Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Grumpy

Was it really the right move

Recommended Posts

Prompted by an article in the EDP regarding players out on loan.

Disregarding Klose,Trybul and Heise there are 17 currently out on loan.There are some who are playing non league who it would seem havent got a cat in hells chance of playing for the first team but what about those who were signed with the first team in mind.

I am thinking of the likes of McCallum,Soto,Sinani,Sitti,Bashiri and Famewo.

It would seem we are currently looking for at least a left back and a central defender pushing some of these players even further down the pecking order.Most of these players were sent out because they were considered not ready for championship football,never mind premiership and needed to further their development by playing elsewhere.

The situation regarding McCallum is good example.Bought at some considerable cost but a loanee is preferred so he is loaned back to Coventry.When injury to the loanee means that a defensive right sided player is the only option and there is the possibility that another left back is being scouted as cover,McCallums chances of playing for NCFC are pushed even further back.

Somehow I wonder if playing for Norwich first team is just a distant dream for some of these players and they might have been better going for a different option given that they might have had that opportunity.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With the Covid situation potentially jeopardising availabilty..together with the number if games to be played in a short space of time ,potentially causing the levels of injuries we've seen in the first half if the season, I'd certainly be looking to recalling a few.

Yes its good for players to be getting experience but we simply cannot allow ourselves to be in a position we were a few weeks ago when 13 were out injured....guarding against that is more important

With the latest injury update on Byram not being great we should be bringing McCallum back having played half a season at this level now for Coventry.

If Famewo is considered currently more advanced that Omomidele , he should ve recalled too as 4th centre half

The injury to Idah requires a 3rd striker, if Soto now satisfies work permit demands , recall him

The injuries to Hernandez and Placheta exposed a lack of width, Sinani back to cover

...then theres the keeper situation, presumably we will sign another keeper?. but if we dont , should Mair cone back from Kings Lynn??

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Grumpy said:

Prompted by an article in the EDP regarding players out on loan.

Disregarding Klose,Trybul and Heise there are 17 currently out on loan.There are some who are playing non league who it would seem havent got a cat in hells chance of playing for the first team but what about those who were signed with the first team in mind.

I am thinking of the likes of McCallum,Soto,Sinani,Sitti,Bashiri and Famewo.

It would seem we are currently looking for at least a left back and a central defender pushing some of these players even further down the pecking order.Most of these players were sent out because they were considered not ready for championship football,never mind premiership and needed to further their development by playing elsewhere.

The situation regarding McCallum is good example.Bought at some considerable cost but a loanee is preferred so he is loaned back to Coventry.When injury to the loanee means that a defensive right sided player is the only option and there is the possibility that another left back is being scouted as cover,McCallums chances of playing for NCFC are pushed even further back.

Somehow I wonder if playing for Norwich first team is just a distant dream for some of these players and they might have been better going for a different option given that they might have had that opportunity.

 

 

Can we not buy players then with one eye on the future to varying degrees, and send them out on loan then? You’re speaking as if you know that all those players we brought in were for the first team from the off. As far as I can see, that is a wild assumption and there has never been any suggestion of that to be the case from Farke and Webber, so I’m pretty confident this was always the plan.

Do you know McCallum was bought to be first choice LB this season? I don’t recall that being the case either. 

And we don’t know what LB we’re scouting now either. My feeling is that it’s just short term cover for the rest of the season. McCallum will get nowhere sat on our bench, and it seems our management would rather have another clubs player doing just that rather than one of our own - which really does make total sense to me. 

Edited by Alex Moss
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's an element of hindsight in this - I'm sure we all expected a fair few injuries with the compacted, condensed nature of the season, but 13 at once? Young players do need regular football and in the case of lads like Sitti and Sinani who were making fairly big leaps, an intermediate league (by that I mean one that's something better than what they've played at, but not quite the same standard as the Champs) is also useful.

Also, don't forget that we may have been expecting to lose all five crown jewels so it makes plenty of sense to have their replacements in the building beforehand, otherwise you can imagine we'd have to pay top dollar. Sinani definitely seemed surprised to be out on loan, and I suspect he was earmarked as a Buendia or Cantwell replacement.

As for McCallum, Lewis went quite late IIRC, and we'd got Quintilla in (I think that was the order) and again, a good youngster who could potentially have struggled to get past Lewis wouldn't have developed so well, so why not loan him back to where we bought him from?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear James Maddison - we're sending you out on loan to Aberdeen - looks like you made a bad move coming to us - chances are your career is f****d!

Dear Ben Godfrey - we're sending you out on loan to Shrewsbury - looks like you made a bad move coming to us - chances are your career is f****d! 

 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's always going to be failures and successes with young players but we shouldn't underestimate the progression a year on loan makes for some of these young players, if it's the right club in the right setting.

I think Thirsty nailed it above. Maddison and Godfrey could have likely gone to a higher club than where we signed them from, but lower than us, and played more games sooner. I'm not sure either of those two are complaining about our loan management.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Grumpy said:

Prompted by an article in the EDP regarding players out on loan.

Disregarding Klose,Trybul and Heise there are 17 currently out on loan.There are some who are playing non league who it would seem havent got a cat in hells chance of playing for the first team but what about those who were signed with the first team in mind.

I am thinking of the likes of McCallum,Soto,Sinani,Sitti,Bashiri and Famewo.

It would seem we are currently looking for at least a left back and a central defender pushing some of these players even further down the pecking order.Most of these players were sent out because they were considered not ready for championship football,never mind premiership and needed to further their development by playing elsewhere.

The situation regarding McCallum is good example.Bought at some considerable cost but a loanee is preferred so he is loaned back to Coventry.When injury to the loanee means that a defensive right sided player is the only option and there is the possibility that another left back is being scouted as cover,McCallums chances of playing for NCFC are pushed even further back.

Somehow I wonder if playing for Norwich first team is just a distant dream for some of these players and they might have been better going for a different option given that they might have had that opportunity.

 

 

To an extent the same could have been said for a certain Todd Cantwell when we loaned him to a bottom of the league Dutch team a couple of years ago.

These are mostly very recent recruits. Most of the time youngsters don't just become 1st team players overnight. If they're good enough, they'll be good enough. They get to showcase that on loan, which a number of them are. But hey, they don't all work out. I for one am pretty excited by the progress being shown with a number of our loanees.

Patience, I hear it's a virtue.

Edited by Flying Dutchman
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

Well Barden was at Bury Town last season and got a game! 

But in reality that's because of circumstances not share ability,so much so that they played a half fit and very cautious Krul and they are on the lookout for another backup.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TheGunnShow said:

There's an element of hindsight in this - I'm sure we all expected a fair few injuries with the compacted, condensed nature of the season, but 13 at once? Young players do need regular football and in the case of lads like Sitti and Sinani who were making fairly big leaps, an intermediate league (by that I mean one that's something better than what they've played at, but not quite the same standard as the Champs) is also useful.

Also, don't forget that we may have been expecting to lose all five crown jewels so it makes plenty of sense to have their replacements in the building beforehand, otherwise you can imagine we'd have to pay top dollar. Sinani definitely seemed surprised to be out on loan, and I suspect he was earmarked as a Buendia or Cantwell replacement.

As for McCallum, Lewis went quite late IIRC, and we'd got Quintilla in (I think that was the order) and again, a good youngster who could potentially have struggled to get past Lewis wouldn't have developed so well, so why not loan him back to where we bought him from?

I agree some hindsight is involved but plenty of people suggested at the time going into a busy season with 6 defenders (7 if you count Byram) was not a sensible idea and likely to put strain on the team. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not knocking the model,in fact I really hope that some if not all of these players turn out to be excellent investments,especially McCallum as I am impressed by him,I was merely posing the question as to whether these players might question the decision they made.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, king canary said:

I agree some hindsight is involved but plenty of people suggested at the time going into a busy season with 6 defenders (7 if you count Byram) was not a sensible idea and likely to put strain on the team. 

Although contrary to what those people said at the time we've still amassed more points than any other team in this league! If that doesn't vindicate the decision I'm not sure what does!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Grumpy said:

I am not knocking the model,in fact I really hope that some if not all of these players turn out to be excellent investments,especially McCallum as I am impressed by him,I was merely posing the question as to whether these players might question the decision they made.

 

I doubt they will be.

Soto for example would have signed knowing a loan was his only option- he's not eligible for a work permit so clearly made the choice to join a club in England where he'd have to be loaned out.

The only one who may have some regrets is Sinani- he's 23 so not exactly a youth teamer and may have expected to get some game time with us. Even then though, he's playing at a higher level than he was before. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, hogesar said:

Although contrary to what those people said at the time we've still amassed more points than any other team in this league! If that doesn't vindicate the decision I'm not sure what does!

I don't think it vindicates the decision generally- for all we know with a proper left back available we may have 4 or 5 more points, we can never tell. We also had games where we either had totally untested youngsters Farke clearly didn't trust or unfit players we weren't willing to bring on on the bench. 

It is a case of deciding to take a calculated risk (despite @PurpleCanary insisting those don't exist) and it working out. Equally if Zimbo's injury earlier in the season had been worse or Sorenson looked totally out of his depth at left back we'd cursing. It's worked out but that doesn't make the idea that we should have signed another defender wrong.  

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The players that go out on loan at a lower level are clearly being given the chance to impress and take their chance to shine in that lower level, and develop quicker than they would at under 23 level. Klose, Heise and Trybull are different - they are not part of the first team plans so the loan is just a contribution to their cost. None would have got in the team, even with 13 injuries.

Of those you mention, Mair, McCallum, Famewo and Soto are probably the only ones actually taking their chance at the moment.

All four of those will either get new loans at a higher level or another chance to impress here. McCallum in particular I would expect to be our left back next season, whatever division we find ourselves in, if he continues to impress at Coventry.

There are undoubtedly some disappointments so far - Bushiri, Sitti, Thomas and Sinani are not exactly pulling up trees. Others like Adshead and Fitzpatrick are just getting their heads down and playing regularly. I'm not sure that Adshead is playing in a higher level than he was at Rochdale, but he is at least playing.

Some others are just winding down contracts until their likely release.

The crucial point is that none of those out on loan are currently considered good enough for the first team squad. If any of them have regrets, they need to look at themselves first because they've all been given an opportunity and some are not taking it. That's the way of the world.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, king canary said:

I don't think it vindicates the decision generally- for all we know with a proper left back available we may have 4 or 5 more points, we can never tell. We also had games where we either had totally untested youngsters Farke clearly didn't trust or unfit players we weren't willing to bring on on the bench. 

It is a case of deciding to take a calculated risk (despite @PurpleCanary insisting those don't exist) and it working out. Equally if Zimbo's injury earlier in the season had been worse or Sorenson looked totally out of his depth at left back we'd cursing. It's worked out but that doesn't make the idea that we should have signed another defender wrong.  

I think there's more evidence (i.e being top of the league) that we got the decision right, than there is evidence we got it wrong.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, king canary said:

I agree some hindsight is involved but plenty of people suggested at the time going into a busy season with 6 defenders (7 if you count Byram) was not a sensible idea and likely to put strain on the team. 

Sure, but the main concern was centre-half, and the kerfuffle around Gibson was very protracted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, king canary said:

I don't think it vindicates the decision generally- for all we know with a proper left back available we may have 4 or 5 more points, we can never tell. We also had games where we either had totally untested youngsters Farke clearly didn't trust or unfit players we weren't willing to bring on on the bench. 

It is a case of deciding to take a calculated risk (despite @PurpleCanary insisting those don't exist) and it working out. Equally if Zimbo's injury earlier in the season had been worse or Sorenson looked totally out of his depth at left back we'd cursing. It's worked out but that doesn't make the idea that we should have signed another defender wrong.  

The only thing is that equally we could have had a ‘proper left back’ playing (rather than Sorensen) and amassed 4 or 5 points less, or even worse. If’s, but’s, and maybe’s.

What we do know is that we’re 4 points clear at the top of the league, and Sorensen has done a very decent job there - he even adds a goal threat and isn’t afraid to get into dangerous positions. So it’s very difficult to complain about an alternate improved universe given our standing at the top of the tree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd also add Lewis went late, and so did Klose. That said, we already knew Tettey could be an emergency centre-half at this level if needed, and the same for Sørensen, who had played that position for Denmark U21s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, hogesar said:

I think there's more evidence (i.e being top of the league) that we got the decision right, than there is evidence we got it wrong.

Going into a season with three centre backs and one left back is a little bit like not buying home insurance or riding a bicycle at night without any lights or reflective gear. You may well get away with it for a while and claim your decision was right, but it doesn't necessary mean it was a wise decision and it will probably come back to bite you eventually if you persist with it.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Alex Moss said:

The only thing is that equally we could have had a ‘proper left back’ playing (rather than Sorensen) and amassed 4 or 5 points less, or even worse. If’s, but’s, and maybe’s.

Yeah that is exactly my point. We can never tell so I don't think it makes people who were concerned when the window shut wrong to be so. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, king canary said:

Yeah that is exactly my point. We can never tell so I don't think it makes people who were concerned when the window shut wrong to be so. 

Not saying you are wrong, but not saying you’re right either. If we were in the sh1te now and hovering mid table, then it’s vindicated, but we’re not so it’s a bit of a moot point imo KC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Alex Moss said:

Not saying you are wrong, but not saying you’re right either. If we were in the sh1te now and hovering mid table, then it’s vindicated, but we’re not so it’s a bit of a moot point imo KC.

But those are my favourite kind of points...

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Alex Moss said:

I have noticed! 😉

Look, we're in lockdown again, if I can't argue about completely unprovable hypothesis' on the pinkun forum then how am I supposed to pass the time?!

  • Like 1
  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Alex Moss said:

 

Do you know McCallum was bought to be first choice LB this season? I don’t recall that being the case either. 

 

Historically as far as Norwich City is concerned Alex paying a seven figure sum for a player suggests otherwise.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, king canary said:

Look, we're in lockdown again, if I can't argue about completely unprovable hypothesis' on the pinkun forum then how am I supposed to pass the time?!

I’m guessing you‘ve already used up your ‘1 walk a day’ quota already then, Kingo 😂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, TIL 1010 said:

Historically as far as Norwich City is concerned Alex paying a seven figure sum for a player suggests otherwise.

It was a few million from what I remember, and if Webber thinks a signing offers great potential and future resale value then I don’t think he ruled out spending within our means for a player with that profile, John. There appeared to be a few other clubs sniffing around if I remember rightly so we had to act fast, which Webber generally does in those instances. And not to mention there’s nothing to say he’s not been signed with the view to him becoming our starting LB, but that doesn’t mean the hierarchy didn’t intend to give him a season elsewhere to develop further.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Alex Moss said:

It was a few million from what I remember, and if Webber thinks a signing offers great potential and future resale value then I don’t think he ruled out spending within our means for a player with that profile, John. There appeared to be a few other clubs sniffing around if I remember rightly so we had to act fast, which Webber generally does in those instances. And not to mention there’s nothing to say he’s not been signed with the view to him becoming our starting LB, but that doesn’t mean the hierarchy didn’t intend to give him a season elsewhere to develop further.

We bought him at a time when Byram was injured long term ( and still is ! ) and Lewis had been sold to Newcastle which meant we were desperately short of a LB and i am still of the opinion Alex that McCallum was bought as the answer to the problem rather than one for the future.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...