Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Register Log in

Permanent signiing v loan signing



Cadiz Seagull

Cadiz Seagull

Grey bearded old man
Jul 7, 2003
5,990
Between Haywards Heath and Trujillo, Extremadura,
On the assumption that our objectives are :-

Short term - get to the Premier league

Medium term - survive the first couple of seasons

Long term - become an established Premier League team


I actually think we are better off with loans rather than permanent signings (I mean reasonably long term signings, not 28 days, they are for emergencies)

If we don't need to pay a fee that allows us to pay higher wages which presumably makes it easier to attract a better player, probably more experienced.

The down side of loans is that the player might not be so committed and the player is only with us for a relatively short period of time.

The first is a problem for the manager and the club to make sure doesn't happen. This second is less of a problem as it means we can concentrate on players who can get us out of league but who may not be able to hack it at a higher level. The likes of Kevin Phillips for example.

You often see teams promoted who keep pretty much the same squad and the team that looked unstoppable one season isn't good enough to stay in the Premier. Such as Reading last year.

If we take someone on a three or four year contract we need to be sure they can both get us up and keep us there.

Loan players allow us to go up, then change them for others who can keep us there, and buy us time to bring in (or develop) the players who will get us established.
 




Gazwag

Gazwag

5 millionth post poster
Mar 4, 2004
30,130
Bexhill-on-Sea
I was thinking last night what incentive does a player have to get a team promoted. Look at Palace (yes I know the P word again) they have signed a new squad meaning the old squad are not premiership quality so will get sold, shipped out on loan or just forgotten in the reserves. A squad full of loanees (mercenaries if you like) maybe is the way forward.
 


S

Shropshire Seagull

Well-known member
Nov 5, 2004
8,496
Telford
Gazwag said:
I was thinking last night what incentive does a player have to get a team promoted. Look at Palace (yes I know the P word again) they have signed a new squad meaning the old squad are not premiership quality so will get sold, shipped out on loan or just forgotten in the reserves. A squad full of loanees (mercenaries if you like) maybe is the way forward.
Click to expand...

Ah, you mean like Watford [aka Udinese stiffs] last season ...
Oh, hang on ......
 


symyjym

symyjym

Banned
Nov 2, 2009
13,138
Brighton / Hove actually
Advantages of a player on loan;

No multimillion price tag
They have more to prove
If they don't fit in, we give them back
As with all loans if it works out well for them and a club, a purchase would always be an option

Disadvantage of purchasing a player;

Multimillion price tag
No guarantee of gelling with the team or style
If they don't fit in we would be committed to high wages for two or three years
You may not get back what you paid for them when they are off loaded

I would rather see players on trial here first before we purchase them, that is the only way you will know if a player is right for you. Try before you buy I say, because clubs don't do returns for faulty goods.
 


shaolinpunk

shaolinpunk

[Insert witty title here]
Nov 28, 2005
7,187
Brighton
symyjym said:
Advantages of a player on loan;

No multimillion price tag
They have more to prove
If they don't fit in, we give them back
As with all loans if it works out well for them and a club, a purchase would always be an option

Disadvantage of purchasing a player;

Multimillion price tag
No guarantee of gelling with the team or style
If they don't fit in we would be committed to high wages for two or three years
You may not get back what you paid for them when they are off loaded

I would rather see players on trial here first before we purchase them, that is the only way you will know if a player is right for you. Try before you buy I say, because clubs don't do returns for faulty goods.
Click to expand...

For balance, I'll provide some alternatives

Disadvantages of signing a player on loan:
Might not be motivated
Could be recalled
If they do well, price goes up or someone else pinches them

Advantages of purchasing a player:
Stability
You may make a hefty profit if they do well
Can keep them for years
 




El Turi

El Turi

Injured
Aug 13, 2005
6,924
Argentina
I can't think of too many teams that have had success using a lot of loanees (the Watford situation was slightly different as they were all long term and from the same club) so I would much prefer us to continue what we did under Gus and use the loan market sparingly. Unfortunately with the tight budget, it seems that isn't really an option any more.
 


The Sock of Poskett

The Sock of Poskett

The best is yet to come (spoiler alert)
Jun 12, 2009
2,802
El Turi said:
I can't think of too many teams that have had success using a lot of loanees (the Watford situation was slightly different as they were all long term and from the same club) so I would much prefer us to continue what we did under Gus and use the loan market sparingly. Unfortunately with the tight budget, it seems that isn't really an option any more.
Click to expand...

Actually, I think we're perfectly placed to use the loan market sensibly. We get an additional striker in, and we've got up to 93 days to use him (depending on when the deal is done). If it works well for him and us, we can sign him permanently in January if we want to. Even if CMS hits the ground running in November - and after such a long layoff it would be surprising if he didn't need a while to find his feet in a new setup - we're still going to be light on strikers unless the youngsters suddenly blossom.

Can't see us needing or getting more than a couple more in on loan, to add to Ward and Andrews.
 


symyjym

symyjym

Banned
Nov 2, 2009
13,138
Brighton / Hove actually
shaolinpunk said:
For balance, I'll provide some alternatives

Disadvantages of signing a player on loan:
Might not be motivated
Could be recalled
If they do well, price goes up or someone else pinches them

Advantages of purchasing a player:
Stability
You may make a hefty profit if they do well
Can keep them for years
Click to expand...

I hear what you are saying and it's good to have a balance on this.

I do think that try before you buy is less of a gamble. It gives the player the chance to see how our club is run, he may get on very well with the manager, or not, he can get a taste of the Amex and what we are about. And it gives us the chance to see if the player is up to it and really does fit in with the team.

Ryan Harley took a lifetime to offload, Dobbie was easier. The Vokes, Painter, Asulin, Ruzak, Gonzalo Jara and Steve Harper loans were better just being that.

The loans that do seem to be working are Andrews, Ward and Agustien and it is clear that they are motivated and are settling in very well. Bridge worked out as a loan as well even though he did move on, though in truth promotion would have probably kept him here.

You could set out an agreement of the player's cost to purchase at the time of the loan with a sell on clause if a purchase is ultimately made.
 




shaolinpunk

shaolinpunk

[Insert witty title here]
Nov 28, 2005
7,187
Brighton
I suppose the ultimate try-before-you-buy for us must be Bobby Zamora
 








ThePaddy

ThePaddy

Active member
Aug 27, 2013
799
Loans could be very good this season for all Championship clubs. If Guidetti from City is available on loan (he probably is) then somebody will pick up a fantastic striker for a small fee
 




B.W.

B.W.

New member
Jul 5, 2003
13,666
We only need 1 player - a striker. We are clearly short in this area. Is 3 strikers enough? Possibly, if we are only going to play 1 of them, but what if we want to play Ulloa with A N Other playing off of him, then 3 looks VERY low IMHO. (I am discounting the permanently-injured Hoskins). In short, we need to (a) do our homework, (b) buy. Loan-to-buy could also work.
 




Pevenseagull

Pevenseagull

Anti-greed coalition
Jul 20, 2003
19,609
Cadiz Seagull said:
On the assumption that our objectives are :-

Short term - get to the Premier league

Medium term - survive the first couple of seasons

Long term - become an established Premier League team


I actually think we are better off with loans rather than permanent signings (I mean reasonably long term signings, not 28 days, they are for emergencies)

If we don't need to pay a fee that allows us to pay higher wages which presumably makes it easier to attract a better player, probably more experienced.

The down side of loans is that the player might not be so committed and the player is only with us for a relatively short period of time.

The first is a problem for the manager and the club to make sure doesn't happen. This second is less of a problem as it means we can concentrate on players who can get us out of league but who may not be able to hack it at a higher level. The likes of Kevin Phillips for example.

You often see teams promoted who keep pretty much the same squad and the team that looked unstoppable one season isn't good enough to stay in the Premier. Such as Reading last year.

If we take someone on a three or four year contract we need to be sure they can both get us up and keep us there.

Loan players allow us to go up, then change them for others who can keep us there, and buy us time to bring in (or develop) the players who will get us established.
Click to expand...








this is a FOOTBALL FORUM, not a sensible reasoned debate FORUM







No Pele? BARBER OUT!!!
 


Pevenseagull

Pevenseagull

Anti-greed coalition
Jul 20, 2003
19,609
.................. if I were to buy into the sensible reasoned debate shenanigans I would go down the development squad route ........ but then I'd be arrested as part of Operation "Yew Tree"
 


ManxSeagull

ManxSeagull

NSC Creator
Jul 5, 2003
1,637
Isle of Man
The down side of loans is that the player might not be so committed and the player is only with us for a relatively short period of time.

Why dont the club offer an incentive to the loan players that if they assist the club in getting promotion they get a whacking bonus (pro-rata to the number of games they play). We could afford it and nothing to loose, no promotion no payout. Obviously we would still need to play a reasonable proportion of their salary to their parent club to obtain the player.
 


seagullsovergrimsby

seagullsovergrimsby

#cpfctinpotclub
Aug 21, 2005
43,690
Crap Town
Gives the club a further chance to evaluate a player brought in on loan rather than an outright purchase.
 




Blue Valkyrie

Blue Valkyrie

Not seen such Bravery!
Sep 1, 2012
32,165
Valhalla
This is the last year of the loan window. After the 2 loan windows this year, no more 93 day loans.

After that 1 year loans are pretty much the same as 1 year permanent deals from the buying club perspective. Half season loans will still be an option.
 




You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here