nutty nigel 7,528 Posted September 23, 2009 When Chase got out in 1996 did he know what was coming? Posters love benchmarking different era''s to show how far the club has fallen but is that fair? Chase baled in 1996 just as changes came into the game that would make the successful strategies of the previous 10 years unworkable. The Bosman ruling meant we could no longer buy small and sell big, something that had worked so well for us over the previous dozen years. Dave Watson, Steve Bruce, Robert Fleck, Andy Linighan, Kevin Drinkell, Andy Townsend, Mike Phelan, Ashley Ward just to name a few who were sold for at least three times what we paid. This was a great strategy that Chase was especially good at. It''s also is why he fell foul with the fans so often despite overseeing the most successful 10 years in our history. Fans protested because their heroes were sold but they got over it because new heroes were bought. It worked for us all. But Bosman was going to put a stop to that. Players could now let their contracts run out and move for nothing. Putting them on longer contracts wasn''t an option either because the freedom of movement for players in Europe meant that the top clubs wouldn''t want these players anyway. The money that used to circulate around the clubs on transfer fees left the game and went into the pockets of players and their agents. All that was left was to hope that the academies would produce youngsters that Premier clubs wanted. If you had some of these a fee could still be forthcoming. Then rules were introduced in 1998 which said that young players must live within 90 minutes'' travelling time of their academy. This put paid to another of our strategies from those "benchmarking years". Craig Bellamy would be the last of these players sold for big money. Others that we cashed in on were Darren Eadie and Andy Johnson. Now we have to find local talent to bring through the academy and as Glen Roeder said Norfolk does not have a history of producing great footballers. If it was just a case of us missing out on them they would surface somewhere else. And while we can rightly be proud of Sutton, Fox, Gordon they are the exception rather than the rule. These traditional revenue streams that had served our club so well in the 80''s and early 90''s have dried up now. What''s required to run a football club has changed beyond recognition since 1996. The board had to try and find other ways to finance the football club. They virtually fill the ground every match but still it''s not enough. The football doesn''t finance itself. Now I believe they did OK up until the last 3 years but mistakes with football manager appointments coupled with money tied up in land of little value has put them in a precarious position. However the fact that they are still in there trying to sort it out, keep us afloat and weather the storm is surely better for us all than if they walked away and let the club sink. Back in the 80''s and early 90''s not just Norwich but clubs like Ipswich, Forest, Southampton, Watford, QPR, Sheffield Wednesday and Crystal Palace regularly finished in the top six alongside the "ever presents". Since they got relegated from the Premier League these clubs have had 11 seasons back in the top flight between them. They have also spent a total of 10 seasons in the third tier between them. They haven''t all been owned by Smith & Jones so maybe it would be prudent to look elsewhere. Over the last few seasons big mistakes have been made with the football managers and football players brought to the club. The buck stops at the top and the owners should, and I believe have, accept the responsibility for this. But this scapegoating and making ridiculous comparisons with era''s that bear no relevance to the present show a lack of understanding of the state of the present day game in this country. I fully expect to be called an apologist for failure and a Delia loving sheep for pointing this out but can anyone really deny it''s true? And can anyone benchmarking the past explain how those regimes would have had success in the current football climate? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
First Wazzock 902 Posted September 23, 2009 Very good post.I am sure there are still those who will twist it round to suit their own agenda though. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
First Jedi 0 Posted September 23, 2009 Wow! What a good post! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
William Darby 0 Posted September 23, 2009 The Bosman ruling meant we could no longer buy small and sell big, etc etc is nonsense imo. During the 80s and early 90s we had a knack for spotting potential talent and buying them cheap. That is something this club has been lacking in since then. Bosman or no Bosman that makes no difference. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nutty nigel 7,528 Posted September 23, 2009 I don''t think it''s nonsense (obviously). If you look at the "ever presents" pre Bosman you will see many players brought for big money from smaller English clubs. Manchester United had the likes of Parker, Irwin, Bruce and Pallister while Arsenal had the likes of Winterburn, Linighan, Bould, Seaman, Smith and Wright. Look at their sides now and you will they have no use for talent brought cheap by lesser teams. I guess it does happen to a degree between the Championship clubs and the leagues below but it''s much more usual for a player to move when he''s out of contract. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Butler 0 Posted September 23, 2009 A good post Nutty but you miss several very valid points.We have bought cheap and sold on, Ashton as one Green another and so on.You also fail to mention the legacy of Bobs land that has been used up.The parachute payments.The increase in debt from 6 to 20 million.The policy of prudence when a small gamble would have made a massive difference. Your support of Worthy should remind you of the Ashton position and failure to stay in the prem division.One other point, they can''t just walk as well you know until they part with their shares they are very liable and her reputation would suffer VERY badly.Whatever you may think they will not do that for nowt. So Mcnally and co are their big attempt to rescue something and stop the good ship NCFC sinking further and diluting their money even more.Oh and no football can never be as it was in the 50''s 60''s and 70''s the pigs took over the trough and will eventually consume themselves. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Wings of a Sparrow 1,414 Posted September 23, 2009 As usual Nutty a very well crafted and eloquent post. I can hear Smidgeon now..................... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nutty nigel 7,528 Posted September 23, 2009 Green came through our academy Butler. He came to us before the new rules in 1998. Ashton is one of the exceptions that prove the rule. And there are one or two like that. But in the years before Bosman the top clubs were full of players who had been brought big from lesser clubs. As I pointed out just now the top clubs no longer want such players and the money that circulated has gone from the game.Did the other clubs I mentioned not receive parachute payments? Was their debt not increased? Was the wicked cook responible for them too?Why don''t you answer the questions that my post poses. Or at least give me a list of clubs that regularly challenged the "ever presents" back when we did but have done so much better than us since?Come on Butler... I know you''ve got it in you[;)] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BlyBlyBabes 0 Posted September 23, 2009 I think that it was you who first characterised her as the wicked cook in order to over-dramatise some posters views.Maybe you could get work with The Star? I mean, any little helps these days.OTBC Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
canarytom 0 Posted September 23, 2009 Thanks, that was a really interesting read Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Butler 0 Posted September 23, 2009 The problem I have Nutty is that unlike you I can''t be bothered to Nit Pick.I am much more concerned with my club than the success or failure of the Birminghams, Wolves, etc of this world.Even Hull have managed to survive more than one season.I did know Green came through the accademy as did Lewis another sold for money.There are many others that SHOULD have brought money to the transfer kitty but didn''t.(I wonder what happened to it)Good negotiation works both ways and I don''t think we have made the most of some of our "sales" as we should have done.There is still a degree of good young talent being bought and used in the prem, but as it is now awash with money, they have the choice of the world, not just our little bit. But then we could be having some of that money if prudence had not got in the way. Sorry you missed that bit.As I said I agree with how football has changed, not for the benefit of clubs in general, but it is they that let the pigs run the farmyard.[;)]The board as a whole under the umbrella of DS and MWJ made stupid decisions and policies that have cost our club not only money but it''s position and more importantly it''s credence as well. That as much as anything is what I find unforgiveable. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BlyBlyBabes 0 Posted September 23, 2009 [quote user="nutty nigel"]When Chase got out in 1996 did he know what was coming? Posters love benchmarking different era''s to show how far the club has fallen but is that fair? Chase baled in 1996 just as changes came into the game that would make the successful strategies of the previous 10 years unworkable. The Bosman ruling meant we could no longer buy small and sell big, something that had worked so well for us over the previous dozen years. Dave Watson, Steve Bruce, Robert Fleck, Andy Linighan, Kevin Drinkell, Andy Townsend, Mike Phelan, Ashley Ward just to name a few who were sold for at least three times what we paid. This was a great strategy that Chase was especially good at. It''s also is why he fell foul with the fans so often despite overseeing the most successful 10 years in our history. Fans protested because their heroes were sold but they got over it because new heroes were bought. It worked for us all. But Bosman was going to put a stop to that. Players could now let their contracts run out and move for nothing. Putting them on longer contracts wasn''t an option either because the freedom of movement for players in Europe meant that the top clubs wouldn''t want these players anyway. The money that used to circulate around the clubs on transfer fees left the game and went into the pockets of players and their agents. All that was left was to hope that the academies would produce youngsters that Premier clubs wanted. If you had some of these a fee could still be forthcoming. Then rules were introduced in 1998 which said that young players must live within 90 minutes'' travelling time of their academy. This put paid to another of our strategies from those "benchmarking years". Craig Bellamy would be the last of these players sold for big money. Others that we cashed in on were Darren Eadie and Andy Johnson. Now we have to find local talent to bring through the academy and as Glen Roeder said Norfolk does not have a history of producing great footballers. If it was just a case of us missing out on them they would surface somewhere else. And while we can rightly be proud of Sutton, Fox, Gordon they are the exception rather than the rule. These traditional revenue streams that had served our club so well in the 80''s and early 90''s have dried up now. What''s required to run a football club has changed beyond recognition since 1996. The board had to try and find other ways to finance the football club. They virtually fill the ground every match but still it''s not enough. The football doesn''t finance itself. Now I believe they did OK up until the last 3 years but mistakes with football manager appointments coupled with money tied up in land of little value has put them in a precarious position. However the fact that they are still in there trying to sort it out, keep us afloat and weather the storm is surely better for us all than if they walked away and let the club sink. Back in the 80''s and early 90''s not just Norwich but clubs like Ipswich, Forest, Southampton, Watford, QPR, Sheffield Wednesday and Crystal Palace regularly finished in the top six alongside the "ever presents". Since they got relegated from the Premier League these clubs have had 11 seasons back in the top flight between them. They have also spent a total of 10 seasons in the third tier between them. They haven''t all been owned by Smith & Jones so maybe it would be prudent to look elsewhere. Over the last few seasons big mistakes have been made with the football managers and football players brought to the club. The buck stops at the top and the owners should, and I believe have, accept the responsibility for this. But this scapegoating and making ridiculous comparisons with era''s that bear no relevance to the present show a lack of understanding of the state of the present day game in this country. I fully expect to be called an apologist for failure and a Delia loving sheep for pointing this out but can anyone really deny it''s true? And can anyone benchmarking the past explain how those regimes would have had success in the current football climate? [/quote]''Chase got out.............''''Chase baled out.........''No, Chase was forced out,But, way to go! Colt the game. Play bad card.Still, one love y''hear.OTBC Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
blahblahblah 2 Posted September 23, 2009 [quote]Back in the 80''s and early 90''s not just Norwich but clubs like Ipswich, Forest, Southampton, Watford, QPR, Sheffield Wednesday and Crystal Palace regularly finished in the top six alongside the "ever presents". Since they got relegated from the Premier League these clubs have had 11 seasons back in the top flight between them.[/quote]To answer why these clubs haven''t been able to match these feats, maybe you have to look to the names of the clubs that have replaced them in the top flight - Wigan, Burnley, Stoke, Birmingham, Fulham, Hull, Portsmouth, also West Brom, Newcastle and Middlesborough during recent times. I''d put Blackburn in this bracket too, although they''ve been there a while now. The clubs that have the following used to be able to practically guarantee a Premiership spot - now we have Premiership attendances under 20,000 at places like Blackburn and Wigan, Burnley have 6,000 season ticket holders. The following clubs - Wigan, Birmingham, Bolton, Portsmouth, Burnley, Hull, can''t manage to attract an average attendance above Norwichs'' league 1 average, in the Premiership. TV money skews the natural landscape.I''d argue that it isn''t just down to Bosman, it''s partly to do with money, and mainly (in my opinion) to do with available talent, and where that talent now resides. The talent that used to be in the Championship, League 1 and League 2 teams gets snapped up by Premiership clubs at pre-school-leaving age, plays in the youth leagues, graduates to loan appearances in the lower leagues, and then either makes the first team, occupies a bench, or plays in front of 500 people in the Premiership reserve league. The championship clubs that have the best contacts with the big boys get the best loan signings, such as Shawcross for Stoke, or Bendtner for Birmingham, and get a significant boost in their attempts to promote to the Premiership.Look at Chelseas'' transfer ban for example - they weren''t banned for poaching a rivals'' veteran striker, not a Rooney, nor a Tevez, but for tapping up a teenager. The top clubs have top-class, massive scouting networks across Europe, the whole world even. They do this because they know that training up a 14 year old is always going to be cheaper than buying an 18 year old in. Look at what Arsenal paid for Walcott as an example. The fact is that football has become practically an industrial process for athletes, with industrial processes in place to procure talent, which is why we''re left looking at modern-day Ian Wrights such as Cody MacDonald for our talent - blokes who came to the game late, shine in non-league and understand how lucky they are to get a chance. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BlyBlyBabes 0 Posted September 23, 2009 [quote user="1st Wazzock"]Very good post.I am sure there are still those who will twist it round to suit their own agenda though.[/quote]Actually Wazzy it''s twisted already.Somebody will have to sort it out.Wish I had the time, but needs must.......OTBC Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
blahblahblah 2 Posted September 23, 2009 [quote]I am much more concerned with my club than the success or failure of the Birminghams, Wolves, etc of this world.[/quote]They are operating in the same environment - if you can''t understand what made them successful, how can yo hope to replicate it ? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Butler 0 Posted September 23, 2009 [quote user="blahblahblah"][quote]I am much more concerned with my club than the success or failure of the Birminghams, Wolves, etc of this world.[/quote]They are operating in the same environment - if you can''t understand what made them successful, how can yo hope to replicate it ?[/quote]That should have been them looking at our success and wondering, as in the past, how we did it.Ambition without prudence Blah, appointing decent managers and getting in decent players.The odd million or two also helped and directors with no little commercial acumen. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
William Darby 0 Posted September 23, 2009 [quote user="nutty nigel"]I don''t think it''s nonsense (obviously). If you look at the "ever presents" pre Bosman you will see many players brought for big money from smaller English clubs. Manchester United had the likes of Parker, Irwin, Bruce and Pallister while Arsenal had the likes of Winterburn, Linighan, Bould, Seaman, Smith and Wright. Look at their sides now and you will they have no use for talent brought cheap by lesser teams. I guess it does happen to a degree between the Championship clubs and the leagues below but it''s much more usual for a player to move when he''s out of contract. [/quote]I don''t agree with that either, firstly every Prem team will have players bought up from lower teams. Majority on a Bosman? doubt that. Arsenal was was doing a fine trade up to now buying unknown talent and turning them into decent players. Take Adebayor handsome profit thank you very much. Tottenham have been buying up lower league talent for ages.Bosmans didn''t screw us up, Chase''s gravy train ground to a halt and our scouting and youth set up went for a burton. What made the greater difference to City''s set up above bosmans was the 90 minute (whatever it is) travel ruling on kids. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
blahblahblah 2 Posted September 23, 2009 Have you seen that Man City are setting up an academy facility in Abu Dhabi ? Now, is that to get around the 90 minute rule, or to scout Saudi youths ? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nutty nigel 7,528 Posted September 23, 2009 And there we have it. I go to the trouble of pointing out why I believe what I do. I bring facts to the table and show how factors other than change in ownership have contributed to the demise of the club since 1996. In return, on this thread and others, I am accused of nit-picking, of being unemployable, of spending my life on this message board, of not having a proper job, of being concerned about other clubs, basically a happy clapping Delia loving apologist. This is no surprise to me, afterall, I predicted it in my opening post.I''m in good company it seems because a few weeks ago a poster called Myra Hawtree posted a very reasonable post on here speaking out about what she believed was unwarranted vitriol against Delia Smith from some fans on here. Nobody it seemed would debate the points she had made about it not all being Delia''s fault. She was called "a freak, an alien". She was told to "stick to netball". She was told she was "so far up Delia''s a*se it was unbelievable". Told "she should be ashamed". Told that "people like her probably don''t know who Geoffrey Watling or Gordon Bennett are". Told to "Take the blinkers off". Yet nobody would debate the issue she raised. The reason why I bring this up here is because Myra Hawtree is not a happy clappy Delia loving sheep at all. She is a longstanding lifelong fan of over 55 years and her dad was a lifelong fan before her. She has seen all those "glorious benchmarking years" of the past and didn''t just turn up at Carrow Road to worship a celebrity chef. She believes a lot of the vitriol aimed at Delia is unwarranted and so do I.Because I am an unemployable saddo who spends his life on this message board I have the time to set out why that is. I did so on the opening post and would be quite happy to debate those points with posters who don''t agree with them.Oh and Babes - Chase "got out", he "bailed out". He left with the words "I have found the right person with the right offer", sold his shares to watling and walked into the sunset. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
blahblahblah 2 Posted September 23, 2009 Er, nutty, I did try...[*-)] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nutty nigel 7,528 Posted September 23, 2009 Sorry Blah.. I know you did. I think Bosman played a bigger part though. Not just because of the players in this country but the freedom of players to move across Europe at the same time as the Premiership really caught light and Sky TV came to the fore. This made it a double edged sword. With so many players flooding into the country for a wage and signing on fee there was both not enough money and not enough room to pay the likes of Norwich the likes of 1m for the likes of Steve Bruce.Now I''ve got a Free Bet to think about and bogs to clean [;)] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BlyBlyBabes 0 Posted September 23, 2009 [quote user="blahblahblah"]Er, nutty, I did try...[*-)][/quote]There, there blah we know you did. Cheer up, there''s a good chap.It''s just a pity that when nutty puts on his angelic robes he tries too hard - and forgets his sense of humour.OTBC Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
blahblahblah 2 Posted September 23, 2009 [quote user="BlyBlyBabes"][quote user="blahblahblah"]Er, nutty, I did try...[*-)][/quote]There, there blah we know you did. Cheer up, there''s a good chap.It''s just a pity that when nutty puts on his angelic robes he tries too hard - and forgets his sense of humour.OTBC [/quote]He does have a point though Bly, in a debate if you mock the opponent, or attempt to deflect from the salient point, Unless your you usually lose the argument. Unless you''re Derren Brown. Haven''t seen many mentalists in here... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Butler 0 Posted September 23, 2009 [quote user="nutty nigel"]And there we have it. I go to the trouble of pointing out why I believe what I do. I bring facts to the table and show how factors other than change in ownership have contributed to the demise of the club since 1996. In return, on this thread and others, I am accused of nit-picking, of being unemployable, of spending my life on this message board, of not having a proper job, of being concerned about other clubs, basically a happy clapping Delia loving apologist. This is no surprise to me, afterall, I predicted it in my opening post.I''m in good company it seems because a few weeks ago a poster called Myra Hawtree posted a very reasonable post on here speaking out about what she believed was unwarranted vitriol against Delia Smith from some fans on here. Nobody it seemed would debate the points she had made about it not all being Delia''s fault. She was called "a freak, an alien". She was told to "stick to netball". She was told she was "so far up Delia''s a*se it was unbelievable". Told "she should be ashamed". Told that "people like her probably don''t know who Geoffrey Watling or Gordon Bennett are". Told to "Take the blinkers off". Yet nobody would debate the issue she raised. The reason why I bring this up here is because Myra Hawtree is not a happy clappy Delia loving sheep at all. She is a longstanding lifelong fan of over 55 years and her dad was a lifelong fan before her. She has seen all those "glorious benchmarking years" of the past and didn''t just turn up at Carrow Road to worship a celebrity chef. She believes a lot of the vitriol aimed at Delia is unwarranted and so do I.Because I am an unemployable saddo who spends his life on this message board I have the time to set out why that is. I did so on the opening post and would be quite happy to debate those points with posters who don''t agree with them.Oh and Babes - Chase "got out", he "bailed out". He left with the words "I have found the right person with the right offer", sold his shares to watling and walked into the sunset. [/quote]After being threatened,he and his family, abused etc.Delia has had a hand shake compared with what Bob got.Who has put the club in the worse position? 6 million debt with assets both in players and really saleable land deals or 20million debt and bugger all!!Only you can answer that!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nutty nigel 7,528 Posted September 23, 2009 [quote user="The Butler"][Who has put the club in the worse position? 6 million debt with assets both in players and really saleable land deals or 20million debt and bugger all!!Only you can answer that!![/quote]I tried in the opening post Butler. My whole point was that the methods that served Chase so well had been taken away from us by the changes made in the game. You will find more posts from me criticising Delia than you will criticising Big Bob. I think you know this. Even in my opening post you see that I point out that his talent for selling big but repeatedly buying good quality replacements for a fraction of that kept everyone happy in the end.My point is that none of our contemporaries from those days have done that much better since. They are all in a worse position too and they didn''t all have the devious duo in charge. [;)] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Wings of a Sparrow 1,414 Posted September 23, 2009 "Now I''ve got a Free Bet to think about and bogs to clean"On a lighter note - Nutty can you help Canary Tom with a Toilet problem on the non-football board......You''ll always get your knockers on here. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PurpleCanary 5,557 Posted September 23, 2009 [quote user="nutty nigel"]The Bosman ruling meant we could no longer buy small and sell big, something that had worked so well for us over the previous dozen years. Dave Watson, Steve Bruce, Robert Fleck, Andy Linighan, Kevin Drinkell, Andy Townsend, Mike Phelan, Ashley Ward just to name a few who were sold for at least three times what we paid. This was a great strategy that Chase was especially good at. It''s also is why he fell foul with the fans so often despite overseeing the most successful 10 years in our history. Fans protested because their heroes were sold but they got over it because new heroes were bought. [/quote]---There was actually a time in the early''90s when you could make up a perfectly respectable team (a bit shorton fullbacks but otherwise OK) in a kind of wing-back formation fromplayers we had sold who were playing in the top flight in England orScotland.From memory it was something like Woods in goal, Sherwood and Phillipsas wing-backs, Linighan, Bruce and Watson in central defence, amidfield of Gordon, Townsend and Phelan, and Fleck and Drinkell upfront. Not to mention a couple of subs. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BlyBlyBabes 0 Posted September 23, 2009 [quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="The Butler"][ Who has put the club in the worse position? 6 million debt with assets both in players and really saleable land deals or 20million debt and bugger all!!Only you can answer that!![/quote]I tried in the opening post Butler. My whole point was that the methods that served Chase so well had been taken away from us by the changes made in the game. You will find more posts from me criticising Delia than you will criticising Big Bob. I think you know this. Even in my opening post you see that I point out that his talent for selling big but repeatedly buying good quality replacements for a fraction of that kept everyone happy in the end.My point is that none of our contemporaries from those days have done that much better since. They are all in a worse position too and they didn''t all have the devious duo in charge. [;)][/quote]First ''the wicked cook''.Now ''the devious duo''.These are your oversimplifications that you have wrapped into catchy phrases which you have invented and/or retailed. Rather like the red-tops.I don''t believe there is one poster who holds the view that 1996- is all our major shareholders fault.However.However, they have owned the club since 1996 and with that ownership comes the power to both control and lead. They set policy and have a veto on all major decisions.Some smaller clubs like us have found the route to success over the past 12 years (or so) having realised that they must play the hand they are presented wit.h. We have not found that route.The buck stops at the top.Arthur South found a way in 1958 onwards And. it was the responsibility of DS and MWJ to have found a way in todays reality. They haven''t - and if the latest strategy fails they must bear the consequences.If you search for bouquets of success, you must be prepared to accept the brickbats of failure.It really doesn''t matter if it''s all their fault or 75% their fault - or whatever. Others have suceeded, we have failed. And your emotive characterisations won''t change that.The ground rules have shifted over the past 15 years - yes. But other smaller clubs have strategised success whilst we haven''t.Who''s responsibility is that? OTBC Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
O.T.B.C 0 Posted September 23, 2009 1st decent post I have seen off you Bly for a wee while. Agree completly. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nutty nigel 7,528 Posted September 23, 2009 You''ll really have to do better than that Babes. If you want to discuss how smaller clubs than us have found success then start a thread and I''ll play. My post on here was about how us, and virtually all our contemporaries from the 80''s and early 90''s have not found that success again during the Witches Reign (Witch''s[;)] ) Try and stick to the point for a while longer [:O] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites