I'm ruling out:-

[lake district canary 0]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="lake district canary"]

Imo, Lappin and Martin are useful back up.  We may need them   if injuries occur.   Wouldn''t expect them to set the world on fire - but equally I don''t think they would let us down either. 

[/quote]

 

I am sorry, ldc but these damning-with-faint-praise phrases utterly fail your own "Everything is absolutely wonderful" test. I''m afraid you are in danger of being banned for aiding the enemy unless you can show that this was an aberration and from on will return  to posting your usual blind and much-loved optimism...[;)][:D][;)]

[/quote]

 

 

The trouble is, purple,  I don''t see everything as being wonderful.      I say it as I see it.        People assume because I take a positive view of the club''s present position that I am somehow in some kind of cloud cuckoo land.    I am very positive about the club because of it''s development since McNally appeared on the scene. The policies, the pulling together, getting the right personell etc etc.    I had  no doubt that we were going to be ok last season because of the competetiveness and positive attitude of Lambert and what I had learnt about him from the previous two seasons.   What surprised me a bit was that not everybody seemed to buy in to it and we had thread after thread on here slagging off our players when all they needed to do was get behind them.   

 

 

Alot of  people have to see it before they believe it.    Maybe I believe it before I see it, I don''t know - but I do say things as I see them.   Hughton was who I wanted as manager and was pleased when we got him - but only a few weeks later people were slagging him off before we''d even kicked a ball in anger.      I tend to react to other peoples negativity - especially if it is unwarranted.   If that makes people think that I think everything is wonderful then thats how it has to be.    I do think its a great time to be a Norwich supporter though and we don''t really have that much to complain about........such a change around from the fallow years.   Also, it makes the drive to matches much more bearable when your team is doing well.   Long may it continue.

 

 

 

 

 

[Indy_Bones 441]

[quote user="Steady On..."]Well I for one can''t wait for you to come whining every time he touches the ball for stoke.[/quote]As previously mentioned during the whole Owen/Heskey debate however, we didn''t have the squad space for Owen and unless we could have shipped out 2 players we couldn''t have signed him anyway so it''s all somewhat moot at this point.IF we could have accomodated him AND he proves to be a success at Stoke, then I still won''t be whining, I''ll simply point out that it was a potentially missed opportunity that I thought was a good idea.Whereas I''m sure that you and other posters with your level of charm will be happy to come on and post abuse towards people like me if he doesn''t perform for Stoke...

[CambridgeCanary 0]

[quote user="Indy_Bones"][quote user="CDMullins"]I dont believe that Stoke are only paying £25k a week.

Of course Jackson/Martin arnt better than Owen, but id rather have them 2, than Owen. Based on injury record and my belief that Owen would want much more than £25k.[/quote]
[url]http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/stoke-city/9520735/Michael-Owen-joins-Stoke-after-agreeing-a-12-month-deal.html[/url]

Go argue with sources like the Telegraph about it then.

In truth the only people who definitely know what Owen is on per week are Owen himself and the finance team at Stoke, but I''m more inclined to accept sensible reports from the press than some guy on a message board.

As for Owen ''dropping down'' a league to get regular games to show his ''passion'', you don''t drop down unless you don''t think you''re good enough anymore, and Owen clearly feels he is, as do Stoke for that matter...
[/quote]

 

This is quoted in the Times too so it has broader acceptance.

 

I am astounded by the number of people who assert with brazen confidence what people they have never met would want.  How do you know Owen would want more than £25,000?   I am constantly being told what other people will or will not accept by those arrrogant enough to try and put themselves in other''s shoes and second guess their desires and wishes.  I was repeatedly told what Lambert did and didn''t want in his career and it is apparent now that he didn''t know himself most of the time.

 

Here''s one for you all.  What Owen and Heskey and others want might just possibly, maybe, as a happenchance and perhaps be affected by the fact that they are/were unemployed.   £25,000 might be peanuts compared to Owen''s pomp but it is a lot compared with nothing.

 

We are told players need to get real but in this case I think it is many posters who should.  Someone unemployed who wants to work will do so for the best rate he can get not some fanciful ideal of what he is. in abstract, worth.   No one who wants to work will set artificial limits.  You look for the best offer and if it is good enough, you take it.  You may have been employed at £60,000 but if the best offer is £45,000, you take it because it is a lot better than being unemployed.

[Indy 3,301]

This has the message board in two halfs again, I for one wouldn''t want Owen here nor for that matter CMS when we were linked to him! Both in my book would be here for their last pay day, I know CMS is 28 but this would be his only chance at premiership footy and big wages.

 

For me Hughton has it right to bring in a young hungry international quality player eager to play, motivated to learn and above all will bust a gut to show what he has. Kane was the best option from those who you guy''s are all talking about!

 

Here''s one for you too, if Kane proves to be a hit here and by chance we stay up, what are the chances of signing him?

 

We have had our share of bigger named strikers who really didn''t perform and lead us to lower leagues! so leave Heskey and Owen to go where they want apart from Carrow Road please.

[Steady On... 0]

[quote user="Indy_Bones"][quote user="Steady On..."]Well I for one can''t wait for you to come whining every time he touches the ball for stoke.[/quote]As previously mentioned during the whole Owen/Heskey debate however, we didn''t have the squad space for Owen and unless we could have shipped out 2 players we couldn''t have signed him anyway so it''s all somewhat moot at this point.IF we could have accomodated him AND he proves to be a success at Stoke, then I still won''t be whining, I''ll simply point out that it was a potentially missed opportunity that I thought was a good idea.Whereas I''m sure that you and other posters with your level of charm will be happy to come on and post abuse towards people like me if he doesn''t perform for Stoke...[/quote]

Correct, I will. You deserve nothing less.

[paul moy 235]

Owen is on 20K a week plus bonuses apparently. It''s just a shame he has retired from ''football''.  

[Steady On... 0]

[quote user="paul moy"]Owen is on 20K a week plus bonuses apparently. It''s just a shame he has retired from ''football''.  [/quote]

 

Wow, getting lower and lower! Soon he''ll be on Cody McDonalds Wages

[Webbo118 0]

[quote user="paul moy"]Owen is on 20K a week plus bonuses apparently. It''s just a shame he has retired from ''football''.  [/quote]

 

Apparently? Says who?

[paul moy 235]

[quote user="Webbo118"]

[quote user="paul moy"]Owen is on 20K a week plus bonuses apparently. It''s just a shame he has retired from ''football''.  [/quote]

 

Apparently? Says who?

[/quote]

On the radio this morning.... can earn up to 50K a week with bonuses, but basic is 20K.

[Indy_Bones 441]

[quote user="Steady On..."][quote user="Indy_Bones"]Whereas I''m sure that you and other posters with your level of charm will be happy to come on and post abuse towards people like me if he doesn''t perform for Stoke...[/quote]Correct, I will. You deserve nothing less.[/quote][img]http://i910.photobucket.com/albums/ac303/j3ffr3y11/Obvious-troll-is-obvious.jpg[/img]

[No Swoop Done 0]

[quote user="BroadstairsR"][quote user="No Swoop Done"]

[quote user="BroadstairsR"]Chris Martin ever scoring another goal in the Premier League.[/quote]

At least get it correct if you''re going to groan.

[/quote]

No Prem. goals yet despite all the chances Lambert gave him (or didn''t because of his lack of managerial nous?)

[/quote]

You mean all four chances he had last season? You make it sound like it was double figures.

[Steady On... 0]

[quote user="Indy_Bones"][quote user="Steady On..."][quote user="Indy_Bones"]Whereas I''m sure that you and other posters with your level of charm will be happy to come on and post abuse towards people like me if he doesn''t perform for Stoke...[/quote]Correct, I will. You deserve nothing less.[/quote][img]http://i910.photobucket.com/albums/ac303/j3ffr3y11/Obvious-troll-is-obvious.jpg[/img][/quote]

 

So i''m a troll because you think we should sign a bloke that hasn''t been any good for 10 years. Yeah, okay.

[CDMullins 436]

[quote user="CambridgeCanary"]

[quote user="Indy_Bones"][quote user="CDMullins"]I dont believe that Stoke are only paying £25k a week. Of course Jackson/Martin arnt better than Owen, but id rather have them 2, than Owen. Based on injury record and my belief that Owen would want much more than £25k.[/quote][url]http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/stoke-city/9520735/Michael-Owen-joins-Stoke-after-agreeing-a-12-month-deal.html[/url]Go argue with sources like the Telegraph about it then.In truth the only people who definitely know what Owen is on per week are Owen himself and the finance team at Stoke, but I''m more inclined to accept sensible reports from the press than some guy on a message board.As for Owen ''dropping down'' a league to get regular games to show his ''passion'', you don''t drop down unless you don''t think you''re good enough anymore, and Owen clearly feels he is, as do Stoke for that matter...[/quote]

 

This is quoted in the Times too so it has broader acceptance.

 

I am astounded by the number of people who assert with brazen confidence what people they have never met would want.  How do you know Owen would want more than £25,000?   I am constantly being told what other people will or will not accept by those arrrogant enough to try and put themselves in other''s shoes and second guess their desires and wishes.  I was repeatedly told what Lambert did and didn''t want in his career and it is apparent now that he didn''t know himself most of the time.

 

Here''s one for you all.  What Owen and Heskey and others want might just possibly, maybe, as a happenchance and perhaps be affected by the fact that they are/were unemployed.   £25,000 might be peanuts compared to Owen''s pomp but it is a lot compared with nothing.

 

We are told players need to get real but in this case I think it is many posters who should.  Someone unemployed who wants to work will do so for the best rate he can get not some fanciful ideal of what he is. in abstract, worth.   No one who wants to work will set artificial limits.  You look for the best offer and if it is good enough, you take it.  You may have been employed at £60,000 but if the best offer is £45,000, you take it because it is a lot better than being unemployed.

[/quote]Not really,

I just said I dont believe he is only on £25k

Heres me thinking message boards were for opinions, silly me

[zemas tendon 0]

I for one, would have CMS here, full of energy, No fancy dan premiership defender would like that, now showing Brighton fans why they paid all that money for him, if Brighton can afford that kind of money, surely we can, as for C Martin, im sure all the premiership defenders would love playing against him as he is lazy, slow, Scores no Goals!!!

[lappinitup 629]

[quote user="zemas tendon"]I for one, would have CMS here, full of energy, No fancy dan premiership defender would like that, now showing Brighton fans why they paid all that money for him, if Brighton can afford that kind of money, surely we can, as for C Martin, im sure all the premiership defenders would love playing against him as he is lazy, slow, Scores no Goals!!![/quote]It''s not often that I agree with you zema but I certainly do on this occasion. With CMS''s finishing ability plus his energy, I think he would have made a great partner for either Holt or Morison. More to the point, Chris Hughton agrees with you too, enough to make a bid for him.

[Steady On... 0]

CMS is a far more viable, competitive and sensible option than Owen or any other aging freeloader.

[PurpleCanary 5,562]

[quote user="Steady On..."]CMS is a far more viable, competitive and sensible option than Owen or any other aging freeloader.[/quote]

 

I am not remotely arguing for Owen or any other free agent, but there has to be a question as to how viable in terms of price NCFC thought Mackail-Smith was, since the club decided not to increase the offer that Brighton said on the record it rejected.

[Indy_Bones 441]

[quote user="Steady On..."]CMS is a far more viable, competitive and sensible option than Owen or any other aging freeloader.[/quote]Apart from costing more (based on info around wages, transfer fees etc which are currently available), having never played in the top level or scored goals there and not actually being that young himself...

[lappinitup 629]

[quote user="Indy_Bones"][quote user="Steady On..."]CMS is a far more viable, competitive and sensible option than Owen or any other aging freeloader.[/quote]Apart from costing more (based on info around wages, transfer fees etc which are currently available), having never played in the top level or scored goals there and not actually being that young himself...[/quote]Chris Hughton seems to have made some very astute signings from what we''ve seen so far. Why do you think he got his assessment of CMS so wrong?

[Steady On... 0]

[quote user="Indy_Bones"][quote user="Steady On..."]CMS is a far more viable, competitive and sensible option than Owen or any other aging freeloader.[/quote]Apart from costing more (based on info around wages, transfer fees etc which are currently available), having never played in the top level or scored goals there and not actually being that young himself...[/quote]

Well we wouldn''t presumably be offering Michael Owen a 3 year deal as we probably would cms so what''s your point? He''s a far more likely performer for our club and would fit in a lot better. And he''s 28 he''s not ancient, have you seen Owen score a goal like the one he did at the weekend in the last ten years? Didn''t think so.

[PurpleCanary 5,562]

[quote user="Steady On..."][quote user="Indy_Bones"][quote user="Steady On..."]CMS is a far more viable, competitive and sensible option than Owen or any other aging freeloader.[/quote]
Apart from costing more (based on info around wages, transfer fees etc which are currently available), having never played in the top level or scored goals there and not actually being that young himself...
[/quote] Well we wouldn''t presumably be offering Michael Owen a 3 year deal as we probably would cms so what''s your point? He''s a far more likely performer for our club and would fit in a lot better. And he''s 28 he''s not ancient, have you seen Owen score a goal like the one he did at the weekend in the last ten years? Didn''t think so.[/quote]

 

Perhaps it''s just me but I''m getting a bit confused. You said CMS was a more viable option for us than a free agent like Owen. Now "viable" has to mean financially viable, since we don''t have unlimited cash. But as you say here apart from having to pay around £3m, at a guess, for CMS we would also have to offer him a three-year deal. Whereas with a free agent there wouldn''t be a transfer fee and we, as you say, certainly wouldn''t commit ourselves to a three year-deal. So how does CMS get to be financially more viable than a free agent?

[Steady On... 0]

Oh my GOD this is BS, what hit you on the head to convince you Owen is remotely viable. CMS wouldn''t spend every waking minute surrounded by horses, there''s a plus point, we''d be getting a player we could play every week and improve over a 3 year period. With Owen we''d get a 1 year injury riddled waste of a chunk of cash season and we''d be the joke of the premier league.

[paul moy 235]

[quote user="BroadstairsR"]

[quote user="Yellows"]I''d rather just trust Hughtons judgement, and I don''t know why people say C Martin has had his chances, cos he hasn''t, no matter what the idiots say on here.[/quote]

 

 

Oh! The insult merchants have entered the debate.

 

 

[/quote]

It''s plainly stupid to consider Michael Owen when we have the hidden potential of Chrissie to call upon.  

[Steady On... 0]

[quote user="paul moy"][quote user="BroadstairsR"]

[quote user="Yellows"]I''d rather just trust Hughtons judgement, and I don''t know why people say C Martin has had his chances, cos he hasn''t, no matter what the idiots say on here.[/quote]

 

 

Oh! The insult merchants have entered the debate.

 

 

[/quote]

It''s plainly stupid to consider Michael Owen when we have the hidden potential of Chrissie to call upon.  

[/quote]

 

If only we had Cody!!!!!!!

[PurpleCanary 5,562]

[quote user="Steady On..."]Oh my GOD this is BS, what hit you on the head to convince you Owen is remotely viable. CMS wouldn''t spend every waking minute surrounded by horses, there''s a plus point, we''d be getting a player we could play every week and improve over a 3 year period. With Owen we''d get a 1 year injury riddled waste of a chunk of cash season and we''d be the joke of the premier league.[/quote]

 

Er, I never said Owen was viable. And indeed have never even thought it. It would help if you occasionally actually read and understood read what posters have written. The point I was making is that you - having claimed that CMS was viable as a signing - have since done a very good job of explaining why he would financially (which is what counts) actually be less viable than a one-year deal for a free agent, because of what he would cost the club over three years. And if you still think CMS is viable - at what he would cost - you need to explain why NCFC didn''t increase its offer for him and instead went for a season-long lan for Harry Kane.

[Scooby 0]

Norwich only has one runway ??

[Steady On... 0]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"]

[quote user="Steady On..."]Oh my GOD this is BS, what hit you on the head to convince you Owen is remotely viable. CMS wouldn''t spend every waking minute surrounded by horses, there''s a plus point, we''d be getting a player we could play every week and improve over a 3 year period. With Owen we''d get a 1 year injury riddled waste of a chunk of cash season and we''d be the joke of the premier league.[/quote]

 

Er, I never said Owen was viable. And indeed have never even thought it. It would help if you occasionally actually read and understood read what posters have written. The point I was making is that you - having claimed that CMS was viable as a signing - have since done a very good job of explaining why he would financially (which is what counts) actually be less viable than a one-year deal for a free agent, because of what he would cost the club over three years. And if you still think CMS is viable - at what he would cost - you need to explain why NCFC didn''t increase its offer for him and instead went for a season-long lan for Harry Kane.

[/quote]

 

I''m not sure why I''m talkiing to you. I''m sure your just sticking up for your little chum but I find it infuriating that I have to justify that CMS would fit us better than a 32 year old crocked Michael Owen. I can throw all manner of stats at you but whats the point, it''s clearly obvious to the people that aren''t stupid that Owen was an option that never would have happened. Part of that was financial, part of that was having a manager that isn''t a vegetable.

 

We didn''t increase our offer because any more would have been more of a risk, it''s very simple. 3m is a number you''ve pulled out of the air as well professor, it could have been 1m plus add ons or whatever. He wouldn''t be on 25K either.

[Indy_Bones 441]

[quote user="lappinitup"]Chris Hughton seems to have made some very astute signings from what we''ve seen so far. Why do you think he got his assessment of CMS so wrong?[/quote]I don''t think it''s possible for me to answer that one Lapps, I can only give my own reasoning as to why I don''t think it was a good move, and that''s because I''ve never been impressed by CMS and I honestly don''t see the point in the signing.All the other players CH has brought in are either better than, or provide strong competition for our existing players - I just don''t see this being the case with CMS.He''s never played at this level and hasn''t set the world alight in the CCC either, I mean Chris Martin is constantly being accused of not being good enough for the prem, yet in the CCC he managed 7 goals in 26 games (1 in 3.7 goal to game ratio) in a poor Palace side where he was played in midfield in some games, yet CMS gets just 9 in 45 (1 in 5 goal to game ratio) at the same level and somehow he''s a better signing and worth paying decent money for - I just don''t get it.I know some will pull stuff out about CMS being played as a lone striker last season and needing a strike partner etc, but he had much the same returns the last time he was in the CCC, and that was when he wasn''t being played as a lone striker and did have a strike partner!For me he''d be the 4th choice striker at best (and if Vaughan was

still here that would be 5th choice), and I can''t see the logic in

paying over 3 mil to facilitate that scenario, as I think we should be paying money to either provide genuine, strong competition for existing players or to be getting in better players than we have and I don''t see CMS as fulfilling either of those areas.I''d rather keep the 3mil and put it towards a better player - be this in Jan or in the summer, than I would spend it on a squad player who may not even get a game ahead of our current players.Clearly CH sees things differently, but I just can''t see why tbh...

[TIL 1010 4,751]

[IMG]http://i261.photobucket.com/albums/ii53/Steeljedi/chill-pill2.gif[/IMG]

 

Try one of these Steady On it might just help.

[Steady On... 0]

[quote user="Indy_Bones"][quote user="lappinitup"]Chris Hughton seems to have made some very astute signings from what we''ve seen so far. Why do you think he got his assessment of CMS so wrong?[/quote]I don''t think it''s possible for me to answer that one Lapps, I can only give my own reasoning as to why I don''t think it was a good move, and that''s because I''ve never been impressed by CMS and I honestly don''t see the point in the signing.All the other players CH has brought in are either better than, or provide strong competition for our existing players - I just don''t see this being the case with CMS.He''s never played at this level and hasn''t set the world alight in the CCC either, I mean Chris Martin is constantly being accused of not being good enough for the prem, yet in the CCC he managed 7 goals in 26 games (1 in 3.7 goal to game ratio) in a poor Palace side where he was played in midfield in some games, yet CMS gets just 9 in 45 (1 in 5 goal to game ratio) at the same level and somehow he''s a better signing and worth paying decent money for - I just don''t get it.I know some will pull stuff out about CMS being played as a lone striker last season and needing a strike partner etc, but he had much the same returns the last time he was in the CCC, and that was when he wasn''t being played as a lone striker and did have a strike partner!For me he''d be the 4th choice striker at best (and if Vaughan was

still here that would be 5th choice), and I can''t see the logic in

paying over 3 mil to facilitate that scenario, as I think we should be paying money to either provide genuine, strong competition for existing players or to be getting in better players than we have and I don''t see CMS as fulfilling either of those areas.I''d rather keep the 3mil and put it towards a better player - be this in Jan or in the summer, than I would spend it on a squad player who may not even get a game ahead of our current players.Clearly CH sees things differently, but I just can''t see why tbh...[/quote]

 

I can''t believe you want players to provide good competition then suggest Owen. Absurd! Maybe Chris hughton selects his players on the suggestions of his scouts and his own opinions when seeing them up close and not in the stats garbage you would prefer to talk in.