| According to ITN news 22:34 - Apr 27 with 3840 views | BluedanW |
Norwich have been promoted on a budget and Sheffield United are all but there on a shoe string.
If that is the case, how would they describe our level of investment? |  | | |  |
| According to ITN news on 22:42 - Apr 27 with 3746 views | Reuser_is_God |
I think ours & Sheff United budgets are very similar. |  |
| |
| According to ITN news on 22:44 - Apr 27 with 3725 views | BluedanW |
| According to ITN news on 22:42 - Apr 27 by Reuser_is_God |
I think ours & Sheff United budgets are very similar. |
Our recruitment however has not been similar | | | |
| According to ITN news on 22:44 - Apr 27 with 3718 views | J2BLUE |
Norwich haven't spent a massive amount. They've been incredibly lucky that almost all of their signings have come off, especially the ones where they spent a reason fee in the £1-2m range and of course, Pukki on a free. |  |
| |
| According to ITN news on 22:46 - Apr 27 with 3702 views | BluedanW |
| According to ITN news on 22:44 - Apr 27 by J2BLUE |
Norwich haven't spent a massive amount. They've been incredibly lucky that almost all of their signings have come off, especially the ones where they spent a reason fee in the £1-2m range and of course, Pukki on a free. |
Puki on a free and we pay £2M odd for Jackson and Harrison | | | |
| According to ITN news on 22:47 - Apr 27 with 3689 views | Ftnfwest |
| According to ITN news on 22:44 - Apr 27 by J2BLUE |
Norwich haven't spent a massive amount. They've been incredibly lucky that almost all of their signings have come off, especially the ones where they spent a reason fee in the £1-2m range and of course, Pukki on a free. |
They’ve bought well although can offer wages 3 times what we can which is the difference in attracting the better players to start with. Of course next season it’ll be 10 times more |  | | |
| According to ITN news on 22:47 - Apr 27 with 3688 views | Guthrum |
| According to ITN news on 22:46 - Apr 27 by BluedanW |
Puki on a free and we pay £2M odd for Jackson and Harrison |
There's probably some good scouting in there, but also a degree of luck. Puki has turned out to be a brilliantly successful gamble. Ours haven't. |  |
| |
| According to ITN news on 22:48 - Apr 27 with 3672 views | Reuser_is_God |
| According to ITN news on 22:44 - Apr 27 by BluedanW |
Our recruitment however has not been similar |
Indeed. | |
| |
| According to ITN news on 22:50 - Apr 27 with 3646 views | Felstow1978 |
Maybe the two promoted sides simply have competent managers who can build cohesive, organised, motivated teams who have a sense of pride when they pull on the shirt? | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| According to ITN news on 23:31 - Apr 27 with 3388 views | unstableblue |
They’d probably describe it as “at the same level of investment as The Blades Ipswich allowed their series of incompetent managers to instill unexpansive, restrictive, hoofing, styles of football with no strategy to progress the side” |  |
| |
| According to ITN news on 23:37 - Apr 27 with 3333 views | WasNotWas |
| According to ITN news on 22:44 - Apr 27 by J2BLUE |
Norwich haven't spent a massive amount. They've been incredibly lucky that almost all of their signings have come off, especially the ones where they spent a reason fee in the £1-2m range and of course, Pukki on a free. |
Not been all plain sailing.
Norwich (we. Yes, I'm a nodge fan) wasted £8mil each on Van Wolfswinkel and Naismith just a few seasons ago and we had to rely on the sale of the Murphy twins, Madison and Pritchard being worth something for the club to viable for this season, as I don't think the business would have stacked up otherwise.
Yes, some great signings recently for not much money but there's always a fine line between getting an on-form Pukki and an off-form Van Wolfswinkel. | | | |
| According to ITN news on 23:43 - Apr 27 with 3268 views | bournemouthblue |
| According to ITN news on 22:44 - Apr 27 by J2BLUE |
Norwich haven't spent a massive amount. They've been incredibly lucky that almost all of their signings have come off, especially the ones where they spent a reason fee in the £1-2m range and of course, Pukki on a free. |
They didn't spend a lot this year but still shell out about £15 million last season I believe
The Madison sale was like another season of parachute payments essentially |  |
| |
| According to ITN news on 06:39 - Apr 28 with 2821 views | m14_blue |
| According to ITN news on 23:37 - Apr 27 by WasNotWas |
Not been all plain sailing.
Norwich (we. Yes, I'm a nodge fan) wasted £8mil each on Van Wolfswinkel and Naismith just a few seasons ago and we had to rely on the sale of the Murphy twins, Madison and Pritchard being worth something for the club to viable for this season, as I don't think the business would have stacked up otherwise.
Yes, some great signings recently for not much money but there's always a fine line between getting an on-form Pukki and an off-form Van Wolfswinkel. |
Are you expecting big changes this summer? I guess not?
Farke will, understandably, want to be loyal to the players that got you up but I wonder how many of them are good enough for the prem, particularly in midfield. Stiepermann, Vrancic, Hernandez, McClean etc have been a revelation this season but I can see them being overrun in the top flight.
Changes defensively are a certainty surely, given how many goals you’ve conceded this year? The two young full backs should flourish though I reckon.
All in all, a remarkable achievement for your lot, and done playing football the right way. Extremely begrudging congratulations | | | |
| According to ITN news on 07:54 - Apr 28 with 2575 views | floridaboy |
| According to ITN news on 06:39 - Apr 28 by m14_blue |
Are you expecting big changes this summer? I guess not?
Farke will, understandably, want to be loyal to the players that got you up but I wonder how many of them are good enough for the prem, particularly in midfield. Stiepermann, Vrancic, Hernandez, McClean etc have been a revelation this season but I can see them being overrun in the top flight.
Changes defensively are a certainty surely, given how many goals you’ve conceded this year? The two young full backs should flourish though I reckon.
All in all, a remarkable achievement for your lot, and done playing football the right way. Extremely begrudging congratulations |
Totally agree. They have been promoted. Good luck to them. Some have compared their season with Wolves last year and that they could do OK next season.
Problem with that is that Wolves spent massive amounts of money to get where they are now. Farke will not be allowed to spend much. £20m has been mentioned. We will see! | | | |
| According to ITN news on 08:28 - Apr 28 with 2459 views | backwaywhen |
| According to ITN news on 07:54 - Apr 28 by floridaboy |
Totally agree. They have been promoted. Good luck to them. Some have compared their season with Wolves last year and that they could do OK next season.
Problem with that is that Wolves spent massive amounts of money to get where they are now. Farke will not be allowed to spend much. £20m has been mentioned. We will see! |
Farke & co are already looking at more cheaper option German players , who have squad experience with the likes of Bayern , he is a shrewd cookie that guy , pains me to say . | | | |
| According to ITN news on 08:35 - Apr 28 with 2404 views | Bluebell |
| According to ITN news on 23:43 - Apr 27 by bournemouthblue |
They didn't spend a lot this year but still shell out about £15 million last season I believe
The Madison sale was like another season of parachute payments essentially |
Didn't they get £25million for Maddison? No wonder they can offer higher wages.
We can never compete financially with a team like that especially when we sell all our better players for peanuts.
I wonder what the season would have been like if we had hung onto Waghorn, Garner and Webster. We sold them and got Jackson, Harrison and Nsaila in return! |  | | |
| According to ITN news on 08:53 - Apr 28 with 2319 views | Superfrans |
| According to ITN news on 22:42 - Apr 27 by Reuser_is_God |
I think ours & Sheff United budgets are very similar. |
They have a bigger turnover and wages, the latter very similar though.
SUFC
Turnover £20.0m
Wages £19.0m
ITFC
Turnover £17.1m
Wages £18.5m.
The difference in turnover is largely down to biggest matchday income, £8.7m for them, £4.7m for us - although our commercial income is higher (£4.4m vs £1.9m - we may simply be not counting this towards matchday inclement, while they are).
So, our owner invests more in our club than theirs does.
😉 |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
