According to transfer market their spend was less than £30m - £10m, £5m and £14m. Still less over 3 years than we spent regardless of sales.
Take a better look at what Norwich did and you will see that after relegation they let go of lots of players including Ruddy and Bennett to Wolves.
You might not give a toss about FFP but the EFL does and by extension so do the clubs.
You are trying to downplay the achievement of a club that has spent less than us, turned a profit on transfers and still got promoted.
There really is no point discussing it with you as you are too busy trying to prove they must have had an unfair advantage when the reality is they have just made better use of their resources.
Ok, so your mate CP turns up and you turn a perfectly amicable debate into something more aggressive. Why?
I for one will remain respectful because I just don't care about any personal vendetta you may be trying to build. If it's all the same to you I will remain civil.
Firstly, I am looking at the exact same transfermarkt website as you, and I am getting £40m.
€25m in 16-17, €15m in 17-18, and €5.5m this season. Maths isn't my subject, but I know that that equates to €45.5m and a simple currency converter gives that as just a shade under £40m. Sorry Basha, but I have no idea where you are getting your gross figures from.
I don't give a toss about FFP because it has no bearing on the debate we are having. They passed, we passed. We are talking about how much has been spent per season and how much squad strengthening Norwich have done and how expensively they have done it.
For a start, there is no point whatsoever comparing a PP club to a non-PP club. There is no point comparing a club with premiership players to sell to one that doesn't, and there is little point comparing a club that has had on and off premiership revenues, sponsorship and exposure to one that has been in the middle two tiers for the last 20 years. FFP is not relevant to the point about whether Norwich have spent fuck all on their squad. Passing FFP doesn't mean you are low spending.
I have no idea why you have this bizarre notion that I am pushing some "unfair advantage" line. I wouldn't mind so much if I had said or implied that.
Norwich have not had any unfair advantage whatsoever. But they have had an advantage. They started in this division as a team that had been in the premier League in 4 of the previous 5 seasons, and mid table in two of those. That's a hell of an advantage on most other clubs in this division. Not an unfair advantage but they were still coming from an unlevel playing field in both a sporting and commercial sense.
Upon relegation they sold Brady, Redmond, Ollsen and Canos. The latter two both fetched below £4m. That's not a lot of premiership players leaving. That's a squad that's pretty reasonably intact.
Look at Barnsley a couple of years ago. Came up, sold virtually their entire squad, absolutely nothing to spend from it. That is economic reality for the majority of football league clubs
If you want to see the quality of the squad they have had in that time, look at results against us. We have beaten them once in 7 meetings. The season they came down, they beat us 2-1 at the CG and 5-1 at Carrow Road. I didn't see the latter but I remember the home game well and they absolutely wiped the floor with us. It was embarrassing.
Now, no doubt Norwich have done well in their business since then. Pukki is one of the free foreign signings of the decade. They have a whole host of foreign imports who have done well. There is no doubt that they have found some bargains in the current squad.
But you cannot claim they have spent fuck all. They have spent £40m over 3 seasons. Norwich's wage bill is £54m. They have one of the biggest budgets outside the Premier League and have done for 3 seasons. That's not belittling, but if you look at it in purely economic terms then Sheffield United being promoted is a surprise but Norwich isn't.
