OK Hughton, you can stop now...

[Dr. Ink 0]

Anyone else feeling a bit underwhelmed about the talk of more transfers? Hughton''s got in a few that I''m sure will be in there with a shout as a regular starters. But Snodgrass is the only one I can honestly say I am excited about.

My current thoughts are unless a new signing brings a significant improvement over what we already have, then don''t bother! Jones from Liverpool for example, why? Defensive Midfielder rumours, why?

OK we may be light on the LB slot with only Tierney, but I''m sure some of the new CBs have played as LB as well, and there''s always Lapps.

Now an exciting pacey striker would be great, perhaps a youngster with big potential, but do we really need anyone else that is probably no better than what we have already?

[City penguin 0]

Whittaker- Cheap signing that is experienced and very versatile plays anywhere across the back or on the wings. Handy player to have.

Butterfield- Tore the championship up in the first 6 months, you''ve all seen how well Howson has taken to the premier league, well butterfield was getting better ratings and reviews than howson at the start of the last season, in a worse team. Could be pure class and stable player in the premier league for years to come.

Snodgrass- Quality no doubt.

Turner- Played the majority of the games with O''Neil in charge and was solid by all accounts, Sunderland fans rate him highly and there is a feeling he was sold because they couldn''t offload there other defenders, e.g titus bramble. Hull fans rave about him. Will provide the experience to help Ayala and Bennet to flourish and develop.

.

Jones from liverpool will allow either Rudd or Steer to go out on loan to gain the game time needed. So not needed for first team but will help the club no end.

We don''t have a defensive midfielder in the anchor man role, Fox plays deep but more of a play making role and johnson isn''t solid enough to play the role required, great for getting stuck in and ball winning.

Our rise from the depths has been based on the idea that quality is quality no matter where it comes from or the reputation it has, we are continuing in this vein and am very pleased with signings so far, with a fair whack of budget left. The club have always been underwhelming when talking about transfers for a number of reasons, one it keeps the perception that we are skint in peoples minds, hence we don''t start getting held to ransom over fees, two it keeps the potential deals going on behind the scenes out of the spotlight preventing other clubs coming in to scupper deals.

[spencer 1970 214]

I was unimpressed with Holt''s signing 3 years ago, but I kept quiet as history has taught me in relative terms that I haven''t got a clue compared to professional managers and scouts.

Maybe take a leaf?

[RvWs 4 year contract 0]

I fail to see how people are not impressed by Turner as well.The guy has played a lot of premiership football and here we are not thinking he''s good enough- or an improvement for our defence.

[Bury Yellow 2]

I agree with the last three posts and would add that there are bound to be some exits from our squad.

An obvious statement but we won''t really won''t know CH''s buying/selling plans until the window shuts.

[Beauseant 0]

[quote user="Bury Yellow"]I agree with the last three posts and would add that there are bound to be some exits from our squad. An obvious statement but we won''t really won''t know CH''s buying/selling plans until the window shuts.[/quote]

 

Hughton''s trying to build a squad, not impress people with marquee signings. Ultimately he and McNally will know exactly what''s required and how they intend to get it. Our recruitment over the last three years has been pretty successful and I''m sure it will continue in the same vein. Fundamentally, if they bring someone in I''m all for it, and if that player isn''t the sort of "name" that some people seem to want, then I''m sure our system will allow him to become one.

[PurpleCanary 6,389]

[quote user="Beauseant"]

 

Hughton''s trying to build a squad, not impress people with marquee signings. Ultimately he and McNally will know exactly what''s required and how they intend to get it. Our recruitment over the last three years has been pretty successful and I''m sure it will continue in the same vein. Fundamentally, if they bring someone in I''m all for it, and if that player isn''t the sort of "name" that some people seem to want, then I''m sure our system will allow him to become one.

[/quote]

 

The Norwich City fans whose opinions I''ve canvassed all think a marquee signing would show real intent on our part. Of course we need to rope in the right guy, and tie them down to a long-term contract, but otherwise I fear we shall be pegged back this season.

[Bryangunnshairline 0]

Hardly any of lamberts signings looked impressive at the start.

If Lambert would have made these signings would you be moaning?

I''m more impressed with the signing of turner. I don''t doubt Snodgrass is good but we have a lot of competition and quality in midfield already. We also must remember he has never played at the top level before and there is a lot of expectation about him.

Turner on the other hand has experience in the top flight. Last pre season loads of people , me included were saying we needed an experience premier league centre back matty upson name was mentioned by many.

Turner has that experience and we are getting him in his prime years. Really who do people expect us to sign in that position? Check turners history and you will see he has been player of the season several times at several of his clubs. He also chips in with the goals and will give us that steal , strength and calmness at the back we have been missing. I bet john ruddy is happy turner has joined. The likes of martin will be great along side him or young Bennett will grow long side a solid experienced player in turner.

[Chelmsford Canary 0]

What if he is planning to sell/loan Crofts, Lappin, Martin, Korey?

That would need replacements, agree about need for LB 

[Green Grimlock 0]

What marquee signings are there that we would want or afford. Much prefer what we have to say qpr who seem to only buy these so called marquee players.

[Pyro Pete 2,354]

I think we need a little bit more quality up front.  But even a little bit comes with a huge price tag these days.

[Bryangunnshairline 0]

Also anyone with half a footballing brain will have noticed last season we needed that complete defensive midfielder . We need a Scott parker type. We need a combo of Johnson/fox. So to the op don''t you see this? If we got that player in we could move others on to improve the squad.

[Thumbelina 0]

[quote user="Grant Holts 3 year contract"]I fail to see how people are not impressed by Turner as well.The guy has played a lot of premiership football and here we are not thinking he''s good enough- or an improvement for our defence.

[/quote]Who isn''t impressed with Turner? A good signing, as are Butterfield and Snodgrass.Still improvements to be made though. The moment that you stand still, you start moving backwards.I would still like to see another full back or two added to the squad now, along with a defensive midfielder and another striker if the correct players become available at a reasonable price. I think that we will miss Naughton a lot, as he was a different class to any of our other full backs this season.  I wonder whether a change in formation will see us go 3 at the back and flood the midfield more this season though? There is no need for us to rush out and buy players who will not improve what we have got here already.With the possible exception of Whittaker though,  I''m am impressed with the signings we have made.

[William Darby 0]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Beauseant"]

 

Hughton''s trying to build a squad, not impress people with marquee signings. Ultimately he and McNally will know exactly what''s required and how they intend to get it. Our recruitment over the last three years has been pretty successful and I''m sure it will continue in the same vein. Fundamentally, if they bring someone in I''m all for it, and if that player isn''t the sort of "name" that some people seem to want, then I''m sure our system will allow him to become one.

[/quote]

 

The Norwich City fans whose opinions I''ve canvassed all think a marquee signing would show real intent on our part. Of course we need to rope in the right guy, and tie them down to a long-term contract, but otherwise I fear we shall be pegged back this season.

[/quote]I''m sure we could afford a couple of Poles.

[Salopian 1]

We don''t know the budget allowed to CH. What we do know is that it would wise to keep some back in case we need to make an emergency signing in the January window.  One unknown is how much has been spent, including signing on fees and agents fees, etc. When these are all included we may have spent something approaching, say, £8m for the four players. Some of this is not due immediately, of course, including as much as half of what we agreed over Snodgrass.

 

So I believe CH when he talks of having to be within a tight budget, and I suspect that he may have as little as £2m left to cover transfer fees and other fees on further puchases. If I am right, then his movement is limited. The opportunities for lower division player purchase and Bosman signings have now gone, so he is left looking in the "bargain buy" situtation where other clubs are having to reduce salaries - perhaps Turner comes into this category.

 

I may be shown to be absolutely wrong, and we may all be amazed, when some prominent player from home or abroad arrives to bolster our resources, but I doubt it. Unless the board relents, and agrees to further debt, I think that we could be at the end of our signings this summer.

[Kolin Kob 0]

[quote user="Bryangunnshairline"]Also anyone with half a footballing brain will have noticed last season we needed that complete defensive midfielder . We need a Scott parker type. We need a combo of Johnson/fox. So to the op don''t you see this? If we got that player in we could move others on to improve the squad.[/quote]Well, of course we could do with a Scott Parker type - but there aren''t many players out there like him. That''s partly why he plays for England!I would like to say that I have half a footballing brain at least, and I disagree with your post. We could always do with better players in every position - it doesn''t mean we can get them, does it? Nor does it mean that the ones we have are lacking.Howson can play in a defensive role, as can Johnson and Fox. Also, we do not know which formation Chris Hughton is going to use, so he may well use a formation which doesn''t utilise a DM.

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 2,424]

[quote user="Bryangunnshairline"]Also anyone with half a footballing brain will have noticed last season we needed that complete defensive midfielder . We need a Scott parker type. We need a combo of Johnson/fox. So to the op don''t you see this? If we got that player in we could move others on to improve the squad.[/quote]

Firstly, Scott Parker is nothing like Fox and Johnson combined. Secondly, we have a player very similar to Scott Parker in Jonny Howson. Thirdly, Scott Parker is a long way off being a ''compelte defensive midfielder''.

 

So, are you saying we need 3 new players (although with Jonny Howson we already have a Scott Parker)? Or are you saying we need one player who is a defensive midfielder and who is also like Scott Parker, Bradley Johnson and David Fox?

 

I have just confused myself.

[ca 1]

Would have thought by now CH would have indicated who hes prepared to let leave or go out on loan ??

[Bryangunnshairline 0]

You watch a different game to me. Parker is just like Johnson in his break up play. But parker can make that pass that maybe Johnsonlacks. He is a defensive midfielder he done just that for England and spurs last season. He is more like Johnson but with some ability than howson.

Anyway comparisons aside , all I was trying to say was we were lacking that big, strong defensive midfielder that has ability last season . Of course that person would come at a price but to improve the squad thats what we need imo. On the same level we needed an experienced defensive rock at the back. I believe we have him now in turner.

[Phillip J Fry 0]

[quote user="Bryangunnshairline"]big, strong defensive midfielder that has ability last season . [/quote]

No we didn''t, we had Bradley Johnson, who fits all the characteristics you just listed.

[Bryangunnshairline 0]

I like Bradley johnson. But his game is limited. He is outstanding at breaking up play and out fighting his man. However he lacks that pass and can''t shoot for toffee.

That said ye showed he is good enough at this level but his game is limited. So no he does not fit the characteristics I listed. Ability at this level he lacks.

[Phillip J Fry 0]

[quote user="Bryangunnshairline"]I like Bradley johnson. But his game is limited. He is outstanding at breaking up play and out fighting his man. However he lacks that pass and can''t shoot for toffee.

That said ye showed he is good enough at this level but his game is limited. So no he does not fit the characteristics I listed. Ability at this level he lacks.[/quote]

Bradley Johnson can pass, maybe not an attacking pass that splits the defence for a striker but he is more than capable of passing the ball to a nearby teammate (most of the time). Statistically he averaged 41.6 passes a game (5th highest in the entire squad) with an average pass success rate of 78%, 10th highest in our team and above the Premier League average of 73%, Bradley Johnsons biggest problems are a) he just looks clumsy and uncomposed on the ball (even when he''s not) and b) the amount of long passes he hits (the most of any outfield player with moxed success). As for the shooting, well it''s kind of irrelevant for a defensive midfielder no? Let''s not forget that Johnson is also quite good at lofted balls from free kicks, I can remember at least two goals caused directly by him from free kicks and he''s ranked as our second highest ''assister'' with 5 assists, which indicates he is not completely bereft of talent with the ball at his feet.

[Bryangunnshairline 0]

Your clearly a johno fan Gareth. Like I said I like him but he is not the complete defensive midfielder. Yes he can pass . But anything over 6 metres he fails to deliver more often than not. I believe he knows this so made so many (or was told to) short passes.

Whenever he plays I love it when he wins a ball and plays that short pass to someone like howson or fox. But when he trys it himself he fails more times than not.

You watch next time and you will know what I mean.

But to get that complete defensive midfielder take johno and add fox or howsons passing ability then we have one hell of a player. Then the likes of a Wesley or playing that 2nd /3 rd striker is possible whilst remaining strong at the back.

[Bryangunnshairline 0]

more than capable of passing the ball to a nearby teammate (most of the time).

Spot on Gareth

[Phillip J Fry 0]

[quote user="Bryangunnshairline"]Your clearly a johno fan Gareth. Like I said I like him but he is not the complete defensive midfielder. Yes he can pass . But anything over 6 metres he fails to deliver more often than not. I believe he knows this so made so many (or was told to) short passes.

Whenever he plays I love it when he wins a ball and plays that short pass to someone like howson or fox. But when he trys it himself he fails more times than not.

You watch next time and you will know what I mean.

But to get that complete defensive midfielder take johno and add fox or howsons passing ability then we have one hell of a player. Then the likes of a Wesley or playing that 2nd /3 rd striker is possible whilst remaining strong at the back.[/quote]

Unfortunately I don''t think he''d be playing for Norwich for very long...

To be honest Johnson is good at what he does and that''s all he needs to do, play him along a more technically gifted player and he''ll shine, play him with Crofts or as the main passing midfielder and your doomed. Johnson is your typical ''runner/destroyer'' midfielder who looks to cover ground and recover the ball and pass the ball to the ''passing'' midfielder. Most good teams have one. Newcastle have Tiote as the destroyer and Cabaye as the passer, the treble winning Man Utd. team had Keane and Scholes, the best Liverpool team in recent memory had Mascherano and Xabi Alonso with Gerrard in a free role in front of them. In each of these systems the ''destroyer'' has been less gifted and looked to play a high number of short passes to the midfield. A midfielder that combines the energy and toughness of a destroyer with the vision and technique of a passer is world class, and if he ever did play for Norwich, he''d be gone before we came up with a chant.

[Indy_Bones 444]

There''s been numerous DM''s over the years who''ve been excellent at breaking up play, but nothing special in the pass/attacking department, the most obvious example being Makelele who''s passing was very average, his attacking play was laughable, but he was superb at the job he was asked to do which was break up play and then make a simple pass to a more technically gifted teammate.This is exactly what Johnson offers (albeit his attacking is better than Makelele''s at the cost of some defensive aptitude), and this is pretty much what Scott Parker does as well.If you want a DM that offers it all then you''re moving into the territory of players like Rijkaard and Beckenbauer, and let''s be fair - they don''t come around very often, and even less likely that they''d sign for us anyway!From a pure DM role, Johnson is good enough, Fox offers more creativity at the cost of strength and Crofts is a mix between the two but not really strong enough to displace either.Howson is the classic Box-to-box midfielder and I think we''ll see him operating more defensively this year than last - depending on the formation of course.