A Bit of Fun Transfer Rumours Thread (Potential New Signings)

[Yorkshire Blue]

I'm interested where those statistics come from. Looking at Transfermarkt, the top seven clubs loaned 63 players last season, including 42 from PL/EFL clubs. That's an average of 9 players per club in the top 7 positions, 6 of which were from the PL/EFL.

The other 16 clubs in the National League loaned 121 players in total (7.56 per club), of which 91 were from PL/EFL clubs (5.69 per club), which aren't too different to those in the top 7.

All clubs bring in loan players, to a greater or lesser extent, so bringing in loan players in itself doesn't suggest that a club will be successful. Sutton, the champions, and Dover, who were bottom, both brought in 5 loan players apiece (albeit Dover's were in a truncated season).

Barnet (9), King's Lynn Town (7), Woking (19), Wealdstone (13) towards the bottom of the table brought in more than Sutton (indeed Woking (20th) and Wealdstone (19th) brought in more than any other club, including those in the play-offs).

I don't think number of loans tell the story: it's more the number of appearances by loanees.

I'd expect the successful clubs had fewer loans but those loans contributed more appearances each. Having 10 loanees who made 1 appearance each would have less impact than 5 loanees who played 40 times each.

 

[Shepshead]

I'm interested where those statistics come from. Looking at Transfermarkt, the top seven clubs loaned 63 players last season, including 42 from PL/EFL clubs. That's an average of 9 players per club in the top 7 positions, 6 of which were from the PL/EFL.

The other 16 clubs in the National League loaned 121 players in total (7.56 per club), of which 91 were from PL/EFL clubs (5.69 per club), which aren't too different to those in the top 7.

All clubs bring in loan players, to a greater or lesser extent, so bringing in loan players in itself doesn't suggest that a club will be successful. Sutton, the champions, and Dover, who were bottom, both brought in 5 loan players apiece (albeit Dover's were in a truncated season).

Barnet (9), King's Lynn Town (7), Woking (19), Wealdstone (13) towards the bottom of the table brought in more than Sutton (indeed Woking (20th) and Wealdstone (19th) brought in more than any other club, including those in the play-offs).

I think that you may find that the figures of 33 loan players by the top 7 clubs, reflects those on loan as at the last day of the season. Clearly, those that came and went during the season aren’t included in that stat. Hackett-Fairchild is an example of that having been at Bromley on loan until Christmas then with us until the end of the season.

 

[kentblues]

I don't think number of loans tell the story: it's more the number of appearances by loanees.

I'd expect the successful clubs had fewer loans but those loans contributed more appearances each. Having 10 loanees who made 1 appearance each would have less impact than 5 loanees who played 40 times each.

This is a good point.
Loan players can be hit and miss but they are are cheap. So, for example, if you have a core of players eating up your budget then building the squad using loans makes sense.

 

[Mad Cyril]

This is a good point.
Loan players can be hot and miss but they are are cheap. So, for example, if you have a core of players eating up your budget then building the squad using loans makes sense.

What about the likes of Harry Bunn and Sam Mantom?

They obviously weren't sent to Southend as part of their development so maybe we picked up a fair chunk of their salaries?

 

[bluesfansince1952]

Clearly the reasons behind loan players is that the parent club see the benefits to a young player and is part of their development to higher standards. The NL in many cases is the youngsters first movement into men’s football. This can create an hit or miss situation and the challenge to our management team is to identify the potential of players available.

Loan players can make a very real impact but others can struggle to adapt. We have seen that with Southend in both Leagues 1 and 2, and, we might see it this season in the NL. It is a similar situation with products from our own Academy.
My own view is that this is the fault of the Academy system. Whatever its virtues may be it struggles to produce players ready and able to play in, and, make an impact in competitive men's football. When a loanee or youth prduct shows he can contribute and bridge the gap I suspect that it is because of the character and adaptability of the player. He succeeds in spite of the system, and, not because of it.

 

[Yorkshire Blue]

Loan players can make a very real impact but others can struggle to adapt. We have seen that with Southend in both Leagues 1 and 2, and, we might see it this season in the NL. It is a similar situation with products from our own Academy.
My own view is that this is the fault of the Academy system. Whatever its virtues may be it struggles to produce players ready and able to play in, and, make an impact in competitive men's football. When a loanee or youth prduct shows he can contribute and bridge the gap I suspect that it is because of the character and adaptability of the player. He succeeds in spite of the system, and, not because of it.

I'm not sure what golden period you are referring to where more players appeared ready-made for first team football but England's man of the match in their last game in the Euros was a 19 year old. They've had a 17 year old become the youngest Englishman to appear at a major tournament. Then there's Reece James, 21; Phil Foden just turned 21 a month ago; Mason Mount 22; Jadon Sancho has yet to appear but is 21; Marcus Rashford 23. These are all products of the academy system. That's an awful lot of exceptions succeeding in spite of the system not because of it.

The problem with Southend is that we don't get the pick of the best kids because when we find a Finley Burns, a Glen Kamara, a Dominic Iorfa Jr, an Isaac Hayden etc they get poached by a bigger club. The kids in the Southend academy are maybe the 1000th best prospect in their age group. The 1000th best prospects in their age group aren't going to be ready for first team football at 18. The fact that they can consider a career in professional football is testament to the success of the academy. That we can find players discarded or overlooked by the Premier League clubs and turn them into Terrell Egbris, Jack Bridges, Lewis Gards, Charlie Kelmans etc is a success. But because we aren't dealing with the best prospects we shouldn't expect them to be ready at 18 and we should expect them to need more time to develop.

 

[Tilson_Blues]

True what yo say about signing on fees but that will still be repeated along with older players demand big money because they once earned high wages further up the leagues.

As for wages. We offered £1200 to an experienced CB who was on £2,000 in the NL last season. He has resigned with his current club for £1650.

Interestingly Hornchurch offered £700 part time as they know he is currently retraining for a career after football.

The same player was offered a contract with Tranmere a few years back. He turned the chance of the EFL down as he had a young family and a wife who's business was expanding and earning more than he did......Offering more money has a big advantage but its not always the deciding factor in life.

who ever told you all these figures should be sacked should be confidential

 

[mfurok]

I'm interested where those statistics come from. Looking at Transfermarkt, the top seven clubs loaned 63 players last season, including 42 from PL/EFL clubs. That's an average of 9 players per club in the top 7 positions, 6 of which were from the PL/EFL.

The other 16 clubs in the National League loaned 121 players in total (7.56 per club), of which 91 were from PL/EFL clubs (5.69 per club), which aren't too different to those in the top 7.

All clubs bring in loan players, to a greater or lesser extent, so bringing in loan players in itself doesn't suggest that a club will be successful. Sutton, the champions, and Dover, who were bottom, both brought in 5 loan players apiece (albeit Dover's were in a truncated season).

Barnet (9), King's Lynn Town (7), Woking (19), Wealdstone (13) towards the bottom of the table brought in more than Sutton (indeed Woking (20th) and Wealdstone (19th) brought in more than any other club, including those in the play-offs).

That's all very well but how old were they?

 

[Justleavingwork]

Loan players can make a very real impact but others can struggle to adapt. We have seen that with Southend in both Leagues 1 and 2, and, we might see it this season in the NL. It is a similar situation with products from our own Academy.
My own view is that this is the fault of the Academy system. Whatever its virtues may be it struggles to produce players ready and able to play in, and, make an impact in competitive men's football. When a loanee or youth prduct shows he can contribute and bridge the gap I suspect that it is because of the character and adaptability of the player. He succeeds in spite of the system, and, not because of it.

This is why it should be mandated that any professional football (minutes on the pitch) a loaned player plays, the football club should receive a percentage of any fee received by the selling club for FA registered club.

Certainly a way to ensure the richer club paying down the football ladder to keep the small clubs in business when they suck up all the talented players for nominal fees and then loan them back to smaller clubs so they continue to develop.

 

[kentblues]

What about the likes of Harry Bunn and Sam Mantom?

They obviously weren't sent to Southend as part of their development so maybe we picked up a fair chunk of their salaries?

Agreed- but most we get (and others get) are u23s. But thank you for highlighting my point regarding generalisations:-)

 

[southendkid]

What about the likes of Harry Bunn and Sam Mantom?

They obviously weren't sent to Southend as part of their development so maybe we picked up a fair chunk of their salaries?

Whilst technically those are loans they're really just free 1 year transfers where the old club agrees to pay a portion of the wages because no one is willing to take him off their hands for the wages they've been paying him.

 

[Shepshead]

I'm not sure what golden period you are referring to where more players appeared ready-made for first team football but England's man of the match in their last game in the Euros was a 19 year old. They've had a 17 year old become the youngest Englishman to appear at a major tournament. Then there's Reece James, 21; Phil Foden just turned 21 a month ago; Mason Mount 22; Jadon Sancho has yet to appear but is 21; Marcus Rashford 23. These are all products of the academy system. That's an awful lot of exceptions succeeding in spite of the system not because of it.

The problem with Southend is that we don't get the pick of the best kids because when we find a Finley Burns, a Glen Kamara, a Dominic Iorfa Jr, an Isaac Hayden etc they get poached by a bigger club. The kids in the Southend academy are maybe the 1000th best prospect in their age group. The 1000th best prospects in their age group aren't going to be ready for first team football at 18. The fact that they can consider a career in professional football is testament to the success of the academy. That we can find players discarded or overlooked by the Premier League clubs and turn them into Terrell Egbris, Jack Bridges, Lewis Gards, Charlie Kelmans etc is a success. But because we aren't dealing with the best prospects we shouldn't expect them to be ready at 18 and we should expect them to need more time to develop.

Take your point regarding those England players and their ages. But let’s not lose sight of the fact that Harry Kane came through the loan system at Millwall, Orient and Leicester.

 

[Thundersley Blue]

I'm interested where those statistics come from. Looking at Transfermarkt, the top seven clubs loaned 63 players last season, including 42 from PL/EFL clubs. That's an average of 9 players per club in the top 7 positions, 6 of which were from the PL/EFL.

The other 16 clubs in the National League loaned 121 players in total (7.56 per club), of which 91 were from PL/EFL clubs (5.69 per club), which aren't too different to those in the top 7.

All clubs bring in loan players, to a greater or lesser extent, so bringing in loan players in itself doesn't suggest that a club will be successful. Sutton, the champions, and Dover, who were bottom, both brought in 5 loan players apiece (albeit Dover's were in a truncated season).

Barnet (9), King's Lynn Town (7), Woking (19), Wealdstone (13) towards the bottom of the table brought in more than Sutton (indeed Woking (20th) and Wealdstone (19th) brought in more than any other club, including those in the play-offs).

I am pretty sure you will find, that some Clubs in the National League opted to furlough some, if not all of their players and then use loaness and non contract players to fulfil their fixtures.
Hence an usually high number of loan players at some Clubs.

 

[annie1954]

i thought this very very very long thread was called summer transfer rumours ? not how much players are paid .parachute payments or how much budget other clubs have , should all this be on a separate thread . before we have another 90 odd pages .

 

[Medway Blue]

i thought this very very very long thread was called summer transfer rumours ? not how much players are paid .parachute payments or how much budget other clubs have , should all this be on a separate thread . before we have another 90 odd pages .

Annie, are you ok?

 

[rigsby]

who ever told you all these figures should be sacked should be confidential

Its OK it was no one from Southend and I haven't named anyone.

I posted it so people on here understand that we are not flashing the cash and to not expect us to be top of the the table after 4 games.

It will be along hard slog and we might have to wait and see how sales go and if stadiums are fully open before al signings are completed.

 

[mfurok]

i thought this very very very long thread was called summer transfer rumours ? not how much players are paid .parachute payments or how much budget other clubs have , should all this be on a separate thread . before we have another 90 odd pages .

I agree.

Not enough rumours about Smith and Jones.

 

[Yorkshire Blue]

I agree.

Not enough rumours about Smith and Jones.

Alas.

 

[Chrisb]

I agree.

Not enough rumours about Smith and Jones.

Keith Jones and Nicky Smith type players would be useful right now.

 

[Ricey]

Keith Jones and Nicky Smith type players would be useful right now.

Nathan Jones and Jay Smith?