Hypothetical Question

At the minute anyway. If we sold Yidaom and replaced him with a loanee would you consider that acceptable?

 

Money money money its a rich mans world...loans i just think they hinder our own young lads chances but on saying that weve been cannie so far in our dealings in this market

 

Not overly no. We need at least a couple of players in the squad who have experience at this level, not to mention he's one of the first names on the teamsheet.

 

I wouldn't no as I don't want to end this transfer windows with 4/5 loan signings as it will provide us with little or no scope to bring loans in later on when we inevitably sell our best players in January.

 

Hypothetically, if the moon was made of cheese....

 

Do you mean in his position? In general I'd expect us to use some or most of the Yiadom money on contracted replacements.
However, lets just say we've got 5 million available, not solely from a Yiadom deal but in general. It seems to me we can't buy a 5 million player anyway. We cant afford the wages that calibre of player will demand. We can't go out and buy a proven Championship striker. So any money spent has to be on the type of players we have been buying already. Until we've generated enough cash to lift our whole wage structure to a higher level ee are where we are.

 

I would be more upset if Yiadom left rather than Yidaom. Better player.

 

And to think, you were being Ok earlier in the week Jcak. Thanks for your input though.

 

You are welcome my friend.

To answer your question I would prefer a permanent signing over a loan signing to cover Yiadom

 

Nope.

 

I would have a problem with this, selling our best players and helping other clubs gain experience for their own youngsters. We need experience and our own players.

 

I think the problem with these hypothetical questions, is that we only know what the club want us to know. ie. we know we are buying cheap to develop and sell for a profit, but I'm sure the club also have a long term goal and we plebs won't know how close to the end game we actually are...

If it did happen, I'd personally hope it was a mans to end and that we had a permanent, long term(as long term as possible in today's climate) lined up to com in in the near future.

 

The fewer loan players the better hopefully yids will stay fingers crossed

 

I wouldn't consider it a replacement at all. If we were to bring in a loanee in that position, I'd say it's because we can't bring in his permanent replacement at this time.

Sent from my WAS-LX1A using Tapatalk

 

In that hypothetical situation I'd be surprised if anyone preferred a loanee replacement. But surely it would depend on who is available. In another hypothetical situation if the choice is taking a risk on a lower league player on a permanent contract or signing Enngland's U20 full back on loan for the season, I would think the latter is very acceptable. The decision should surely be based on which player will help the team win most Championship matches and I'd be surprised if Hecky thought any other way at this stage in the build up to the new season.

 

Is England's Under 20 full back the standard of Gethin Jones/Callum Elder?

 

I would be if it meant we were getting someone in who was at the same level as Yiadom as then it would allow us more time to scout a new long term replacement, or bring someone we already have up to that level.

Would not be happy if we lost him to just get someone worse in on a loan.

If we do lose Yids could we maybe try and show some interest in Amari'i Bell from Fleetwood? I know there is a lot of rumoured interest but he could fill the gap

 

Which hypothetical answer would you prefer

 

For every Jones & Elder there's a Trippier & Curtis.
Interesting that despite the criticism of Jones on this board, Everton have thought it fit to offer him a new contract.