mystic megson 0 Posted June 22, 2006 We usually get a young player on a season-long loan from a Prem Club. What do you think of this policy? Who would you like to see this season? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
yella belly 0 Posted June 22, 2006 I think we should try and get theo walcot on season long loan.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Yellow Rages 0 Posted June 22, 2006 I think it''s a good policy. You can get the services of some very good and normally young players who dont break the bank to keep in alchopops.Generally, as youngsters they are hungry and aiming to impress the loaning clubs manager. You do sometimes get the odd disgruntled goat who doesn''t want to be there. And the occational ''I''m too good for this smaller club'' type (David Bentley) for example.But it normally makes good sense to give the younger ones some experience of being more involved with a first team.It works all round really providing you don''t load a wrong''un. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Northern Canary 0 Posted June 22, 2006 i dont see much wrong with a young premiership player for a season, which we can then sign if he is any good. I object to Loans being our main form of transfer activity Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ZLF 261 Posted June 23, 2006 Loans have a place in any clubs squad building - its about signing the right players for the season. As northern points out too often recently we have used loan signings to BE our squad and transfer activity. As only two players (or is it one these nowadays?) can be for the season the rate of change is disruptive to good team building.Get the rihgt players in at the right times and for a suitable length of time is fine. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Saint Canary 0 Posted June 23, 2006 [quote user="Northern Canary"]I object to Loans being our main form of transfer activity[/quote]I agree with that. We had far too many loans last year that were just to make the numbers up.For me if we are going to loan players they have to be the Marney/Bentley style loans that improve the team not just fill the squad out. Nor do we want players who are not really good enough and obstruct the development and limit the playing chances of our own youth players who maybe we should look to loan out. Last year we brought in a few "Premiership" players on loan that in all honesty were mediocre Championship players at best - these signings are no good.In ideal world I would like our squad to consist of players we own but that just does not happen in modern football. Even Chelsea brought in Maniche on loan! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Christov 3 Posted June 23, 2006 I agree with what has already been said, if its for the season and they will be a first team regular I think it can only be a good thing as effectively you get a decent player who wants/needs to impress, as its for the season it also give some stability as you are not swapping your squad around every 3 months! Like that has already been mentioned it should not be the main make-up of your team/transfer activity as it doesn''t allow long term building. I also think its stupid to loan a player then buy them reguardless of how they play while on loan, Etuhu/Robinson anyone...........The main problem with city the last few seasons is we have always had a light squad and at the end of every season we seem to lose 4-7 players who we then have to replace so we have a constant revolving door so the squad never gets any stronger, its also no coincidence that our ''better'' players are the ones who have been here 2+ seasons is it...... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites