Did we really need to sign these 2 loan players?

for 8 matches.

Whats your thoughts?

 

Keith and Flicker believe we do and that will do for me. We may have a clean bill of health at last, but that wont last forever, especially with the schedule we have coming up. These pair of newbies add variety/options, and I do believe they are players that could tempt a few part-timers back.. plus, it will ensure that the other lads need to keep performing to be guaranteed a game.. hope that didnt help and just confused you

 

I believe so. Done has had one good game against the worst team to play at Oakwell this year and all of a sudden we've got a young Ryan Giggs on our hands. Before Donny ive found him to be slow and ineffective for most parts.

If Davies gets injured I dont believe we have another striker who could score a reasonable amount of goals in those 8 games. Is Ranger the player that can step in and carry the can? I dont know, but Gray and Vaz Te aren't.

 

Yes we needed a few new faces in to freshen up the squad, get us through the busy xmas period so players aren't as tired, and incase we pick up injuries before the transfer window opens in January.

 

I'm taking the young lad to 2/3 out of the next eight games. now its not often I can point to a Barnsley team and say 'yeh he came out of the same football school as Messi'. Just being able to mention Barnsley and Barcelona in the same sentence without a hint of sarcasm will be a nice change for me.

And lets be honest even Man city have some street cred these days.

 

Massive yes a must I would say with games coming up and suspensions. Keeping moving forward and step up in January when we normally fall asleep for a couple of month.

 

imho no

Now that the injury situation is sorted we've got a healthy competition for places as it is. We're doing OK and there appears to be a very good team spirit. I don't know how the team spirit can be improved by bringing in players to take the place in the team of the regular players, only for these new players to bugger off again in a few weeks. Anyway, I thought we'd stopped spending money on loan signings.

I don't particularly like loan signings at the best of times, but when we're playing well and already have competition for places then I don't see the point of it at all.

 

He's been a consistant player when given enough of a game. He was really good at Reading back in August not just with his goal but his work ethic.

 

Yep.
Im baffled at these remarks about Done.
He was quality at Reading and decent at Millwall I think. And Im sure it was Leicester at Oakwell, where he ran rings round their full-back..? Oh, and when he made his 1st comeback at St. Andrews he was on fire until the hammy went again, and young Clicker replaced him.
He looked rusty in his 2 appearances prior to Brighton off the bench where he was great, and of course setdi..
But he is no Ryan Giggs, and Ive seen no comments suggesting such talk.. so there

 

I think in the short term yes to avoid complacency and help out over Christmas. Ranger regardless offers someting different up front. raw pace and power as for the other I suspect he will inject a bit more creative umpf into the team.

 

Not in my opinion. I would love to know how much it has cost us in wages and agents fees and whether that negates all the claimed extra income from fleecing the fans at 30 quid a time.

 

how much cash have we spent on Addison and Park? They should have gone straight back months ago. One is not good enough and the other I have no idea if he is good enough, because he didnt play enough.
These 2 new loans, I have absolutely no idea as to what role they will play, but they must be good because Hill wants them and loans are now OK with this board , just as long as they are not Robins loans.

 

Agreed.

BBSer 1: Do you remember when robins brought those loanees in?
BBSer 2: Yes, terrible. I hate Loan signings.
BBSer 1. Aye, Hills brought 5 in so far as well.
BBSer 2: Ah yeah but loanees are really good for the club.

 

It seems a bit surprising seeing as a number of our injured players have returned to full fitness. However, I've no problems with the manager managing the team as he sees fit. If they're a success, then Barnsley as a club will benefit from the deals. If they don't, there's plenty who'll be chomping at the bit to point it out. Personally, I like to see players brought in on loan if they're being signed with a view to making it a permanent deal. I don't know whether that applies to any of our four present loan signings.

 

We brought a load in ST and mark.
What was hayes for. He brought Tex in and made us chance the way we played.
Chris wood Nouble, Mellis wasn't always on it. Can't remember some of the others but it wasn't good.

 

I cant be bothered to decypher most of that so I will just agree,

 

wheres ya 8 matches Leeds and Doncaster games won't go ahead first sign of a cold snap and plod will jump all over it and call them both off

 

Back-up

With the loan window closing, all we need is a few injuries again and we're back to where we were at the start of the year. Maybe it's just to sure things up, and what with Park going back, and Miller leaving the club, it's 2 less players we have on the books, the squad's 2 players shorter.

 

I understand your point, but I think there are differences.

Apparently Addison's wages are paid by Derby as part of the Shackell deal (whether that is good deal regarding Shackell is another argument). I'd be surprised if we're paying 100% of Park's wages as he's young and Boro want to give him experience at a high level (e.g. Not League 1 or 2).

When Robin's brought in loans they were high profile e.g. Chris Wood, Garry O'Connor, Jacob Mellis, Franck Nouble, Paul McShane. These players are not only in high demand by other clubs, but also likely to be a realtively high earners. Robin's generally did that as a policy, and often said we can't afford to compete and therefore we will look for experienced Championship players on loan. In order to get these players from their parent clubs I'd imagine we had to pay a fee, their wages and possibly an agent too.

Keith Hill has clearly got a strategy for developing a team and players (as saleable assets). That strategy does not explicitly state that we will not loan players when the opportunity is there. It says that we will no longer RELY on EXPENSIVE loan deals. I think many people could agree that last season we did rely on the loan players too much. I thought on numerous times about what would happen if the loan players were recalled to their parent clubs. So KH could either justify his loan signings one of two ways; they either aren't expensive or they've got potential to become more than a permanent signing.

I've got faith in KH more than I've had in other managers, but I also supported MR and his judgement last season. Hopefully Hillcroft will continue to repay that faith in the same way that they have done so far.

 

Bearing in mind that these deals were probably being finalised before the Donny match and when we could have been heading into a poor run of form, then 'yes.' Also bear in mind that we had played some good football, but not hit the net enough to win, even having played well. So, the addition of one new striker and one new attacking midfielder has to have been the right move. Hope it works out well, both for players of for club. Maybe one, or both will extend their loan as well. We'll see.