To perhaps draw a distinction that might not be true: Under McNally/Lambert we managed to clear the £25m or so long term debt that had become a millstone around the club's neck. Once solvent, the club spent every penny available on the playing budget, and I think pushed the limits as far as they dared. So I suspect when we were relegated every bit of the parachute payments were committed to paying wages, etc. This left only player sales as a way to finance new signings. Therefore this summer, we had no working capital with which to make deals. There wasn't a lump sum in the transfer kitty. To pay for Webber, Farke and his team (probably not cheap), and then Husband, Franke, Vrancic, etc, we temporarily went into debt - but as described above, closer to an overdraft than long term structured debt. It's been rumoured that the Murphy deal has been paid in bulk up front, which is quite rare in transfers. So the circa. £10m we picked up there has paid off the overdraft. The Dorrans fee seems small enough to not be relevant, and the Howson fee may not be structured as helpfully. So moving forward, I suspect we have some money available, but not vast amounts. We probably have the money to buy a CM and another defender at a similar price to what we've spent on other players this summer. If someone kindly agrees to take Naismith off us (for example), I'd expect any future fees received this summer to be much more readily at Farke and Webber's disposal.
Martin O'Neil, Dean Windass, Robert Chase, an example of money asked for to sign a player and refusal, £600,000 was the figure that my memory has retained.
£2M apparently the fee. I think that's smart business. Worth the risk, especially after selling a striker for £15M.
Nottingham is a bit too far from the sea to use him for donkey rides on the beach! He is one player I would not support our team going for!
Sunderland also interested in Jerome. They need a goalkeeper as well, tell them McGovern is available but lay off CJ.
Holt was 28 when we signed him, Murphy is 34! Combined with his undoubtedly higher wage demands, I certainly wouldn't be keen.
I've told my friends up there they can have McGovern for a bag of crisps and there'll be plenty of volunteers to drive him up there!
Just seen this - http://www.pinkun.com/norwich-city/...th-premier-league-champions-chelsea-1-5114451 If he feels he wants to leave, there's not much we can do!!!
We are interested in taking Snoddy back on loan. He would be on high wages and frustrating to watch and a step backwards in my opinion taking up a starting place . I hope it's bullshit. http://readnorwich.com/2017/07/20/norwich-interested-in-re-signing-snodgrass/
Hmmm...interesting. I heard Leeds and Hull both wanted him back. I'm sure he will have plenty of offers from better teams.
Never go back. Ain't that right Mr Fleck, Mr M Walker ...and R Snodgrass. I see Leeds are named as an interested party. Don't they ever learn to just move on and not try to replicate the (in)famous past? They wanted Howson, they want Snodders - anyone got Becchio's phone number?
Why? Snodgrass would be a retrograde step, not in keeping with the new energy being created. No way Snoddy.
It doesn't feel like a move we would make, if we only paid a proportion of his wages and we are to lose another wide attacker (Josh?) then we would need someone and he is a good player. He was 2nd in our player of the season during Hughtons first season and whilst he frustrates, he was one of our few players who could cut it at PL level. At champioship level he is very good so I wouldn't object if Farke and Webber think he would be important in gaining promotion. As a loan it would be a low risk move. As long as he doesn't fall out with Nelson and not pass to him! Bah!
Zero chance of him actually getting a game at Chelsea but If the big boys give you an opportunity to sign it would be difficult not to have your head turned. No doubt we have pinched some of our youngsters from so called lesser clubs.
