Loans next season?

[Gingerpele 0]

Are they a good idea?

Many Norwich fans now hate loans because of the whole Roeder saga, a team built on loan players who on the most part were not all that dedicated (with a couple of exception of course).

But this season, and last we have had a couple of loans that have just helped push us past the line.

And with players like Lansbury, Pacheco and Borini amongst others being mentioned (i.e Young premiership players, who may or may not have a future at there club) I think its very likely we will get one or two season long loans.

I personally think it will be great for all parties. For us, even if we only have these players for a year, but they help keep us up. We stay up and have more money to spend next season on building a long term squad like Lambert has already started, and the loan players get first team premiership experience (ok, and there parent club benefit from it as well...).

This is not a so much, who do you think we will sign, more of a do you think loan signings are needed next season, or would you rather just sign players that we can keep (although arguably, signings premiership quality players permanently, and then getting relegated would/could lead to those players leaving, being no more than a loan anyway)

[Yorkshire Canary 118]

I agree but a couple of loans is the most that we want

[Europe_93 50]

Loans are there for the taking, everybody else will be taking on who they can get and we should not deny ourselves any opportunities.

Personally, I''d prefer if there was no loan system.  It enables clubs, especially the bigger clubs with bigger budgets, to hold on to players that are not fully mature.  Consider Arsenal''s position with Lansbury if there was no loan system available, they would either have to put him in the 25 man squad or leave him out of it (and pay him) with no chance of playing.  In which case it would clearly be in the players and Arsenals best interest to sell him, making it more viable for clubs like us to sign him, and at a reasonable fee.

[Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man 4,616]

With regards to how many loanees we should/will sign, we are limited to only two domestic loanees in the Premier League, unless this rule has been changed (but I can''t remember hearing anything about that). We can have as many as we want from overseas though.[quote user="Europe_93"]

Loans are there for the taking, everybody else will be taking on who they can get and we should not deny ourselves any opportunities.

Personally, I''d prefer if there was no loan system.  It enables clubs, especially the bigger clubs with bigger budgets, to hold on to players that are not fully mature.  Consider Arsenal''s position with Lansbury if there was no loan system available, they would either have to put him in the 25 man squad or leave him out of it (and pay him) with no chance of playing.  In which case it would clearly be in the players and Arsenals best interest to sell him, making it more viable for clubs like us to sign him, and at a reasonable fee.

[/quote]To be fair though, it works both ways, as we have seen this season with Adeyemi, Francomb, McDonald etc.

[I am a Banana 0]

I''d personally get a GK in on loan with prem exp with ruddy back up and send both Rudd and Steer ot on loan! Or get a back up in for Ruddy so we can let the 2 youth keepers out on loan to get XP!

[Lambo 0]

Lansbury and Dani would be fine with me.

[Xabi Alonso??? nah id rather have David Fox!! 0]

yes definately i think 3 or 4 loans next season will bolster our squad and as you said i think its been player like lansbury and pacheco that just agve us a bit more of a buzz when we needed them id take back lansbury and pacheco next season absolutely

[York Canary 29]

Could probably buy Borini if Swans don''t go up and relatively cheaply I''d hope. Would love Borini, Pacman and Lansbury loan or not.

[Mr. Bump 0]

[quote user="Jin - York Canary"]Could probably buy Borini if Swans don''t go up and relatively cheaply I''d hope. Would love Borini, Pacman and Lansbury loan or not. [/quote]I think Borini is out of contract. Would be a good signing.

[Chelmsford Canary 0]

[quote user="Europe_93"]

Loans are there for the taking, everybody else will be taking on who they can get and we should not deny ourselves any opportunities.

Personally, I''d prefer if there was no loan system.  It enables clubs, especially the bigger clubs with bigger budgets, to hold on to players that are not fully mature.  Consider Arsenal''s position with Lansbury if there was no loan system available, they would either have to put him in the 25 man squad or leave him out of it (and pay him) with no chance of playing.  In which case it would clearly be in the players and Arsenals best interest to sell him, making it more viable for clubs like us to sign him, and at a reasonable fee.

[/quote]

I like this idea.

I think PL would prefer to get in his prefered contract signings.

Then try for Lansbury and Dani.

Permanent signings are the priority

[Yobocop 1,444]

BEntley did alright for us last time around so I think lansbury is a must and Pacheco would be good too...

Other than that I think we should build our own squad consisting of:

1 x gk

1 x rb

2 x cb

2 x wing

1 x cm

2 x cf

[AJ 1,359]

I''m not a massive fan of loans as it leaves you crippled at the end of the season. Like this year, if we can''t get them back, we must replace Dani and Lansbury before we even start thinking about bringing new players in. However, like previously said bringing in one or two like Lambert has this year can really pay off.

Lamberts clever, he won''t kill the club with loans like Grant/Roeder did!

Sibierski anyone?!

[Yellow Wal 315]

Yes Bentley did alright for us last time ...... he didn''t do too bad for Arsenal either.

We trained him, coached him, played him, paid him, gave him exposure and just for Arsenal''s benefit we increased his value by a few million for Arsenal to finally sell him.

And during all this time how many matches did he play for Arsenal in the Premiership before his multi million pound sale? Not one!

But that is why Arsenal have 17 players out on loan at the moment. The system stinks!

It was brought in to help clubs in time of emergency, now it is used to keep the best young talent on the books of the richest clubs and to make them money. Almost every Premiership club except the top six have loan players that they will, probably, never be allowed to buy until they prove they will not be ''good enough'' for their ''parent'' club.

The reserve leagues should be improved and clubs should play their own youngsters in those leagues. If they all did that then the competition would be of a high standard. If clubs stopped loaning players what would the top six clubs do with 50 or 60 players on their books?

Yes we are benefitting from loaning our players but again their experience could be gained in a competitive Reserve league.

Ban all loans and perhaps the monopoly that the top clubs have could be broken by other means than just rich arabs.

[Mahogany 0]

Loans are rarely free from what I understand so it''s really a matter of what sort of a deal we can get. Personally I don''t really want anyone in on loan unless we have an option to buy at some point (even if it is at a premium price).