Loan players

[The Great Mass Debater]

Now we've gone up, how do you feel about them? The Roeder era soured our experience. We've had some good loanees like Naughton, and of course the bad ones.

Me personally, I would prefer us to sign our own players, whose futures are intertwined with the clubs and dont have the option of s*dding off to their parent club at the end of the season. Id prefer us to invest in long-term options, as we've proven this year we can keep the investments together for the most part and bounce right back should we go down, or sell carefully chosen members like Snodgrass. I dont htink we should fear investing in our own players.

That said, I wouldnt be against an established player coming in to play games who cant get a look-in elsewhere (for example when Sinclair couldnt get in Man City's team, or van Ginkel at Chelsea).

What I really think we should avoid though is giving someone elses youth player a chance. OK at championship level like Bamford etc, but in the Premier League I think we need to be signing loan players with more than just potential. Cant be carrying anyone or furthering other clubs youth by letting them make their mistakes with us.

No journeymen, no youth, but loans of established players simply out of favour, wouldnt be against that.

How do you feel?

 

[Salopian]

Loan players have something to prove, if only to persuade their club back home of their worth. This is especially true of the (Premiership) area we are now entering.This assumes that the loan player isn't just looking for a year's salary before retiring. So some care has to be exercised, as it wasn't frequently in the past when we borrowed some unmotivated players in our desperation.

Much depends on the spirit in the changing room, and the quality of the borrowing manager. We surely have no fear here in our present manager and how he got them playing.

We have some good youngsters coming through but arguably if they were nor quite ready for the Championship they will probably not be ready for the Premiership now. Josh may be the exception, but some of the rumours are suggesting that we are looking for wingers and if they are true it may suggest that Neil doesn't feel that Josh can step up at the moment.

Finally, there is always a risk with a loan player. Take him out of his home club, away from his family and familiar surroundings, and you never know how far he will repeat his achievements. But it may be worth the risk, if it is done with due diligence rather than panic.

 

[ZLF]

I dont see much difference between loan and permanent signings - for each huckerby there is an elmander,  each garrido or forster a sibierski.   Likewise we can end up with a jason jarrett or a john ruddy.   Like full signings some work and just as many dont.  Just make sure its no more than a couple

its all about the player;  do they add quality,  what will they cost will they intergrate with the squad and do they have the hunger to perform?  the same as a permanent signing.

Looking at the rumours so far I would say I would prefer to take Jenkinson on loan than sign Lowton.

I would hope we use the loan market for the right players coming in (cant takle more than 2 from other prem clubs I think) but just as crucially use it to give of peripheral players some competetive match experience - as Cam McGs interview points out its invaluable experience.

 

[morty]

If it is a loan, then the player should be good enough to be included in the first 11. Not interested in blooding other clubs youngsters for them, it doesn't work out more than it does.

 

[Din]

I agree with Morty. I don't think there's any harm in bringing in a player on loan, but if we do then it has to be in the same way to improve the first team, in the same way that Kyle Naughton did in our first season in the PL last time around. Javier Garrido did the same the following season, and then Johan Elmander was also bought in to.......

I also would prefer us to sign players rather than get loans in, but if there are some genuinly quality players available on loan then we should certainly take a look. Wouldn't really want any more than one though.

 

[splutcho]

It would be foolish to turn down a player that would improve our squad for a season just because it was a loan. I bet West Brom don't regret the season they had with Lukaku a couple of years back.

 

[The Great Mass Debater]

What I dont like about loans is that it is only ever a temporary solution. Unless ur doing something like with did with Garrido and Dorrans you end up with a Kyle Naughton - good player, good solutuion for that season but next season you've got to find someone else.

You're never building a team or a spine or a foundation with a loan, purely bunging up a hole. Id rather we looked at longer-term options 

 

[ZLF]

You're never building a team or a spine or a foundation with a loan, purely bunging up a hole. Id rather we looked at longer-term options 

Maybe - but Fer / RvW leave after a year too so not sure we miss out that often or much.

The Roeder years have hurt us mainly because we became over dependent on them - too many and poorly researched.      Lambert used the loan system perfectly showing it could work incredibly well with Fortser, Elliott, Rose and many more all helping us get promoted - he borrowed far more than I would have liked but he got the balance right - and thats crucial for me

As long as  - mo more than a couple at a time is good - squads and players are rarely stable.

 

[yoraffetto]

I agree with Morty. They need to come in and be an immediate starter.

 

[GJP]

I don't know if they need to be an "immediate starter" but they need to be good enough to play in the Premier League and better than the man they are replacing.

 

[Jimmy smith]

I don't think we will be able to attract the best raw talent permanently so if they would add a spark for us then why not. Bolton benefitted massively from Sturridge and Wilshere.

Not keen on loaning people on their last payday like Elmander but I think that was a panic buy after plan A failed. Garrido and Dorrans were always with a view to permanent so it's slightly different.

All in moderation though (i.e. not Roeders tactic of having 15 in!) but if the likes of Jason Denayer or Adnan Januzaj were offered to us, we'd be foolish to turn them away.

 

[morty]

I don't think we will be able to attract the best raw talent permanently so if they would add a spark for us then why not. Bolton benefitted massively from Sturridge and Wilshere.

Not keen on loaning people on their last payday like Elmander but I think that was a panic buy after plan A failed. Garrido and Dorrans were always with a view to permanent so it's slightly different.

All in moderation though (i.e. not Roeders tactic of having 15 in!) but if the likes of Jason Denayer or Adnan Januzaj were offered to us, we'd be foolish to turn them away.

Would love Janusaj, but I would have thought he will be in and around the Man Utd squad next season.

 

[Jimmy smith]

Would love Janusaj, but I would have thought he will be in and around the Man Utd squad next season.

He went backwards last season after exploding onto the scene the year before. I think he'll be squeezed out of their plans for a year and sent on loan to get experience.

 

[Canaryboy]

The annoying thing about loans is that if they go really well you price yourself out of signing the player on a permanent and having to pay much more then you would if you'd just signed them to begin with.

Kyle Naughton is a good example of that, proved himself in the Premier League with us and was given a £6m price tag. I wonder how much it would have cost us to buy him outright instead of loaning him, £3m perhaps? 

If we do use the loan market for young players then I'd prefer deals with a buyout clause. That way we know the player really wants to be here, and we know that if it goes well we can keep hold of the player. 

Patrick Bamford has a £10m price tag according to the media. No doubt we'd be reluctant to pay that up front for a player unproven in this division, but what if we paid a £2m loan fee with a £10m buy out clause? If the loan goes well and he scores double figures to help keep us up then £10m is within our reach, whilst if it goes bad and he flops then £2m isn't too much of a hit to take. 

Those types of deals interest me much more, loan with a view to purchase. 

 

[Boyerboy]

That's exactly what St Etienne agreed with us for Ricky and we had Garrido and Jonas on similar arrangements. Seems to work well.

 

[derehamyella]

I take that Harry Kane again ..lolol