there was a rather large bit of missing logic in there

he said we'd have nothing to lose by appointing Lampard.

But the only thing that we'd actually gain from having Lampard is that he "brings a profile to Norwich, he has that ability to draw in a few players to Norwich that possibly he can pull out of Chelsea's youth team, like he did at Derby who helped him there and who he trusted when he went to Chelsea. He has that relationship with the Chelsea set up."

But he then added that Lampard won't be able to keep us up (because nobody could).

In which case why would we have nothing to lose in appointing him? If the only thing a manager brings us is an ability to draw in a few players on loan from Chelsea's youth team like Lampard did at Derby, to help us in the championship next season - well, I think we can possibly aim a bit higher than that. (It's not as if it took Derby up or anything.)

Posted By: jampersands, Nov 9, 13:57:35