Jump to content

George Thorne


North_Stand_Ram

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 10.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Has it occurred to you that it's maybe Thorne who wants the 'loan with a view' as it gives him an escape clause. It's in his control.

 

Let's face it...he's hardly the most loyal sort.

If it was a loan, it wouldn't be to a view of a perm transfer, it would be loan for a season with fee agreed and permanent transfer at the end of it. WBA have done this a few times in recent seasons

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it was a loan, it wouldn't be to a view of a perm transfer, it would be loan for a season with fee agreed and permanent transfer at the end of it. WBA have done this a few times in recent seasons

stop trying to rumble things up.. 2.75 PERMANENT deal signed todayyyy.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not ITK, but just an idea.

What would you think if West Brom offered Thorne to us for free but wanted 100 percent of his sell on fee?

I would think would be a very bad idea for WBA, there are no guaranties that his value is going to get better than what it is seen as now. He could lose form and derby give him a free transfer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it was a loan, it wouldn't be to a view of a perm transfer, it would be loan for a season with fee agreed and permanent transfer at the end of it. WBA have done this a few times in recent seasons

I don't even see how that makes sense, we loaned him last year to see his potential. We know how good he is, I thought the whole loan to permanent move thing was just for clubs to evaluate what a NEW player means to the club.. We already know how key he is to the midfield, I really don't see what west brom would get out of it either? He either lives up to the potential and we pay the 2.75M or he flops and he's sent back to you. Don't really see a positive out of it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't even see how that makes sense, we loaned him last year to see his potential. We know how good he is, I thought the whole loan to permanent move thing was just for clubs to evaluate what a NEW player means to the club.. We already know how key he is to the midfield, I really don't see what west brom would get out of it either? He either lives up to the potential and we pay the 2.75M or he flops and he's sent back to you. Don't really see a positive out of it.

You seem to have trouble understanding the loan to permanent part. If he flops you don't get to send him back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You seem to have trouble understanding the loan to permanent part. If he flops you don't get to send him back.

Depends. Sometimes this does actually happen. Leeds agreed to sign Cameron Stewart after his initial loan deal, but the player and Leeds both mutually agreed to cancel it. Hull weren't fussed as he went to Ipswich a few days later for the same fee

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You seem to have trouble understanding the loan to permanent part. If he flops you don't get to send him back.

I always thought it was a standard loan with an agreement fee set at the end that the team can either accept or decline? Otherwise if it had to be accepted there wouldn't be a point of the whole loan thing?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would think would be a very bad idea for WBA, there are no guaranties that his value is going to get better than what it is seen as now. He could lose form and derby give him a free transfer

So far though he's looked good every time he's been on the pitch.

England at every youth level? Was breaking into WBA team. Injured and then impressed with loan spells. Came here his debut was the 5-0 win over Forest and included a play off semi final thrashing of Brighton and a MOTM performance at Wembley. He's scored a couple of superb goals too.

I think he's more than likely to go onto big things than vanish.

But a free transfer with 100% sell on would be bad for us both. One of us would lose out where if you get the fee you want then we both win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't even see how that makes sense, we loaned him last year to see his potential. We know how good he is, I thought the whole loan to permanent move thing was just for clubs to evaluate what a NEW player means to the club.. We already know how key he is to the midfield, I really don't see what west brom would get out of it either? He either lives up to the potential and we pay the 2.75M or he flops and he's sent back to you. Don't really see a positive out of it.

It was a loan for Thorne to get match fit and come back to WBA to force his was back in to the team.

We occasionally have loan to optional purchase (inwards( and loans to compulsory purchase (outwards).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...