McQuoid to join tomorrow (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter junglej13
- Start date
wexfordskyblue
Facebook User
Anyone else feel a little bad reading that article when you get to the part Wilson scores a hat-trick
T. Whitty
T. Whitty
FRY-CCFC
Well-Known Member
Thanks for that wise addition to this thread. I forgot sisu ruined football and also pretty sure Tim Fisher killed Bambi's mum.
Last edited:
FRY-CCFC
Well-Known Member
I think that they will all be till January with Bournemouth paying all the wages and then if we want to extend the loans, then we have to contribute something to the wages
Chinny_Hill
New Member
The point is valid though, from a footballing and a continuity perspective these loans are pointless additions to the squad, and indicative of the situation we find ourselves in. Of course there only seem to be extremes in our particular argument, however I for one know enough to not get excited about these types of loans which are intrinsically linked to our situation and not to blindly accept them as great news either. The only positive is that we have a good manager who retains his vision for how the game should be played and believes that he can work with the personnel that our reality means he has to choose from.
Samo
Well-Known Member
What a ridiculous remark. If they helped us gain promotion I'd hardly call them pointless from either perspective.
One person saying something is not "you lot"
personally I don't care where someone comes from, though having to sign 6 month loan deals rather than getting players full time is a bad sign and worked out very poorly last season, the bigger worry though is his goal scoring record and what the fans of his recent clubs think of him and yes I'm fully aware of McGoldrick, but the vast majority of the time signing someone with a good record and thought of highly by their club is better than the opposite.
Chinny_Hill
New Member
We don't do promotion.
Samo
Well-Known Member
What must Man City be thinking taking Lampard? Fools!
Last edited:
Samo
Well-Known Member
and I get accused of being negative! Jeez.
sw88
Chief Commentator!
We definitely need another addition up top. Miller runs around a lot but not sure that play compliments Tudgay, who I assume will be our number 1 striker on the team sheet this year, so we need a plan B, especially with Thomas and Maddison not getting squad numbers straight away, which would suggest it's too soon for us to see them in the first team in the league
yes that really shows up my post because lampard has a bad goal scoring record and his previous club doesn't think highly of him at all.
There is far to many nonsense absolutes being posted on this forum, for the most part we are signing loans because we don't have the finances to attract and pay for full time players, this is not the same as saying all loan signings are bad, we are signing only frees because we don't have the finances to attract and pay for players, this is not the same as saying all free transfers are bad.
Sometimes loan signings can be great for people in our league, if you are able to get a player of a much higher calibre than one who would want to sign for a league one team. For the most part though that hasn't been the reason for us signing loan players and even when this has appeared to be the case the fact we've been so desperate has led to us needing to agree stupid one sided deals like Akomb constantly heading back to Arsenal.
Samo
Well-Known Member
Nonsense generalizations will of course prompt nonsense absolutes.
RegTheDonk
Well-Known Member
That's assuming they don't get us into a promotion position, then p* off to someone who will double their wages.
Samo
Well-Known Member
No its not assuming that... it would still be a positive.
I didn't make a nonsense generalization, I said "having to sign 6 month loan deals...is a bad sign" and it is, the fact we have to sign loan deals to create a decent size squad is a bad sign. If you read that and think I'm saying signing loan players is bad even when they are the quality of frank lampard then you need better reading comprehension.
it's the same thing with fees having to only sign players who don't command a fee is a bad sign. that does not mean that free transfers are all bad as in fact it can be the best way to sign a player.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Off the top of my head I can immediately think of 2 clubs that achieved promotion to the premiership by signing loan players.
What percentage of loan players make up an average league 1 team do you think?
What genuinely annoys me in here is that people like you whine about if but so not attend sixfields. Surely this is what you want and expect - a poorer squad if loans and free transfers due to the effect of the boycott.
Samo
Well-Known Member
But we don't have to sign them. There are plenty of frees out there that SP could have chosen to use the wages on.
Samo
Well-Known Member
Apparently not... they want to boycott and then expect investment in the team. It'd be funny if it wasn't so tragic.
I've already said that signing loan players is a good thing when you can get someone who is a higher calibre than someone who would sign and play in this league and I've already said in the rare occasions we have done this we've been so desperate we've had to agree to terribly one sided deals.
no this isn't what I want, I want sisu to leave and I want everyone to criticise the damage they are doing to this club until they do and what genuinely annoys me is the amount of effort people will go to criticise those criticising sisu. But yes while we remain at sixfields it is what I expect, that doesn't mean we shouldn't complain that the only way our club can fill out a squad (despite selling players for millions)
SkyBlue_Bear83
Well-Known Member
How many are people are actively boycotting though? I haven't set foot in sixfields but I wouldn't consider myself a boycotter.
Regardless of boycott or not, sixfields would still be empty. You can only blame SISU/ACL for the lack of investment on the pitch as they have created the situation which led to it, not the boycotters.
but thats just as bad, we either have to sign loans or we have to sign from the small number of frees who are willing to come to our messed up club with low wages (and again for the hard of thinking, this isn't saying free signings are all bad Grendel)
Grendel
Well-Known Member
I am not blaming the boycotters I am saying that it must be what they want. If the club were signing championship players for lots of money then I would expect complaints as the nopm campaign would be folly. Nopm means one of two things
Sisu grovel back to the Ricoh
Sisu adopt a strategy of attrition and live in a budget to reflect income
They have chose the second option. It's stupid that this can then be criticised by supporters who want to prove their lack if support is having an impact.
I do agree most non sixfields attendees are not boycotters. They just can't go or can't be bothered as I will not be once winter sets in.
ccfc_Tom
Well-Known Member
And on the wing if baker goes and coulibaly is never fit