How do we rate the transfer window? I have looked at a lot of 'experts' rating the 20 premiership clubs transfer windows. Most rank Norwich as average in whatever the scale is, usually because they say we sold Buendia and then reinvested the money in the squad (conversely many give Villa an high ranking for doing the same with Grealish). Buendia is a loss, we might have financially been able to keep him without the effects of Covid, but without outside investment we sell to invest in the club with the majority of TV money going into wages. Most 'experts' don't know that. ...and no there isn't a Reading option!
I put very good but losing Buendia is a massive blow he was by far our most consistent creative player . He wanted out and a pay rise in exchange we bought 4 players with the funds . IF and it's a big IF we survive and we keep hold of everyone we have a good chance of establishing ourselves at this level . If we fall short and go down we have a side more than capable of bouncing back up again . The "relegation is worse than death " rhetoric from our backroom staff shouldn't be around anymore. I'm going to try to enjoy the season knowing that we couldn't have done much more without risking financial oblivion. We are a work in progress and a beacon of hope to other clubs that haven't sold their souls to foreign billionaires. I would go so far as to say Farke has the safest job as manager anywhere and one of the most loyal patient fan bases around. If some of the teams implode and sack their managers early on they could easily get dragged down the ****ter . Without scoring goals or keeping the odd clean sheet then we don't have a chance .
I think you have to say that the window has been excellent in the sense that I don't see how Webber could have produced anything more than he has. There was almost certainly a gentleman's agreement with Buendia that he could go if he stayed and helped us back up, so we had to lose him, and the new guys look pretty good on paper. But that's it - on paper. We have to see how they adapt to English football, how they gel as a team, and how much good or bad luck with injuries we get this time. EDIT: I think the luck aspect is especially important. Take Sheffield United. I think I'm right in saying that the first season up they managed to play the same back four almost every week, while the second season the luck ran out. The difference between being a surprise package and the whipping boys is paper-thin in the Prem.
I agree with Gozo, given the limitation that a Buendia departure was pre-agreed, and making that agreement perhaps went a long way to getting us promoted, I don't think we could have had a much better window on paper. On paper, this is the strongest, most expensive, most proven squad Norwich have had since the mid-90s(?). We can name a full XI of internationals*, many of which have European football experience. Now we just need it to gel and translate that potential into results. On paper, I don't believe Watford, Brentford, Burnley or Newcastle have stronger squads than us, but all play a style of football traditionally better suited to getting more out of limited players. If I was to nitpick, a better window would have had players in the door slightly earlier, but I can accept that if we'd tried to do that, the quality of players signed may have suffered, and the first 3 results were unlikely to be better. But we do need this team to learn to play together quickly. The DM issue remains unresolved until Normann has shown whether he's a Tettey/Skipp-like addition to the squad, or another Amadou. *To prove the point: Krul Aarons Hanley Kabak Giannoulis Norman Gilmour McLean Rashica Tzolis Pukki Bench of: Sargent, Omobamidele, Idah Could arguably be a side we start at some point this season, and all are internationals, with Aarons the only U21.
You could have Placheta on the bench as well DH. I rate the window as even better than very good, but it's true that we need to see the quality on the pitch. As with Maddison, we all knew that Emi wanted out, but by my count we've got 6 players in on the £33m Villa paid up front. While he's excelled in the Championship, Buendia is still relatively unproven in the PL whereas the 6 coming in all have considerable top level experience. That we have 2 internationals out on loan (Hernandez & Sinani) also speaks volumes, as does getting Normann, Kabak and Williams in on loans on top of the previous 6 others borders on the incredible. All of that done with a modest net spend overall.
At the moment, it is a "Good" for me on the basis that we have got what we wanted. However, it is always really difficult to truly rate transfer windows otherwise than with hindsight - if we stay up, I would go so far as to say that will probably automatically make this "Excellent", if we get relegated with barely a whimper, it probably moves down a few notches.
No mention here of Stuart Webber's other important bit of summer business, getting Daniel Farke to sign on for a further four years. Shouldn't that be rated too (now and whenever these incoming player ratings are to be revisited)? After all, none of us are expecting a continuation of Farkeball as we've known it. Daniel Farke Mark 2 is, in this sense, as much of an unknown quantity as Rashica, Gilmour, Normann or Kabak.
Surprised you’re pleased or is this sarcastic?! Though I don’t think Farke will change anywhere near as much as I expect you hope.
Neither. It was just that the idea of rating players without reference to the coach and system in which they are being required to play seems odd. Given that DF's new contract was another case of "we got what we wanted", I presume your overall rating at this point would remain "good". When it comes to revisiting the ratings with hindsight, DF will be as much under scrutiny as any of our new signings.
It's more of an evolution than an abrupt change. Rashica was the first indication in that he's a pacey, counterattacking player and Sargent and Tzolis added to that. Gilmour and Lees-Melou were another shift, moving away from the double pivot of Skipp and McLean which thrived in the Championship but could be overrun in the PL. A 3 man midfield allows a wider screen in front of the defence but other options to support our own attack as well. McLean, Lees-Melou, Rupp and now Normann can also play at CAM which helps to bridge the gap from midfield to the attacking players while still being able to cover for FBs going forward. The 3-3 balance of midfielders and attacking players should make us stronger overall and harder to predict in attack, hopefully with more goals from midfield as well. With the possible exception of WR (when Sargent isn't playing there), every position has been strengthened for this season and the way we play has been strengthened as well.
I'm hoping we become harder to beat but I can't see where the goals are going to come . Hopefully the midfielders chip in with a few Idah isn't exactly banging them in for fun and neither is Pukki which is a bit concerning.
It's interesting that Spurs have switched to a 3 man midfield with Skipp playing between Alli and Hojberg. Skipp "is expected to provide a link between the defence and attack, meaning that he is key in transition. That was evident against Watford, as he completed 68 passes. Only Hojbjerg completed more. Skipp isn’t expected to play defence splitting through balls, but he is very effective at making the simple pass to move his team up the pitch." Presumably Normann will be playing a similar role for us. Unlike Skipp, however, Normann is capable of playing "defence splitting through balls", but the test will come in achieving the right balance between defence and attack. https://eplindex.com/86476/analysing-oliver-skipps-emergence-at-tottenham.html
Not how I see it. The first indications of a change of basic approach came in Project Restart, when Drmic was selected up front, and the ball moved forward more quickly and directly than pre-suspension. In the summer, Placheta arrived, and Hugill, and Dowell; at the same time possession-orientated players like Leitner and Trybull were told their services were no longer required. There was a definite shift towards a more direct style of play (e.g. McLean over Trybull), more use of long diagonal passes out of defence (v intricate passing up the touchlines to advance the ball), and so on. Keeping Emi and Pukki, and being back in the Championship, meant that we still had more than enough to keep the old possession-based approach operating smoothly last season, in effect buying us time and replenishing the coffers in anticipation of a more complete revamp of the playing squad this summer, which is exactly what we've seen. The shift from a possession-based approach, to a counter-attacking one is like the emergence of a completely new virus, rather than a mutation from one variant to another.
Trust you to see DF's tactical development as "a completely new virus", Robbie. To me it's 'in addition to' rather than 'in place of'. We used counter-attacking in the PL last time, like the second goal against ManCity, for example. DF is not abandoning our possession based tactics as he still wants us to play the ball out of defence when possible, but he also wants the option to move the ball forward quickly when the opposition over commits to the press. Yes Placheta was seen as a counter-attacking option, but that was also the case with Hernandez long before that and Dowell was brought in for patient build-up play rather than breakaways. Rashica and Tzolis are upgrades on existing tactics rather than a new direction. Counter-attacking is only effective if it has the element of surprise. DF is not the 'one trick pony' you like to make him out to be - his tactical planning is evolving all the time according to the players he has available.
The Telegraph's take on our transfer window. Unfortunately, logging on or creating an account may be required.
