Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

January Transfer Window (rumours + actuals)

1727375777889

Comments

  • edited January 24
    zzzzzzzz  :)
  • Simonsen said:
    "In the building....."  Modern football wank-speak. Just say "he's signed" or "he's blown us out". 
    I don't say in the building when I'm knocking one out
  • fenaddick said:
    Think the loan market is incredibly different now to when we had Cullen and even JRS. The beginning of January saw most of the successful loans being recalled, we experienced that with Gallagher and it was a nightmare. I can understand not wanting to take the risk unless you are 100% sure they won't be recalled
    Teams in the Premier League also tend to use loans as a method to get around FFP now. Owners at this level like MacAnthony at Peterborough havent hidden their distain in the past with Premier League clubs wanting outrageous loan fees for their players
  • edited January 24

    I disagree with the current loan policy; we need all the help we can get getting out of this division. Some of the best players (if not the best) we've had on our books over the last 5 years or so have been loan players: Rak-Sakyi, Cullen, Gallagher, Bielik, Millar, and Maatsen.

  • fenaddick said:
    Think the loan market is incredibly different now to when we had Cullen and even JRS. The beginning of January saw most of the successful loans being recalled, we experienced that with Gallagher and it was a nightmare. I can understand not wanting to take the risk unless you are 100% sure they won't be recalled
    Teams in the Premier League also tend to use loans as a method to get around FFP now. Owners at this level like MacAnthony at Peterborough havent hidden their distain in the past with Premier League clubs wanting outrageous loan fees for their players
    I don't like the principle of it. But anything that pisses of that knobhead MacAnthony can't be all bad!
  • Sponsored links:


  • fenaddick said:
    Think the loan market is incredibly different now to when we had Cullen and even JRS. The beginning of January saw most of the successful loans being recalled, we experienced that with Gallagher and it was a nightmare. I can understand not wanting to take the risk unless you are 100% sure they won't be recalled

    So how do you think we would have done in that Championship season if instead of bringing in Gallagher for half a season we had prioritised out youth and played Ben Dempsey in each game instead.  Nothing against Ben but something tells me we wouldn't have been in with a chance of staying up in the last game of the season.  So, whilst him being recalled in January was a big disappointment, it was still a successful loan.

    Do you think Stockport owners, manager and fans wish they hadn't bought in Barrie for half a season?  
    Yeah you're proving my point, we would have been worse off without him because we were worse off without him. Barry is slightly different as he spent 18 months there
  • I disagree with the current loan policy; we need all the help we can get getting out of this division. Some of the best players (if not the best) we've had on our books over the last 5 years or so have been loan players: Rak-Sakyi, Cullen, Gallagher, Bielik, and Maatsen.

    Some of our worst players over recent years have been loan signings

    Smith, Smith, Tedic, Camara, Abankwah, Fiorini, Ladapo, Penney, Kilkenny, Kane, Castillo, John, Levitt, Smyth, McGeady, Davis

    Am sorry for the PTSD trauma I've brought up for people by mentioning those names... I've just put therapy sessions back weeks, after so many improvements of late too
    I don't think one of the Matt Smith's was that bad, we just barely played him. He's played pretty consistently at this level since.
  • I disagree with the current loan policy; we need all the help we can get getting out of this division. Some of the best players (if not the best) we've had on our books over the last 5 years or so have been loan players: Rak-Sakyi, Cullen, Gallagher, Bielik, and Maatsen.

    Some of our worst players over recent years have been loan signings

    Smith, Smith, Tedic, Camara, Abankwah, Fiorini, Ladapo, Penney, Kilkenny, Kane, Castillo, John, Levitt, Smyth, McGeady, Davis

    Am sorry for the PTSD trauma I've brought up for people by mentioning those names... I've just put therapy sessions back weeks, after so many improvements of late too
    Don't forget Smith! 
  • We’ve had our pants pulled down with so many signings over recent years that the whole concept of new players is now barely of any interest. 

  • I can only conclude that I am wrong & must thank the club for signing Ahadme for a fee rather than getting Louie Berry in on loan. 

    Alrighty.
    I don't think it was a one or the other decision  :D
  • Nicholas said:
    They weren’t opposed to loans prior to Nathan Jones coming in so it’s clearly a directive from the manager.

    For every Rak-Sakyi, Gallagher or Cullen there’s a Nile John, Juan Castillo, Chem Campbell, Slobodan Tedic, Louie Watson…
    That’s the same principle for signing players permanently as well though, should they be stopped too?  For every Ramsey, Small and Lloyd Jones there’s Ahadme, Potts and Hylton.  
    Not saying I agree necessarily because I do think there’s a place for loan players but look at Wycombe. Two key players pulled out from under them mid-way through the season.

    The best way to do it is probably somewhere in the middle between what we did last year (too many, they couldn’t all be named in the squad) and this year where we have one and he’s turned out to be not be the player we thought we were getting.
  • Sponsored links:


  • I'd say the happy ground is probably 3 , personally I'd never loan a keeper though for the exact reason of you're possibly one injury at the parent club away from a recall. But 3 solid loanees, doesn't matter if they're youngsters or not feels like the best way to build things. 
  • I’d say the key to loans is having your head scout or head of recruitment having a good handle on the up and coming prospects at various clubs. Not easy but that’s their job. I’d suggest taking a PL kid on loan is probably something like 95% failure rate or at least disappointment rate. On the whole I just don’t think it works well. Grabbing at 19 year olds just because they play for Man City or Arsenal isn’t good. You have to know what you’re getting and are they better than your own U-21’s. The possible exception in my opinion is taking senior players that for whatever reason are not getting games at Championship level or are likely to be released at the end of their contract and there’s a possibility you might want to sign them. 
  • I understand the frustration over the clubs “loan” position but I am sorry with the clubs basic corporate strategy there is (at one end of the argument)  “little room at the Inn”.

    If your corporate policy means 8 development prospects are already mandated into their 888 fiscal plan just how many “more prospects needing senior football exposure”did you want the senior squad to carry? PL & Championship clubs loan out their young talent for the express purpose of securing exposure to Senior Football.

    The same largely applies to scouting non league talent. Much has been made of Kone’s progress at Wycombe but where exactly did you expect to find him development time within our existing group of Leaburn, Kanu, T. Campbell, Dixon, Casey and Mbick?

    At the other end of the loan scale it is entirely a matter of money.

    If a Championship or PL senior player is surplus to requirements then the issue is how much of their inflated pay cheque can their club get the loan club to pick up. It is then a matter of how many clubs are interested and the sliding fiscal calculation of the days left in the transfer window.

    While there will always be interest in players A. Campbell was signed in the last week of the window. Who fiscally blinked first is open to speculation. After 8 barren weeks did it look like we were desperate to acquire his skills at any price?

  • Scoham said:
    I can only conclude that I am wrong & must thank the club for signing Ahadme for a fee rather than getting Louie Berry in on loan. 

    Alrighty.
    Yeah very disappointing we didn’t loan 5 ft 9 Louie Barry to play as a target man.

    He’d have been an alternative to Godden, and although he’s been recalled and that could have happened here too, it might have left us in a better position. If there was a mistake then that’ll be the one rather than loaning Barry instead of signing Ahadme.

    We wanted that Arsenal GK on loan and it was close to being done until a La Liga club came in for him, so it’s never been the case that NJ is 100% against young PL loanees.
    That is quite a literal take on the point being made, that loans can't play a part in success and signings are better. Don't think there are many that are too pleased that we have 3 1/2 years to develop Ahadme as an "asset", as our CEO put it. 

    Doesn't really matter if it is a loan or a permanent signing really imo, it is all about the recruitment Vs budget. It's stupid to ignore the fact that good loans tend to be integral to teams getting promoted from league one these days. If you lose someone in January, then you have to recruit and reallocate that budget, so it again comes down to recruitment.  
  • Scoham said:
    I can only conclude that I am wrong & must thank the club for signing Ahadme for a fee rather than getting Louie Berry in on loan. 

    Alrighty.
    Yeah very disappointing we didn’t loan 5 ft 9 Louie Barry to play as a target man.

    He’d have been an alternative to Godden, and although he’s been recalled and that could have happened here too, it might have left us in a better position. If there was a mistake then that’ll be the one rather than loaning Barry instead of signing Ahadme.

    We wanted that Arsenal GK on loan and it was close to being done until a La Liga club came in for him, so it’s never been the case that NJ is 100% against young PL loanees.
    That is quite a literal take on the point being made, that loans can't play a part in success and signings are better. Don't think there are many that are too pleased that we have 3 1/2 years to develop Ahadme as an "asset", as our CEO put it. 

    Doesn't really matter if it is a loan or a permanent signing really imo, it is all about the recruitment Vs budget. It's stupid to ignore the fact that good loans tend to be integral to teams getting promoted from league one these days. If you lose someone in January, then you have to recruit and reallocate that budget, so it again comes down to recruitment.  
    It’s how players are targeted - if you want a hold up striker you don’t sign a small winger/striker type.

    I never said loans couldn’t or shouldn’t be used, we know the impact they can make from the various PL loanees listed in this thread. I gave the one example we know about of a PL loanee we were after. It was a shame it didn’t work out as neither Mannion or AMB stand out at this level.

    I wasn’t suggesting Ahadme has been a good signing or was better than loaning alternatives.

    Agree it’s about recruitment vs budget. We’ve done well recently with CBs and WBs, but signings in more attacking roles need to be much better than they have been. It seems to be the roles we’re aiming for with 1 or 2 signings this month, hopefully we can get those deals done. Get them right and we’ll be better and more well rounded team.
  • “I’m pretty convinced that we will have one, if not two, in the building before the end of the window.”

    Says Ronnie Moore tomorrow
    The club are delighted to announce the return of Danny Hylton and Dan Potts on six month contracts, keeping them in SE7 until the end of the season.
    Many a true word spoken in jest...🤦‍♂️
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!