jdckelly Posted December 16, 2013 Share Posted December 16, 2013 Makes far more sense to be one of the only clubs our level not benefiting from it. its the principle of the matter. I would much rather give a chance to one of our kids than loan one of manchester uniteds regardless of ability gap because at the end of the day its a ridiculous short term measure and only to manchester uniteds benefit. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teasy Posted December 16, 2013 Share Posted December 16, 2013 Makes far more sense to be one of the only clubs our level not benefiting from it. Having Lukaku for a season would be benefiting from it, having Zaha for a season wouldn't. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted December 16, 2013 Share Posted December 16, 2013 I just don't want to be fattening up other clubs players for them. This. I hate it. I have lost faith in players giving a fuck and showing any loyalty so if a good one who would improve our squad becomes available on loan I would be more than happy to take them. They will fuck off as soon as someone bigger/offering more money comes along anyway so why not improve us in the short term? Would anyone have seriously turned their nose up at Lukaku on a season long loan? Teams like Man Utd and Chelsea are more than likely going to be ahead of us long term so why not take advantage of their greed? A lot of the time these players don't stay at their parent club anyway. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Segun Oluwaniyi Posted December 16, 2013 Share Posted December 16, 2013 I think people are underrating Zaha personally. He is a good player who was a level above anything in the lower division and hasn't been given any sort of chance for his new club. This is not his fault, and I believe he will still prove to be quality at this level. That said, we are fairly well stocked out wide. Unless Obertan and/or Jonas are leaving, there is no reason to bring more players in for this area. A striker is much more pressing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdckelly Posted December 16, 2013 Share Posted December 16, 2013 I just don't want to be fattening up other clubs players for them. This. I hate it. I have lost faith in players giving a fuck and showing any loyalty so if a good one who would improve our squad becomes available on loan I would be more than happy to take them. They will fuck off as soon as someone bigger/offering more money comes along anyway so why not improve us in the short term? Would anyone have seriously turned their nose up at Lukaku on a season long loan? Teams like Man Utd and Chelsea are more than likely going to be ahead of us long term so why not take advantage of their greed? A lot of the time these players don't stay at their parent club anyway. we're supposed to be competing with these teams, not fattening up players because they have so many players through stockpiling them they can't play them all and they get pissy about it. The only kind of loan I can tolerate is a loan with a buy out clause, otherwise its just an admission that you really are just another small pathetic club and all that matters is the "sky teams" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Segun Oluwaniyi Posted December 16, 2013 Share Posted December 16, 2013 I just don't want to be fattening up other clubs players for them. This. I hate it. I have lost faith in players giving a f*** and showing any loyalty so if a good one who would improve our squad becomes available on loan I would be more than happy to take them. They will f*** off as soon as someone bigger/offering more money comes along anyway so why not improve us in the short term? Would anyone have seriously turned their nose up at Lukaku on a season long loan? Teams like Man Utd and Chelsea are more than likely going to be ahead of us long term so why not take advantage of their greed? A lot of the time these players don't stay at their parent club anyway. we're supposed to be competing with these teams, not fattening up players because they have so many players through stockpiling them they can't play them all and they get pissy about it. The only kind of loan I can tolerate is a loan with a buy out clause, otherwise its just an admission that you really are just another small pathetic club and all that matters is the "sky teams" Preventing ourselves from acquiring quality players for a season without paying a transfer fee is going to help NUFC compete with the upper echelon of the league? The club should do what is best for itself. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teasy Posted December 16, 2013 Share Posted December 16, 2013 I just don't want to be fattening up other clubs players for them. This. I hate it. I have lost faith in players giving a fuck and showing any loyalty so if a good one who would improve our squad becomes available on loan I would be more than happy to take them. They will fuck off as soon as someone bigger/offering more money comes along anyway so why not improve us in the short term? Would anyone have seriously turned their nose up at Lukaku on a season long loan? Teams like Man Utd and Chelsea are more than likely going to be ahead of us long term so why not take advantage of their greed? A lot of the time these players don't stay at their parent club anyway. I don't think loyalty is the issue, more like weighing up the negative aspects of a short term loan vs the positives in each case. Lukaku for instance is so good and would improve our first team to such a degree that he'd be worth taking even with no possibility of a permanent transfer. Zaha just isn't, not even close. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdckelly Posted December 16, 2013 Share Posted December 16, 2013 I just don't want to be fattening up other clubs players for them. This. I hate it. I have lost faith in players giving a f*** and showing any loyalty so if a good one who would improve our squad becomes available on loan I would be more than happy to take them. They will f*** off as soon as someone bigger/offering more money comes along anyway so why not improve us in the short term? Would anyone have seriously turned their nose up at Lukaku on a season long loan? Teams like Man Utd and Chelsea are more than likely going to be ahead of us long term so why not take advantage of their greed? A lot of the time these players don't stay at their parent club anyway. we're supposed to be competing with these teams, not fattening up players because they have so many players through stockpiling them they can't play them all and they get pissy about it. The only kind of loan I can tolerate is a loan with a buy out clause, otherwise its just an admission that you really are just another small pathetic club and all that matters is the "sky teams" Preventing ourselves from acquiring quality players for a season without paying a transfer fee is going to help NUFC compete with the upper echelon of the league? The club should do what is best for itself. and when these players go back to their parent club? its short term thinking at its worst. we should be looking to sign young players of ability on permanent deals not borrow them for a temporary lift which will fade once he's gone anyway. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Interpolic Posted December 16, 2013 Share Posted December 16, 2013 Makes far more sense to be one of the only clubs our level not benefiting from it. Having Lukaku for a season would be benefiting from it, having Zaha for a season wouldn't. It's a matter of opinion, he was regarded as one of the most exciting young players around 6 months ago but his stock has obviously dropped now. Sturridge wasn't looking upto much when he went to Bolton, Andros Townsend's been all over the place and has only really started to look the part recently, even the likes of Wellbeck and Rose have done canny jobs for the mackems in the recent past. I'd rather not do it either but when you have an owner that spends fuck-all, beggars can't be choosers and we 100% need more depth and variety in the forward/wide positions. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted December 16, 2013 Share Posted December 16, 2013 I just don't want to be fattening up other clubs players for them. This. I hate it. I have lost faith in players giving a fuck and showing any loyalty so if a good one who would improve our squad becomes available on loan I would be more than happy to take them. They will fuck off as soon as someone bigger/offering more money comes along anyway so why not improve us in the short term? Would anyone have seriously turned their nose up at Lukaku on a season long loan? Teams like Man Utd and Chelsea are more than likely going to be ahead of us long term so why not take advantage of their greed? A lot of the time these players don't stay at their parent club anyway. we're supposed to be competing with these teams, not fattening up players because they have so many players through stockpiling them they can't play them all and they get pissy about it. The only kind of loan I can tolerate is a loan with a buy out clause, otherwise its just an admission that you really are just another small pathetic club and all that matters is the "sky teams" Realistically we won't be competing with them, not in the long term so I don't see how improving our options is going to be a detriment to us. Its not like Chelsea, Man City, Man Utd etc... can't just go out and buy a shed load of talent whenever they please. These are clubs who have players struggling to get an appearance who would walk into our side. As for fattening up, what does that really mean? If these players are good enough they will get loans anyway, why not improve the quality of our squad if we get the chance rather than letting them go to our real rivals while we have our 'pride'. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Interpolic Posted December 16, 2013 Share Posted December 16, 2013 I just don't want to be fattening up other clubs players for them. This. I hate it. I have lost faith in players giving a f*** and showing any loyalty so if a good one who would improve our squad becomes available on loan I would be more than happy to take them. They will f*** off as soon as someone bigger/offering more money comes along anyway so why not improve us in the short term? Would anyone have seriously turned their nose up at Lukaku on a season long loan? Teams like Man Utd and Chelsea are more than likely going to be ahead of us long term so why not take advantage of their greed? A lot of the time these players don't stay at their parent club anyway. we're supposed to be competing with these teams, not fattening up players because they have so many players through stockpiling them they can't play them all and they get pissy about it. The only kind of loan I can tolerate is a loan with a buy out clause, otherwise its just an admission that you really are just another small pathetic club and all that matters is the "sky teams" Preventing ourselves from acquiring quality players for a season without paying a transfer fee is going to help NUFC compete with the upper echelon of the league? The club should do what is best for itself. Jonas and Obertan should be out of the door as they're not good performers in the wide positions and will not improve. If they left then you've only got Gouffran, Ben Arfa and Remy with injuries and suspensions to deal with and also the likelihood that one of them will have to fill in centrally now and then, or more often than that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdckelly Posted December 16, 2013 Share Posted December 16, 2013 I just don't want to be fattening up other clubs players for them. This. I hate it. I have lost faith in players giving a fuck and showing any loyalty so if a good one who would improve our squad becomes available on loan I would be more than happy to take them. They will fuck off as soon as someone bigger/offering more money comes along anyway so why not improve us in the short term? Would anyone have seriously turned their nose up at Lukaku on a season long loan? Teams like Man Utd and Chelsea are more than likely going to be ahead of us long term so why not take advantage of their greed? A lot of the time these players don't stay at their parent club anyway. we're supposed to be competing with these teams, not fattening up players because they have so many players through stockpiling them they can't play them all and they get pissy about it. The only kind of loan I can tolerate is a loan with a buy out clause, otherwise its just an admission that you really are just another small pathetic club and all that matters is the "sky teams" Realistically we won't be competing with them, not in the long term so I don't see how improving our options is going to be a detriment to us. Its not like Chelsea, Man City, Man Utd etc... can't just go out and buy a shed load of talent whenever they please. These are clubs who have players struggling to get an appearance who would walk into our side. As for fattening up, what does that really mean? If these players are good enough they will get loans anyway, why not improve the quality of our squad if we get the chance rather than letting them go to our real rivals while we have our 'pride'. I'd rather hang onto pride and hope that with intelligent enough planning and leadership from top to bottom of the club that in time we could compete with them again rather than wave the white flag and admit we'll never be better than them because if thats the case then what the fuck is the point. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
afar Posted December 16, 2013 Share Posted December 16, 2013 I just don't want to be fattening up other clubs players for them. This. I hate it. I have lost faith in players giving a f*** and showing any loyalty so if a good one who would improve our squad becomes available on loan I would be more than happy to take them. They will f*** off as soon as someone bigger/offering more money comes along anyway so why not improve us in the short term? Would anyone have seriously turned their nose up at Lukaku on a season long loan? Teams like Man Utd and Chelsea are more than likely going to be ahead of us long term so why not take advantage of their greed? A lot of the time these players don't stay at their parent club anyway. we're supposed to be competing with these teams, not fattening up players because they have so many players through stockpiling them they can't play them all and they get pissy about it. The only kind of loan I can tolerate is a loan with a buy out clause, otherwise its just an admission that you really are just another small pathetic club and all that matters is the "sky teams" This, hate the loan system. Wish they would ban it tbh. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ponsaelius Posted December 16, 2013 Share Posted December 16, 2013 The loan system is a big fucking cop out from actually making any proper rules and restrictions. It is shite. Rather buy somebody who could be ours, even if its a worse player. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teasy Posted December 16, 2013 Share Posted December 16, 2013 Makes far more sense to be one of the only clubs our level not benefiting from it. Having Lukaku for a season would be benefiting from it, having Zaha for a season wouldn't. It's a matter of opinion, he was regarded as one of the most exciting young players around 6 months ago but his stock has obviously dropped now. Sturridge wasn't looking upto much when he went to Bolton, Andros Townsend's been all over the place and has only really started to look the part recently, even the likes of Wellbeck and Rose have done canny jobs for the mackems in the recent past. I'd rather not do it either but when you have an owner that spends fuck-all, beggars can't be choosers and we 100% need more depth and variety in the forward/wide positions. Well my view is that a loan that's guaranteed to be short term has to have very obvious benefits or its not worth doing. Bringing in a player who can't get a game for a side below us because he hasn't developed yet isn't worth doing IMO. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted December 16, 2013 Share Posted December 16, 2013 I just don't want to be fattening up other clubs players for them. This. I hate it. I have lost faith in players giving a fuck and showing any loyalty so if a good one who would improve our squad becomes available on loan I would be more than happy to take them. They will fuck off as soon as someone bigger/offering more money comes along anyway so why not improve us in the short term? Would anyone have seriously turned their nose up at Lukaku on a season long loan? Teams like Man Utd and Chelsea are more than likely going to be ahead of us long term so why not take advantage of their greed? A lot of the time these players don't stay at their parent club anyway. we're supposed to be competing with these teams, not fattening up players because they have so many players through stockpiling them they can't play them all and they get pissy about it. The only kind of loan I can tolerate is a loan with a buy out clause, otherwise its just an admission that you really are just another small pathetic club and all that matters is the "sky teams" Realistically we won't be competing with them, not in the long term so I don't see how improving our options is going to be a detriment to us. Its not like Chelsea, Man City, Man Utd etc... can't just go out and buy a shed load of talent whenever they please. These are clubs who have players struggling to get an appearance who would walk into our side. As for fattening up, what does that really mean? If these players are good enough they will get loans anyway, why not improve the quality of our squad if we get the chance rather than letting them go to our real rivals while we have our 'pride'. I'd rather hang onto pride and hope that with intelligent enough planning and leadership from top to bottom of the club that in time we could compete with them again rather than wave the white flag and admit we'll never be better than them because if thats the case then what the fuck is the point. So because we are being realistic there isn't any point? Fair enough, let your West Broms, Evertons etc.. loan the quality talent while we have Shola starting or Obertan a couple of injuries from starting Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdckelly Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 I just don't want to be fattening up other clubs players for them. This. I hate it. I have lost faith in players giving a fuck and showing any loyalty so if a good one who would improve our squad becomes available on loan I would be more than happy to take them. They will fuck off as soon as someone bigger/offering more money comes along anyway so why not improve us in the short term? Would anyone have seriously turned their nose up at Lukaku on a season long loan? Teams like Man Utd and Chelsea are more than likely going to be ahead of us long term so why not take advantage of their greed? A lot of the time these players don't stay at their parent club anyway. we're supposed to be competing with these teams, not fattening up players because they have so many players through stockpiling them they can't play them all and they get pissy about it. The only kind of loan I can tolerate is a loan with a buy out clause, otherwise its just an admission that you really are just another small pathetic club and all that matters is the "sky teams" Realistically we won't be competing with them, not in the long term so I don't see how improving our options is going to be a detriment to us. Its not like Chelsea, Man City, Man Utd etc... can't just go out and buy a shed load of talent whenever they please. These are clubs who have players struggling to get an appearance who would walk into our side. As for fattening up, what does that really mean? If these players are good enough they will get loans anyway, why not improve the quality of our squad if we get the chance rather than letting them go to our real rivals while we have our 'pride'. I'd rather hang onto pride and hope that with intelligent enough planning and leadership from top to bottom of the club that in time we could compete with them again rather than wave the white flag and admit we'll never be better than them because if thats the case then what the fuck is the point. So because we are being realistic there isn't any point? Fair enough, let your West Broms, Evertons etc.. loan the quality talent while we have Shola starting or Obertan a couple of injuries from starting yes west brom, borrowed lukaku got a nice temporary boost and now they've crashed back down as that short term thinking left a large hole in their squad this season compared to last, they would have been better off taking a chance on some young player their scouting department think could be a good player. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ponsaelius Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 Loaning can do one unless its with a view to buy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teasy Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 Realistically we won't be competing with them, not in the long term so I don't see how improving our options is going to be a detriment to us. Its not like Chelsea, Man City, Man Utd etc... can't just go out and buy a shed load of talent whenever they please. These are clubs who have players struggling to get an appearance who would walk into our side. None of the players on Man Utds bench the other day would walk into our side like (or shouldn't anyway), including Zaha. Chelsea and Man City probably have a few. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Interpolic Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 Makes far more sense to be one of the only clubs our level not benefiting from it. Having Lukaku for a season would be benefiting from it, having Zaha for a season wouldn't. It's a matter of opinion, he was regarded as one of the most exciting young players around 6 months ago but his stock has obviously dropped now. Sturridge wasn't looking upto much when he went to Bolton, Andros Townsend's been all over the place and has only really started to look the part recently, even the likes of Wellbeck and Rose have done canny jobs for the mackems in the recent past. I'd rather not do it either but when you have an owner that spends fuck-all, beggars can't be choosers and we 100% need more depth and variety in the forward/wide positions. Well my view is that a loan that's guaranteed to be short term has to have very obvious benefits or its not worth doing. Bringing in a player who can't get a game for a side below us because he hasn't developed yet isn't worth doing IMO. Howay man, this is Man Utd we're talking about and he was the most highly rated young British talent around 6 months ago. God knows why he hasn't featured more for Man Utd, I couldn't tell you. But there aren't many that would have turned their noses up at signing him in the summer. Seems more like a Sturridge-type situation than anything else, Sturridge was looking very handy at a very young age for Man City (albeit for a short time) then had years of nothingness at Chelsea. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deuce Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 ManU's just a wee club n' all. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Interpolic Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 Loaning can do one unless its with a view to buy. Just domestic or would you not have that lad from Barcelona that Everton have? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ponsaelius Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 Don't care, still don't want him on loan. Rather sign that cunt McGeady for £2 million and at least own the player. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Interpolic Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 Obertan's made 4 or 5 appearances for us in the last 6 weeks alone, if you don't think we'd have use for Zaha then fuck knas. I understand the people that say it's a point of principle and at heart I completely agree, but again the owner is a tight cunt and we've gladly went without for the sake of saving a few quid previously. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deuce Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 Don't care, still don't want him on loan. Rather sign that cunt McGeady for £2 million and at least own the player. You may not like the system (I certainly don't), but it's the law of the land. Play the game until the game changes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts