clint van damme
Well-Known Member
True, I keep forgetting we got the Peterboro lad but they played hardball on the loan back
The no loans strategy (3 Viewers)
- Thread starter fernandopartridge
- Start date
True, I keep forgetting we got the Peterboro lad but they played hardball on the loan back
robbiethemole
Well-Known Member
TBH we just needed more bodies in Jan, and look what's happened, we've run out of legs. Sometimes, a couple of strategic loans can make all the difference.
Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
It is also a 5 year plan, not a 1-2 seasons go all in for Premiership football.
The stated goal is to get promotion and stay in the Prem. That’s a long process and of our squad right now, there aren’t many who could perform at that level over 38 games.
A few loans when we’re ready to really go for it, absolutely. It’s great that we have an owner willing to invest in our own players rather than relying on 4-6 loanees to fill gaps in our squad.
Loans are a great supplement and I’m glad Robins had made that point to King.
SkyBlue_Bear83
Well-Known Member
Ayari and Binks were the wrong loans unfortunately, needed probably a right back and a winger who could play on both sides, the positions which rely on explosiveness from a standing start and are really exposed when players get tired.
clint van damme
Well-Known Member
Don't think Binks deserves mentioning in the same breath as Ayari!
He was a very poor loan.
He was a very poor loan.
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
Hardly, he agreed to loan the player back
Id actually got the impression that Robins and Adi were the ones maybe getting fed up of coaching and improving players only for them to disappear at the end of the season. I’m not convinced this was a solely a directive from above. No doubt we got caught short when Peterborough moved goalposts in Jan though
Peterborough changed their position and said they would only agree to sale if we loaned Mason Clark back. This was right at the end of the window from memory. Maybe they’d lined up a replacement that fell though, who knows. Either way, I’m glad we still did the Mason Clark deal
Maybe we’d have got away with it if Sakamotos season wasn’t ended in Feb. Sod’s Law
covcity4life
Well-Known Member
Was either that or lose the player completely
Life doesn't always work out perfectly.
stupot07
Well-Known Member
Yeah agree with that, he may not have been a regular starter but we needed a back up left sided centre back. I don't see him as a waste, we brought in Thomas and Lati to compete for RCB and Kitching and Binks to compete for left centre back, with Fadz in the middle. Then we went to a back 4.
long way home
Well-Known Member
You have to he flexible in the loan market and open minded enough to use it. However to build a squad you cant rely on it to use it so 50% of the starting line up. If used that way you never get out the cycle and you as a club are basically saying the recruiting is failing and the coaching at youth level is not good enough
For King he doesn't see the value in it, but i bet next time round he will use it if he cant get deals over the line in Jan..
For King he doesn't see the value in it, but i bet next time round he will use it if he cant get deals over the line in Jan..
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
It was either that or we didn't agree the signing at that time. The real point is though that the deal did not help in January.
Cally Fedora
Well-Known Member
But that’s where we did well. We obviously tracked the player, and didn’t let the knock back stop us doing the deal. Long term thinking. We were unlucky in that we found a system that suited but left us relying a lot on Sakamoto.
COVKIDSNEVERQUIT
Well-Known Member
Let's hope Doug King has learnt his lesson, re loans.
3 top quality players, "which you can't afford to buy" is the difference between promotion and finishing 8th in the league.
3 top quality players, "which you can't afford to buy" is the difference between promotion and finishing 8th in the league.
We have had 5 loans under DK.
COVKIDSNEVERQUIT
Well-Known Member
skybluecam
Well-Known Member
Lots of inaccuracies with what you said but for one Casadei was recalled because Chelsea had injury problems in central midfield and wanted him to play a part in the squad.
covcity4life
Well-Known Member
No the real point is that the intent was there to help in january
blunted
Well-Known Member
Simples, We need a bigger squad. Some loans let us see if we can chase a player in the future eg McNally or Norton Cuffey. Maatsen and Doyle are out of our price range. The jury is out on Panzo but he should be on a free soon.
Loans only really work if we get promoted. They are a means to an end. OK, they go back to their club a better player and you probably can't buy them, but if you go up you can either loan them again in the Prem or you have shit loads of money to buy someone really good.
Ayari is a class player but lightweight so I see why we sent him back. MR has said Binks is on an improving trajectory and is only 22. I gather Bologna want too much money for him at the moment. Could see him coming in two seasons time on a free. Norton Cuffey I would try to sign.
To replace O'Hare will need a player on high wages so a high profile loan may tick the box.
McNally may be available to buy especially if Burnley stay up.
Loans only really work if we get promoted. They are a means to an end. OK, they go back to their club a better player and you probably can't buy them, but if you go up you can either loan them again in the Prem or you have shit loads of money to buy someone really good.
Ayari is a class player but lightweight so I see why we sent him back. MR has said Binks is on an improving trajectory and is only 22. I gather Bologna want too much money for him at the moment. Could see him coming in two seasons time on a free. Norton Cuffey I would try to sign.
To replace O'Hare will need a player on high wages so a high profile loan may tick the box.
McNally may be available to buy especially if Burnley stay up.
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
Personally I'd still rather limit teams to a squad of around 40 players, no caveats, and let the talent that get horded by the bigger clubs filter down the system for smaller clubs to benefit from both on the pitch and financially from their development.
It's admirable to want to produce your own players but given the financial disadvantage of non-parachute clubs ignoring loans is self-defeating. Even the relegated teams use them; Leeds with Rodon and Roberts, Southampton with Downes and Harwood-Bellis, Leicester with Fatawu.
The sweet spot is to have 3 top quality loans. We've got five (technically four because Brandon Williams hasn't been seen since November) but largely due to this being our first season up and needing to strengthen quickly to compete with the rest of the top four after our unexpectedly good start to the campaign.
That said, you're in a much stronger position than 12 months ago though having finished 8th with a squad that's entirely your own. The floor of the squad is much higher and even if you lose a couple in the summer the impact won't be the same because you won't have the additional problem of replacing Doyle, McNally etc on top of any sales. The Championship will be extremely open next year but you'll be one of the favourites with a couple of loan and permanent additions.
Just let us win tomorrow FFS.
The sweet spot is to have 3 top quality loans. We've got five (technically four because Brandon Williams hasn't been seen since November) but largely due to this being our first season up and needing to strengthen quickly to compete with the rest of the top four after our unexpectedly good start to the campaign.
That said, you're in a much stronger position than 12 months ago though having finished 8th with a squad that's entirely your own. The floor of the squad is much higher and even if you lose a couple in the summer the impact won't be the same because you won't have the additional problem of replacing Doyle, McNally etc on top of any sales. The Championship will be extremely open next year but you'll be one of the favourites with a couple of loan and permanent additions.
Just let us win tomorrow FFS.
There are 3 types of loan signings to my mind:
1. Top quality premier league player with little experience (Ostigard/Maatsen/BNC) - There is an expectation to play these players and you have little chance of signing them after their loan has finished, but not unheard of (Gyok)
2. Loan with a view or obligation to buy (Sheaf) - These are done because you want the player but may need to loan them first for financial reasons
3. Experienced player surplus to requirements (James) - Done to plug a gap as you cannot afford to buy the player likely due to wages. There is a chance of signing these players afterwards as they are surplus but wages may be an issue
--
Brentford (the model) had two loans the year they got promoted:
Sam Ghoddos (Loan with option to buy) - Category 2
Winston Reid (Loan signing in January) - Category 3
They avoided Category 1 loan signings as they have little financial reward. Ghoddos joined permanently at the end of the season and Reid was signed because Brentford had an injury crisis at CB and needed to plug the gap.
--
I think King is right to think that we do not need Category 1 loan signings as a general rule as it can hinder the development of your own players who are the saleable assets.
However, in January we were in desperate need of plugging the gaps on the wing. Leaving just Wright/Saka (and Palmer at a push) for 2 positions was simply crazy, especially as Wright had only just returned from injury himself.
The model works up to a point - but we needed to be flexible due to having such a shortage in a key position (like Brentford were by signing Reid). It is frankly dangerous to have such little cover - if Wright breaks down due to playing too much we've jeopardized a key asset.
This summer, if we sign 6-8 players I'm happy with none being loan signings (Category 2 loan signings excepted). But if we reach January without adequate cover and we need to plug gaps with loans to keep the squad healthy.
1. Top quality premier league player with little experience (Ostigard/Maatsen/BNC) - There is an expectation to play these players and you have little chance of signing them after their loan has finished, but not unheard of (Gyok)
2. Loan with a view or obligation to buy (Sheaf) - These are done because you want the player but may need to loan them first for financial reasons
3. Experienced player surplus to requirements (James) - Done to plug a gap as you cannot afford to buy the player likely due to wages. There is a chance of signing these players afterwards as they are surplus but wages may be an issue
--
Brentford (the model) had two loans the year they got promoted:
Sam Ghoddos (Loan with option to buy) - Category 2
Winston Reid (Loan signing in January) - Category 3
They avoided Category 1 loan signings as they have little financial reward. Ghoddos joined permanently at the end of the season and Reid was signed because Brentford had an injury crisis at CB and needed to plug the gap.
--
I think King is right to think that we do not need Category 1 loan signings as a general rule as it can hinder the development of your own players who are the saleable assets.
However, in January we were in desperate need of plugging the gaps on the wing. Leaving just Wright/Saka (and Palmer at a push) for 2 positions was simply crazy, especially as Wright had only just returned from injury himself.
The model works up to a point - but we needed to be flexible due to having such a shortage in a key position (like Brentford were by signing Reid). It is frankly dangerous to have such little cover - if Wright breaks down due to playing too much we've jeopardized a key asset.
This summer, if we sign 6-8 players I'm happy with none being loan signings (Category 2 loan signings excepted). But if we reach January without adequate cover and we need to plug gaps with loans to keep the squad healthy.
Offhegoes
Well-Known Member
We don't seem to have any youth players that are good enough to be in the First Team squad. Burroughs was the only one, and he was rightly loaned out, and did well but seemed to be frozen out of the Lincoln team since February. Howley was very raw, and barely played at Dundee. I don't think the latter can be considered next season, but Burroughs could be a useful a squad player as he can play multiple positions. What's going on with Isaac Moore? He was the next big thing, but only came back from an ACL this season and I haven't seen him playing in any of the U21 or U23 games.
ccfcricoh
Well-Known Member
I'd rather do what we did this season and not be losing 4/5 players at the end of the season that straight away need replacing, before you even look at improving the squad.
DK clearly playing the long game, add a few more perms in this summer, and maybe 1/2 more loans and we'll be much stronger next season, gone are the days we have 5 loans which i think is a positive
DK clearly playing the long game, add a few more perms in this summer, and maybe 1/2 more loans and we'll be much stronger next season, gone are the days we have 5 loans which i think is a positive
SkyBlueMatt
Well-Known Member
After the rebuild and the start that we had, I have no problem with the decisions in January.
We could have brought in a couple but I think we were always reaching this season. If they worked out, we could have made playoffs but I don't think we win them. If it didn't work out, we p*ss a few million away.
Next season, I think it could be different. If we are sitting in the playoffs come January and we need loans, I think King pulls the trigger.
We could have brought in a couple but I think we were always reaching this season. If they worked out, we could have made playoffs but I don't think we win them. If it didn't work out, we p*ss a few million away.
Next season, I think it could be different. If we are sitting in the playoffs come January and we need loans, I think King pulls the trigger.
Offhegoes
Well-Known Member
Our plans were scuppered a bit with moving to a flat back 4, which meant Fadz wasn't going to play, and we had no real cover for MVE at right back. So we saw Lati there, when he was brought in as a CB, and Binks didn't get much game time as Kitching had the LCB role.
Ayari was such a disappointment. I can't believe the fans that get on Palmer's back for not working hard enough and/or tracking back.
Don't they remember Ayari? He did f*ck all offensively too
Ayari was such a disappointment. I can't believe the fans that get on Palmer's back for not working hard enough and/or tracking back.
Don't they remember Ayari? He did f*ck all offensively too
skybluecam
Well-Known Member
A winger on loan would not have cost a few million and would have made a massive difference to our season.
skybluecam
Well-Known Member
The Hull game should have been a lesson for DK if he’s still against loans.
1st hull goal assisted by Carvalho (loanee). 2nd is a penalty won by Delap (loanee) scored by Carvalho (loanee). 3rd is scored by Ohio (loanee).
Meanwhile we’re dredging up Kelly, Godden, Dasilva playing on the wing etc just to put a team out.
1st hull goal assisted by Carvalho (loanee). 2nd is a penalty won by Delap (loanee) scored by Carvalho (loanee). 3rd is scored by Ohio (loanee).
Meanwhile we’re dredging up Kelly, Godden, Dasilva playing on the wing etc just to put a team out.
Maybe the Semi was a lesson for DK
first goal scored by Simms, second goal scored by COH third goal scored by Haji, 4th goal scored by Torp … All Cov players
