Corky Posted 29 June 2013 Posted 29 June 2013 Doesn't have to be in the same position to be at the expense of another player. There are limited spaces in a squad you know? Lindgard was crap though - you can't deny that. We ship on Beckford whilst still paying his wages - and bring in players like that. Not defending Beckford and probably right to move him on, but it SHOULD make you think. I doubt it does as none of you lot strike me as great thinkers, but it SHOULD Usually best in a direct comparison though. Really hope we get rid of Schmeichel so we can bring in a new right winger doesn't really work.
Mark_w Posted 29 June 2013 Posted 29 June 2013 You're right, thank god such footballing talents as Jamie Vardy and Jesse Lingaard could be accommodated at the expense of Jermaine Beckford - and Whitbread at the expense of Mills. Hallelujah, praise be, NP really is the man! They're hardly direct replacements though. Beckford was signed to be first choice striker, Vardy has come in to be a relatively cheap (in terms of wages) third choice, while Wood who is a much better player has been signed to be our main striker alongside Nugent. We stopped playing Mills and started attempts to move him on in January, around that time you might remember a certain Wes Morgan coming in for a 5th of the money we spent on Matt Mills. Zak Whitbread may not have had an awful lot of playing time this season but he was brought in on a free, almost certainly earns a lot less than Matt Mills does and was considered by Norwich fans to be one of their best players the season before. We spent about 6-7 Million on Beckford and Mills, with that amount of money Pearson was able to bring in the likes of Anthony Knockaert, Wes Morgan, Matty James, Chris Wood and yes a few flops, but those flops didn't cost us the majority of our transfer and wage budget like Sven's did.
William Boast Posted 29 June 2013 Posted 29 June 2013 Usually best in a direct comparison though. Really hope we get rid of Schmeichel so we can bring in a new right winger doesn't really work. What do you mean it doesn't really work? Of course it works? Do you think if LCFC sell Schmeichel all of that money HAS to be spent on a GK? If Everton sell Baines for £20million, do you think they'll spend £20million on a new LB? Often the money may be reinvested elsewhere in the playing squad or not at all.
fleckneymike Posted 29 June 2013 Posted 29 June 2013 Look, the 'truth' is he was bought in to get us promoted, he didn't. Pearson was brought in to get us promoted, he hasn't. Budgets, squads, fees, wages etc are, in the grand scheme of things, a distraction. Both men had one job to do and thus far both men have failed.
Fox92 Posted 29 June 2013 Posted 29 June 2013 Not defending Beckford and probably right to move him on, but it SHOULD make you think. I doubt it does as none of you lot strike me as great thinkers, but it SHOULD Why are you trying to defend your argument saying we can't think? Just because we have different opinions to you?
William Boast Posted 29 June 2013 Posted 29 June 2013 Why are you trying to defend your argument saying we can't think? Just because we have different opinions to you? My argument is sound. I don't need to defend it since so far, at least, there hasn't been a worthwhile question raise or criticism levelled..? I'm sure you'll come up with one eventually though. You express yourself well. You write well. Its just your understanding of the subject at hand which is lacking.
Guest Col city fan Posted 29 June 2013 Posted 29 June 2013 Look, the 'truth' is he was bought in to get us promoted, he didn't. Pearson was brought in to get us promoted, he hasn't. Budgets, squads, fees, wages etc are, in the grand scheme of things, a distraction. Both men had one job to do and thus far both men have failed. The most sensible post on the thread... Anything else is an aside.
Mark_w Posted 29 June 2013 Posted 29 June 2013 My argument is sound weak. I don't need to can't defend it since so far, at least, there hasn't been a against several worthwhile questions raised or criticism levelled..? in this thread that I've actively chosen to ignore. I'm sure you'll going to continue to ignore any you come up with one eventually though. You express yourself well. You write well. Its just your understanding of the subject at hand which is lacking impeccable. Fixed it for you.
Fox92 Posted 29 June 2013 Posted 29 June 2013 My argument is sound. I don't need to defend it since so far, at least, there hasn't been a worthwhile question raise or criticism levelled..? I'm sure you'll come up with one eventually though. You express yourself well. You write well. Its just your understanding of the subject at hand which is lacking. Fair play.
Greatness_Since_1884 Posted 29 June 2013 Posted 29 June 2013 I've removed that obstacle to debate. The biggest obstacle to debate is your low IQ level
William Boast Posted 29 June 2013 Posted 29 June 2013 The biggest obstacle to debate is your low IQ level Haha. Do you seriously actually believe I have a low IQ? Or are you just a really poor troll?
Webbo Posted 29 June 2013 Posted 29 June 2013 If playing budget decides who wins the league then nobody we appoint this season will get us promotion as Reading QPR and Wigan will all have more money than us. Might as well stick with who we've got and save ourselves some money.
William Boast Posted 29 June 2013 Posted 29 June 2013 Well, last season was the big chance, but NP blew it. Agree our chances are slimmer this year.
Webbo Posted 29 June 2013 Posted 29 June 2013 Well, last season was the big chance, but NP blew it. Agree our chances are slimmer this year. So we're agreed, no point sacking Nige.
fleckneymike Posted 29 June 2013 Posted 29 June 2013 The most sensible post on the thread... Anything else is an aside. At least two of us get it Col.
William Boast Posted 29 June 2013 Posted 29 June 2013 So we're agreed, no point sacking Nige. Well, I disagree actually. I think we should get in a manager to build a side over a period of time. I don't buy in to what NP is evidently trying to do, so I don't think he should remain in charge any longer.
Kitchandro Posted 29 June 2013 Posted 29 June 2013 Given that Pearson has inherited some players on large wages - lets use Mills and Beckford as an example, do you think it would be wise to try to involve them, get them motivated and hungry and use their abilities, since you're paying large wages anyway? These are not useless players? No, because they're not interested in that. I'm sure he would have used them as squad players if they didn't start kicking off and start looking for a move away. This is what you don't seem to understand - these players aren't interested in working hard for their place, if they were why wouldn't Pearson use them? Their egos are to big for that, that's why they got shipped out. That is perfectly obvious to anyone with half a brain and that's what people have been trying to explain for the last year. Do try to keep up.
Kitchandro Posted 29 June 2013 Posted 29 June 2013 Doesn't have to be in the same position to be at the expense of another player. There are limited spaces in a squad you know? Lindgard was crap though - you can't deny that. We ship on Beckford whilst still paying his wages - and bring in players like that. Not defending Beckford and probably right to move him on, but it SHOULD make you think. I doubt it does as none of you lot strike me as great thinkers, but it SHOULD Because Beckford wasn't happy to be on the bench and we weren't happy to keep paying the full wages of someone who a) hadn't scored enough goals or contributed to the team enough b) wasn't happy not being first choice. Lingard was a poor signing I'll give you that. But it hardly makes a difference to the Beckford situation.
William Boast Posted 29 June 2013 Posted 29 June 2013 No, because they're not interested in that. I'm sure he would have used them as squad players if they didn't start kicking off and start looking for a move away. This is what you don't seem to understand - these players aren't interested in working hard for their place, if they were why wouldn't Pearson use them? Their egos are to big for that, that's why they got shipped out. That is perfectly obvious to anyone with half a brain and that's what people have been trying to explain for the last year. Do try to keep up. I agree that would seem obvious to someone, like yourself, with half a brain. I have a whole brain, so know a huge amount more.
Kitchandro Posted 29 June 2013 Posted 29 June 2013 I agree that would seem obvious to someone, like yourself, with half a brain. I have a whole brain, so know a huge amount more. Oh yeh, such as?
Mark_w Posted 29 June 2013 Posted 29 June 2013 Well, I disagree actually. I think we should get in a manager to build a side over a period of time. We have a talented, incredibly young side that is already capable of a top six finish in the Championship. Nigel Pearson has brought in players like Knockaert, James and Wood who are young and have the potential to be very, very good players. What you're apparently asking for is exactly what Pearson is trying to do, rather than playing average relatively old players like Beckford & Danns, he's signing young talented players who are going to be great for us long term. Surely you can see that?
Kitchandro Posted 29 June 2013 Posted 29 June 2013 We have a talented, incredibly young side that is already capable of a top six finish in the Championship. Nigel Pearson has brought in players like Knockaert, James and Wood who are young and have the potential to be very, very good players. What you're apparently asking for is exactly what Pearson is trying to do, rather than playing average relatively old players like Beckford & Danns, he's signing young talented players who are going to be great for us long term. Surely you can see that? He wants a side built over time but completed immediately.
Webbo Posted 29 June 2013 Posted 29 June 2013 Well, I disagree actually. I think we should get in a manager to build a side over a period of time. I don't buy in to what NP is evidently trying to do, so I don't think he should remain in charge any longer. No point building a team, the relegated from the PL teams will always have more money than us. Perhaps we should just accept our fate.
5waller5 Posted 29 June 2013 Posted 29 June 2013 I'd love to say that we're officially over the Eriksson era and that this bickering would stop. Sadly, the finances say otherwise. And until we've gotten the sheet clean again, it shall continue. Unfortunately the bickering will continue because we are still under-performing and failing .... and the scape goat is currently the guy that managed a few seasons ago now. When NP is sacked it will then be him ..... Unless we have a decent manager that comes in, does what a decent manager does and stamps his authority on the club, makes a difference and achieves promotion.
Webbo Posted 29 June 2013 Posted 29 June 2013 Unfortunately the bickering will continue because we are still under-performing and failing .... and the scape goat is currently the guy that managed a few seasons ago now. When NP is sacked it will then be him ..... Unless we have a decent manager that comes in, does what a decent manager does and stamps his authority on the club, makes a difference and achieves promotion. How do you mean stamps his authority on the club? Things like not playing certain players, sending them out on loan, maybe refusing to talk to certain journalists? That sort of thing?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.