Ashley's Loan Strategy: now that we're back in the top flight.

[Dolly Potter MD 0]

I know quite a few supporters who are heavily in favor of Ashley's transfer strategy, which is significantly built around the premise of 'try before you buy' if you go by the number of loans deal negotiated by Ashley's partner in crime, Mr Llambarse.

 

On a side-note i'm of the opinion that the loan system as is stands [re- clubs borrowing top prospects, from higher calibre clubs in the top flight with greater numbers in depth] should be abolished [amongst top flight/1st division teams irrespective of the nation] as it acts a 'get of out jail free' card for club owners who don't have the ambition and are not prepared to gamble & pay the so-called going rate in what is a highly speculative market.

 

It will also force larger clubs with depth aplenty to make a quicker, definitive evaluation as to whether a talented youngster will make it in the top grade based on their current rate of development [within their own 1st team set-up], when making making the transition from their respective youth teams to senior squads. Certainly player agents [as much as i despise them] will certainly prompt the ball to move in this regard, and in certain areas player movement has to be encouraged.

 

Back to the premise of the original post. Ashley and Llambarse would be naive to think that they can keep the ship afloat [when our lack of depth is found out, due to injuries] by assuming the likes of Man United [with their depth] will pass down a favour, or hand-me-down in the form Anderson who i can only imagine would be a potential loan deal as he would fall outside our January budget.

 

We're back in the big league now, with playing assets [Carroll & Enrique] which the big boys will be keeping tabs on. The retention of our premiership status [by capturing a couple of impact players, to save our season, via loan] through loaning off the current big hitters is counter-productive to the very clubs Ashley will hopefully try to hoodwink come January. Our potential relegation spells good news for such clubs who probably have targeted our top assets.

 

Unlike last season, Ashley & Co can't expect any favors from the top flight this time. His retail/trade stall or customer orientated philosophy of running the club [namely try before you buy] will bare little fruit if we're pursuing the likes of Anderson. It's time to punch in accordance to our weight, and behave like a big boy, instead of acting like time-wasters. A previous & maligned chairman seemed to understand this very notion.

[Guest]

We have one loaned player.

[manc-mag 1]

The loan system should be abolished?

 

eh?

 

Expecting Man Utd to do us favours?

 

eh?

[LeazesMag 0]

We have one loaned player.

 

he doesn't say we have loaned more, at the moment.

 

As usual, it is all lost on you.

[khay 8]

We had Willo ,Aanholt and Simpson on loan.

[The Mighty Hog 343]

We had Willo ,Aanholt and Simpson on loan.

 

 

Didn't have Williamson. But had Hall, Harewood and Khizanishvili to add to that list.

[Tom 13901]

Williamson was initially a loan.

[The Mighty Hog 343]

Williamson was initially a loan.

 

For one day. I wouldn't really class that as a loan.

 

From the wiki:

 

On 27 January 2010, Newcastle United completed a deal for Williamson for an undisclosed fee. He made his debut on 27 January 2010 at St James' Park in a 2–0 win over Crystal Palace,[8] in which he played the full 90 minutes and won the Man of the Match award in the process. On 28 January it was revealed that he was initially signed on an emergency loan deal in order for him to play the previous day, with the deal then finalised and Williamson signing a three and a half year contract.

[Kid Dynamite 6068]

Well technically it is

 

I would say the system works. We got Williamson and Simpson out of it and possibly Ben Arfa, whilst we managed to get rid of Harewood and Kizinishvili. In years gone by we would have just bought the lot of them at inflated prices and then realised after 3 games that some of them are shit. Ala Leon Best.

[LeazesMag 0]

Well technically it is

 

I would say the system works. We got Williamson and Simpson out of it and possibly Ben Arfa, whilst we managed to get rid of Harewood and Kizinishvili. In years gone by we would have just bought the lot of them at inflated prices and then realised after 3 games that some of them are shit. Ala Leon Best.

 

no we wouldn't have bought the lot of them at inflated prices. We would have bought better quality footballers at the going rate, most of whom fulfilled their ability and expectation while a few did not but thats football.

 

Anyway, I'm off to the game and if its called off I'll be in the pub instead.

[Kid Dynamite 6068]

Well technically it is

 

I would say the system works. We got Williamson and Simpson out of it and possibly Ben Arfa, whilst we managed to get rid of Harewood and Kizinishvili. In years gone by we would have just bought the lot of them at inflated prices and then realised after 3 games that some of them are shit. Ala Leon Best.

 

no we wouldn't have bought the lot of them at inflated prices. We would have bought better quality footballers at the going rate, most of whom fulfilled their ability and expectation while a few did not but thats football.

 

Anyway, I'm off to the game and if its called off I'll be in the pub instead.

 

Nice exit strategy before your completely baseless statement is destroyed

 

Boumsong, Luque, Viana, Xisco, Just a few off the top of my head who are definately not . . .

 

better quality footballers at the going rate, most of whom fulfilled their ability

[manc-mag 1]

Tbf if a loan is available, unless the player represents an exceptional opportunity (either because of his particular talent or because the permanent transfer fee is such fantastic value for money at that point in time) then why not a loan? If they've got owt about them then they play hard to show that they're worth the permanent transfer. If they're shit then they can be fucked off.

 

We've managed to turn up some good additions having been forced to be a bit more resourceful. It can't be a long term strategy but it can serve a purpose in a first season strategy of re-establishing ourselves as a Prem club.

[The Mighty Hog 343]

Well technically it is

 

I would say the system works. We got Williamson and Simpson out of it and possibly Ben Arfa, whilst we managed to get rid of Harewood and Kizinishvili. In years gone by we would have just bought the lot of them at inflated prices and then realised after 3 games that some of them are shit. Ala Leon Best.

 

But not for a "try before you buy" it was a way to try and get around the clauses that Pompey had to pay to Watford. The intention was to sign him outright from the beginning.

[Christmas Tree 4003]

Tbf if a loan is available, unless the player represents an exceptional opportunity (either because of his particular talent or because the permanent transfer fee is such fantastic value for money at that point in time) then why not a loan? If they've got owt about them then they play hard to show that they're worth the permanent transfer. If they're shit then they can be fucked off.

 

We've managed to turn up some good additions having been forced to be a bit more resourceful. It can't be a long term strategy but it can serve a purpose in a first season strategy of re-establishing ourselves as a Prem club.

 

 

Exactamundo

[manc-mag 1]

Well technically it is

 

I would say the system works. We got Williamson and Simpson out of it and possibly Ben Arfa, whilst we managed to get rid of Harewood and Kizinishvili. In years gone by we would have just bought the lot of them at inflated prices and then realised after 3 games that some of them are shit. Ala Leon Best.

 

no we wouldn't have bought the lot of them at inflated prices. We would have bought better quality footballers at the going rate, most of whom fulfilled their ability and expectation while a few did not but thats football.

 

Anyway, I'm off to the game and if its called off I'll be in the pub instead.

 

 

 

It's semantics really though. Even if we paid the 'going rate', it's still a complete waste of money if you pay that and then welcome them to a holiday camp rather than a serious football club, which is effectively what we did.

[OTF 6310]

I don't like the whole system where-by the bigger clubs purchase large amounts of promising young players and then farm them out until they're ready to play. They may represent good short term value for the loaning sides, and good potential for a long term return for the bigger club but on the whole it aids to further reduce the tribalism of football teams. It's much better to have an attachment to a player, and if that can't be with a player who has come through the local ranks at least let it be with someone who is there for more than a season or two.

 

Loaning out some players in the champonship to provide cover was perfectly acceptable in my opinion. Van aanholt came in very handy, and even Fitz Hall figured a few times. With the Ben Arfa deal if it's a loan with established terms for a purchase at the discretion of the loaning club then there's absolutely nothing wrong with that!

[LeazesMag 0]

Well technically it is

 

I would say the system works. We got Williamson and Simpson out of it and possibly Ben Arfa, whilst we managed to get rid of Harewood and Kizinishvili. In years gone by we would have just bought the lot of them at inflated prices and then realised after 3 games that some of them are shit. Ala Leon Best.

 

no we wouldn't have bought the lot of them at inflated prices. We would have bought better quality footballers at the going rate, most of whom fulfilled their ability and expectation while a few did not but thats football.

 

Anyway, I'm off to the game and if its called off I'll be in the pub instead.

 

 

 

It's semantics really though. Even if we paid the 'going rate', it's still a complete waste of money if you pay that and then welcome them to a holiday camp rather than a serious football club, which is effectively what we did.

 

you show me a "holiday camp" who qualified for europe more than any club bar 4 over a period of 15 years, attracted top quality international footballers to do it, filled a 52000 stadium every home game, got to the 2nd round of the Champions League, expanded a world wide profile and attracted big sponsorship deals [which have now disappeared], sold shirt all over the far east and worldwide [who have now disappeared], and increased the value of a football club from one deemed to be not worth 1.25m quid into one that was going for the thick end of 200m give or take.

 

Until then, pipe down and stop talking utter shite.

 

Edit.

 

Seriously mate, I realise you aren't a brainless idiot, like some, but points of view like you have just posted make me fuckin wonder about the mentality of football supporters, not even mentioning their ability to latch onto any old stupid unrealistic and daft cliches they find, which have absolutely no foundation whatsoever.

 

I hope you enjoyed those "circus" years, because they may be a long time coming back again ........although my "man in the pub" tells me otherwise unlike your own esteemed and high profile circles......

Edited November 28, 2010 by LeazesMag

[LeazesMag 0]

Well technically it is

 

I would say the system works. We got Williamson and Simpson out of it and possibly Ben Arfa, whilst we managed to get rid of Harewood and Kizinishvili. In years gone by we would have just bought the lot of them at inflated prices and then realised after 3 games that some of them are shit. Ala Leon Best.

 

no we wouldn't have bought the lot of them at inflated prices. We would have bought better quality footballers at the going rate, most of whom fulfilled their ability and expectation while a few did not but thats football.

 

Anyway, I'm off to the game and if its called off I'll be in the pub instead.

 

Nice exit strategy before your completely baseless statement is destroyed

 

Boumsong, Luque, Viana, Xisco, Just a few off the top of my head who are definately not . . .

 

better quality footballers at the going rate, most of whom fulfilled their ability

 

 

I would prefer to talk about Shearer, Ferdinand, Cole, Ginola, Batty, Robert, Bellamy, Dyer, Jenas, Solano, Speed, Ferguson, Barton, Albert, Lee, Fox, Sellars, Venison, Beresford, Peacock, Woodgate, Dabizas, Milner, Given and many more, and 15 years of regular european competition if its' alright with you.

 

Unless of course you think that the recent acqusiitions made under Mike Ashley is setting the same standards. Kevin Keegan didin't think so anyway

[manc-mag 1]

Well technically it is

 

I would say the system works. We got Williamson and Simpson out of it and possibly Ben Arfa, whilst we managed to get rid of Harewood and Kizinishvili. In years gone by we would have just bought the lot of them at inflated prices and then realised after 3 games that some of them are shit. Ala Leon Best.

 

no we wouldn't have bought the lot of them at inflated prices. We would have bought better quality footballers at the going rate, most of whom fulfilled their ability and expectation while a few did not but thats football.

 

Anyway, I'm off to the game and if its called off I'll be in the pub instead.

 

 

 

It's semantics really though. Even if we paid the 'going rate', it's still a complete waste of money if you pay that and then welcome them to a holiday camp rather than a serious football club, which is effectively what we did.

 

you show me a "holiday camp" who qualified for europe more than any club bar 4 over a period of 15 years, attracted top quality international footballers to do it, filled a 52000 stadium every home game, got to the 2nd round of the Champions League, expanded a world wide profile and attracted big sponsorship deals [which have now disappeared], sold shirt all over the far east and worldwide [who have now disappeared], and increased the value of a football club from one deemed to be not worth 1.25m quid into one that was going for the thick end of 200m give or take.

 

Until then, pipe down and stop talking utter shite.

 

Edit.

 

Seriously mate, I realise you aren't a brainless idiot, like some, but points of view like you have just posted make me fuckin wonder about the mentality of football supporters, not even mentioning their ability to latch onto any old stupid unrealistic and daft cliches they find, which have absolutely no foundation whatsoever.

 

I hope you enjoyed those "circus" years, because they may be a long time coming back again ........although my "man in the pub" tells me otherwise unlike your own esteemed and high profile circles......

 

What I mean is too many of the top international footballers we bought didnt have any respect for the club. And that was entirely the fault of those running the club. And of the things you mention, significantly, it was the one dynamic for success that you can't achieve by solely throwing money at something. Which is the tragedy for me, you actually don't need shedloads of money for that, you just need the club to be run by someone demanding the top effort from your top buys. We never had that though, in truth we've had a bit of a soap opera for years outside of the Keegan era, with only Bobby's quiet dignity bringing welcome respite.

 

I'm not knocking Shepherd for spending the club's money, I'm saying he got very basic things wrong (consistently) and these actively devalued the money we spent.

 

Btw, the fact it's even back onto this sort of proves a point. The guy really should have been completely anonymous. Which of the big clubs that ever won anything of value since the Prem started have done so with a Chairman who's felt the need to be as big as the club itself? Even Abramovich keeps it buttoned and he's spent hundreds of millions of his own money running a club with gates that used to be 6,000 ffs. The Glazers are cunts but you never hear a peep. Who gave a fuck who the Chairman of Liverpool was when they were winning everything?

 

I have a far more balanced view than you do on this. You (wrongly) take pretty much anything as Shepherd bashing to the extent that even the legitimate criticisms of him wind you up. It's not some sort of Ashley love-in. Ashley came throwing his sports direct money around and being the playboy around the Bigg Market. Look where that ultimately got us. Relegated.

 

There's very basic psychological principles behind it all.

[LeazesMag 0]

Well technically it is

 

I would say the system works. We got Williamson and Simpson out of it and possibly Ben Arfa, whilst we managed to get rid of Harewood and Kizinishvili. In years gone by we would have just bought the lot of them at inflated prices and then realised after 3 games that some of them are shit. Ala Leon Best.

 

no we wouldn't have bought the lot of them at inflated prices. We would have bought better quality footballers at the going rate, most of whom fulfilled their ability and expectation while a few did not but thats football.

 

Anyway, I'm off to the game and if its called off I'll be in the pub instead.

 

 

 

It's semantics really though. Even if we paid the 'going rate', it's still a complete waste of money if you pay that and then welcome them to a holiday camp rather than a serious football club, which is effectively what we did.

 

you show me a "holiday camp" who qualified for europe more than any club bar 4 over a period of 15 years, attracted top quality international footballers to do it, filled a 52000 stadium every home game, got to the 2nd round of the Champions League, expanded a world wide profile and attracted big sponsorship deals [which have now disappeared], sold shirt all over the far east and worldwide [who have now disappeared], and increased the value of a football club from one deemed to be not worth 1.25m quid into one that was going for the thick end of 200m give or take.

 

Until then, pipe down and stop talking utter shite.

 

Edit.

 

Seriously mate, I realise you aren't a brainless idiot, like some, but points of view like you have just posted make me fuckin wonder about the mentality of football supporters, not even mentioning their ability to latch onto any old stupid unrealistic and daft cliches they find, which have absolutely no foundation whatsoever.

 

I hope you enjoyed those "circus" years, because they may be a long time coming back again ........although my "man in the pub" tells me otherwise unlike your own esteemed and high profile circles......

 

What I mean is too many of the top international footballers we bought didnt have any respect for the club. And that was entirely the fault of those running the club. And of the things you mention, significantly, it was the one dynamic for success that you can't achieve by solely throwing money at something. Which is the tragedy for me, you actually don't need shedloads of money for that, you just need the club to be run by someone demanding the top effort from your top buys. We never had that though, in truth we've had a bit of a soap opera for years outside of the Keegan era, with only Bobby's quiet dignity bringing welcome respite.

 

I don't agree with this at all. The fact is, most supporters consider their clubs to be the "best" and they think no other club commands the same publicity, good or bad. So to that extent, the fact that you and others think the club was a "circus" is neither here nor there, supporters of other clubs are exactly the same. Fact is, at the end of the day, what you are saying is that in a period of 12 years, the club was run by 2 top managers for 10 of them which is pretty good going, and they made huge steps forward in every way possible accordingly.

 

We may have the 2nd/3rd biggest support in the country, and we are a unique one city one club football club, but nobody else realises this because we haven't won the trophies to show it to them, and the reason for this is prior to 1992 we were a nothing club for almost 40 years and playing catch up with psychological barriers to overcome as well as pressure heaped onto the club by us the supporters through the demands for success and frustration of those 40 years. As Keegan said, the first one is the hardest.

 

I'm not knocking Shepherd for spending the club's money, I'm saying he got very basic things wrong (consistently) and these actively devalued the money we spent.

 

Btw, the fact it's even back onto this sort of proves a point. The guy really should have been completely anonymous. Which of the big clubs that ever won anything of value since the Prem started have done so with a Chairman who's felt the need to be as big as the club itself?

 

irrelevant. Nothing but a myth. There is nothing wrong with bigging up your club, in fact if anything, it adds to the interest in the club from the outside.

 

 

Even Abramovich keeps it buttoned and he's spent hundreds of millions of his own money running a club with gates that used to be 6,000 ffs. The Glazers are cunts but you never hear a peep. Who gave a fuck who the Chairman of Liverpool was when they were winning everything?

 

everybody knew the Moores family owned Liverpool. What about Jack Walker ? It;s totally irrelevant. It's about having a winning mentality inside the club and footballers who can take the pressure of big games.

 

I have a far more balanced view than you do on this. You (wrongly) take pretty much anything as Shepherd bashing to the extent that even the legitimate criticisms of him wind you up. It's not some sort of Ashley love-in. Ashley came throwing his sports direct money around and being the playboy around the Bigg Market. Look where that ultimately got us. Relegated.

 

There's very basic psychological principles behind it all.

 

I'm not wound up about anything. I just want the club to show itself in the levels they did under the old regime as quickly as possible and get some trophies to finish the job off.

Edited November 28, 2010 by LeazesMag

[Monroe Transfer 0]

Right, I'm joining the ignoring Leazes club. Sick of reading the same old.

 

Loans we had last season are irrelevant. All lower league clubs utilise them, it's near essential.

 

We have one single player on loan at the moment - and we all know the circumstances surrounding that. Getting him on loan was, with his history, great business in my eyes. Suited all parties although what effect his injury will have on any future deals, I don't know.

 

The OP is talking about a "strategy" that has so far yielded one player. A few paragraphs in response to one rumour, and what he thinks might happen in the future (plenty of lower table Prem clubs bring in loan players I might add).

Edited November 28, 2010 by Tecato

[LeazesMag 0]

Right, I'm joining the ignoring Leazes club. Sick of reading the same old.

 

Loans we had last season are irrelevant. All lower league clubs utilise them, it's near essential.

 

We have one single player on loan at the moment - and we all know the circumstances surrounding that. Getting him on loan was, with his history, great business in my eyes. Suited all parties although what effect his injury will have on any future deals, I don't know.

 

The OP is talking about a "strategy" that has so far yielded one player. A few paragraphs in response to one rumour, and what he thinks might happen in the future (plenty of lower table Prem clubs bring in loan players I might add).

 

oh dear. Someone else who can't take the truth. Why do people like you only want to hear what suits you ?

 

A club like Newcastle United should be buying top players in their own right, not being a nursery club for others and taking them on loan.

[Kitman 2188]

A club like Newcastle United should be buying top players in their own right, not being a nursery club for others and taking them on loan.

 

[manc-mag 1]

It;s totally irrelevant. It's about having a winning mentality inside the club and footballers who can take the pressure of big games.

 

Bingo. Completely agree 100% and that's exactly what they didnt find at NUFC. And these were top international players as you rightly point out, so it's a big indictment.

 

That's basically what it all boils down to for me.

 

We disagree on it for the most part so we won't come round to each other's way of thinking, but you (wrongly) accuse me of being ungrateful for the peak years and that's completely untrue. I'm 33 and we've won fuck all in my entire lifetime so I'm probably going to be at least as grateful for that football as you for instance, whose been around during FA Cup and European successes. So I'll simply say you're wrong on that, but beyond that I don't feel the need to apologise for holding robust views on how the club should be run. It doesnt make me ungrateful, it doesn't make me an Ashley sympathiser, it just makes me an emininently realistic student of how the top clubs do things. In fact I'd go as far as to say it's completely retrograde if you don't learn lessons from what's around you.

Edited November 29, 2010 by manc-mag

[LeazesMag 0]

It;s totally irrelevant. It's about having a winning mentality inside the club and footballers who can take the pressure of big games.

 

Bingo. Completely agree 100% and that's exactly what they didnt find at NUFC. And these were top international players as you rightly point out, so it's a big indictment.

 

That's basically what it all boils down to for me.

 

they tried, they did their best, they went for it, they paid the going rate. If you don't take a shot, you don't score a goal. We got close, mightily close, and had some great years, because they had a go. Thats all you can ask. We should also be demanding the same from the current owner, and the next owner too. Its as simple as that, instead of swallowing all this bullshit and lowering of standards they are coming out with.

 

Would you rather not take a shot ?

 

You can't blame owners and directors for seasoned international footballers and managers bottling big games, they supply the means to provide the managers the tools as best they can to the ability of the club, they have done their side of the deal.

 

Hopefully the next owner will go for it.

Edited November 29, 2010 by LeazesMag