Interesting Mick Dennis article

[Loopzilla 1]

http://tinyurl.com/cgkw5be

Good read.

[blahblahblah 2]

A well written article, but kind of what we already know.I''d be interested to know who Mick thinks the next Paul Lambert is, if "the model" has to continue along the lines he set down - who is capable of bringing these league 1 / championship players up to the Premier League standard ? 

[Loopzilla 1]

[quote user="blahblahblah"]A well written article, but kind of what we already know.I''d be interested to know who Mick thinks the next Paul Lambert is, if "the model" has to continue along the lines he set down - who is capable of bringing these league 1 / championship players up to the Premier League standard ?  [/quote]

Good point. Maybe he''ll tell us here if he''s reading?

[Loopzilla 1]

I''d like to know who "baldy" is in the 2nd paragraph though...[;)]

From most rumours I''d read the money available for this seasons campaign was the same as last years, but Mick has quoted a 10 million increase; which considering how many players we bought in last year seems to be a pretty substantial kitty, even if it means shopping in the lower leagues again.

[blahblahblah 2]

"From most rumours I''d read the money available for this seasons

campaign was the same as last years, but Mick has quoted a 10 million

increase; which considering how many players we bought in last year

seems to be a pretty substantial kitty, even if it means shopping in the

lower leagues again.

"It''s a substantial championship kitty.  In the Premiership, it''s a couple of bench-warmers.

[Loopzilla 1]

[quote user="blahblahblah"]"From most rumours I''d read the money available for this seasons

campaign was the same as last years, but Mick has quoted a 10 million

increase; which considering how many players we bought in last year

seems to be a pretty substantial kitty, even if it means shopping in the

lower leagues again.

"It''s a substantial championship kitty.  In the Premiership, it''s a couple of bench-warmers.[/quote]

Don''t forget that is an increase on last year, not the full amount. Apparently we spent around £17 million in transfers last season. I''m not sure there is too many Championship clubs looking to spend £25-£30 million this close season...quite a few Premier clubs will struggle to match that.

[Guest]

[quote user="blahblahblah"]"From most rumours I''d read the money available for this seasons

campaign was the same as last years, but Mick has quoted a 10 million

increase; which considering how many players we bought in last year

seems to be a pretty substantial kitty, even if it means shopping in the

lower leagues again.

"It''s a substantial championship kitty.  In the Premiership, it''s a couple of bench-warmers.[/quote]Really? You think we would only get a couple of squad bench warmers for 20 million quid?

[Jonzey 0]

Excellent article, albeit a couple of sentances which we now know to be slightly guessed at, including the transfer kitty and the reason the board didn''t allow PL to talk to Villa. But the point of the article is spot on. Don''t stand in the way of an ambitious man, and be grateful to him for taking the club as far as he could at this particular point in time.

[Monty13 2,241]

Its good article and explains what we all new in our hearts about Lambert, he had more ambition than Norwich could provide him with the opportunity to fulfil. I honestly thought he would stay one more season just because Liverpool weren''t interested and there seemed to be something rotten at Villa, but if HE sees it as the right stepping stone, then we all new he would take it. I have not heard anyone talk about the clubs transfer policy of hungry young players being a board set strategy before. I, like many i would have thought, presumed it was Lamberts. It will obv have a very big effect on the next manager imo as I doubt many of the bigger names would be happy not being able to shop at the top levels.

[blahblahblah 2]

"Really? You think we would only get a couple of squad bench warmers for 20 million quid?"Chelsea would.  They''re in the Premiership still, aren''t they ?Ok, ok, I was being facetious.  But it''s easy to throw big numbers around, but they mean nothing when you consider that we''re still the 18th - 20th "richest" club in the league for playing staff budgets.

[William Darby 0]

[quote user="I.S."][quote user="blahblahblah"]"From most rumours I''d read the money available for this seasons

campaign was the same as last years, but Mick has quoted a 10 million

increase; which considering how many players we bought in last year

seems to be a pretty substantial kitty, even if it means shopping in the

lower leagues again.

"It''s a substantial championship kitty.  In the Premiership, it''s a couple of bench-warmers.[/quote]Really? You think we would only get a couple of squad bench warmers for 20 million quid?[/quote]I can''t see Villa giving Lambert much more than that anyway

[Mick Dennis 0]

The £10m extra was the figure stated publicly by chairman Bowkett at the end of season dinner. He said that the playing budget would be increased by £10m for 2012-13 and by another £10m for 13-14 (if we are still in the PL then). Bear in mind that the kitty is for player purchases AND wages. Our top earning players are on £15k a week (£780k p.a.). So £10m would (for instance) buy 5 players at £1m each and cover their wages (with a few quid to spare). One central fallacy during Cullum-gate was the assumption that his £20m could be spent on transfers. In fact it would also have had to cover the wages of the new signings for as long as they were at NCFC. Another inconvenient truth, undisclosed by his supporters, was that the offer was actually £5m in the December transfer window (fees and wages, remember) with another £15m if we''d stayed up that season. If we''d gone down, he wanted his £5m back -- and we''d have gone into administration. We''d probably have gone bust anyway, because he had no plausible plan to deal with the debts. The current plan sees us only owing money to Delia and Michael Foulger within two years. Nothing in my piece on the Waghorn site was guessed at. OTBC.

[PurpleCanary 5,579]

[quote user="Mick Dennis"]The £10m extra was the figure stated publicly by chairman Bowkett at the end of season dinner. He said that the playing budget would be increased by £10m for 2012-13 and by another £10m for 13-14 (if we are still in the PL then). Bear in mind that the kitty is for player purchases AND wages. Our top earning players are on £15k a week (£780k p.a.). So £10m would (for instance) buy 5 players at £1m each and cover their wages (with a few quid to spare). One central fallacy during Cullum-gate was the assumption that his £20m could be spent on transfers. In fact it would also have had to cover the wages of the new signings for as long as they were at NCFC. Another inconvenient truth, undisclosed by his supporters, was that the offer was actually £5m in the December transfer window (fees and wages, remember) with another £15m if we''d stayed up that season. If we''d gone down, he wanted his £5m back -- and we''d have gone into administration. We''d probably have gone bust anyway, because he had no plausible plan to deal with the debts. The current plan sees us only owing money to Delia and Michael Foulger within two years. Nothing in my piece on the Waghorn site was guessed at. OTBC.[/quote]

 

More than that, the mythical £20m was not just for transfers/wages but to cover everything. Acquiring the company and paying off debt all had to come out of that figure. What then would have been left (ie probably nothing, because Cullum indeed did not have a plan for the debt) would have been available for transfers.

[Canary Willo 0]

Mick,

Great article, love reading your stuff on MFW.

Do you have any thoughts on new manager? Personal opinion I would like to see Hughton, great job in trying circumstances at both Brum and Newcastle and bought players within reasonable budgets at Newcastle who are going on to have very good careers in Prem, i.e. Tiotte, Ben Arfa. Unassuming style would also fit with McNally, unlike a Holloway for example.

[im spartacus canary 0]

mick do you know charlie wyett ? is he a norwich fan ? if he is have a bloody word will you [:@]

[kdncfc 27]

So at this moment in time our wage bill is probably in the region of 20 million pounds so does a budget of 47 million this year mean that the excess of 27 million pounds plus any raised from sales will be the amount of money a new manager will have avaliable to spend on transfer fees and wages for new players? If so that is quite a decent amount.