ras Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 Are constant short term loan signings a formula for success, please discuss. I agree loans play a part especially to patch up teams when injuries mean key players are out short term, but I dont agree with this philosophy they genuinely offer better value? Of course financially they do but the actual retun you get is that of 1-3 months of service. They dont work! 1-3 months and they are on their way again and we are back to square one, every single time. Mnay of them have no loyalty whatsoever and others just look like they cant be bothered. Some have worked out well, but again you cant rely on all this chopping and changing to build success. I would prefer if our board said loans is all we can afford, as opposed to loans are better value deal for us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcfcdavecov Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 Are constant short term loan signings a formula for success, please discuss. I agree loans play a part especially to patch up teams when injuries mean key players are out short term, but I dont agree with this philosophy they genuinely offer better value? Of course financially they do but the actual retun you get is that of 1-3 months of service. They dont work! 1-3 months and they are on their way again and we are back to square one, every single time. Mnay of them have no loyalty whatsoever and others just look like they cant be bothered. Some have worked out well, but again you cant rely on all this chopping and changing to build success. I would prefer if our board said loans is all we can afford, as opposed to loans are better value deal for us. Are you talking to yourself? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ras Posted February 10, 2011 Author Share Posted February 10, 2011 Are you talking to yourself? No? I was putting my view up you witty so and so. And asking others for theirs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uttoxram75 Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 Loans are a fact of modern football life. No one really likes or wants them, its up to managers to try and get the best they can out of the system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donny Ram Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 Not unless there's an injury that requires needs an emergency signing as cover. Alternatively, if a player is signed on loan with a view to a permanent, this would be okay imho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Day Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 Cardiff City sat in 3rd place prove that loans don't work, me personally I wouldn't want to swap places in the table with them, no way Pedro. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ras Posted February 10, 2011 Author Share Posted February 10, 2011 Cardiff City sat in 3rd place prove that loans don't work, me personally I wouldn't want to swap places in the table with them, no way Pedro. Bellamy is a little bit different to what we bring though in isnt he. And its his home town club, he loves the club, they love him. They are going for promotion and I bet the loan fee/wage combination is pretty significant, well out of our range. He is almost a permanent signing anyway, if they go up he'll sign of that I am sure. Completely different to our situation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Teale Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 I think season long loans are very different to the one-three month ones that are always clearly temp. To be fair though I wouldnt mind an Aaron Ramsey type player here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Day Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 Bellamy is a little bit different to what we bring though in isnt he. And its his home town club, he loves the club, they love him. They are going for promotion and I bet the loan fee/wage combination is pretty significant, well out of our range. He is almost a permanent signing anyway, if they go up he'll sign of that I am sure. Completely different to our situation I thought you were talking about loans in general and not Derby County loans. Are you happy with the Fielding, Moore, Kuqi loans last year? they came and were in the team that took us to the dizzy heights of 4th. Yes they have gone now and we may have had the chance to sign them on permanent deals, but do you look back in anger how they couldn't be bothered? Had we gone out in January and signed 2 new strikers and a keeper that were either just as good or even better than those 3, you would have to agree that they were good loans. As uttoxram said we would all love to have a team without them but they are part of football now, some flop and some are a success. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Teale Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 It annoys me that Glick and Clough talk about building long term for the future and in the next breath say they are looking for loans as there is more value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ras Posted February 10, 2011 Author Share Posted February 10, 2011 Daveo, Yes loans in general. And yes the players you quote were a short term success, but low and behold we didnt keep hold of them. Therefore how can you bring long term success when you just keep borrowing other teams players all the time. Theya rent ours, they would good for 3 months or whatever and then they went back and we were back to square 1. Its alright saying some work some dont, the ones that work and the ones that help the team, when they are gone the team suffers. We cant expect serious success relying on other teams players all the time. Unless we had a good set of contracted players to cope when the loans expire, which in certain department we simply dont have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Day Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 Daveo, Yes loans in general. And yes the players you quote were a short term success, but low and behold we didnt keep hold of them. Therefore how can you bring long term success when you just keep borrowing other teams players all the time. Theya rent ours, they would good for 3 months or whatever and then they went back and we were back to square 1. Its alright saying some work some dont, the ones that work and the ones that help the team, when they are gone the team suffers. We cant expect serious success relying on other teams players all the time. Unless we had a good set of contracted players to cope when the loans expire, which in certain department we simply dont have. They help you through a sticky patch when you are short of players for whatever reason, where would we have been without those 3 loans? I would imagine we would be even further down the table than what we are now. Yes they were a short term success but in May when we are hopefully still in this league we can look back and consider them more than just a short term success. The loans themselves are not the problem, the problem is when you don't replace them or sign them once the window re-opens which we haven't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alph Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 I don't like loans (who does?) Even succesful loans usually end in misery as they player returns to his club to either be part of his own team or is snapped up by someone else with more to offer. But they are part of football and unless your Man City, Man Utd etc then it's something we have to accept we need. It's often the only way to get that bit of extra quality that's normally outside your reach. When you have injuries not many teams other than the big clubs have equal quality on the bench ready to just come in and provide the same level of performance. It's always nice when succesful loans are made long term though. Don't think anyone likes loans. But they are neccesary. :frown: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ras Posted February 10, 2011 Author Share Posted February 10, 2011 They help you through a sticky patch when you are short of players for whatever reason, where would we have been without those 3 loans? I would imagine we would be even further down the table than what we are now. Yes they were a short term success but in May when we are hopefully still in this league we can look back and consider them more than just a short term success. The loans themselves are not the problem, the problem is when you don't replace them or sign them once the window re-opens which we haven't. I partially agree. Thats the whole risk of using the loan market and using other teams players to field a strong starting 11. When the loans are up the vast majority of the time in our case they go back to their parent club and we are back at square one, i.e. have a poor pot of players to pick from. Then, as happens time and again, we find we cant replace these loans who have been and gone, so we dont replace them at all, or we dont replace with the same quality, and subsequently we just get worse. If these loans come in and do a job and improve us we should do all we can to sign them!!! Not just say "hey ho they can go back we'll get someone else next week". I would be amazed that if we really wanted to we couldnt sign fielding and moore on permanenet deals. If we really honestly wanted to get them here as permanent DCFC players, we could do it. My point is DCFC need 5/6 real quality players on 2/3 year contracts, supplemented with loans as and when if they really want to push on. Signing 3 players from league 1 and 2 each pre-season and then telling us we will get better loan signings for value does not wash with me. Relying on loans is madness it does not work, as has been proven by DCFC time and again. When we had Phil Brown is was the same loan after loan and we were utterly hopeless. I am pretty sure we even had to sell Tudgay to be able to bring in Danny Graham on loan, what was all that about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ras Posted February 10, 2011 Author Share Posted February 10, 2011 I don't like loans (who does?) Even succesful loans usually end in misery as they player returns to his club to either be part of his own team or is snapped up by someone else with more to offer. But they are part of football and unless your Man City, Man Utd etc then it's something we have to accept we need. It's often the only way to get that bit of extra quality that's normally outside your reach. When you have injuries not many teams other than the big clubs have equal quality on the bench ready to just come in and provide the same level of performance. It's always nice when succesful loans are made long term though. Don't think anyone likes loans. But they are neccesary. :frown: Thats my whole gripe, players like fielding and moore are surely not out our reach for full term contracts, and they improved us, so why didnt we try and get them full time. Swansea surely dont have a bigger wage budget than us, I'm sorry that cant be the case. Tudgay would have been a good signing for DCFC, exactly the sort of player who I would imagine would fit in our budget and would improve on what we have got. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Day Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 ras the problem isn't the loans then is it? it's either the manager or the board not sharing the same views as the fans. Looking at this season when we was 4th in the table with Kuqi, Moore and Fielding I think the majority of online fans wanted us to sign all 3 and those 3 were available to sign at the end of the loans. Why didn't we sign them? Kuqi - We have a similar player in Porter says Clough Fielding - Fielding and Bywater are both number 1 keepers says Clough Moore - We did try to keep him on loan but Moore wasn't interested in going on loan again he wanted to find a permanent club, now didn't we go in for him due to financial constraints or simply Nigel didn't rate him enough to sign him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ras Posted February 10, 2011 Author Share Posted February 10, 2011 I'd say its a combination of going down "the loan route" as opposed to the permanent route, mixed with a complete lack of ambition. Loans if they are with a view to a permanent are a good option. Loans with a view that when 3 months are up we'll get another loan is madness in my view, and is no recipe for success at all, but that is exactly what DCFC are doing. They'd happily have 3 individual 3 month loan players to cover a position for a season as opposed to buy a player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ras Posted February 10, 2011 Author Share Posted February 10, 2011 With regards to Fielding, I was very impressed with his overall ability as a GK. Whereas we have seen Bywater for seasons, and Fielding only a couple of months, its hard to draw a fair comparison. That said, I would not be overly upset if Bywater went and Fielding replaced him. I assume Bywater is still on good wages too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramblur Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 They help you through a sticky patch when you are short of players for whatever reason, where would we have been without those 3 loans? I would imagine we would be even further down the table than what we are now. Yes they were a short term success but in May when we are hopefully still in this league we can look back and consider them more than just a short term success. The loans themselves are not the problem, the problem is when you don't replace them or sign them once the window re-opens which we haven't. We seem to be short of players because we haven't enough of them.This isn't what the emergency loan system was supposed to be about.I resented the comment that there was always this loan system to fall back on even before the 'real' window was anywhere near finished .Lo and behold,we're now scratching around trying to find players other clubs don't need.The problem has been there for a long time and it's a complete shambles.Thanks again,GSE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Day Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 Loans with a view that when 3 months are up we'll get another loan is madness in my view, and is no recipe for success at all, but that is exactly what DCFC are doing. I totally agree with that but like I say it's not the loan system that's the problem, it's either Nigel, GSE or both that are the problem here. I have no problem selling Hulse when we did and bringing in a loan striker, even if we had no chance of signing him at the end, say a decent Arsenal or Man Utd youngster. Since we sold Hulse we have had a few months to identify replacements which we haven't done, we got to January and was looking to loan in Waghorn as another short term replacement, now we may have been bringing him on loan with a view to trying sign him at the end but I would guess that was highly unlikely. You could say that if the loan system didn't exsist we wouldn't be in this situation, who knows what we would of done had it not been in place. If used properly the loan system can be great advantage but Derby are using it to a disadvantage at the moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.