1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10 of 13 - and counting.

[Empty Mirror 0]

Of the 24 clubs currently in the Championship I would guess that 16 to 20 consider themselves "Premiership clubs" who are "on loan" to the Championship.   They can''t all go up.  No one has a divine right to go up.

[Mr.Carrow 376]

[quote user="Empty Mirror"]Of the 24 clubs currently in the Championship I would guess that 16 to 20 consider themselves "Premiership clubs" who are "on loan" to the Championship.   They can''t all go up.  No one has a divine right to go up.[/quote]

We are one of ten or so clubs in this league with the realistic potential to establish ourselves in the Prem. (just look at some of the gates this season for evidence).  We have no right to be in the Prem but i think we have a right to be regularly competing in the top end of this division- anything else is under-achievement- and what have we had for three seasons despite parachute payments, sell-outs and multi-million player sales?

Just getting to the last few games of the season with a realistic chance of the play-offs would constitute a welcome bit of hope and excitement, rather than the season being effectively "dead" with eight games to go, or the spectre of relegation haunting the club right up to the last few games.  Cardiff proved last season that a decent Champs side can get to a cup-final, whilst we have been appalling in the cups for years.  Supporters have every right to be p*ssed off about it.

[Branston Pickle 3,657]

[quote user="Empty Mirror"]Of the 24 clubs currently in the Championship I would guess that 16 to 20 consider themselves "Premiership clubs" who are "on loan" to the Championship.   They can''t all go up.  No one has a divine right to go up.[/quote]

There is a fair proportion of them in League 1 as well - obvious sides like Leeds and Leicester, but also Brighton, Swindon, Millwall, Oldham - have all had spells at the top of the game in recent history, and then there''s sides like Huddersfield who have a fantastic history going back further.

The point is that you can pick and choose statistics to show whatever you think proves your point.  But the fact remains that we are where we are.  Part of growing up is accepting such things, but it seems that the author of this thread doesn''t seem to realise the fact.

[Mr.Carrow 376]

[quote user="Branston Pickle"]

[quote user="Empty Mirror"]Of the 24 clubs currently in the Championship I would guess that 16 to 20 consider themselves "Premiership clubs" who are "on loan" to the Championship.   They can''t all go up.  No one has a divine right to go up.[/quote]

There is a fair proportion of them in League 1 as well - obvious sides like Leeds and Leicester, but also Brighton, Swindon, Millwall, Oldham - have all had spells at the top of the game in recent history, and then there''s sides like Huddersfield who have a fantastic history going back further.

The point is that you can pick and choose statistics to show whatever you think proves your point.  But the fact remains that we are where we are.  Part of growing up is accepting such things, but it seems that the author of this thread doesn''t seem to realise the fact.

[/quote]

For goodness sake, you are talking about clubs who rarely touch the 10,000 mark whilst we have only ever been below that figure once for a league game.  Most teams in our division will average less than our number of season-ticket holders so of course we should expect to be challenging for promotion (even Roeder has said as much).  This is just "little norwich" nonsense.

[nutty nigel 7,534]

[quote user="Mr.Carrow"]

We are one of ten or so clubs in this league with the realistic potential to establish ourselves in the Prem. (just look at some of the gates this season for evidence).  We have no right to be in the Prem but i think we have a right to be regularly competing in the top end of this division- anything else is under-achievement- and what have we had for three seasons despite parachute payments, sell-outs and multi-million player sales?

Just getting to the last few games of the season with a realistic chance of the play-offs would constitute a welcome bit of hope and excitement, rather than the season being effectively "dead" with eight games to go, or the spectre of relegation haunting the club right up to the last few games.  Cardiff proved last season that a decent Champs side can get to a cup-final, whilst we have been appalling in the cups for years.  Supporters have every right to be p*ssed off about it.

[/quote]

Mr Carrow - It''s worth repeating to you what I said on another of these countless threads saying ther same thing :-

42 different clubs have competed in the Premiership  since it was formed in 1992. Only 7 clubs (Arsenal, Aston Villa, Chelsea, Everton, Liverpool, Manchester United and Tottenham) have held onto Premier status throughout that time. That leaves 13 places for the other 35 clubs and 35 into 13 doesn''t go.

But we have fared better than some because of the 29 different clubs that have been relegated from the Premiership 12 (Barnsley, Bradford, Coventry, Leeds, Oldham, QPR, Reading, Sheffield Wednesday, Southampton, Swindon, Wimbledon and Wolves) have yet to return.

We are in a group of clubs who HAVE made real efforts to fight for one of those 13 places. Birmingham, Blackburn, Bolton, Charlton, Derby, Crystal Palace, Ipswich, Leicester,  Manchester City, Middlesboro, Norwich City, Nottingham Forest, Sheffield United, Sunderland, Watford, WBA, and West Ham have all had the ambition to fight back and return at least once after relegation.

Our time will come again but until football at the highest level changes we will never hit those heights of the late 80''s and early 90''s.

If we got promoted in the next couple of seasons would you finally give the board any credit for continually trying to get us back to the Premiership. After all said and done they weren''t the architects of our decline from those heady days in the late 80''s and early 90''s. That had already happened before this board ever arrived on the scene.

 

[Scooby 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"]

We are one of ten or so clubs in this league with the realistic potential to establish ourselves in the Prem. (just look at some of the gates this season for evidence).  We have no right to be in the Prem but i think we have a right to be regularly competing in the top end of this division- anything else is under-achievement- and what have we had for three seasons despite parachute payments, sell-outs and multi-million player sales?

Just getting to the last few games of the season with a realistic chance of the play-offs would constitute a welcome bit of hope and excitement, rather than the season being effectively "dead" with eight games to go, or the spectre of relegation haunting the club right up to the last few games.  Cardiff proved last season that a decent Champs side can get to a cup-final, whilst we have been appalling in the cups for years.  Supporters have every right to be p*ssed off about it.

[/quote]

Mr Carrow - It''s worth repeating to you what I said on another of these countless threads saying ther same thing :-

42 different clubs have competed in the Premiership  since it was formed in 1992. Only 7 clubs (Arsenal, Aston Villa, Chelsea, Everton, Liverpool, Manchester United and Tottenham) have held onto Premier status throughout that time. That leaves 13 places for the other 35 clubs and 35 into 13 doesn''t go.

But we have fared better than some because of the 29 different clubs that have been relegated from the Premiership 12 (Barnsley, Bradford, Coventry, Leeds, Oldham, QPR, Reading, Sheffield Wednesday, Southampton, Swindon, Wimbledon and Wolves) have yet to return.

We are in a group of clubs who HAVE made real efforts to fight for one of those 13 places. Birmingham, Blackburn, Bolton, Charlton, Derby, Crystal Palace, Ipswich, Leicester,  Manchester City, Middlesboro, Norwich City, Nottingham Forest, Sheffield United, Sunderland, Watford, WBA, and West Ham have all had the ambition to fight back and return at least once after relegation.

Our time will come again but until football at the highest level changes we will never hit those heights of the late 80''s and early 90''s.

If we got promoted in the next couple of seasons would you finally give the board any credit for continually trying to get us back to the Premiership. After all said and done they weren''t the architects of our decline from those heady days in the late 80''s and early 90''s. That had already happened before this board ever arrived on the scene.

 

[/quote]

Great reply Nigel! Realism is always better than fantasy. Unfortunately there are too many livivng in cloud cuckoo land!

[Mello Yello 2,293]

[quote user="Scooby"][quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"]

We are one of ten or so clubs in this league with the realistic potential to establish ourselves in the Prem. (just look at some of the gates this season for evidence).  We have no right to be in the Prem but i think we have a right to be regularly competing in the top end of this division- anything else is under-achievement- and what have we had for three seasons despite parachute payments, sell-outs and multi-million player sales?

Just getting to the last few games of the season with a realistic chance of the play-offs would constitute a welcome bit of hope and excitement, rather than the season being effectively "dead" with eight games to go, or the spectre of relegation haunting the club right up to the last few games.  Cardiff proved last season that a decent Champs side can get to a cup-final, whilst we have been appalling in the cups for years.  Supporters have every right to be p*ssed off about it.

[/quote]

Mr Carrow - It''s worth repeating to you what I said on another of these countless threads saying ther same thing :-

42 different clubs have competed in the Premiership  since it was formed in 1992. Only 7 clubs (Arsenal, Aston Villa, Chelsea, Everton, Liverpool, Manchester United and Tottenham) have held onto Premier status throughout that time. That leaves 13 places for the other 35 clubs and 35 into 13 doesn''t go.

But we have fared better than some because of the 29 different clubs that have been relegated from the Premiership 12 (Barnsley, Bradford, Coventry, Leeds, Oldham, QPR, Reading, Sheffield Wednesday, Southampton, Swindon, Wimbledon and Wolves) have yet to return.

We are in a group of clubs who HAVE made real efforts to fight for one of those 13 places. Birmingham, Blackburn, Bolton, Charlton, Derby, Crystal Palace, Ipswich, Leicester,  Manchester City, Middlesboro, Norwich City, Nottingham Forest, Sheffield United, Sunderland, Watford, WBA, and West Ham have all had the ambition to fight back and return at least once after relegation.

Our time will come again but until football at the highest level changes we will never hit those heights of the late 80''s and early 90''s.

If we got promoted in the next couple of seasons would you finally give the board any credit for continually trying to get us back to the Premiership. After all said and done they weren''t the architects of our decline from those heady days in the late 80''s and early 90''s. That had already happened before this board ever arrived on the scene.

 

[/quote]

Great reply Nigel! Realism is always better than fantasy. Unfortunately there are too many livivng in cloud cuckoo land!

[/quote]

And there are those li''l sparrers - who are content as long as a few seeds and scraps are thrown out for them......Whilst the larger winged predators feed on ''only the best'' that making the effort to kill, that more worthwhile......Cuckoo!

[YankeeCanary 0]

The cuckoo is notorious for laying its eggs in nests built by birds of other species. Do you detect the similarity of "cuckoo" humans who want to determine how other people''s money should be spent? 

[Robert N. LiM 4,344]

I think you''re asking slightly the wrong question, BBB. I think it is unfair to refer to the years post-Chase and pre-Premiership as failure. The club was in an appalling state when the current board took over. I know we disagree on Chase''s overall performance, but surely you would agree that, in the end, he left the club in a very precarious position. It was always going to take a while to get over that.There then followed four comparatively successful seasons: play-off final, eighth, Champions, season in the Premiership. The big question that needs to be asked is, why have we failed to compete for promotion since relegation, with the advantage of the parachute payments, and our comparatively big crowds?I think you undermine your argument by accusing Delia of things she is innocent of  and not giving her the credit that she deserves. It makes people like me react and defend her much more than we would if you were more reasonable. Your absurd comment on another thread about part of her problem being a woman is a prime example of that.In contrast, Mr Carrow invariably supports his posts with hard facts from the accounts, and is much more convincing as a result.For what it''s worth, I think the current board have been a little behind the times. Modelling ourselves on Charlton and Bolton would have been all very well five years ago, but clubs like that are sinking fast now: Charlton back in the Championship, Bolton surely on their way. A few years ago, promotion, relegation, promotion was a reasonable plan. Now, you have to gamble a lot of money to make sure you stay in the Premiership. Making that gamble is of course a lot easier if it''s not your own money you are gambling.The collapse of ITV digital is not to be overlooked either: in the wake of that, the board clearly wanted to make sure the club was self-sufficient with or without TV money. (And in the forthcoming recession, who knows, they might be proved right?) It''s laughed at, but unless you have a squillionaire, all clubs have to balance prudence and ambition. The problem is that the board, I think, failed to realise that the most prudent thing you can do is buy good players. The surest investment they have made in recent times was not the hotel, or the Jarrold Stand, although I think all these things are good. It was Dean Ashton. I don''t know enough about Cullum to comment. Obviously I would love to see his money coming in. If the board are repelling him, then they are doing the club a disservice. But it seems to me he is not sufficiently interested at the moment to commit himself fully.Leaving Cullum aside, I think the board have made a good choice of manager and I think he''s made some good signings. The target man is obviously urgently needed. But I would expect us to finish mid-table this season (another season of failure by your standards, but a good staging post after the appalling Grant era) and for a proper challenge next season.I await your usual patronising three sentences.

[Mello Yello 2,293]

[quote user="YankeeCanary"]The cuckoo is notorious for laying its eggs in nests built by birds of other species. Do you detect the similarity of "cuckoo" humans who want to determine how other people''s money should be spent? [/quote]

Says the bald-eagle that wants to rule the world.....

[BlyBlyBabes 0]

[quote user="Branston Pickle"]

[quote user="Empty Mirror"]Of the 24 clubs currently in the Championship I would guess that 16 to 20 consider themselves "Premiership clubs" who are "on loan" to the Championship.   They can''t all go up.  No one has a divine right to go up.[/quote]

There is a fair proportion of them in League 1 as well - obvious sides like Leeds and Leicester, but also Brighton, Swindon, Millwall, Oldham - have all had spells at the top of the game in recent history, and then there''s sides like Huddersfield who have a fantastic history going back further.

The point is that you can pick and choose statistics to show whatever you think proves your point.  But the fact remains that we are where we are.  Part of growing up is accepting such things, but it seems that the author of this thread doesn''t seem to realise the fact.

[/quote]

Dear oh dear Branston, where would the world be if we were all satisfied with our lot. Your attitude is a precise statement of City''s current problem - little ambition and self-satisfied owner & board with little performance to recommend them - and no embarrassment.

All I ask is for City to be consistently competitive in the Championship - and you think that is too much to expect. Dear oh dear oh dear.

One love.

OTBC   

[BlyBlyBabes 0]

[quote user="arrdee"]

Now Mac You lovely old boy , you must not be so hard on that sweet lovely old boy , you just put yourself in that poor sweet darlings shoes , how would you feel if you hadn''t seen the City play since the late 50s ? had not seen our lovely ground or stands and still imagine the old wooden main stand with the open south stand and river end , don''t you feel you would be twisted and bitter ? Now my sweet precious treasure Bly why don''t you come over and have a look round ? you might be surprised , I am sure there are banana boats leaving at regular intervals and you could always work your passage....[:D]....arrdee.

[/quote]

You should spend more time writing fiction rd.

Or are you too busy as chairman of the old farts league?[^o)]

One love.

OTBC

 

 

[First Wazzock 902]

[quote user="Scooby"][quote user="Carlos Valderrama"]

I agree, the owners should hold their heads in shame.  And while we are at it former 2 times european cup winners forest, their owners should also hold their heads in shame.  Newcastle owners, you have won nothing in over 50 years, hold your heads in shame.  And Cambridge united, from the old 2nd division to the conference, you were competitive once what the hell has happened, Lee Power hold your head in shame.

Oh hang on, with so many formerly competitive clubs not reliving past glories perhaps its just possible that no one has the divine right to be at the top all of the time.  Have you ever considered that....

[/quote]

Shame on you Carlos! You forgot to mention the mighty Accrington Stanley and many other mighty clubs who have crap leadership.  How dare they not win something every season.  I am always amazed at those lovely Geordies who think, because their club is so huge and well supported, that they have a right to win everything in sight and promptly sack anyone who does not deliver the silverware. Are we such a club? No, well I bloody well hope not.  We are Norwich City. A great club with a fine history and moments of glory that we will never forget and forever mention to anyone who will ever listen, and I am proud of every one of them.  We are not Chelski or the U S of Liverpool and nor would I want us to be.  Do people want us to be filthy rich? Do you want to see all the best Brazilians and Italians gracing the turf of Carrow Road?  Maybe you do and maybe you are wealthy enough to pay £50 a match and twice the price of a season ticket, if you can get on the waiting list.  Yes, endless success would be great but ask yourself, at what price?

[/quote]

10 [*]

superb post

 

[T 190]

Can anyone explain to me why some posters keep posting the same point in a slightly different form and are apparently oblivious of the financial impact of TV money and super rich football owners. Why are  they are apparently not embarrassed that they are not aware of the fundamental change in football finances even though it keeps being pointed out to them?

I''m genuinely puzzled.

Anybody? please.

 

 

 

[ncfcstar 291]

Wouldn''t we all love to know that T!!!

[Mr.Carrow 376]

[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"]

We are one of ten or so clubs in this league with the realistic potential to establish ourselves in the Prem. (just look at some of the gates this season for evidence).  We have no right to be in the Prem but i think we have a right to be regularly competing in the top end of this division- anything else is under-achievement- and what have we had for three seasons despite parachute payments, sell-outs and multi-million player sales?

Just getting to the last few games of the season with a realistic chance of the play-offs would constitute a welcome bit of hope and excitement, rather than the season being effectively "dead" with eight games to go, or the spectre of relegation haunting the club right up to the last few games.  Cardiff proved last season that a decent Champs side can get to a cup-final, whilst we have been appalling in the cups for years.  Supporters have every right to be p*ssed off about it.

[/quote]

Mr Carrow - It''s worth repeating to you what I said on another of these countless threads saying ther same thing :-

42 different clubs have competed in the Premiership  since it was formed in 1992. Only 7 clubs (Arsenal, Aston Villa, Chelsea, Everton, Liverpool, Manchester United and Tottenham) have held onto Premier status throughout that time. That leaves 13 places for the other 35 clubs and 35 into 13 doesn''t go.

But we have fared better than some because of the 29 different clubs that have been relegated from the Premiership 12 (Barnsley, Bradford, Coventry, Leeds, Oldham, QPR, Reading, Sheffield Wednesday, Southampton, Swindon, Wimbledon and Wolves) have yet to return.

We are in a group of clubs who HAVE made real efforts to fight for one of those 13 places. Birmingham, Blackburn, Bolton, Charlton, Derby, Crystal Palace, Ipswich, Leicester,  Manchester City, Middlesboro, Norwich City, Nottingham Forest, Sheffield United, Sunderland, Watford, WBA, and West Ham have all had the ambition to fight back and return at least once after relegation.

Our time will come again but until football at the highest level changes we will never hit those heights of the late 80''s and early 90''s.

If we got promoted in the next couple of seasons would you finally give the board any credit for continually trying to get us back to the Premiership. After all said and done they weren''t the architects of our decline from those heady days in the late 80''s and early 90''s. That had already happened before this board ever arrived on the scene.

 

[/quote]

As well you know nutty, i gave the board plenty of credit for the years of their regime leading to promotion which is why i bought shares and bricks in the new stand.  I even wasn`t too critical during the Prem season although the failure to sign Crouch (for financial reasons- as stated by Worthy), even after he`d publically stated he wanted to join us, set alarm bells ringing.

The boards priorities have been made clear since relegation and they are exactly the priorities which, under Chase, got the club into so much trouble in the first place.  Have those priorities changed?  I don`t think so.  Let`s say Spillane and Martin suddenly come good and are sold for £6m next season.  Do you think, given the boards record, that money will be available for the team?  I`m sure they`ll tell us it is but that doesn`t mean anything anymore does it.......?

Alot of the clubs you mention are far smaller clubs who had a few years in the sun.  Quite a few more have had far more years in the Prem than us in the last 13 years.  To have "it could be worse" as the cornerstone of your argument is very weak indeed.  We have failed to compete in this league for three seasons despite having many financial advantages over our rivals because the performance of the football team has not been a priority.

[arrdee 2]

[quote user="BlyBlyBabes"][quote user="arrdee"]

Now Mac You lovely old boy , you must not be so hard on that sweet lovely old boy , you just put yourself in that poor sweet darlings shoes , how would you feel if you hadn''t seen the City play since the late 50s ? had not seen our lovely ground or stands and still imagine the old wooden main stand with the open south stand and river end , don''t you feel you would be twisted and bitter ? Now my sweet precious treasure Bly why don''t you come over and have a look round ? you might be surprised , I am sure there are banana boats leaving at regular intervals and you could always work your passage....[:D]....arrdee.

[/quote]

You should spend more time writing fiction rd.

Or are you too busy as chairman of the old farts league?[^o)]

One love.

OTBC

 

 

[/quote]

Now of course you lovely old sweet sugar cane you , is the sugar cane cutting season in full swing yet by the way ? always a few bob to be picked up there I should imagine ,with a bit of piece work and cash in hand ,  now my sweet darling whats this old farts league you are on about ? as I am no where as old as you and also I am not stuffed out with pigs fry with your legendary breaking of wind I would say that you would be made President for life....[:D]....arrdee.

40 love .

[Nuff Said 5,140]

[quote user="Mr.Carrow"] We have failed to compete in this league for three seasons despite having many financial advantages over our rivals because the performance of the football team has not been a priority.[/quote]

 

Possibly because the priority has been the survival of the club. Putting more money into the team would be a gamble, and I for one don''t want anyone gambling with the future of the club.

[nutty nigel 7,534]

[quote user="Mr.Carrow"][

The boards priorities have been made clear since relegation and they are exactly the priorities which, under Chase, got the club into so much trouble in the first place.  Have those priorities changed?  I don`t think so.  Let`s say Spillane and Martin suddenly come good and are sold for £6m next season.  Do you think, given the boards record, that money will be available for the team?  I`m sure they`ll tell us it is but that doesn`t mean anything anymore does it.......?

Alot of the clubs you mention are far smaller clubs who had a few years in the sun.  Quite a few more have had far more years in the Prem than us in the last 13 years.  To have "it could be worse" as the cornerstone of your argument is very weak indeed.  We have failed to compete in this league for three seasons despite having many financial advantages over our rivals because the performance of the football team has not been a priority.

[/quote]

Mr Carrow - glad to see you on here sober once more after your efforts from the other day[;)]

The current board have an entirely different and I believe more difficult task than Mr. Chase. Football has changed in so many ways. Chase financed the club in the main by buying players and then selling them on to the top clubs at big profits and also selling our own youngsters for big profits. People only remember our stars from the 90''s being sold off and poorly replaced, the likes of Sutton, Fox and Ekoku. But of course Chase did this throughout our succesful years and there were real protests in the ground after he sold Townsend and Linighnan and we replaced them with Polston, Blades and Woodthorpe. Many other clubs survived in this way in the 80''s and 90''s. Unfortunately it doesn''t work now. The top clubs don''t pay top dollar for these type of players anymore so this board in todays game have to find other ways to finance the club. The fact that they have been doing that while at the same time as being competetive in this league and keeping season ticket prices so low and affordable to families is, I believe, to their eternal credit.

The point I was making about the 29 clubs who have been relegated is that we, under this board, are one of those that has made real efforts to get back to the Premiership.

 

 

[lucky green trainers 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"][

The boards priorities have been made clear since relegation and they are exactly the priorities which, under Chase, got the club into so much trouble in the first place.  Have those priorities changed?  I don`t think so.  Let`s say Spillane and Martin suddenly come good and are sold for £6m next season.  Do you think, given the boards record, that money will be available for the team?  I`m sure they`ll tell us it is but that doesn`t mean anything anymore does it.......?

Alot of the clubs you mention are far smaller clubs who had a few years in the sun.  Quite a few more have had far more years in the Prem than us in the last 13 years.  To have "it could be worse" as the cornerstone of your argument is very weak indeed.  We have failed to compete in this league for three seasons despite having many financial advantages over our rivals because the performance of the football team has not been a priority.

[/quote]

Mr Carrow - glad to see you on here sober once more after your efforts from the other day[;)]

The current board have an entirely different and I believe more difficult task than Mr. Chase. Football has changed in so many ways. Chase financed the club in the main by buying players and then selling them on to the top clubs at big profits and also selling our own youngsters for big profits. People only remember our stars from the 90''s being sold off and poorly replaced, the likes of Sutton, Fox and Ekoku. But of course Chase did this throughout our succesful years and there were real protests in the ground after he sold Townsend and Linighnan and we replaced them with Polston, Blades and Woodthorpe. Many other clubs survived in this way in the 80''s and 90''s. Unfortunately it doesn''t work now. The top clubs don''t pay top dollar for these type of players anymore so this board in todays game have to find other ways to finance the club. The fact that they have been doing that while at the same time as being competetive in this league and keeping season ticket prices so low and affordable to families is, I believe, to their eternal credit.

The point I was making about the 29 clubs who have been relegated is that we, under this board, are one of those that has made real efforts to get back to the Premiership.

 [/quote]

for me, the only seasons where we made a ''real'' effort to get promoted was both seasons when we were relegated...obviously, the season were gained promotion - was transformed through the clever use of top quality loanees -  which  is unlikely to be repeated due to the huge loan fees demanded by prem clubs these days...

[BlyBlyBabes 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"][

The boards priorities have been made clear since relegation and they are exactly the priorities which, under Chase, got the club into so much trouble in the first place.  Have those priorities changed?  I don`t think so.  Let`s say Spillane and Martin suddenly come good and are sold for £6m next season.  Do you think, given the boards record, that money will be available for the team?  I`m sure they`ll tell us it is but that doesn`t mean anything anymore does it.......?

Alot of the clubs you mention are far smaller clubs who had a few years in the sun.  Quite a few more have had far more years in the Prem than us in the last 13 years.  To have "it could be worse" as the cornerstone of your argument is very weak indeed.  We have failed to compete in this league for three seasons despite having many financial advantages over our rivals because the performance of the football team has not been a priority.

[/quote]

Mr Carrow - glad to see you on here sober once more after your efforts from the other day[;)]

The current board have an entirely different and I believe more difficult task than Mr. Chase. Football has changed in so many ways. Chase financed the club in the main by buying players and then selling them on to the top clubs at big profits and also selling our own youngsters for big profits. People only remember our stars from the 90''s being sold off and poorly replaced, the likes of Sutton, Fox and Ekoku. But of course Chase did this throughout our succesful years and there were real protests in the ground after he sold Townsend and Linighnan and we replaced them with Polston, Blades and Woodthorpe. Many other clubs survived in this way in the 80''s and 90''s. Unfortunately it doesn''t work now. The top clubs don''t pay top dollar for these type of players anymore so this board in todays game have to find other ways to finance the club. The fact that they have been doing that while at the same time as being competetive in this league and keeping season ticket prices so low and affordable to families is, I believe, to their eternal credit.

The point I was making about the 29 clubs who have been relegated is that we, under this board, are one of those that has made real efforts to get back to the Premiership.

[/quote]

And just how do you define being competitive in this league?

The world and his wife await.

OTBC

 

[nutty nigel 7,534]

[quote user="BlyBlyBabes"][

And just how do you define being competitive in this league?

The world and his wife await.

OTBC

 

[/quote]

We are in a group of 17 clubs who HAVE made real efforts to fight for one of those 13 places. Birmingham, Blackburn, Bolton, Charlton, Derby, Crystal Palace, Ipswich, Leicester,  Manchester City, Middlesboro, Norwich City, Nottingham Forest, Sheffield United, Sunderland, Watford, WBA, and West Ham have all had the ambition to fight back and return at least once after relegation.

 

[BlyBlyBabes 0]

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

And just how do you define being competitive in this league?

The world and his wife await.

OTBC

[/quote]

We are in a group of 17 clubs who HAVE made real efforts to fight for one of those 13 places. Birmingham, Blackburn, Bolton, Charlton, Derby, Crystal Palace, Ipswich, Leicester,  Manchester City, Middlesboro, Norwich City, Nottingham Forest, Sheffield United, Sunderland, Watford, WBA, and West Ham have all had the ambition to fight back and return at least once after relegation.

[/quote]

So.

Since we have returned ''at least once after relegation'' we will - by your definition - be forever deemed competitive in this league.[:^)]

Where''s the logic in that?

OTBC

 

 

 

[macdougalls perm 0]

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

And just how do you define being competitive in this league?

The world and his wife await.

OTBC

[/quote]

We are in a group of 17 clubs who HAVE made real efforts to fight for one of those 13 places. Birmingham, Blackburn, Bolton, Charlton, Derby, Crystal Palace, Ipswich, Leicester,  Manchester City, Middlesboro, Norwich City, Nottingham Forest, Sheffield United, Sunderland, Watford, WBA, and West Ham have all had the ambition to fight back and return at least once after relegation.

[/quote]

So.

Since we have returned ''at least once after relegation'' we will - by your definition - be forever deemed competitive in this league.[:^)]

Where''s the logic in that?

OTBC

 

 

 

[/quote]

That''s not what is implied at all, NN is using the time scale set out in your original ''argument''; i.e. he was looking at the club''s trajectory in relation to the past twelve years as YOU originally proposed. Perfectly clear.

I don''t think that anyone is in the slightest bit surprised that you have moved the goalposts again ... par for the course.   

[BlyBlyBabes 0]

[quote user="macdougalls perm"][quote user="BlyBlyBabes"][quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="BlyBlyBabes"][

And just how do you define being competitive in this league?

The world and his wife await.

OTBC

[/quote]

We are in a group of 17 clubs who HAVE made real efforts to fight for one of those 13 places. Birmingham, Blackburn, Bolton, Charlton, Derby, Crystal Palace, Ipswich, Leicester,  Manchester City, Middlesboro, Norwich City, Nottingham Forest, Sheffield United, Sunderland, Watford, WBA, and West Ham have all had the ambition to fight back and return at least once after relegation.

[/quote]

So.

Since we have returned ''at least once after relegation'' we will - by your definition - be forever deemed competitive in this league.[:^)]

Where''s the logic in that?

OTBC

[/quote]

That''s not what is implied at all, NN is using the time scale set out in your original ''argument''; i.e. he was looking at the club''s trajectory in relation to the past twelve years as YOU originally proposed. Perfectly clear.

I don''t think that anyone is in the slightest bit surprised that you have moved the goalposts again ... par for the course.   

[/quote]

I suggest you look back at my original post.

Last 12 years.

NN''s assertion would only be valid then if the clubs he mentioned had each been promoted to the Prem at least once over the past 12 years.

I stick to my point that 10 finishes out of the top 6 in 13 successive seasons is pretty fair evidence that we have been consistently uncompetitive since relegation in 1995. 

And I hardly think that it''s the supporters fault, do you?

Its the fault of leadership - any way you try to twist and turn it.

The world and his wife are still waiting.

OTBC

[Mr.Carrow 376]

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

And just how do you define being competitive in this league?

The world and his wife await.

OTBC

 

[/quote]

We are in a group of 17 clubs who HAVE made real efforts to fight for one of those 13 places. Birmingham, Blackburn, Bolton, Charlton, Derby, Crystal Palace, Ipswich, Leicester,  Manchester City, Middlesboro, Norwich City, Nottingham Forest, Sheffield United, Sunderland, Watford, WBA, and West Ham have all had the ambition to fight back and return at least once after relegation.

 

[/quote]

Where have we finished in relation to those clubs the last three seasons?

[BlyBlyBabes 0]

[quote user="Mr.Carrow"][quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="BlyBlyBabes"][

And just how do you define being competitive in this league?

The world and his wife await.

OTBC

 

[/quote]

We are in a group of 17 clubs who HAVE made real efforts to fight for one of those 13 places. Birmingham, Blackburn, Bolton, Charlton, Derby, Crystal Palace, Ipswich, Leicester,  Manchester City, Middlesboro, Norwich City, Nottingham Forest, Sheffield United, Sunderland, Watford, WBA, and West Ham have all had the ambition to fight back and return at least once after relegation.

[/quote]

Where have we finished in relation to those clubs the last three seasons?

[/quote]

One suspects that we have been pretty uncompetitive with that lot over the last 13 years, let alone 3.

Maybe we edged out Leicester for bottom place in that mini-league?[:^)]

OTBC

[macdougalls perm 0]

I''m not arguing over who''s fault the club''s decline is. I''m simply pointing out that NN addressed your question in terms of the time scale you suggested and you then tried to mis-represent him by applying his answer to the indefinite future. 

He was talking about the past twelve years - any way you try to twist and turn it.

The world and his wife are still waiting.

OTBC 

[nutty nigel 7,534]

Babes'' goalposts are on wheels as usual Maccy Dee! If the thread had been entitled 123 years and counting we may have found some common ground. As it is it''s just more drivel based on no fact whatsoever and may as well be called 123 O''Leary[8][:O]. Time and time again the same group of posters make up stuff to discredit various people at the club. Sometimes it''s the manager, sometimes it''s the board, and sometimes the players. Where as I agree anti-board does not mean anti-club, anti-everything most certainly does in my book. The sad thing is other posters then read this drivel and take it as fact so the whole thing escalates. The other day we had a thread where the whole purpose was to get people to believe we employ more staff than most other clubs. People believed it because they wanted to believe it. I found it crazy how many posters were prepared to believe that we employ more staff than Chelsea and yet they call me gullible. The only reason I respond to this nonsense is because in the long run it''s harmful to the club.

Opinions are fair enough and I respect posters opinions even when they are different to mine. Other posters have very different opinions to me and I respect them because they don''t make stuff up to try and prove a point. They could be right and I could be right. But as soon as posters resort to making up stuff to discredit any part of our great club they lose all credibility in my eyes.

 

 

[nutty nigel 7,534]

[quote user="BlyBlyBabes"][quote user="macdougalls perm"][quote user="BlyBlyBabes"][quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="BlyBlyBabes"][

And just how do you define being competitive in this league?

The world and his wife await.

OTBC

[/quote]

We are in a group of 17 clubs who HAVE made real efforts to fight for one of those 13 places. Birmingham, Blackburn, Bolton, Charlton, Derby, Crystal Palace, Ipswich, Leicester,  Manchester City, Middlesboro, Norwich City, Nottingham Forest, Sheffield United, Sunderland, Watford, WBA, and West Ham have all had the ambition to fight back and return at least once after relegation.

[/quote]

So.

Since we have returned ''at least once after relegation'' we will - by your definition - be forever deemed competitive in this league.[:^)]

Where''s the logic in that?

OTBC

[/quote]

That''s not what is implied at all, NN is using the time scale set out in your original ''argument''; i.e. he was looking at the club''s trajectory in relation to the past twelve years as YOU originally proposed. Perfectly clear.

I don''t think that anyone is in the slightest bit surprised that you have moved the goalposts again ... par for the course.   

[/quote]

I suggest you look back at my original post.

Last 12 years.

NN''s assertion would only be valid then if the clubs he mentioned had each been promoted to the Prem at least once over the past 12 years.

I stick to my point that 10 finishes out of the top 6 in 13 successive seasons is pretty fair evidence that we have been consistently uncompetitive since relegation in 1995. 

And I hardly think that it''s the supporters fault, do you?

Its the fault of leadership - any way you try to twist and turn it.

The world and his wife are still waiting.

OTBC

[/quote]

But surely that''s what has happened. Since the advent of the Premiership in 1992 all those clubs I have mentioned have been relegated and managed to fight back and regain their place at least once. Norwich City included.