Which loan player would you most like us to sign permanently?

[amsemp]

Quite often players join on loan before making the switch permanent. Of the current squad, Laird, Timlin and Eastwood have all previously been with us on loan before they signed a deal with us.

Doesn't seem likely, but if the current loanees were to become available, which one would you most like Brown to get in and why?

 

[Agent Lomas]

Quite often players join on loan before making the switch permanent. Of the current squad, Laird, Timlin and Eastwood have all previously been with us on loan before they signed a deal with us.

Doesn't seem likely, but if the current loanees were to become available, which one would you most like Brown to get in and why?

My dad made this good point about Kiernan: He signed a 3 month loan deal. Which takes us to January, which COULD mean tha Wigan are looking to offload him. The only stalling point for us of course is money. They probably won't want to get rid of him on a free

 

[chapperzUK]

We need a defender and I'm not too impressed on Thompson. Kiernan is only 1 year older too.

 

[RHB]

Kiernan, but I doubt we could afford him unfortunately.

 

[Ayrshire Blue]

I doubt we could afford any of them, but in purely hypothetical terms, Kiernan.

 

[Rick Parsnip]

Loan players are a curse in the game. It's the worse thing FIFA have ever come up with.

It is grossly unfair on the young players who have been nurtured through a club's youth policy hoping to eventually progress to the first team but cannot get a game because their club would rather take advantage of a greedy Premier or Championship club's desire to hold onto a player they do not intend to use, (unless in an emergency), but will 'loan' him out like chattel to a lower league club.

I won't forget the Wembley game where two of our players were forced to sit it out after getting us there, only for loanees who we have never seen since have the honour of playing, (and not that well either!!).

The sooner this scheme is done away with the better. Let clubs stand by their own judgement of the youth players they sign and bring on. How many clubs have staved off relegation because one manager has better contacts than another. It's an unfair lottery.

 

[mrsblue]

Loan players are a curse in the game. It's the worse thing FIFA have ever come up with.

It is grossly unfair on the young players who have been nurtured through a club's youth policy hoping to eventually progress to the first team but cannot get a game because their club would rather take advantage of a greedy Premier or Championship club's desire to hold onto a player they do not intend to use, (unless in an emergency), but will 'loan' him out like chattel to a lower league club.

I won't forget the Wembley game where two of our players were forced to sit it out after getting us there, only for loanees who we have never seen since have the honour of playing, (and not that well either!!).

The sooner this scheme is done away with the better. Let clubs stand by their own judgement of the youth players they sign and bring on. How many clubs have staved off relegation because one manager has better contacts than another. It's an unfair lottery.

Fantastic post and I totally agree.

 

[shrimpled]

How many clubs have staved off relegation because one manager has better contacts than another. It's an unfair lottery.

Surely the candidates's 'contacts' should be a consideration when hiring a manager.

 

[chapperzUK]

How many clubs have staved off relegation because one manager has better contacts than another. It's an unfair lottery.

We built our 2010/11 team based on Sturrock's contacts and that allowed us to steady the ship and push for promotion the following season, hardly any of them were loanees.

 

[onceknownasrab]

Loan players are a curse in the game. It's the worse thing FIFA have ever come up with.

It is grossly unfair on the young players who have been nurtured through a club's youth policy hoping to eventually progress to the first team but cannot get a game because their club would rather take advantage of a greedy Premier or Championship club's desire to hold onto a player they do not intend to use, (unless in an emergency), but will 'loan' him out like chattel to a lower league club.

I won't forget the Wembley game where two of our players were forced to sit it out after getting us there, only for loanees who we have never seen since have the honour of playing, (and not that well either!!).

The sooner this scheme is done away with the better. Let clubs stand by their own judgement of the youth players they sign and bring on. How many clubs have staved off relegation because one manager has better contacts than another. It's an unfair lottery.

Idealistic rather than realistic. Your post is full of sentiments than many of us would love to materialise but the real world is not that simplistic. 'It is grossly unfair on the young players who have been nurtured through a club's youth policy'. Yes it can be but not all youth players are ready for the step up as and when the club requires them.

' Let clubs stand by their own judgement of the youth players they sign and bring on.' Stand and fall. There are a lot of young players with promise and prospect that for whatever reason fall along the wayside. In horse racing parlance they just don't 'train on.' A lad of twelve, thirteen, might appear to be a world beater but then never reach the standard required and often it is due to non-football distractions that teens are prone to.

The loan system can be a nuisance/pain/disappointment but it can also be the salvation of clubs. There were few complaints about Britt being with us when he was banging in the goals.

In the absence of any better systems then we are stuck with the one we have and have to make the best use of it.

 

[RHB]

Idealistic rather than realistic. Your post is full of sentiments than many of us would love to materialise but the real world is not that simplistic. 'It is grossly unfair on the young players who have been nurtured through a club's youth policy'. Yes it can be but not all youth players are ready for the step up as and when the club requires them.

' Let clubs stand by their own judgement of the youth players they sign and bring on.' Stand and fall. There are a lot of young players with promise and prospect that for whatever reason fall along the wayside. In horse racing parlance they just don't 'train on.' A lad of twelve, thirteen, might appear to be a world beater but then never reach the standard required and often it is due to non-football distractions that teens are prone to.

The loan system can be a nuisance/pain/disappointment but it can also be the salvation of clubs. There were few complaints about Britt being with us when he was banging in the goals.

In the absence of any better systems then we are stuck with the one we have and have to make the best use of it.

Stonkingly good post, totally agree

 

[rlb999]

There are much better players out there than all 3 of them. I thank them for helping us out whilst we're in ****, but I don't feel the need to go offering them extended contracts when funds are so tight.

 

[WESTY_SUFC]

I doubt we could afford any of them, but in purely hypothetical terms, Kiernan.

You mean Ron can't afford any of them.

 

[WESTY_SUFC]

Kiernan as his the only one better than what we have in his position.

 

[Ayrshire Blue]

You mean Ron can't afford any of them.

Same thing :dim:

 

[DTS]

Kiernan is a class act. Would take Woodrow too because of potential. Thompson to me done nothing of note.

 

[Massimo Giovanni]

In the good old Barry F ry days we would have signed all three and their room mates too. In the A lvin Martin days we would have signed their lesser brothers as a cheap option. Now we can't promise them wages!