Affinity.... (1 Viewer)

Voice_of_Reason · Feb 5, 2015

It's impossible to build an affinity to a team comprising of loan players, because they are not "ours". They are only here for a short time. Previously, the team comprised of contracted signings and established a relationship with the fans. OK, players left, but not at the rate loan signings come and go almost at will.
I my opinion. this is a major reason why some are finding it hard to support a team of players which are not "ours" thus there is no relationship between the team and the fans. Am I right ?

ajsccfc · Feb 5, 2015

I think it's more them playing shit.

covcity4life · Feb 5, 2015

i already think of loanees as ours persoanlly.

if they go back they go back, right now they are ccfc to me.

rupert_bear · Feb 5, 2015

We should be asking ourselves why are they pursuing this policy, is it they know their time here is limited ? lets hope so

fernandopartridge · Feb 5, 2015

Voice_of_Reason said:
It's impossible to build an affinity to a team comprising of loan players, because they are not "ours". They are only here for a short time. Previously, the team comprised of contracted signings and established a relationship with the fans. OK, players left, but not at the rate loan signings come and go almost at will.
I my opinion. this is a major reason why some are finding it hard to support a team of players which are not "ours" thus there is no relationship between the team and the fans. Am I right ?

I find this attitude odd from Coventry United's new number one fan. Are your saying a player must have a contract of employment with a club to represent the team?

Is this a new phenomenon? Presumably in the last 10 years or so loan players weren't a problem?

Astute · Feb 5, 2015

I go to watch CCFC. I don't support the players more vocally that have the longest contracts. Whoever it is that wears our colours gets my support. If it was as simple as you say I would support SP fully as he has the longest contract at our club and could easily be with us longer than anybody else

SkyBlueSid · Feb 5, 2015

It is true that fans gain an affinity with players over time. But players in the modern game tend to have shorter spells with clubs than years ago when many stayed with one club throughout a career. The lower down the divisions you go, the shorter the stays, many have just one year contracts.

When the club returned to the Ricoh I found it difficult to find any affinity with the current team. The problem was that the personnel had changed in that year, the standard of the signings had dropped once again, and none of them seemed to be committed to the idea of Coventry City. They now seem just a random group of mediocre players wearing a sky blue strip.

The fact that many are loan players doesn't help as they are likely to be off in a few weeks. It's just another indication of the state the club is in and the apathy of the fans is growing by the week, I'm afraid.

RFC · Feb 5, 2015

rupert_bear said:
We should be asking ourselves why are they pursuing this policy, is it they know their time here is limited ? lets hope so

You mean the same policy that the majority of Div 1 clubs have to adopt because of financial restrictions and not wanting to incur further debt.

Like 3rd placed Swindon who have 5!!!!!!!!!!

torchomatic · Feb 5, 2015

Totally disagree. I support anyone who wears our shirt. Did you not support or cheer then when McGoldrick scored? Wish he'd missed all those chances and never scored?

Weird attitude.

Voice_of_Reason said:
It's impossible to build an affinity to a team comprising of loan players, because they are not "ours". They are only here for a short time. Previously, the team comprised of contracted signings and established a relationship with the fans. OK, players left, but not at the rate loan signings come and go almost at will.
I my opinion. this is a major reason why some are finding it hard to support a team of players which are not "ours" thus there is no relationship between the team and the fans. Am I right ?

wingy · Feb 5, 2015

RFC said:
You mean the same policy that the majority of Div 1 clubs have to adopt because of financial restrictions and not wanting to incur further debt.

Like 3rd placed Swindon who have 5!!!!!!!!!!

It's a bit of a lottery when you're kids are trying to pick a hero's name to have printed on the back of a shirt
If they could buy one of course
Hero's are Important In a child's mind less so the manager

4waspsting · Feb 5, 2015

Why not print a Shirt with LOANEE on the back it could cover most of the present squad and save you money

Voice_of_Reason · Feb 5, 2015

fernandopartridge said:
I find this attitude odd from Coventry United's new number one fan. Are your saying a player must have a contract of employment with a club to represent the team?

Is this a new phenomenon? Presumably in the last 10 years or so loan players weren't a problem?

Coventry United's number one fan ? I have never been a supporter, merely watching what happens out of interest. Don't say you've never looked for their results ? Yes, we've had the odd loanee in the past but by and large not to the extent we now have them. Not saying I dissapprove of loan players, simply pointing out that it is hard to establish a longer term relationship with a them. As was pointed out, whose name does a young fan put on the back of his shirt now ? Just probably the way football has changed over the past few years I suppose. I blame Sky.

ccfctommy · Feb 5, 2015

VOR has a point. You barely know who is in the team no more.

italiahorse · Feb 5, 2015

Agree. But if the owners are not investing thats all we can have.
Loan players will always be passing through so will never develop a love of the club.
I also think fans criticise them more and the effect is nearly always negative on their performances.
Permanent players or youngster for me with the odd loanee for cover.

mds · Feb 5, 2015

The team is Coventry City, that is where the affinity is, the players and owners like love loathe or hate them are insignificant in the attachment i have for the club, they all come and go yet Coventry City and my affinity with them is constant.

Sky Blue Harry H · Feb 5, 2015

wingy said:
It's a bit of a lottery when you're kids are trying to pick a hero's name to have printed on the back of a shirt
If they could buy one of course
Hero's are Important to a child, less so the mindless manager

Corrected it for you Wingy

Nonleagueherewecome · Feb 5, 2015

Voice_of_Reason said:
It's impossible to build an affinity to a team comprising of loan players, because they are not "ours". They are only here for a short time. Previously, the team comprised of contracted signings and established a relationship with the fans. OK, players left, but not at the rate loan signings come and go almost at will.
I my opinion. this is a major reason why some are finding it hard to support a team of players which are not "ours" thus there is no relationship between the team and the fans. Am I right ?

Totally agree-and I've always felt this, even with the good ones like McGoldrick and Warnock. Of course now it's not only the volume of them but the quality, too. The latest signings might be good, they might not, but it being potentially an entirely new front 3 next game from what we had a few weeks ago-plus a new 'keeper-you just don't the chance to grow an affinity with the players before they're offski again.

It must have been brilliant as Norwich and Southampton supporters to cheer on largely the same group of players through two promotions, and onwards into the top flight. But you not only need money to be able to do that, but a fantastic manager. We have neither.

Nonleagueherewecome · Feb 5, 2015

RFC said:
You mean the same policy that the majority of Div 1 clubs have to adopt because of financial restrictions and not wanting to incur further debt.

Like 3rd placed Swindon who have 5!!!!!!!!!!

5, eh? And how many have we had this season?

Hobo · Feb 5, 2015

If you want a successful team you have to build it. Players will be on varying lengths of contract. But you should build towards some continuity and longevity. You will require a mix of youth and experience. Loan players can play a valuable part i.e. McGoldrick. But they are normally a supplement or the icing on the cake.

You don't normally build a team around loan players. The short term nature of these players as signings cannot provide the two to three year platform for building a competitive team.

boatang · Feb 7, 2015

Who will be the player with most CCFC appearances playing today? And how many times has he played for us? Does his contract expire at the end of this season and is he likely to then move on?
Considering how many are out of contract at the end of this season, who are our longest serving players likely to be next year?
I genuinely dont know the answers to these questions and would like someone who does to help out.
But surely it is easier to follow a team that you recognise, than one where you only know your own players (even if they arent officially at your club), slightly more than the opposition?

Nonleagueherewecome · Feb 7, 2015

56 players used now since the start of last season.

Also, how come we hear people like Eakin constantly saying "they've had to deal in the loan market due to a lack of money" when Waggott insists that "these loans are very expensive"? Well, which is it?

Samo · Feb 7, 2015

Nonleagueherewecome said:
56 players used now since the start of last season.

Also, how come we hear people like Eakin constantly saying "they've had to deal in the loan market due to a lack of money" when Waggott insists that "these loans are very expensive"? Well, which is it?

Loans are very expensive but not as expensive as buying players for fees. That's how come.

wingy · Feb 7, 2015

I don't recall any emphasis on the high cost of loans last season when our turnover was lower and our alleged player budget was £2.5M
I do hope these alleged costs are not being used to mask costs such as litigation, fantasy land expenses or monies out to ARVO which Fisher assures hasn't happened this season

Astute · Feb 7, 2015

Samo said:
Loans are very expensive but not as expensive as buying players for fees. That's how come.

Loans are only very expensive if you bring in a very expensive player and pay all of his wages. Every deal is different. And I would guess that we take the cheaper loans on.

One way of loans being more expensive than having your own players would be never having players to sell.......but at least with loan players they don't have to have a bomb squad each year to get rid of players.

Nonleagueherewecome · Feb 7, 2015

Samo said:
Loans are very expensive but not as expensive as buying players for fees. That's how come.

That doesn't quite work, does it? Waggott has obviously been trying to stress how expensive the loans are as a justification for not paying signing on fees for players (we were never going to be paying transfer fees anyway). So if they aren't actually that expensive and saving us loads of money, he's a liar.

Nonleagueherewecome · Feb 7, 2015

Astute said:
Loans are only very expensive if you bring in a very expensive player and pay all of his wages. Every deal is different. And I would guess that we take the cheaper loans on.

One way of loans being more expensive than having your own players would be never having players to sell.......but at least with loan players they don't have to have a bomb squad each year to get rid of players.

That's what the academy is for.

Grendel · Feb 7, 2015

Nonleagueherewecome said:
That doesn't quite work, does it? Waggott has obviously been trying to stress how expensive the loans are as a justification for not paying signing on fees for players (we were never going to be paying transfer fees anyway). So if they aren't actually that expensive and saving us loads of money, he's a liar.

Last season the Walsall manager said that coventry seemed to have an advantage in the league for being allowed to sign expensive loans that few league one clubs could afford.

Swindon are challenging and have a full loan quota.

Nonleagueherewecome · Feb 7, 2015

Grendel said:
Last season the Walsall manager said that coventry seemed to have an advantage in the league for being allowed to sign expensive loans that few league one clubs could afford.

Swindon are challenging and have a full loan quota.

I didn't say that loans can't be effective. I didn't say that I thought they were cheap-I just asked who is telling the truth, Waggott or Eakin? I probably would side with Eakin in that our loans this season are at the arse-end of the market and probably not breaking the bank: we haven't broken the bank in other areas other than litigation (eg perm signings), so one assumes that our present loans are the cheap option I guess.

I didn't even comment on last season and don't know what that has to do with it. I don't even know who we had on loan, I wasn't interested whilst we were at Sixfields.

I asked RFC this the other day but he didn't reply: how many players have Swindon had on loan this season?

Grendel · Feb 7, 2015

Nonleagueherewecome said:
I didn't say that loans can't be effective. I didn't say that I thought they were cheap-I just asked who is telling the truth, Waggott or Eakin? I probably would side with Eakin in that our loans this season are at the arse-end of the market and probably not breaking the bank: we haven't broken the bank in other areas other than litigation (eg perm signings), so one assumes that our present loans are the cheap option I guess.

I didn't even comment on last season and don't know what that has to do with it. I don't even know who we had on loan, I wasn't interested whilst we were at Sixfields.

I asked RFC this the other day but he didn't reply: how many players have Swindon had on loan this season?

So you think the likes of Madine Nouble Samuel are cheap loans?

It shows how clueless you are.

Do you know which loan player the Walsall manager was referring to?

Glen · Feb 7, 2015

It's not the players whole club is shit from top to bottom

Affinity.... (1 Viewer)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency