Alan
…unlucky Del - No chance 😉
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2012
- Messages
- 42,080
- Reaction score
- 10,742
Don’t tempt me to open just such a threadYep, belongs on the one titled Alan's wank bank
Don’t tempt me to open just such a threadYep, belongs on the one titled Alan's wank bank
You mean exactly the same as Silva is with Anderlecht?Good.
Absolutely zero point developing another teams player, only to give him back and go back to square one.
Connor Gallagher was great for Palace. Didn’t ultimately get them anywhere though, other than having to trawl through sone crap leagues to try and find a replacement.
Chelsea, meanwhile, get their player back with a years Premier League experience under his belt and loads of confidence.
Totally glad we don’t entertain that bullshit.
Same with Broja.If Gallagher plays a significant role in Chelsea's season I will find a hat and eat it.
Same
That’s why a forum exists, wouldn’t do for us all to have the same opinions.You mean exactly the same as Silva is with Anderlecht?
Players suit certain circumstances at certain times. I'd certainly take Nico, Broja and Gallagher on a season long loan even if it wasn't to buy.
It buys time for next season where we might find a better player to do the job and have added financial resources to do it.
Are you ok with loaning Silva out?That’s why a forum exists, wouldn’t do for us all to have the same opinions.
I wouldn’t. I wouldn’t take any of them on loan - honestly don’t see the point. We’re not in a Brentford/Ericksen situation where we need a bit of magic to keep us up.
Don’t mind us loaning a player as long as there’s a buy clause in there and it basically benefits us (like us finding out that Trincao was shit and giving him back) - if not, I just don’t see why we’d be interested.
Does it benefit Wolves?Are you ok with loaning Silva out?
And you can't see the hypocrisy in that?Does it benefit Wolves?
If so, yes. Of course.
Yes, of course I can.And you can't see the hypocrisy in that?
Broja is still only 20, he’s one of those that needs games a bit like we’ve done with Fabio. He’s a bit of a unit which helped him last year but physically it told at the end of the season. For that reason I wouldn’t take him though.Broja couldn't get in a rubbish Southampton team towards the end of his time there, I'm not sure at all about him.
Would obviously take Gallagher in a heartbeat, he's everything we need if we go 4-3-3.
In an ideal world every loan we do incoming would have an option to buy, whereas loans out would depend on circumstances (young player you who you have i future plans no option, players who have no future an obligation) but we don’t live in a perfect world.Yes, of course I can.
I always want every deal to benefit us and be in our best interests - that’s why I don’t want to develop other clubs players, increase their value while paying their wages.
For example, I wouldn’t have loaned Adama and I (certainly) wouldn’t have loaned Coady.
But, of course, more than happy to let Anderlect develop Fabio at their cost and effort.
And if you disagree……guess what…..it’s cool
That's an interesting stance to take.Yes, of course I can.
I always want every deal to benefit us and be in our best interests - that’s why I don’t want to develop other clubs players, increase their value while paying their wages.
For example, I wouldn’t have loaned Adama and I (certainly) wouldn’t have loaned Coady.
But, of course, more than happy to let Anderlect develop Fabio at their cost and effort.
And if you disagree……guess what…..it’s cool
I always thought it was a fool's errand in the Championship having 4-5 loan players who weren't nailed on to join in the event of promotion, because you either have to replace half the team that got you up, or end up spending a load of money to stay exactly where you are and improvements have to be paid for on top. Pretty sure Fulham got stung that way one year and it's why Forest have had to make a daft number of signings this summer.In an ideal world every loan we do incoming would have an option to buy, whereas loans out would depend on circumstances (young player you who you have i future plans no option, players who have no future an obligation) but we don’t live in a perfect world.
I’d happily take a player on loan with no option if it improves us. If it was a toss up as to whether they would, or it’s only a marginal benefit at the expense of playing a young lad, not so much.
Example being if we loan a CM of cundle level, or there or there Abouts then it’s a pointless exercise IMO
He's the one GFFH mentioned a few weeks ago. Does it say a fee?