Vaughan

[CanaryOne 0]

Been offered to Birmingham on a years loan to try sweeten the Curtis Davis deal according to Nursey of the Daily Mirror.

[Norfolk Mustard 94]

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/transfer-news/norwich-ready-to-offer-james-vaughan-1136805

Sounds plausible...

[Block E Buh 0]

Vaughan has real pace and we havent seen the best of him yet, we need pace up front! Davies would be a good signing but also need a pacey striker!

[CanaryOne 0]

[quote user="M.A.T.T"]Vaughan has real pace and we havent seen the best of him yet, we need pace up front! Davies would be a good signing but also need a pacey striker![/quote]Well if we were letting Vaughan go for the season i would hope there are one if not two strikers lined up.

[GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary 1,777]

Why on earth would we do that?, if we want Davies just sign him!......if we really do want to throw in a "sweetener" there are plenty ahead of him surely?, i.e Barnett,Martin

[Lambo 0]

I''d rather see us off them one of Barnett, Chrissy Martin or Jackson personally, if it helps the old budget though it''s not a bad thing.

[Indy 3,301]

Can''t see it myself, we are short on strikers an d one of the key''s to staying up will be scoring goals.

 

Hopefully Hughton will pull ac couple major signings out of the bag, one being a high profile striker.

[Skerritt 0]

According to the mirror, Hughton is considering making a swap move giving vaughan to get Curtis Davies.

 

[Norfolk canary 0]

Would be a shame to lose James without really seeing what he can do

[GenerationA47 755]

I agree wither above.

Vaughan to Brum, Jackson to Blackpool, Martin & Wilbraham to Palace....our only static strikers (not a reference to lack of movement on the pitch) are Morison and (O the irony) Holt, if the current rumours/ reports are to be believed.

Some of it would make sense though if there were a proven top-drawer forward in the offing, as everyone seems to concur that we need one in addition to the above. With no disrespect to them, as they are probably capable of stepping up but there is no guarantee available (beyond Grant).

[Joanna Grey 0]

[quote user="Norfolk canary"]Would be a shame to lose James without really seeing what he can do[/quote]

Vaughan would only be on loan for a season. Shame the OP did not include that anywhere in his post.

[Joanna Grey 0]

It''s also a shame that the OP did not see this;

http://services.pinkun.com/forums/pinkun/cs/forums/2756437/ShowPost.aspx

 

Really should have gone to .....

[colneycanary 0]

Should swap Martin plus cash for Zaha from palace.

[First Wizard 0]

I''m more convinced than ever now that our budget isn''t as good as the club are claiming if we''re swapping players in deals.
 
If we want him, go get him, its really that simple.....

[Webbo118 0]

[quote user="Wiz"]I''m more convinced than ever now that our budget isn''t as good as the club are claiming if we''re swapping players in deals.
 
If we want him, go get him, its really that simple.....[/quote]

 

But are we?

[king canary 7,609]

Am I the only one he sees this as a bit of a win win? We get a good center back and send out an injury prone player to get a chance to prove he can last a season without breaking down again.

[lincoln canary (& Golden Coppel) 0]

I can''t believe the amount people that feel James Vaughan is so integral to our side. I''ve failed to see much quality from Vaughan, and coulpe this with his injury record cant see him ever making a real impact for us in the premier league. He has good pace and full of effort, but he''s not a premier league striker. I pretty confident I''ve seen enough of him to make this judgement. Pinning our hopes on Vaughan is not the answer. At best he''s a great impact player from the bench, if he can stay fit!

Simeon Jackson is a better forward IMO. I''d much rather he got a run of games in the premier league.

As for the loan, I can''t see Brum being keen. Its hardly a sweetner if he gets injured, which is pretty likely.

[star_manic 0]

[quote user="Wiz"]I''m more convinced than ever now that our budget isn''t as good as the club are claiming if we''re swapping players in deals.
 
If we want him, go get him, its really that simple.....[/quote]....why would we spend money if a deal can be done to save some? sound business sense, and says nothing about our transfer kitty. except to doom mongers of course.

[Indy 3,301]

You win games by scoring goals, we are lacking in that department! We need to see what a fit Vaghaun can gve us.

 

I don''t get Curtis Davis thing, is he really better than Ward, he has some many of the same traits that it worries me!

 

We don''t need Davis, we have Bennett, Barnett,  Ayla, Martin, Ward to name 5 player in that position.

[William Darby 0]

[quote user="Wiz"]I''m more convinced than ever now that our budget isn''t as good as the club are claiming if we''re swapping players in deals. If we want him, go get him, its really that simple.....[/quote]Or it''s freeing up a space in the squad. Giving what Vaughan what he really needs, plenty of matches. If it works out, as like Naughton in reverse we have a more valuable player.IMO we could bring in a couple of foreign forwards. It''s really the only position on the pitch where Hughton can get bodies in without assessing too much our existing players. He knows Holt & Morison are the only two that have scored goals.

[Gingerpele 0]

[quote user="Wiz"]I''m more convinced than ever now that our budget isn''t as good as the club are claiming if we''re swapping players in deals.
 
If we want him, go get him, its really that simple.....[/quote]

Wiz for goodness sake, can''t you please try and be a bit less cynical and more positive?

There haven''t been many transfers yet, Hughton has only just met his squad. What were you expecting? And this is a RUMOUR it means nothing, unless it actually happens. Surely at your age you realise 98% of rumours are made up BS? Yet you take them as gospel to preach your extremely pessimistic views. I don''t want to question your support of this club, but to be honest if you really think what you post on here so often, I don''t know how you can support Norwich, and enjoy there succes.

[shefcanary 2,410]

Look Brimingham are in a crap financial position - only just been allowed to make transfers recently.  They were reportedly only expected to start pre-season training with about 14 paid professionals.  If Davies has been targeted as a key signing for us Brum are hardly likely to let him go without having replacements lined up.  They will be doing whatever they can to get their squad  numbers back up to the mid-20''s and as others have said this might be a good way of persuading them to let Davies go without a fight whilst ensuring Vaughan gets a good season long run out with Brum to re-build his match fitness without c8cking our team selection up.  This also implies to me that Hughton has got some forwards lined up as well. 

 

Or am I reading more into things than Wiz is (who frankly is a serial poor assessor of next steps as far as NCFC is at the moment - I think he he is doing as some kind of anti-Hex rather than some attention seeking motivation - I''m giving him the benefit of the doubt).

[Jim Smith 2,322]

[quote user="Indy"]

You win games by scoring goals, we are lacking in that department! We need to see what a fit Vaghaun can gve us.

 

I don''t get Curtis Davis thing, is he really better than Ward, he has some many of the same traits that it worries me!

 

We don''t need Davis, we have Bennett, Barnett,  Ayla, Martin, Ward to name 5 player in that position.

[/quote]

 

And of the 5 you mention it could be argued that not on e of them has yet shown themselves able to perform consistently well in the premier league. Personally i think Bennett and Ayala can and will. I think Martin can do a job there as well. I think Ward and Barnett just have too many mistakes in them.

Friend of mine saw virtually all of Birminghams games last season and he says that davies is very good. Very quick and a good defender but plays best alongside a decent partner. I would think the rumoured deal might work well for all concerned although how up for it Vaughan would be I don;t know. I don;t understand those on here who seem to see him as a likely starter for us in the future. Even when he has played there''s been a lot of effort but not a huge amount of quality on show and i don;t think he looks that quick either.

[Jim Smith 2,322]

I also don''t see why people are clamouring for so many strikers. i think that it seems pretty clear from the addition of Butterfield to the squad and one or two of the comments made around his signing by Butts and Hughton that we are likely to quite regularly play with one out and out striker at times this season with a 2nd striker or attacking midfielder playing behind them I would think striker wise we will therefore go with Holt, Morison, Jackson and probably one more (either Vaughan or if he goes on loan we must have a replacement in mind) as we then have Wes, Butterfield and Howson (plus possible E Bennett) who could all play off the front man.

[Salopian 1]

It''s very puzzling. We are short of top quality strikers, and we lend one for a year, in order to purchase a centre back. Is this because we fear for Vaughan''s future fitness, in which case why not try to sell him now, before he has another breakdown next season. If a year at Brum is to improve his fitness and usefulness, why does he need to go? What do Birmingham get out of it, except a risky striker, whom they lose if he survives a year unscathed? I only hope that such a deal would not leave us paying some of Vaughan''s wages while he is at Brum.

 

 Are we short of money despite what the club says, that we can''t afford to buy Davis, so we make an arrangement which leaves us even more short of strikers whom we can''t afford? If this deal goes through I hope that there is enough money to make two good striker signings.

 

I have considerable doubts about this rumour from the Mirror, and they have been wrong in the past once or twice!! I fail to see how it makes sense, except to free some wages for a striker or two who may come cheaply but need high wages.

[Baldyboy 0]

But it isn''t THAT simple Wiz, is it? Or are you party to transfers now too? Anything to stoke your fire and have a go hey? This would be a great deal as Vaughan was one of Lamberts mistakes IMO as he barely played and we should have had him on a pay as you play deal!!

[lake district canary 0]

The thing about Vaughan is that  he needs to play games.    Both for his own development/confidence and for him to have any sell on value to our club.   These  are two very important things.   We want to see Vaughan play and we need him to have value if we want to sell him on at any stage.   A loan move  where he would be an automatic starter (if fit) would be ideal for all concerned.     He would not be guarenteed a starting place at Norwich, even if fully fit - so this idea does make some sense.    And has been said, would also make sense if we are planning to buy a striker or two.  

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,560]

Vaughan to Birmingham on loan seems to be happening - not sure about the Davies to Norwich part.

[Indy 3,301]

The trouble I have with Davis, is that he has been poor for a couple seasons, it''s not like he''s been the stand out defender in the Championship!

 

He is just another squad player, he''s not going to be a regular, well shouldn''t be!

 

Let''s face it Davis has had his fair few month''s on the sidelines too and a serious dip in form since his 8 million move to Villa, while on loan there he looked an 8 million pound player, since then a 2 bob bit part.

 

I''m all for quality, but not for bolstering what we already have, he is no better than Ward or Barnett and we have 2 youngsters at the back who if fit should hold down those positions in Ayla and Bennett.

[shefcanary 2,410]

BYG - I know you are close to the action so trust what you say.  It will be difficult for Brum to sell Davies without a fight or at least a decent replacement already lined up. 

 

If its a season long loan I''m hopefully ensure option to recall will be in the contract.  So many of these year long loans don''t include such an option but given Brum''s financial position I can''t see them standing the full cost of JV''s salary, so would hope we retain some right over recall to compensate our continuation of payment. 

 

Given also some of the discussion on this board recently (specifically re. Naughton), is this also another sign of our changing status in football terms - this time we get to loan out a young player, have him put in the marketplace and hopefuly raise his profile thus leading either to the return of a competitive squad player or at least a player we can sell and get a real return on. 

 

Finally if the player traffic is only one way, I would expect it does mean an incoming striker (PL squad would be down to 22 as well), but also if Davies is not the target then surely another defender on his way?