Not very far in all honesty HD cause if the lad is any good, which i hope he is, then it will be another Pearson scenario.
Agreed. Wouldn't mind him as a loan signing if we wasn't told at the beginning of the season every player we bring in on the short term are potentially full time figures. From the very limited minutes I've seen young Fletcher play, he's capable of playing for any team in this league but it'll be the same old story, just like Pearson.....if he's a success, someone bigger will snap him up.
not that i'm making any excuses for the recent short-termism. but given where we are right now, i'm not sure long term planning is the priority. if he does well for us and helps us finish the season strongly, he'll have done his job.
Agree as long as that policy changes at the end of the season. We cannot keep going on the merry go round that is relying on loans.
We're in a relegation battle and long term planning isn't the answer...agreed. But shouldn't we be bringing in experience and know how to get us out of this predicament. Being linked with the likes of Jake Buxton and getting hopes up for a second half season rally to be instead put with youngsters. Yes, I think most of the young lads we've brought in have got quality and would add youthfulness and quality to a side but that needs to be an experienced side at that. We can't get away with bringing youngsters in all the time, short or long term.
If we can show that we're a good place to develop talent (a la Stones, Holgate, Pearson, Drinkwater) then more premier league clubs are going to offer us their best youngsters on loan. These loans probably are short-termism but we are slowly building a good reputation (certainly in Man U's eyes) and as such clubs are going to loan us better players in the future. I couldn't care less if a player is contracted or on loan. It doesn't matter to me as long as they're a decent player, entertain, score goals etc. I don't celebrate a goal any less because the player who scored it is only on loan. Yes they'll go back to their parent club eventually but we'll have made good use of them in the meantime. We can't afford both quality and experience in a players, and therefore the alternative is signing young players permanently. Only this time we only get the option of youngsters who have been released or are playing further down the footballing pyramid. The likelihood of them turning out to be a decent player while also helping us in the short term is very low. If we fail numerous times it could also be very costly, both financially and in terms of results. If we do come across an unpolished diamond they'll be gone within 12 months, the length of a season long loan. We'll hopefully have made a tidy profit but there's no guarantee we'll come out having made money overall. You could argue that loans are short term-ist, but our own talent will get poached as soon as they become decent so you're back to square one either way. So it comes down to which costs the least? If you have a conveyer belt of John Stones or an eye for spotting unpolished diamonds in the lower leagues, then contracting players is certainly the most profitable. But a John Stones may only come round every 10/20 years. In reality, loans are lower risk and lower cost. I'm not saying its the approach we should be adopting, but I don't think it should be written off.
I agree i'd rather we gave our own a chance or if they aren't good enough scrap our academy as it's not producing enough for the money pumped into it.
thing is its OK saying you can't plan long term because of where we are but its this short term loan stuff that's got us in the position we are in to start with!
Just started reading this thread after posting something on similar lines. You got it right again Zazlos.
i don't disagree with that. are these experienced heads available though? i seem to recall danny wilson went for experience in the last january window. it was a complete disaster and hammered the final nail in our coffin. no guarantees are there. i agree though, our approach is completely short term. i suspect if there was a 30yr old experienced striker available who could guarantee 10 goals, we probably wouldn't the first in line. i agree though, we seem to be scraping the barrel a bit..
One can only tell it as it is Nudger. No crap, waffle or ballax. Just the way i've been brought up!!!!!
So our poor performance this season is completely down to loaning young players? Our experienced players such as Nyatanga, the club captain, have put in good performances? LJ's tactics have been spot on? For every poor young loan player there's been at least one good one. Pearson, O'Sullivan, Waring and Williams (on loan) have been arguably amongst our best players over the last 12 months or so. Without them we'd be heading for/in league 2. More recently Toney, Isgrove and White have also all been above average. Yes players like Wilkinson, Smith and Rothwell haven't worked out but the good thing about loans, you can send them back, no harm done. We're not stuck with these players for the next three years. It's nice to have players like Ramage, Harewood, Scotland and McShane but they were all on big wages when we were in the championship and able to afford them. But contrast them with Treacy and Lita who were awful. We can't afford both experience and quality now so would you rather we signed **** old players? Give me a young, hungry team over an old plodder looking for last pay packet any day. It's up to the likes of Nyatanga to step up and lead the team.
Steele, Hassell, Foster, Wiseman, Kennedy, Cywka, Mellis, Perkins, Dawson, Dagnall, O'Grady, Scotland, Harewood, O'Brien. The 14 that got thrashed 6-0 by Charlton. Not a youth player among them. All been together for a reasonable amount of time. A team built over several seasons. Long term planning. That's what got us to where we are and caused us to cut our cloth accordingly.
Bloody hell that's been very selective to suit an argument. That was one of the only defeats in 5 months & we were very good in the games either side of this one