Matt Thornhill of Forest

[Barrel of Fun]

Oh, I do agree that we should go for permanent as a preference, but if we can get some real quality to come in on loan, that would be a huge bonus. I don't see any reason why we can't repeat a Paul McShane type figure on a long loan as opposed to someone that has been sitting out games and come here to get fit for a month, before flitting off again.

Chances are, if we want a promotion chasing side, then we might have to borrow a couple of decent players that we would otherwise not be able to purchase outright or afford.

 

[severnside gull]

it's the way of the modern game
bigger clubs have bigger squads and need to keep them fit or bring them on or whatever....especially the youngsters....and competitive games at a lower level achieves that.
and it can work - at least in the case of long term loans where a player knows they are with you all season
we need to learn to live with it
after all what do we lose? a sell on fee?

 

[strings]

In my rash point a few posts before, I was trying to make the point that alll loans are not bad.

In my opinion, short-term loans are pointless unless to cover injuries/suspensions.

However, season-long loans can be a good thing. We get (usually) young players, who are with the squad for the whole season. If we go down they are partly responsible for that and no player wants to have a relegation against their name. Similarly, if we go up than the player will have been a part of a promotion-winning team. As a season-long player I would say they are as dedicated to the cause as any other pernament player, whose contract is up at the end of the season.

 

[B.W.]

Loan players are unmotivated and nowhere near as good as pernament players.

That Paul McShane was rubbish.

Yes, and Robbie Savage was brilliant for us!

 

[B.W.]

Oh, I do agree that we should go for permanent as a preference, but if we can get some real quality to come in on loan, that would be a huge bonus. I don't see any reason why we can't repeat a Paul McShane type figure on a long loan as opposed to someone that has been sitting out games and come here to get fit for a month, before flitting off again.

Chances are, if we want a promotion chasing side, then we might have to borrow a couple of decent players that we would otherwise not be able to purchase outright or afford.

OK... a question: how many of Leicester's squad were loans? I don't know, but I am willing to bet my house that they had a lot less loans than us last season... success should be built on a consistent committed squad...

 

[strings]

Yes, and Robbie Savage was brilliant for us!

Very different circumstances.

Savage was a month-only loan.

McShane was season-long.

In my opinion, a season-long loanee isn't dissimilar to a player with only the rest of the season left on their contract (see my post above).

 

[Brighton Breezy]

There is NOTHING wrong with signing quality loan players.

Yes, last season we had a load of DUFF players but then, plenty of the lads we OWNED were far from great either...

Looking back at the likes of Dickov, Sidwell, Ingimarsson, Owusu, McShane, Racon etc I would say loans can really enhance a team.

Wasn't Zamora on loan first as well? And Leon Knight?

 

[Barrel of Fun]

OK... a question: how many of Leicester's squad were loans? I don't know, but I am willing to bet my house that they had a lot less loans than us last season... success should be built on a consistent committed squad...

From memory, I think they had three long term loanees - One from Arsenal and two from Liverpool. All three of them played an integral part of the team. One of them even secured our survival in the end! (Jack Hobbs own goal in 3-2 comeback). They were there from the start of the season and presumably took part in pre-season training with Leicester.

If we are able to secure someone that we could not afford and/or tempt the parent club to purchase, then I do not see the problem.

 

[sten_super]

OK... a question: how many of Leicester's squad were loans? I don't know, but I am willing to bet my house that they had a lot less loans than us last season... success should be built on a consistent committed squad...

Leicester City | Team

Six.
Kerrea Gilbert (Arsenal)
Tom Cleverley (Man Utd)
Jack Hobbs (Liverpool)
David Martin (Liverpool)
Tony Warner (Hull)
Astrit Ajdarevic (Liverpool)

also didn't they have Mark Bunn (Blackburn) on loan at some point?

Interesting to note that they had 35 different players turn out for them last year!

 

[B.W.]

In my rash point a few posts before, I was trying to make the point that alll loans are not bad.

In my opinion, short-term loans are pointless unless to cover injuries/suspensions.

However, season-long loans can be a good thing. We get (usually) young players, who are with the squad for the whole season. If we go down they are partly responsible for that and no player wants to have a relegation against their name. Similarly, if we go up than the player will have been a part of a promotion-winning team. As a season-long player I would say they are as dedicated to the cause as any other pernament player, whose contract is up at the end of the season.

IMHO... no, they would not be as motivated... because they know they are more likely to return to their parent club... agreed that season-long is better than 1-month tho'...

 

[B.W.]

Leicester City | Team

Six.
Kerrea Gilbert (Arsenal)
Tom Cleverley (Man Utd)
Jack Hobbs (Liverpool)
David Martin (Liverpool)
Tony Warner (Hull)
Astrit Ajdarevic (Liverpool)

also didn't they have Mark Bunn (Blackburn) on loan at some point?

Interesting to note that they had 35 different players turn out for them last year!

And we had more loans, and 40+ players... my home is safe...

 

[Turkey]

I think the problem we had with short term loans was a lack of match fitness. That won't be a problem with long term loans.

 

[seagull_special]

If you have a glut of loanees at any one time the chances of them gelling are minimal plus the obvious lack of match fitness. loaness have to compliment the team not replace it. Short terms loanees should be for emergencies only. Also the problem is, when players shine on loan other clubs become aware i.e. Gotsmanov and Sidwell and we end up missing out. overall It certainly is a minefield with certain benefits if used properly

 

[Meade's Ball]

I think anyone thinking to inject the level of depth into a sportsman that would have them feeling true motivation from a longstanding loyalty to one club is juggling untruths in dreamland. They are well-paid and carry out their jobs to prove that earning is deserved, and to receive a warm round of applause from the audience. Their interests are mostly in their own performances, so motivation is rarely down to which club they are attached to, but how the manager in charge fires a spirit and sense of urgency inside them in their temporary stepping stone to greater things.
Like all signings for any length of time it takes those in charge to look at their skill-level and them as people to see how they would fit into the team. A good manager will get the right man for the job and keep him for as long as he can.

 

[Caveman]

Yes, and Robbie Savage was brilliant for us!

Who was that rubbish loan player Hull City had up front? You know the one bagging all the goals and getting them promoted to the Preimership.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Frazier Campbell

 

[BLOCK F]

You are spot on. This loan system is a joke, a few years ago teams would only get them in if they were injury hit, now they build teams around loanees.

Also to be talking about signing loan players even before we have made a permanent signing is madness. If anything we should be building our own squad as a priority, you know, one that includes our own players and not those from another club.

One of the few decent things Mickey came out with last year was him saying that it would be a kick in the teeth for his players of he put a squad together then went out and got loan players. He did not get much right second time round but that was something he did. Of course, he then went panic loaning a few months later, but there you go.

I am sure Slade is no idiot and he realises the need to actually construct his own squad first and with the new found money sloshing about the need for loaning players should be non-existant.

Albion & England forever.

Thimble Keegan
Rustington BHA

Agree,please preserve us from 'loanitis' again.

 

[folkestonesgull]

Scunthorpe had a few good loan players as well- season long loans of 2-3 promising youngsters is the way forward, allowing lower league teams to a level of talent that they could never afford.

Blending the young and talented loan players with more experienced lower league players is the challenge for RS and any manager at this level...

 

[DIFFBROOK]

I think the reason why the parent club wants the player out on loan and of course the players thoughts on him being loaned out ar whats important.

If its a case of getting the player fit, or trimming a wagebill then its probably a no no. Buts if its say a season long deal for a player who clearly has talent and the parent club wants that player to have 1st team experence (who otherwise wouldn't get it at the parent club) plus the player himself sees the benefits of it, then I thinks its a good idea.

 

[VeronaSeagull]

I saw Thornhill play last year when I took my old man (Forest fan) to their game against QPR at the City Ground. Quality player from what I saw of him, will definitely be a strong addition to the squad even if it is just for the season.