allow this board to run our club with that well worn words, there is no money for football.

 

http://new.edp24.co.uk/content/commentary/NeilDoncaster.aspx

 

In Mr Doncaster''s EDP column "The Chief" the latest dirty word used by us supports is "ambition" but if only if its used in a football context, it looks to be ok to use the word if you are referring to "off the pitch" spending!

I wont go into all what he''s said just read it and form your own opinion but a couple of points I cant leave with out a word or two He says about the many players that the club brought here in recent months? Strange that one, after we got rid of what 9/10 players? with their wagers we bought 1 player Pattison, and got some loaners, did that break the bank? Bringing in another investor is now called "selling out"? And finally he will in a future article summarise how the moneys been spent over the last 10 years. Any one know a good fiction writer? I think Mr Doncaster will need a helping hand with that article.

 

FOOTBALL MUST COME FIRST

[/quote][/quote]

Err? but he didn''t, so just stick to what he did say!.[:|]

[Polar 0]

Actually... i know everyone likes to give him stick and many people are looking for anything to rip into him for here but if anything Donny is saying Roeder has got money to spend and is saying its thanks to the support and fans using the services Norwich City provide that Glenn has the money.I think people have seen the phrases ''No ambition'', the example of Gretna which isn''t being used as a method of how not to do things but a symbol of what lack of fan support can cause and are instantly jumping on the band wagon.Try and read what he''s said:"So when people call on the Norwich City board to be more ambitious,

what they are effectively saying is that the board should give more of

their own money to the club. Delia & Michael, Andrew & Sharon

and the Foulger family have all willingly given their financial support

to the club in recent years."Yes we know this already but so many people are about as grateful for that as they are for Abramovich buying trophys. some people need to wake up to what these people have done for the club."And with over 18,000 season ticket holders already pledging their

support for next season, we are able to look forward to season 2008/09

with a higher degree of financial confidence than many of our brethren

across the League. Hence the reason why we can afford to have brought

so many players to Carrow Road in recent months, and how we have been

able to finance Maceo Rigters'' arrival here on loan, under the noses of

some of our wealthier competitors."Thats the significant bit - we can compete... how can that bit be interpreted any other way? it''s proving we have ambition, its proving we can and already have compete and if anything is a hallmark for how we will be competing in the summer."But, for now, whilst our financial picture remains challenging, with

the huge loyalty and support that underpins our season ticket sales and

with the financial help of board members, the club is able to support

player acquisition while remaining true to its core values of family

and community"In bold it seems to be the only get out claus in his piece, if something happens and we don''t have a successful summer he can''t be blamed by this comment (although he will be and rightly so in some cases)underlined though - how on earth can anyone spin this any other way than to admit that Doncaster has said the board will back Glenn?

On this board there is alot of talk about spin from the club.This isn''t spin, this to me is a pledge of support to Glenn - those who see it differently need to swallow their pride (in some cases) and admit for once that they are the ones producing the spin for their own means.Wakey wakey!

[BBFF 0]

[quote user="BigFish"][quote user="BBFF"]

The softening up has begun. After all the boards words of backing Roeder in the summer when our season tickets were being renewed Mr Doncaster has started the annual softening up of us 20000+ mugs who allow this board to run our club with that well worn words, there is no money for football.

 

http://new.edp24.co.uk/content/commentary/NeilDoncaster.aspx

 

In Mr Doncaster''s EDP column "The Chief" the latest dirty word used by us supports is "ambition" but if only if its used in a football context, it looks to be ok to use the word if you are referring to "off the pitch" spending!

I wont go into all what he''s said just read it and form your own opinion but a couple of points I cant leave with out a word or two He says about the many players that the club brought here in recent months? Strange that one, after we got rid of what 9/10 players? with their wagers we bought 1 player Pattison, and got some loaners, did that break the bank? Bringing in another investor is now called "selling out"? And finally he will in a future article summarise how the moneys been spent over the last 10 years. Any one know a good fiction writer? I think Mr Doncaster will need a helping hand with that article.

 

FOOTBALL MUST COME FIRST

[/quote]

Oh do grow up. If Doomcaster says nothing he would get slated, if says something the bleating begins.

Where does the deconstruction of your post begin. Well, to begin with it totally ignores the comment about an average CCC club (by which the assumption is us) losing £2m per year so your ambition is to spend money the club doesn''t have on top of this. What is ambition to you, a £5m, £10m, £15m loss. How easy is it to spend someone else''s money. It is not going to be very much by this standard but it is clear if the money is there it will go on the team.

Your comment on ND providing background on where the money has gone is churlish. The club doesn''t have to do this and you can''t even give credit to them attempting it. It is clear from the accounts it has gone, so now your going to be told where which can only be good. Like Mr Carrow you may disagree on where it has been spent but you can''t question that being told where is a good thing. This wouldn''t happen at many other clubs.

Finally, selling out is exactly that. Perhaps you think having the club owned by someone like Mandaric ot a tax dodging gun runner would be a step in the right direction which is a point that ND refutes in the Gretna anology but it risk killing the many good things that come with the current regime.

 

[/quote]

You are dead right big fish Mr Doncaster didn''t have to say anything at all, so why did he? he say to dispel the myth the club has money, well when they through money at roads land offices etc we have to think there is money in the club............but is there any for real "on the pitch" investment?

His article and looks like more to follow are just meant to soften the blow of very little being spent this summer again showing the boards true ambition (that dirty word again sorry) when it come to "on the pitch" investment.

I think we will all have to wait and see how much Roader has to spend come the summer and then judge if the board has got it right or not but saying they are going to back Roeder when the season tickets are up for sale then saying there''s no money after 18000+ have signed up Pxxxxx me off.

Its not the games that''s been lost that should worry this board, its the trust that the supporters have lost in them that will ultimately bring this board down.

 

FOOTBALL MUST COME FIRST

[The Fish Seller 0]

[quote user="Polar"]Actually... i know everyone likes to give him stick and many people are looking for anything to rip into him for here but if anything Donny is saying Roeder has got money to spend and is saying its thanks to the support and fans using the services Norwich City provide that Glenn has the money.

I think people have seen the phrases ''No ambition'', the example of Gretna which isn''t being used as a method of how not to do things but a symbol of what lack of fan support can cause and are instantly jumping on the band wagon.

Try and read what he''s said:

"So when people call on the Norwich City board to be more ambitious, what they are effectively saying is that the board should give more of their own money to the club. Delia & Michael, Andrew & Sharon and the Foulger family have all willingly given their financial support to the club in recent years."

Yes we know this already but so many people are about as grateful for that as they are for Abramovich buying trophys. some people need to wake up to what these people have done for the club.

"And with over 18,000 season ticket holders already pledging their support for next season, we are able to look forward to season 2008/09 with a higher degree of financial confidence than many of our brethren across the League. Hence the reason why we can afford to have brought so many players to Carrow Road in recent months, and how we have been able to finance Maceo Rigters'' arrival here on loan, under the noses of some of our wealthier competitors."

Thats the significant bit - we can compete... how can that bit be interpreted any other way? it''s proving we have ambition, its proving we can and already have compete and if anything is a hallmark for how we will be competing in the summer.

"But, for now, whilst our financial picture remains challenging, with the huge loyalty and support that underpins our season ticket sales and with the financial help of board members, the club is able to support player acquisition while remaining true to its core values of family and community"

In bold it seems to be the only get out claus in his piece, if something happens and we don''t have a successful summer he can''t be blamed by this comment (although he will be and rightly so in some cases)

underlined though - how on earth can anyone spin this any other way than to admit that Doncaster has said the board will back Glenn?


On this board there is alot of talk about spin from the club.
This isn''t spin, this to me is a pledge of support to Glenn - those who see it differently need to swallow their pride (in some cases) and admit for once that they are the ones producing the spin for their own means.

Wakey wakey!
[/quote]

 

I took your advice, here''s what I read and my interpretation.

"So when people call on the Norwich City board to be more ambitious, what they are effectively saying is that the board should give more of their own money to the club. Delia & Michael, Andrew & Sharon and the Foulger family have all willingly given their financial support to the club in recent years."

Typical deflection.

(i) More ambitious does not mean that we all want the Board to dig deep in their own pockets, but rather that a more suitable percentage of Club income be used for on the field activities, squad strengthening etc. Had they done this over the last half dozen years instead of syphoning money to fund the off field side of the business we would have shown an adequate level of ambition to keep most of us happy. ND chooses to imply that ambition can only be shown by Directors  putting in more of their own money, if this is the case then we obviously have no Club money left.

"And with over 18,000 season ticket holders already pledging their support for next season, we are able to look forward to season 2008/09 with a higher degree of financial confidence than many of our brethren across the League. Hence the reason why we can afford to have brought so many players to Carrow Road in recent months, and how we have been able to finance Maceo Rigters'' arrival here on loan, under the noses of some of our wealthier competitors."

(ii) Very worrying.  In one paragraph ND tells us that as a result of most of next years income being banked we''ve recently been able to bring new players to the Club. Great!!! Except for the fact that most of them are loanees who will not be with us after the season ends. What is going to pay for the 12 to 15 players we need next season then because it sounds like we''ve already spent next years income on short term fixes this year.

 

"But, for now, whilst our financial picture remains challenging, with the huge loyalty and support that underpins our season ticket sales and with the financial help of board members, the club is able to support player acquisition while remaining true to its core values of family and community"

underlined though - how on earth can anyone spin this any other way than to admit that Doncaster has said the board will back Glenn?

 Try referring to my interpretation number (ii) We needed next years money to support Glenn this year. Not my spin but Neil Doncasters own words.

[BBFF 0]

[quote user="Polar"]Actually... i know everyone likes to give him stick and many people are looking for anything to rip into him for here but if anything Donny is saying Roeder has got money to spend and is saying its thanks to the support and fans using the services Norwich City provide that Glenn has the money.

I think people have seen the phrases ''No ambition'', the example of Gretna which isn''t being used as a method of how not to do things but a symbol of what lack of fan support can cause and are instantly jumping on the band wagon.

Try and read what he''s said:

"So when people call on the Norwich City board to be more ambitious, what they are effectively saying is that the board should give more of their own money to the club. Delia & Michael, Andrew & Sharon and the Foulger family have all willingly given their financial support to the club in recent years."

Yes we know this already but so many people are about as grateful for that as they are for Abramovich buying trophys. some people need to wake up to what these people have done for the club.

"And with over 18,000 season ticket holders already pledging their support for next season, we are able to look forward to season 2008/09 with a higher degree of financial confidence than many of our brethren across the League. Hence the reason why we can afford to have brought so many players to Carrow Road in recent months, and how we have been able to finance Maceo Rigters'' arrival here on loan, under the noses of some of our wealthier competitors."

Thats the significant bit - we can compete... how can that bit be interpreted any other way? it''s proving we have ambition, its proving we can and already have compete and if anything is a hallmark for how we will be competing in the summer.

"But, for now, whilst our financial picture remains challenging, with the huge loyalty and support that underpins our season ticket sales and with the financial help of board members, the club is able to support player acquisition while remaining true to its core values of family and community"

In bold it seems to be the only get out claus in his piece, if something happens and we don''t have a successful summer he can''t be blamed by this comment (although he will be and rightly so in some cases)

underlined though - how on earth can anyone spin this any other way than to admit that Doncaster has said the board will back Glenn?


On this board there is alot of talk about spin from the club.
This isn''t spin, this to me is a pledge of support to Glenn - those who see it differently need to swallow their pride (in some cases) and admit for once that they are the ones producing the spin for their own means.

Wakey wakey!
[/quote]

So financial confidence and FOOTBALL ambition is shown by getting a loan player in for six weeks who cant get in the team 9 in the Prem? He maybe be a very good player I hope he is although he''s not match fit (Roeders words) he has all of 6 weeks to prove our boards ambition before he goes back to Blackburn!!!!!! Looks more like a panic addition to the squad when we should have got someone in the January sale.

 

FOOTBALL MUST COME FIRST

[Mr.Carrow 376]

[quote user="Polar"]Actually... i know everyone likes to give him stick and many people are looking for anything to rip into him for here but if anything Donny is saying Roeder has got money to spend and is saying its thanks to the support and fans using the services Norwich City provide that Glenn has the money.

I think people have seen the phrases ''No ambition'', the example of Gretna which isn''t being used as a method of how not to do things but a symbol of what lack of fan support can cause and are instantly jumping on the band wagon.

Try and read what he''s said:

"So when people call on the Norwich City board to be more ambitious, what they are effectively saying is that the board should give more of their own money to the club. Delia & Michael, Andrew & Sharon and the Foulger family have all willingly given their financial support to the club in recent years."

Yes we know this already but so many people are about as grateful for that as they are for Abramovich buying trophys. some people need to wake up to what these people have done for the club.

"And with over 18,000 season ticket holders already pledging their support for next season, we are able to look forward to season 2008/09 with a higher degree of financial confidence than many of our brethren across the League. Hence the reason why we can afford to have brought so many players to Carrow Road in recent months, and how we have been able to finance Maceo Rigters'' arrival here on loan, under the noses of some of our wealthier competitors."

Thats the significant bit - we can compete... how can that bit be interpreted any other way? it''s proving we have ambition, its proving we can and already have compete and if anything is a hallmark for how we will be competing in the summer.

"But, for now, whilst our financial picture remains challenging, with the huge loyalty and support that underpins our season ticket sales and with the financial help of board members, the club is able to support player acquisition while remaining true to its core values of family and community"

In bold it seems to be the only get out claus in his piece, if something happens and we don''t have a successful summer he can''t be blamed by this comment (although he will be and rightly so in some cases)

underlined though - how on earth can anyone spin this any other way than to admit that Doncaster has said the board will back Glenn?


On this board there is alot of talk about spin from the club.
This isn''t spin, this to me is a pledge of support to Glenn - those who see it differently need to swallow their pride (in some cases) and admit for once that they are the ones producing the spin for their own means.

Wakey wakey!
[/quote]

Polar, when people are calling for the club to be more ambitious the vast majority are asking the club to stop throwing money at infrastructure and concentrate on our declining team.  Then, we might have a chance of competing with clubs like Plymouth, Preston, Burnley, Stoke and Hull who carry stronger squads than us and spend more with half our gates.

You say "we can compete", but where is the evidence?  We made another healthy profit on players in the transfer window and only signed one player permenantly.  "The club is able to support player aquisition" could mean absolutely anything couldn`t it?  Signing ten non-league players would be "supporting player acquisition" wouldn`t it?

If the Gretna example was used as a "symbol of what lack of fan support can cause" then what relevance does it have to NCFC who have plenty of fan support?

I`m sure Doncaster can come up with better spin than that load of pap, but it seems to me people are so gullible he doesn`t have to try too hard......wakey wakey.

[Paul Lamberts Disciple 0]

[quote user="YankeeCanary"]I also believe that your critical offerings are often lacking in balance and objectivity.
[/quote]

How many times does Mr Carrow have to directly quote the club accounts before you accept his views are well grounded?

I notice that those who take a more "positive" view of the management of this club tend to avoid those "pesky numbers", what with their damning factual evidence and all.

[Mello Yello 2,273]

[8]"When the Sun beats down and I lie on the bench, I can always hear them talk......Me? I''m just a Lawyer-moaner, you can tell by the way I squawk".......[8]

 

 

[BlyBlyBabes 0]

[quote user="Polar"]Actually... i know everyone likes to give him stick and many people are looking for anything to rip into him for here but if anything Donny is saying Roeder has got money to spend and is saying its thanks to the support and fans using the services Norwich City provide that Glenn has the money.

I think people have seen the phrases ''No ambition'', the example of Gretna which isn''t being used as a method of how not to do things but a symbol of what lack of fan support can cause and are instantly jumping on the band wagon.

Try and read what he''s said:

"So when people call on the Norwich City board to be more ambitious, what they are effectively saying is that the board should give more of their own money to the club. Delia & Michael, Andrew & Sharon and the Foulger family have all willingly given their financial support to the club in recent years."

Yes we know this already but so many people are about as grateful for that as they are for Abramovich buying trophys. some people need to wake up to what these people have done for the club.

"And with over 18,000 season ticket holders already pledging their support for next season, we are able to look forward to season 2008/09 with a higher degree of financial confidence than many of our brethren across the League. Hence the reason why we can afford to have brought so many players to Carrow Road in recent months, and how we have been able to finance Maceo Rigters'' arrival here on loan, under the noses of some of our wealthier competitors."

Thats the significant bit - we can compete... how can that bit be interpreted any other way? it''s proving we have ambition, its proving we can and already have compete and if anything is a hallmark for how we will be competing in the summer.

"But, for now, whilst our financial picture remains challenging, with the huge loyalty and support that underpins our season ticket sales and with the financial help of board members, the club is able to support player acquisition while remaining true to its core values of family and community"

In bold it seems to be the only get out claus in his piece, if something happens and we don''t have a successful summer he can''t be blamed by this comment (although he will be and rightly so in some cases)

underlined though - how on earth can anyone spin this any other way than to admit that Doncaster has said the board will back Glenn?


On this board there is alot of talk about spin from the club.
This isn''t spin, this to me is a pledge of support to Glenn - those who see it differently need to swallow their pride (in some cases) and admit for once that they are the ones producing the spin for their own means.

Wakey wakey!
[/quote]

You do use rather a lot of short words to say very little. And flavoured with a little attitude.

Are you Delia in disguise?

OTBC

[lucky green trainers 0]

i think donny got emboldened by the reception roeder got the other night. enough to paint the same old brushstrokes, but wheres the detail??? the statement of intent to aim for promotion to the prem or even the top 6??? 

[The Voice of the Thorpe Area 0]

As I have said before, we should reserve judgement on the board until after the summer transfer window.

All other conversation is in material until we see the actual actions of our board.

[Joanna Grey 0]

[quote user="Mr.Carrow"]

Polar, when people are calling for the club to be more ambitious the vast majority are asking the club to stop throwing money at infrastructure and concentrate on our declining team.  Then, we might have a chance of competing with clubs like Plymouth, Preston, Burnley, Stoke and Hull who carry stronger squads than us and spend more with half our gates.

[/quote]

Stoke City are owned by Peter Coates - worth £40M

Hull City are owned by a consortium headed by Paul Duffen - They previously attempted to buy West Ham (eventually sold for £80M) and Cardiff (£30M) - neither bid failed due to lack of funds.

Preston are just a point above us...

Leicester (2pts below us) loaned 5 and bought 3 in the transfer window.

QPR (4pts above us) brought in 2 loanees and bought 5 players for undisclosed fees and 2 others for £1M and £350,000.

Which all goes to prove that football really is a funny old game, there is no magic formula and your assumption about other teams falls flat on it''s backside.

[yellow hammer 0]

The true story of Gretna is of a club-owner who is unable or unwilling to invest any more money into his club, for whatever reason, and as a result the club has gone from boom to bust in a very short time.

But that is exactly the same point that Doncaster goes on to make about NCFC. That the current owners have put so much of their personal finance into the club that they are now in a position where they are either unable or unwilling to put any more money into the club.

We might not expire as spectacularly as Grenta but we are every so slowly going down the plughole in a mean and miserly way ever since we were ejected from the Premiership. We can''t even afford to rebuild a permanent squad of players, and according to Doncaster, our ambitions reach as far as signing a loanee for six weeks.

We''re in this position because of the disastrous decisions taken during our Premier season to pump money into infrastructure instead of building a team. Those same policies are still in place today. Nothing has changed on that front. Doncaster is wrong in stating that we wish for the owners to dig deeper into their own pockets; what we are saying is that we want the focus to be on the football side of the club - everything else is a lesser priority.

Of course, it is understandable from the owners'' point of view that they wish to invest in bricks and mortar as it lessens their risk and provides some tangible assets when they decide to cut and run.

If our owners are unable or unwilling to invest further in the club, then rather than allowing the club to be slowly throttled to death through lack of investment, then they must stand aside and allow someone to take over who will allow us to compete at the top level. Do I worry that our great club would be at risk under foreign ownership? No I do not because NCFC is already at great risk from the current set of owners.

Like most posters, I will be very interested to see Doncaster''s finacial statement concerning the past ten years. He doesn''t have to do this, it has been said, but I think it is because he is under pressure from brave men such as Mr. Carrow who enlightens us with his financial knowledge.

 

[ricardo 7,328]

It''s the usual pre-season rubbish from the Doomcaster only it''s come 3 months early. In essence it''s saying we''ve got your money (thanks to a good mid season run of results) so now we can go back to our usual strategy of lowering the fans expectations.

All those who were expecting money to be pumped in during the summer must surely be having second thoughts after reading this article. Why he can''t just say that we finance this club by making money on transfer fees is beyond me. You only have to look at the accounts to see that this process has been going on for years. They even spelled it out in the 2006 Accounts page 9 £12.1 million profit over the previous 5 years. They have made at least another £2 million since then. Get a copy of the Accounts if you don''t believe me.

This board are only happy to run a profitable lower Championship side. They have no intention of of bringing someone in who might break up their cosey little setup.

If the Premiership ever happens again it will be more by luck than judgement.

[Mr.Carrow 376]

[quote user="bunny"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"]

Polar, when people are calling for the club to be more ambitious the vast majority are asking the club to stop throwing money at infrastructure and concentrate on our declining team.  Then, we might have a chance of competing with clubs like Plymouth, Preston, Burnley, Stoke and Hull who carry stronger squads than us and spend more with half our gates.

[/quote]

Stoke City are owned by Peter Coates - worth £40M

Hull City are owned by a consortium headed by Paul Duffen - They previously attempted to buy West Ham (eventually sold for £80M) and Cardiff (£30M) - neither bid failed due to lack of funds.

Preston are just a point above us...

Leicester (2pts below us) loaned 5 and bought 3 in the transfer window.

QPR (4pts above us) brought in 2 loanees and bought 5 players for undisclosed fees and 2 others for £1M and £350,000.

Which all goes to prove that football really is a funny old game, there is no magic formula and your assumption about other teams falls flat on it''s backside.

[/quote]

I am repeating myself yet again bunny and i know it will never sink in with you, but we have a board who combined are worth £300m+.  Not that it`s doing us much good.......If the Hull people are sinking good money into a smaller club with little history then it just proves one of Doncasters many foot-in-mouth moments-"no-one wants to invest in loss-making Championship clubs"- completely wrong doesn`t it?

As you have kindly pointed out, all the clubs mentioned are doing better than us and showing more ambition with half our crowds.  Preston have bought two £1m+ players this year- we wouldn`t even pay £1m for Tiny who was proven quality and wanted to sign.

[Polar 0]

[quote user="Mr.Carrow"][quote user="bunny"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"]

Polar, when people are calling for the club to be more ambitious the vast majority are asking the club to stop throwing money at infrastructure and concentrate on our declining team.  Then, we might have a chance of competing with clubs like Plymouth, Preston, Burnley, Stoke and Hull who carry stronger squads than us and spend more with half our gates.

[/quote]

Stoke City are owned by Peter Coates - worth £40M

Hull City are owned by a consortium headed by Paul Duffen - They previously attempted to buy West Ham (eventually sold for £80M) and Cardiff (£30M) - neither bid failed due to lack of funds.

Preston are just a point above us...

Leicester (2pts below us) loaned 5 and bought 3 in the transfer window.

QPR (4pts above us) brought in 2 loanees and bought 5 players for undisclosed fees and 2 others for £1M and £350,000.

Which all goes to prove that football really is a funny old game, there is no magic formula and your assumption about other teams falls flat on it''s backside.

[/quote]

I am repeating myself yet again bunny and i know it will never sink in with you, but we have a board who combined are worth £300m+.  Not that it`s doing us much good.......If the Hull people are sinking good money into a smaller club with little history then it just proves one of Doncasters many foot-in-mouth moments-"no-one wants to invest in loss-making Championship clubs"- completely wrong doesn`t it?

As you have kindly pointed out, all the clubs mentioned are doing better than us and showing more ambition with half our crowds.  Preston have bought two £1m+ players this year- we wouldn`t even pay £1m for Tiny who was proven quality and wanted to sign.

[/quote]Ok fair play, i can''t argue that in recent times the board have spent on rubbish both on the pitch and off it.personally however i read that piece as Doncaster saying they are going to back Roeder and show ambition - i don''t know how many people are reading this with an open mind and willing to accept Doncaster is doing the right thing for once, there are certain posters here who will pick him apart no matter what he says. Even if he says: we are going to give Glen alot of money to buy new players - someone will find something wrong with that, and slander him for it. Then again maybe i''m being optimistic and being the idiot, who knows? its all about interpretation and some of us are going to interpret this differently to others based on our views on Doncaster. No saying i support or don''t support him but i''ll take him at his word and rip him apart later if he doesn''t back Roeder.And Bly....yes i am Delia in disguise...

[Mr.Carrow 376]

[quote user="Polar"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"][quote user="bunny"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"]

Polar, when people are calling for the club to be more ambitious the vast majority are asking the club to stop throwing money at infrastructure and concentrate on our declining team.  Then, we might have a chance of competing with clubs like Plymouth, Preston, Burnley, Stoke and Hull who carry stronger squads than us and spend more with half our gates.

[/quote]

Stoke City are owned by Peter Coates - worth £40M

Hull City are owned by a consortium headed by Paul Duffen - They previously attempted to buy West Ham (eventually sold for £80M) and Cardiff (£30M) - neither bid failed due to lack of funds.

Preston are just a point above us...

Leicester (2pts below us) loaned 5 and bought 3 in the transfer window.

QPR (4pts above us) brought in 2 loanees and bought 5 players for undisclosed fees and 2 others for £1M and £350,000.

Which all goes to prove that football really is a funny old game, there is no magic formula and your assumption about other teams falls flat on it''s backside.

[/quote]

I am repeating myself yet again bunny and i know it will never sink in with you, but we have a board who combined are worth £300m+.  Not that it`s doing us much good.......If the Hull people are sinking good money into a smaller club with little history then it just proves one of Doncasters many foot-in-mouth moments-"no-one wants to invest in loss-making Championship clubs"- completely wrong doesn`t it?

As you have kindly pointed out, all the clubs mentioned are doing better than us and showing more ambition with half our crowds.  Preston have bought two £1m+ players this year- we wouldn`t even pay £1m for Tiny who was proven quality and wanted to sign.

[/quote]

Ok fair play, i can''t argue that in recent times the board have spent on rubbish both on the pitch and off it.

personally however i read that piece as Doncaster saying they are going to back Roeder and show ambition - i don''t know how many people are reading this with an open mind and willing to accept Doncaster is doing the right thing for once, there are certain posters here who will pick him apart no matter what he says. Even if he says: we are going to give Glen alot of money to buy new players - someone will find something wrong with that, and slander him for it. Then again maybe i''m being optimistic and being the idiot, who knows? its all about interpretation and some of us are going to interpret this differently to others based on our views on Doncaster. No saying i support or don''t support him but i''ll take him at his word and rip him apart later if he doesn''t back Roeder.

And Bly....

yes i am Delia in disguise...
[/quote]

Nothing wrong with being optimistic mate and i who knows, maybe the recent fan pressure and ongoing brush with relegation will force them to rethink their approach.  I am however, very doubtful it will happen whilst so many people seem to think they should be under no pressure at all to buck their ideas up.

As for Doncasters article, we`ve been hearing those kinds of meaningless platitudes since relegation and they carry no weight whatsoever. Remember "All money received in transfers is re-invested in the squad"?  An outright lie i`m afraid and just goes to show they will sink pretty low to keep a lid on fan pressure.

[BlyBlyBabes 0]

[quote user="yellow hammer"]

The true story of Gretna is of a club-owner who is unable or unwilling to invest any more money into his club, for whatever reason, and as a result the club has gone from boom to bust in a very short time.

But that is exactly the same point that Doncaster goes on to make about NCFC. That the current owners have put so much of their personal finance into the club that they are now in a position where they are either unable or unwilling to put any more money into the club.

We might not expire as spectacularly as Grenta but we are every so slowly going down the plughole in a mean and miserly way ever since we were ejected from the Premiership. We can''t even afford to rebuild a permanent squad of players, and according to Doncaster, our ambitions reach as far as signing a loanee for six weeks.

We''re in this position because of the disastrous decisions taken during our Premier season to pump money into infrastructure instead of building a team. Those same policies are still in place today. Nothing has changed on that front. Doncaster is wrong in stating that we wish for the owners to dig deeper into their own pockets; what we are saying is that we want the focus to be on the football side of the club - everything else is a lesser priority.

Of course, it is understandable from the owners'' point of view that they wish to invest in bricks and mortar as it lessens their risk and provides some tangible assets when they decide to cut and run.

If our owners are unable or unwilling to invest further in the club, then rather than allowing the club to be slowly throttled to death through lack of investment, then they must stand aside and allow someone to take over who will allow us to compete at the top level. Do I worry that our great club would be at risk under foreign ownership? No I do not because NCFC is already at great risk from the current set of owners.

Like most posters, I will be very interested to see Doncaster''s finacial statement concerning the past ten years. He doesn''t have to do this, it has been said, but I think it is because he is under pressure from brave men such as Mr. Carrow who enlightens us with his financial knowledge.

[/quote]

An exceptionally interesting and well constructed insight Yellow Hammer.

This should be required reading.

OTBC

 

 

[lucky green trainers 0]

[quote user="bunny"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"]

Polar, when people are calling for the club to be more ambitious the vast majority are asking the club to stop throwing money at infrastructure and concentrate on our declining team.  Then, we might have a chance of competing with clubs like Plymouth, Preston, Burnley, Stoke and Hull who carry stronger squads than us and spend more with half our gates.

[/quote]

Stoke City are owned by Peter Coates - worth £40M

Hull City are owned by a consortium headed by Paul Duffen - They previously attempted to buy West Ham (eventually sold for £80M) and Cardiff (£30M) - neither bid failed due to lack of funds.

Preston are just a point above us...

Leicester (2pts below us) loaned 5 and bought 3 in the transfer window.

QPR (4pts above us) brought in 2 loanees and bought 5 players for undisclosed fees and 2 others for £1M and £350,000.

Which all goes to prove that football really is a funny old game, there is no magic formula and your assumption about other teams falls flat on it''s backside.

[/quote]both QPR and preston underspent in the summer, got into trouble, had changes at boardroom level, spent money and are looking to be out of trouble.  leicester spent loadsa dosh - but have changed managers - so will probably be stronger next season.  their squad should be strong enough to escape relegation.both stoke and hull spent more than their income justifies - and are doing well.so - this shows that 2 teams suffered for underspending in the summer, but since spending more have probably done enough to avoid relegation.  and 2 out of 3 bigger spending teams are in the top 6.  of these, leicester example shows you need a proven good manager in the hot seat to maximise your potential - it doesn''t matter how much money you give a bad manager, he''ll still bomb.therefore, spending money is the only way to build a credible, ambitious top 6 challenging team, allied with a good manager, facilities, backroom staff, and the odd slice of luck.its clear, the champs is in the middle of a ''gold rush'' (seeking the prem in them thar hills) where speculative investors probably outnumber traditional, sensible investors.  only 3 teams can be successful, the rest will suffer losses - which isn''t a problem if investors cover their losses, rather than stack up debt.  however, in the current credit cruch climate, i would imagine football club debt is ''untouchable,''  or on horrible prohibitive terms, leaving investors to guarantee these losses.speculative investment is the name of the game.  and next season, with new entrants, it''ll be even worse.  players transfer values and wages in the champs will be higher.  either we can compete, or we can''t.  either we can build a credible top 6 side, with a credible manager, or we can''t.  if we can''t, then at least we should be honest and say we can''t.  there''s no shame, but if we can''t do these things, then in the best interests of NCFC, and the 25000 paying punters each match, the board should step aside and allow those who can do these things to have a go. everybody is doing it, bar us.  but the problem is delia bought cheap, and quite rightly, she''s looking to maximise her resale value - so she won''t sell to any tom, dick or harry, fair enough.  but, even if she only gets back what she''s put in, or nothing back, what will she have lost??? £6-8m.  not bad for a multimillionaire for 12 years enjoyment of owning a footy club - say £600k a year.  not much is it really???