Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Mister Chops

This week's "Fan's Eye" - it's all wrong

Recommended Posts

Here you go.Now, what irritated me particularly with regard to this article was this:"The point is I pay my money to watch my beloved Norwich City play, not a rag tag team of other club''s off-cuts."Leaving aside the idea that Bertrand, england''s future left-back, is an "off cut", which is a ludicrous thing to say... what galls me is this out-dated notion that we, Norwich City FC, can still "own" a player.  It''s 1980s thinking.Modern players are like cats.  They don''t care where they are, or who you are, as long as they''re being looked after.  Look at Fotheringham, who "loves it here" and yet would only sign a one year deal.  Look at Doc, who took all of six weeks to sign his new contract despite the usual protestations that he "wanted to stay" - it''s fair to assume if someone had come in with £10k a week, he''d have been straight out of Dussindale.And, within this context, how are Norwich City really going to afford decent players as permanent signings?Nobody knows where the money''s gone, not really.  Maybe a few in the circle of trust within the boardroom, but the rest of us just guess.  What we don''t have to guess is that we have no money.  That much is obvious.  And this is not Roeder''s fault.So, we''re skint, and we need decent players.  We can''t pay huge wages, and we can''t pay million pound transfer fees.We therefore have two choices:(a) use the Free Transfer system, which has previously brought us the delights of Murray, Brellier, Fotheringham(b) buy cheap players from lower leagues, or other people''s reserve players (Chris Brown) and hope they turn out to be good... as it says above, the Fan''s Eye writer doesn''t pay to "watch other people''s off-cuts", but what does the writer think we would be able to buy?  With our budget, it wouldn''t be off-cuts - it would be offal.(c) bring in quality on a temporary basis because we can''t do anything else, handing over the wages and the occasional loan fee.No, I don''t particularly like the number of loan players we have, but I''m tired of people bashing Roeder for it.  What else is he supposed to do?  Get rid of Kennedy and bring Spillane back from Luton?  Ask Lupoli to leave so we can have Chris Martin back?For a club like Norwich, the only difference between a permanent signing and a loan signing is you get some money back when you sell the permanent player on.  There''s no more or less loyalty than that.  People need to stop carping about the number of loans we have and get behind the team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Me thinks you might be talking too much sense for this board.Spot on IMO.  We are in a desparate position on the finance front and Roeder is trying his best.  The blame lays elsewhere for us having to rely on loans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote](b) buy cheap players from lower leagues, or other people''s reserve

players (Chris Brown) and hope they turn out to be good... as it says

above, the Fan''s Eye writer doesn''t pay to "watch other people''s

off-cuts", but what does the writer think we would be able to buy? 

With our budget, it wouldn''t be off-cuts - it would be offal.[/quote]Absolutely spot on.  Billy Sharpe, 2 million was it ?  4 goals last season ?  Also multi-million transfers for Eastwood from Southend, 22 k a week for Luke Varney at Charlton, and what has he done ?I''d take Lita or Sibierski on a loan above any of those players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Woodstock"]Here you go.

Now, what irritated me particularly with regard to this article was this:

"The point is I pay my money to watch my beloved Norwich City play, not a rag tag team of other club''s off-cuts."

Leaving aside the idea that Bertrand, england''s future left-back, is an "off cut", which is a ludicrous thing to say... what galls me is this out-dated notion that we, Norwich City FC, can still "own" a player.  It''s 1980s thinking.

Modern players are like cats.  They don''t care where they are, or who you are, as long as they''re being looked after.  Look at Fotheringham, who "loves it here" and yet would only sign a one year deal.  Look at Doc, who took all of six weeks to sign his new contract despite the usual protestations that he "wanted to stay" - it''s fair to assume if someone had come in with £10k a week, he''d have been straight out of Dussindale.

And, within this context, how are Norwich City really going to afford decent players as permanent signings?

Nobody knows where the money''s gone, not really.  Maybe a few in the circle of trust within the boardroom, but the rest of us just guess.  What we don''t have to guess is that we have no money.  That much is obvious.  And this is not Roeder''s fault.

So, we''re skint, and we need decent players.  We can''t pay huge wages, and we can''t pay million pound transfer fees.

We therefore have two choices:
(a) use the Free Transfer system, which has previously brought us the delights of Murray, Brellier, Fotheringham
(b) buy cheap players from lower leagues, or other people''s reserve players (Chris Brown) and hope they turn out to be good... as it says above, the Fan''s Eye writer doesn''t pay to "watch other people''s off-cuts", but what does the writer think we would be able to buy?  With our budget, it wouldn''t be off-cuts - it would be offal.
(c) bring in quality on a temporary basis because we can''t do anything else, handing over the wages and the occasional loan fee.

No, I don''t particularly like the number of loan players we have, but I''m tired of people bashing Roeder for it.  What else is he supposed to do?  Get rid of Kennedy and bring Spillane back from Luton?  Ask Lupoli to leave so we can have Chris Martin back?

For a club like Norwich, the only difference between a permanent signing and a loan signing is you get some money back when you sell the permanent player on.  There''s no more or less loyalty than that.  People need to stop carping about the number of loans we have and get behind the team.

[/quote]

 

Spot on,Chops. Players are professionals and I have never bought the "loans lack loyalty" argument.We have to cut our coat according to our cloth and at the moment that means the loan market.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hear, hear, you win my thread of the year award. You have perfectly summed up our predicament and I can''t see how anyone can possibly have an argument against your comments. On the other hand, wait a minute, I''m sure someone will be along in a minute to disagree![;)]

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OOOH! Look!  It''s a gripin'' gaggle of self opinionated, ego massaging and safety in numbers pro-boardist luvvies......How quaint.

"Yes, because I assume that all the Championship clubs, also currently have at least 8 loans on their books.....Don''t they?"

I personally think ''Fan''s Eye'' is spot on....

But, he''s probably just a closet binner stirring up trouble.....eh?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Woodstock"]We therefore have two choices:(a) use the Free Transfer system, which has previously brought us the delights of Murray, Brellier, Fotheringham(b) buy cheap players from lower leagues, or other people''s reserve players (Chris Brown) and hope they turn out to be good... as it says above, the Fan''s Eye writer doesn''t pay to "watch other people''s off-cuts", but what does the writer think we would be able to buy?  With our budget, it wouldn''t be off-cuts - it would be offal.(c) bring in quality on a temporary basis because we can''t do anything else, handing over the wages and the occasional loan fee.

[/quote]Two? You sure?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="blahblahblah"][quote](b) buy cheap players from lower leagues, or other people''s reserve

players (Chris Brown) and hope they turn out to be good... as it says

above, the Fan''s Eye writer doesn''t pay to "watch other people''s

off-cuts", but what does the writer think we would be able to buy? 

With our budget, it wouldn''t be off-cuts - it would be offal.[/quote]Absolutely spot on.  Billy Sharpe, 2 million was it ?  4 goals last season ?  Also multi-million transfers for Eastwood from Southend, 22 k a week for Luke Varney at Charlton, and what has he done ?I''d take Lita or Sibierski on a loan above any of those players.[/quote]Yes because Lita and Sibierski are knocking them in for fun , at least if we owned our players instead of borrowing half a squad we wouldnt be the laughing stock of the league . Derek Riorden quality striker who was available for around £100,000 probably a fraction of what we are wasting borrowing a clapped out old French striker from the mighty Wigan .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Mello Yello"]

OOOH! Look!  It''s a gripin'' gaggle of self opinionated, ego massaging and safety in numbers pro-boardist luvvies......How quaint.

"Yes, because I assume that all the Championship clubs, also currently have at least 8 loans on their books.....Don''t they?"

I personally think ''Fan''s Eye'' is spot on....

But, he''s probably just a closet binner stirring up trouble.....eh?

 

 

[/quote]

I''m sorry Mello but who on the thread before you have shown any support for the board.  I think they are sympathetic towards what Roeder has had to deal with to build an entire squad in one transfer window.  It is admitted that we are skint and that is clearly the board''s responsibility.

I wont expect a proper response from you, just your usual soundbites bollox.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Mello Yello"]

OOOH! Look!  It''s a gripin'' gaggle of self opinionated, ego massaging and safety in numbers pro-boardist luvvies......How quaint.

[/quote]Who''s griping?  If I am, I''m griping against the gripers... and since when did acknowledging we don''t know where the money''s gone make people pro-boardist?  It should be fairly clear that I can''t understand how the current administration have got us into the state we''re in, financially and otherwise, and I hold them accountable for that - but in the meantime, we need to put out the best team we can, and the only way we can do that is through loans as we can''t afford good players on permanent contracts.Now back to your "Heavin Nooz", or some other quaint wordplay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SWP.....

Least my soundbites have bollox.....and you''re apologising for the apologists. (that good enough for yah?)

What would you class as a ''proper'' response then? Roeder is the best thing since Peter Grant or Brian Hamilton? Also, the board have got their hands tied - due to the unreasonable and unfeasible demands of the current manager.....For whom, without his unwavering continuous desire to build a decent squad of players (including 8 loans) would have allowed the prudent Directionless, to proceed with further infrastructure expansion, with the construction and completion of a much needed multi-storey car-park, that would see us challenging for the most available (and required) car parking slots in the Championship.

There are posters above on this thread, who when criticism has been directed at the board (including the Major-shareholding duo and the CE). Have risen to their defence.....Check their history.....and while you''re at it....check mine. (they''re full of my usual soundbites bollox of which I''m sure you''ll enjoy getting irate over)....enjoy.[:|]

Or, just ignore them.[:|]

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Woodsplinter sez.

Who''s griping?  If I am, I''m griping against the gripers... and since when did acknowledging we don''t know where the money''s gone make people pro-boardist?  It should be fairly clear that I can''t understand how the current administration have got us into the state we''re in, financially and otherwise, and I hold them accountable for that - but in the meantime, we need to put out the best team we can, and the only way we can do that is through loans as we can''t afford good players on permanent contracts.

Now back to your "Heavin Nooz", or some other quaint wordplay.

......Read my reply to SWP......I''m off for my Heavenin'' Snooze....Shite Nite![|-)]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But we do know where the money had gone don''t we?  A wage bill of over 8 million and gate receipts of over 5 million leaves a 3 million deficit.  We cannot pay our way through gate receipts alone.  We need all the other sources of income aplus the generosity of the board and all the other supporters who give or loan the club money in whatever shape or form.  It has been this way since before the last ill-fated excursion to the ''Premier'' league.  The same is true of most clubs at all levels.

Other than that the original post succinctly puts the problems of the club in a true perspective.  No-one is satisfied with the current position on or off the field it is just that some are more realistic than others. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Woodstock"]Here you go.Now, what irritated me particularly with regard to this article was this:"The point is I pay my money to watch my beloved Norwich City play, not a rag tag team of other club''s off-cuts."Leaving aside the idea that Bertrand, england''s future left-back, is an "off cut", which is a ludicrous thing to say... what galls me is this out-dated notion that we, Norwich City FC, can still "own" a player.  It''s 1980s thinking.Modern players are like cats.  They don''t care where they are, or who you are, as long as they''re being looked after.  Look at Fotheringham, who "loves it here" and yet would only sign a one year deal.  Look at Doc, who took all of six weeks to sign his new contract despite the usual protestations that he "wanted to stay" - it''s fair to assume if someone had come in with £10k a week, he''d have been straight out of Dussindale.And, within this context, how are Norwich City really going to afford decent players as permanent signings?Nobody knows where the money''s gone, not really.  Maybe a few in the circle of trust within the boardroom, but the rest of us just guess.  What we don''t have to guess is that we have no money.  That much is obvious.  And this is not Roeder''s fault.So, we''re skint, and we need decent players.  We can''t pay huge wages, and we can''t pay million pound transfer fees.We therefore have two choices:(a) use the Free Transfer system, which has previously brought us the delights of Murray, Brellier, Fotheringham(b) buy cheap players from lower leagues, or other people''s reserve players (Chris Brown) and hope they turn out to be good... as it says above, the Fan''s Eye writer doesn''t pay to "watch other people''s off-cuts", but what does the writer think we would be able to buy?  With our budget, it wouldn''t be off-cuts - it would be offal.(c) bring in quality on a temporary basis because we can''t do anything else, handing over the wages and the occasional loan fee.No, I don''t particularly like the number of loan players we have, but I''m tired of people bashing Roeder for it.  What else is he supposed to do?  Get rid of Kennedy and bring Spillane back from Luton?  Ask Lupoli to leave so we can have Chris Martin back?For a club like Norwich, the only difference between a permanent signing and a loan signing is you get some money back when you sell the permanent player on.  There''s no more or less loyalty than that.  People need to stop carping about the number of loans we have and get behind the team.[/quote]Can you honestly say that every single player we have on loan is "decent" because the last time I looked we were fourth

from bottom and our level of play and confidence seems to be reducing with each game.  Bertrand is a good player no doubt and Lupoli and Kennedy  have done well but IMO the jury is still out on the rest.  Yes loans are the way of the world in football now but 5 strikers on loan!!!  Come on, the only other teams with close to the amount of loans we have are ones that have been in administration like Luton.We are now in such a poor position that we are having to loan players to provide cover for our loan players and to be honest I would rather Roeder had gone bargain hunting for young players in the lower leagues because this squad/team is heading nowhere.  I have been to every game this season and I have seen nothing that gives me any hope for next season and beyond.  I would be happy if I could at least see where Roeder was trying to take us but I can''t.  I don''t see that a team is being built just a patchup job being done with loans.  The argument to defend this is always "we will get a couple of perms each year and reduce the amount of loans etc etc" but if we can''t afford to sign players now what will be different come next summer?  All the loan sigings are going to be perpetual every year because if we have no money so sign perms then all we are going to ever do is tread water.  That is what is so annoying about this and I don''t get why people don''t understand that it''s not the loan players individually, their commitment or the fact we have to have loan players in the first place.  The problem is the volume of loans and the indication it gives that the club is still on the decline with little hope for the future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="blahblahblah"][quote](b) buy cheap players from lower leagues, or other people''s reserve players (Chris Brown) and hope they turn out to be good... as it says above, the Fan''s Eye writer doesn''t pay to "watch other people''s off-cuts", but what does the writer think we would be able to buy?  With our budget, it wouldn''t be off-cuts - it would be offal.[/quote]

Absolutely spot on.  Billy Sharpe, 2 million was it ?  4 goals last season ?  Also multi-million transfers for Eastwood from Southend, 22 k a week for Luke Varney at Charlton, and what has he done ?

I''d take Lita or Sibierski on a loan above any of those players.
[/quote]

Oh, aren''t you an ambitious one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also agree with the gist of what the Evening News journalist had to say. And, correct me if I''m wrong, but I don''t see these "quality" unaffordable players from the Premier League making too much difference this season so far - we''re at the wrong end of the table, not challenging for the top six. If they had helped to form a winning successful team I wouldn''t mind so much, but they''re not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Seaman Staines"]I also agree with the gist of what the Evening News journalist had to say. And, correct me if I''m wrong, but I don''t see these "quality" unaffordable players from the Premier League making too much difference this season so far - we''re at the wrong end of the table, not challenging for the top six. If they had helped to form a winning successful team I wouldn''t mind so much, but they''re not.[/quote]So bearing in mind our budget, who could we feasibly buy to replace the following...?BertrandOmoKennedyLupoliSibierskiLita

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually think the FA should change the rules so that clubs cannot have NINE loan players at any one time. The way i see it is that we need to sign as many permanant players as we can and get the best we can and then the gaps need to be plugged by players from our academy. If a team isn''t good enough so be it, because at the moment if we go up or down it''s not even our team that got us promoted/relegated.

Get martin, spillane & chadwick back send the loans back keeping a reasonable number, three kennedy, bertrand & lupoli

Green, Nelson

Otsemobor, drury, bertrand, doherty, spillane, stefanovic, kennedy, lappin

eagle, bell, croft, chadwick, hoolahan, pattison, fotheringham, clingan, russell,

cureton, martin, renton, lupoli

Is that squad much worse than what we''ve already got? i think that we would loose a certain amount of experience & ability but i we''d save money for permanent signings in january, we''d have a much more commited team & we could develop players such as spillane, eagle, martin & renton + whoever else could be promoted from the academy. Who knows the next Eadie or Bellamy may be just waiting for the opportunity to play.

The current team will NOT get us promoted so as long as you think the one above would not take us down then i can''t see an arguement against this.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Say Hello To The Angels"]

I actually think the FA should change the rules so that clubs cannot have NINE loan players at any one time. The way i see it is that we need to sign as many permanant players as we can and get the best we can and then the gaps need to be plugged by players from our academy. If a team isn''t good enough so be it, because at the moment if we go up or down it''s not even our team that got us promoted/relegated.

[/quote]I''d like to see Renton get a chance, he scored two today for City against Arsenal Youth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...