The benefit of loan agreements

[7rew 0]

I have seen many times the accusation being thrown about that other managers are picking Glenns team for him.  It is universally regarded as a bad thing.  I would like to put forward the opposing viewpoint!At the end of January we were in a position where we had got rid of the deadwood from the squad and we were fairly safe from relegation. However we were majorly short on bodies and wouldn''t be able to cope with injuries and/or suspensions. Also the playoffs were unrealistic.Therefore Glenn had two options, buy players at January Prices or loan players.  We would have to buy players in to cover the gaps eventually, so the choice was to buy in January (Sellers market) or the Summer (Buyers market).  Given that it looked (and looks) very likely we will be in this league next season, it really becomes a no-brainer, buy in the summer.Consequently we went into the loan market.  We already had Evans, Camara and Bertrand and on the last day of the window we brought in Bates, Pearce, Henry, Gibbs and Evans (extended).  In order to get Bates, Pearce, Henry and Gibbs, Roeder will have had to give assurances to their managers along the lines of that they will play, within reason, when able to.2 things that are important are:1) Roeder got in more loanees than aloud in the squad - this will have been designed to give him room to drop loanees and blame the loan rules, but this has been ruined by the injury to Bates.2) Roeder is keeping his word on playing these players when he can.  I find that this is a good thing.  It isn''t massively harming our chances, we would be on course to survive on a DLDLDLDLDLD run to the end of the season.  Keeping his word will enhance our reputation as a place to send your promising youngsters.  This should mean that next season we could net two or three good season long loans (Evans and Bertrand for the season anyone?), without having to give the same magnitude of assurances that we have given this year.  This is the major benefit of this half season and is a way of "building for the future" just not building the squad, neccessarily.Note: If Roeder does have to break his word for one of two games to ensure survival then it probably won''t make a difference to point 2.Well, thats my viewpoint.  Now for it to be shot down.

[BBFF 0]

I am not a fan of loan players, too many just kill time before going back to their clubs. Players like Hucks were and Evans are good loans.

You can understand why Roeder got loans in but I think he went one loan too far with Gibbs, the lads just not ready to play with the big boys yet and I don''t like City being a prem clubs kindergarten. Also there will have to be a total squad rebuild again in the summer and with that you don''t get any kind of constancy if its again filled with more loans.

The board say they with back Roeder in the summer transfer market, only time will tell but not holding my breath for a big pot of money sitting on Roeders deck.

Next season I wouldn''t like to see more than 3 loans on the books at one time, be them first team regulars or just cover.

 

FOOTBALL MUST COME FIRST

[Scooby 0]

Extremely well constructed and, I would say, pretty accurate. Couldn''t agree more.

I await the Spifires and Hurricanes with great relish. [ap]  No doubt one, at least, will throw a "Tiny" bomb in for good measure.

[YellowIce 0]

Note: I hope we buy Pattison from Scunthorpe in the summer.

[Thecanaryfan 0]

[quote user="7rew"]

Keeping his word will enhance our reputation as a place to send your promising youngsters.  This should mean that next season we could net two or three good season long loans (Evans and Bertrand for the season anyone?)

[/quote]

Very interesting this point this. Roeder clearly has a rapport for looking after young players from big clubs. The fact that most on here - and Im not over exagerating here - despise -  the latest intake of loanees prob doesnt help Roeders cause. True, many of them have not met expectations, far from it infact wrt one young Gunner. Maybe some of us should learn to turn a blind eye to the loanee situation because it could be detremental to club in the long run. Every player is subject to scrutiny regardless of who he is or where he comes from but maybe we have over reacted to certain performances.

I wouldnt want to flatten our clubs chances of missing out on highly valued loanees next season because we are seen as using them as an excuse for out underachievement..........Would you?

[sydneysider 0]

7rew thats a good post, I''ve intended writing a similar post for a few weeks. My feeling and belief (rightly or wrongly) is that loan players were a wiser option than buying players for various reasons:-

1. In January threre were no guarantees that we''d escape relegation. I''m sure some players wouldn''t come, no matter how good a manager they thought Roeder is. I believe they wouldn''t want to sign given the fact we were still in the mire and I''m sure their wife or g.f. would say if Norwich get relegated ''Will we want to move and then find you want to be playing for a Championship side or higher next season and then we''ll have to move again?''

2. Maybe? the club and Roeder agreed it was better to go for loan players rather than sign them on 2 or 3 year contracts, just incase the worst case scenario happens and then find players who had signed in January wanted to leave in the summer

3. If Roeder shows and has shown the way he can turn around a club just with loan players, players will be more likely to sign for us next season whether its full time or on loan when they can see what he has achieved.

27 Years a Canary

PS If Reading get relegated their loan players might not want to go back but ask if they can move to us - just a thought

[lucky green trainers 0]

glen did the best he could in the circumstances, but the fact the best he could do was get 4 green loanees hardly speaks volumes for the club - its the cheapest option, and truly smacks of scaping the barrel.  as for keeping his ''powder dry'' for the summer - the recent public statements by fozzy, roeder and mumby suggests insufficient powder is being made available for the summer.  i take my hat off to roedy, he''s done a great job til now - but Choosing (being forced???)  to play sub-standard loanees must be like playing with both hands behind your back -  impossible.  a club like norwich has ro rely on loans, every champs side does, but it seems to me we''ve taken the whole exercise to new and possibly ridiculous levels.  its clear, there was no intent in jan by the board to  finance  a tilt at the play-offs, and so  they''ve gone for the cheapest possible option - content to just escape relegation this season, which given our position in october, has to be applauded for sure.but lets be clear - to retain roedy and the likes of an ambitious fozzy - and to attract the quality of player we need here, like ''tiny,''  throwing  shirt buttons  for roeder  to build  a proper and credible side capable of achieving a top 6 finish, will require £5m plus, according to adams - has the club got that sort of dosh.  anything else, would be a betrayal and amateurish.  it would be like giving £5,000 to refurbish yellows - so instead of having a smart, trendy bar - it would look more like pats cafe!!!

[Carlos Valderrama 0]

Posted something very similar myself on another thread.  The loan system is a good game to play when done well.  And like you say, the way we are playing it this season hopefully puts us in a much stronger position for next season.

For me, quality loans are a good way of bulking up the squad without using valuable capital.  Next season we are going to need a minimum of 6 new players, possibly as many as 8/9.  Is it realistic to expect us to purchase that many outright.  We have seen the outcome of quantity over quality with the squad Grant built.

For me the summer should look a bit like this....

2/3 permanent signings with a fee involved.  Outlay approx. £2 - 3m.

1/2 permanent signings on a bosman style free.

3/4 quality loan signings.

Thats a minimum of 6 and a maximum of 9 new players in for next season.  It is purely speculative but I think that would be a decent model to build a squad on.