The reported money from the sale of Snodgrass was a very shrewd piece of business as he was guilty of fluffing his lines every game, why he took all our corners i will never know ? Hull have bought a dud in my opinion and we made a handsome profit from the sale.
As it stands we still have our best players so until we do a Southampton then we are yet to penny pinch, i would compare it to a racing driver selling his wheels and engine and expecting to finish in the top 3.
Snodgrass was our top scorer last season I think, so calling him a dud is a bit extreme, he made a few mistakes but he's still a very good footballer. I can never tell if you're being serious or saying these things to provoke an argument lol.
this penny pinching nonsense is pure make believe. we were relegated and cost-cutting HAS to happen whether we like it or not. the club is very well run behind the scenes from a financial point of view. you can take a swipe at them for their judgement over hughton, you can take a bash at them over their appointment of adams, but you cannot seriously suggest they don't run the club sensibly when looking at the pound signs. we were bankrupt five years ago! now we are debt free. they haven't achieved that by refusing to spend money. to have (so far) only sold snodgrass, and at a grossly inflated price and loaned rvw has been refreshing. we've even managed to spend that money if rough estimates on grabban and lafferty are true. so the club have invested what they've received so far. i'm sure fer will go - his reputation makes him our most prized asset (rightly or wrongly). the likes of redmond and olsson are not so clear cut. there's been no fire sale and there won't be a fire sale. if we get a silly offer for ANY player they will go - that happens at any football club. if we get an offer that matches our valuation for one of our highest earners, they too will go. that's what happens when you lose more than half your income in a short space of time. it doesn't mean the club aren't trying to keep them - there just comes a point where it is best for everyone involved to deal. get used to it. that's where the club is now
he was talking about his situation though, which to be fair, was pretty ****. wes has never ever been good enough for the premier league. he only ever turned up once in a blue moon and of course, motd would then highlight his performance as if they'd just discovered a superstar and begin to question why he wasn't a regular. fact is, he just wasn't good enough to make things happen on a consistent basis at the highest level and every norwich fan who watched him week in, week out knew that, deep down. at championship level however he is a real asset and if we can keep him on board and keep him happy then that has to be a positive. it'd cost a hell of a lot more to replace him than we'd get from his sale.
VERY well said Supers. IMO, he could be a very useful player in the Championship, but I wouldn't start him in every game!! <donsflakjacketemoticon>
Lambert designed his tactics around Wes and to an extent Adams is accommodating him as well in a way that Hughton seldom did. I like Adams' willingness to vary formations tactically in games. Those accusing him of being a 'rookie manager' don't recognise his knowledge of the game or that of Holt or Martin. The change in Wes as a result is quite remarkable and a huge bonus for City. Like Supers, I think Hoolahan's play is much more difficult to achieve in the PL, but in the Championship he can be the ACM we have been hoping for. Both Grabban and Lafferty have acknowledged how effective he is in providing through balls. This gives me a lot of hope for the coming season.
Given time I don't think Adam's will be a bad manager, it's just the timing which I'm not keen on. I think Gary Holt will do well Lambert apparently saw a lot in him, also I like having someone on board who values having a highly conditioned squad with good fitness levels.
Interesting article on Saints woes - the parents of a 15 year old academy player want him to go to a different club. Full article here - http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/28593032
Odd comment Dave. Surely as scenarios go, three leaving from quote 'A' is rather more likely than the three arriving from quote 'B'. Just don't get your point, sorry.
gandy, my point was, why act as if our best player's will leave, NA and DM have both said there is no need for anyone to go, the majority of them have said they want to stay and take us back up to the Prem., so why talk as if it's a certainty that they will go? Those other 3 arriving is just as likely until we hear differently! Some are beating the club over the head over something that has not, and may never, happen!
Exactly Dave. Some fans posting on here are convinced that Fer, Tettey, Redmond, Ruddy and Ollson will all leave/have already left. I'd be very surprised if Fer stays and Tettey could follow him, but I feel we'll still have the nucleus of an excellent squad and I also expect a few new recruits to come in and not forgetting there may be one or two youngsters who will be able to 'step up to the plate'. Before others shoot me down, I'm not advocating a wholesale replacement of any senior players with youngsters, but we should give those who are good enough a chance and where possible loan others out to lower league clubs.
http://www.not606.com/showthread.php/271705-Gary-O-Neil?p=6841059#post6841059 QPR fans on Gary O'Neil.
Those comments are in line with others I've seen. His main asset seems to be that "he knows where to pass and how to create space" as one said. Like Surman in that regard, but also in the lack of pace. If so, good positioning and good passing can make up for that. He's more of a CM who can also play WR than a 'utility' player, but I think he could be very good on the right of the diamond opposite Surman. Note to Dave: "our best player's" (Catching the habit?)
