slystallone Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 Just wanting to gauge people’s opinions on this; as for me, I wouldn’t have Eaves back on loan this season after the deal is done to sell him. But; lots on here have said they want the deal to include having him back for the season. The way I see it is we don’t necessarily need him to come back; and it’s not really in our interests to have him in the side after he’s gone. If we don’t sell him; and he remains our players; it’s 100% in our interests to play him. He’ll be a contracted player; one of our lads; who’s game will develop the more games he plays (hopefully) – if he does well; it should increase his value; meaning more money into the club if we sell him at a later date. If he goes to say Bolton; he obviously then becomes their player. It then becomes the usual loan debate of playing another clubs youngster instead of one of ours; to the detriment of our young players. Even though Kelly is older than Eaves; I wouldn’t necessarily want Eaves to be playing in front of Kelly; restricting his development (Kelly) for Bolton’s advantage (Eaves’ development). Granted Brooke would appear to out injured for a fair few months – but once eaves ceases to be a Latics player; I wouldn’t necessarily want him to get game time ahead of Brooke, Kelly, Bemba-Lita et all. He’s an 18 year old who’s finding his feet & learning his trade. Once he’s not our player; I’d sooner those players learning their trade & finding their feet were our players long-term. Thoughts on this??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 Its good idea I think... As long as he is hungry to do well then it can only be good... if he isn't playing well or up for it we have lost nothing... and more deals like this will see young English players developing better in the game... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
24hoursfromtulsehill Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 Just wanting to gauge people’s opinions on this; as for me, I wouldn’t have Eaves back on loan this season after the deal is done to sell him. But; lots on here have said they want the deal to include having him back for the season. The way I see it is we don’t necessarily need him to come back; and it’s not really in our interests to have him in the side after he’s gone. If we don’t sell him; and he remains our players; it’s 100% in our interests to play him. He’ll be a contracted player; one of our lads; who’s game will develop the more games he plays (hopefully) – if he does well; it should increase his value; meaning more money into the club if we sell him at a later date. If he goes to say Bolton; he obviously then becomes their player. It then becomes the usual loan debate of playing another clubs youngster instead of one of ours; to the detriment of our young players. Even though Kelly is older than Eaves; I wouldn’t necessarily want Eaves to be playing in front of Kelly; restricting his development (Kelly) for Bolton’s advantage (Eaves’ development). Granted Brooke would appear to out injured for a fair few months – but once eaves ceases to be a Latics player; I wouldn’t necessarily want him to get game time ahead of Brooke, Kelly, Bemba-Lita et all. He’s an 18 year old who’s finding his feet & learning his trade. Once he’s not our player; I’d sooner those players learning their trade & finding their feet were our players long-term. Thoughts on this??? I don't mind the loan back scheme - I don't see anything wrong with it. This time, though, we need to make sure that the big money comes in via a first team / international appearances threshold and a sell-on clause. We'll probably miss out on money for Richards because he'll stay at Citeh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarryBosch Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 Just wanting to gauge people’s opinions on this; as for me, I wouldn’t have Eaves back on loan this season after the deal is done to sell him. But; lots on here have said they want the deal to include having him back for the season. The way I see it is we don’t necessarily need him to come back; and it’s not really in our interests to have him in the side after he’s gone. If we don’t sell him; and he remains our players; it’s 100% in our interests to play him. He’ll be a contracted player; one of our lads; who’s game will develop the more games he plays (hopefully) – if he does well; it should increase his value; meaning more money into the club if we sell him at a later date. If he goes to say Bolton; he obviously then becomes their player. It then becomes the usual loan debate of playing another clubs youngster instead of one of ours; to the detriment of our young players. Even though Kelly is older than Eaves; I wouldn’t necessarily want Eaves to be playing in front of Kelly; restricting his development (Kelly) for Bolton’s advantage (Eaves’ development). Granted Brooke would appear to out injured for a fair few months – but once eaves ceases to be a Latics player; I wouldn’t necessarily want him to get game time ahead of Brooke, Kelly, Bemba-Lita et all. He’s an 18 year old who’s finding his feet & learning his trade. Once he’s not our player; I’d sooner those players learning their trade & finding their feet were our players long-term. Thoughts on this??? Agree 100%. Also, would we be happy with loaning any other Premiership 18 year old who'd never scored in several competitive appearances? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lookers_Carl Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 Just wanting to gauge people’s opinions on this; as for me, I wouldn’t have Eaves back on loan this season after the deal is done to sell him. But; lots on here have said they want the deal to include having him back for the season. The way I see it is we don’t necessarily need him to come back; and it’s not really in our interests to have him in the side after he’s gone. If we don’t sell him; and he remains our players; it’s 100% in our interests to play him. He’ll be a contracted player; one of our lads; who’s game will develop the more games he plays (hopefully) – if he does well; it should increase his value; meaning more money into the club if we sell him at a later date. If he goes to say Bolton; he obviously then becomes their player. It then becomes the usual loan debate of playing another clubs youngster instead of one of ours; to the detriment of our young players. Even though Kelly is older than Eaves; I wouldn’t necessarily want Eaves to be playing in front of Kelly; restricting his development (Kelly) for Bolton’s advantage (Eaves’ development). Granted Brooke would appear to out injured for a fair few months – but once eaves ceases to be a Latics player; I wouldn’t necessarily want him to get game time ahead of Brooke, Kelly, Bemba-Lita et all. He’s an 18 year old who’s finding his feet & learning his trade. Once he’s not our player; I’d sooner those players learning their trade & finding their feet were our players long-term. Thoughts on this??? Considering we could be one striker down (brooke) for some time to come, and the added bonus that they may be paying his wages, then I think it would be a good idea for us. However, it may not be a good idea for Bolton, as I think it would be in their interests to loan him out somewhere where he would be playing week in week out guaranteed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 (edited) Agree 100%. Also, would we be happy with loaning any other Premiership 18 year old who'd never scored in several competitive appearances? Difference is we know this lad inside out... and you know, we probably would be happy... Better than a 33 year old struggling for fitness... gets fit... and goes back... Edited August 9, 2010 by oafc0000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigfinLatic Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 I tend to agree with you Sly, however I've always been of the viewpoint that eaves was never going to be good enough to be a key part of our team this season anyway. If we offload him for a decent wedge, with sell-on clauses, then it is in our interest to see him improve as much as possible, get sold on again, and make us lots of cash. For me, a season with us isnt the best way to develop (Taylor, Smalley, Jigsaw et al...), but go to a better club, play with better coaches, players, etc, and improve... If he goes out on loan straight away, to us or anyone, he may become one of these habitual loanees that never make it at thier clubs. If he goes, for me hes gone... no point hanging on for no reason. As I have said, he isnt even good enough to play anyway. Lots of hysteria over nowt. In a couple of years he may be good enough, but grab the money and let bolton take that gamble. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaticMark Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 Considering we could be one striker down (brooke) for some time to come, and the added bonus that they may be paying his wages, then I think it would be a good idea for us. However, it may not be a good idea for Bolton, as I think it would be in their interests to loan him out somewhere where he would be playing week in week out guaranteed. If we could, I'd have Eaves back on loan until January, when the transfer window re-opens. He'd replace the injured Brooke, who now looks as if he's going to be out for a while. Bolton could then put him in their reserves or loan him out elsewhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slystallone Posted August 9, 2010 Author Share Posted August 9, 2010 Agree 100%. Also, would we be happy with loaning any other Premiership 18 year old who'd never scored in several competitive appearances? Even with Brooke out for 3 or 4 months; it still leaves us with Feeney, Kelly, OT, Bemba-Lita & Dickov; with Lewi (although I expect he’ll stay on the left of midfield) & Smalley who can go up there too. It’s healthier up there than last season in terms of numbers I’d say. What I’m getting at is; if he goes; which I don’t think is in doubt really – I’d rather us go for a more experienced loan signing if a loan striker is to be brought in; rather than having a raw, inexperienced 18 year old who is going to be learning as he goes; even if he is a former player who we ‘know about’. I just don’t see the point in it to be honest; if he goes he should stay gone and we can move on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigfinLatic Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 Considering we could be one striker down (brooke) for some time to come, and the added bonus that they may be paying his wages, then I think it would be a good idea for us. However, it may not be a good idea for Bolton, as I think it would be in their interests to loan him out somewhere where he would be playing week in week out guaranteed. Rochdale? Stalybridge? The Dog and Duck? The fact he wont even play regularly for us, shows what stage he is in in terms of his development... Cash in, dont look back... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yarddog Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 I agree in a sense,personally, Id stick my neck out and just tell any interested clubs to stump up £1m and no add ons ,no ties, nothing, just get the money in the bank and start planning ahead. Just because he becomes a premiership player doesnt mean hes guaranteed a place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankly Mr Shankly Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 If he goes to say Bolton; he obviously then becomes their player. It then becomes the usual loan debate of playing another clubs youngster instead of one of ours; to the detriment of our young players. Even though Kelly is older than Eaves; I wouldn't necessarily want Eaves to be playing in front of Kelly; restricting his development (Kelly) for Bolton's advantage (Eaves' development). Thoughts on this??? Isn't this just the same as this chap from Sunderland who we have on loan? he's a loan player who's standing in the way of development of Kelly? It just happens that Eaves may come back to us, but going of what you're saying then any player coming in on loan is stopping our own youngsters from getting on the pitch/bench. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haribo_man Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 agreed, no benefit to us whatsoever in him returning when we could be giving the likes of Kelly a go which is the obvious. You also don't know what effect it could possibly hjave on the young lads which have played alongside Eaves in the youth set up for him to be a Boilton player on a Bolton contract but esentially still doing the same as them. No reason to have him back as it is very unlikely that he would really be in the running for a start for us. Unfortunately for Latics at the moment finances dictate that we look to short term successes for longer term development which in theory should mean us selling the likes of Eaves in order to strngthen the team to get out of this division. I'd much prefer an interim sacrifice to go up and then look at the longer term development of the youth lot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShakerT Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 I sort of agree let Bolton have him and we can get a player in on loan or Signed with more experience at this level. Eaves is still an unknown quantity so he can go for me with all my very best wishes! Saying that, my lad asked for his shirt after the last game of the season and he said NO!!!! Then some scalley walked off with it!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc1955 Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 Isn't this just the same as this chap from Sunderland who we have on loan? he's a loan player who's standing in the way of development of Kelly? It just happens that Eaves may come back to us, but going of what you're saying then any player coming in on loan is stopping our own youngsters from getting on the pitch/bench. I think loans like Tounkara and Mvoto have the potential to become permanent deals, Eaves however, would be here for only one season no matter what happens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davebuckley06 Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 (edited) i think we should grow some balls and tell any potential buyers were to go or ask them for way over the odds say £2mil. swindon managed to keep hold of cox for a few years (granted one season was on loan) whilst banging them in and then got 1.5mil for him we wont get close to that for eaves. let him develop and if he is gunna be as good as expected sell him in a few years for a decent amount. Edited August 9, 2010 by davebuckley06 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc1955 Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 i think we should grow some balls and tell any potential buyers were to go or ask them for way over the odds say £2mil. swindon managed to keep hold of cox for a few years (granted one season was on loan) whilst banging them in and then got 1.5mil for him we wont get close to that for eaves. let him develop and if he is gunna be as good as expected sell him in a few years for a decent amount. For a club in our financial position the money is here and now...guaranteed, there's no certainty that he will ever become a premiership quality player and we have to negotiate with that in mind. Anything over £300K with add-ons has to be a good deal surely! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slystallone Posted August 9, 2010 Author Share Posted August 9, 2010 Isn't this just the same as this chap from Sunderland who we have on loan? he's a loan player who's standing in the way of development of Kelly? It just happens that Eaves may come back to us, but going of what you're saying then any player coming in on loan is stopping our own youngsters from getting on the pitch/bench. Take your point FMS; but as me & BigFin (& others) are saying; Eaves is still very much in the ‘potential’ bracket. At 18 years old, he’s currently at a L1 side and has 15 appearances 0 goals in the 1st team to his name. Kelly has 1 game (10 mins as a sub) 0 goals. I’d much rather Kelly get the games to learn & develop than someone else’s (as he will be then) 18 year old raw talent who has still so much to prove. I dare say OT was coming in on loan regardless of the Eaves thing; and yeah whilst I take your point about another clubs youngster; he is 21 years old with 1st team games for Sedans under his belt; which already places him way higher up on the experience ladder than Eaves. My point is 2 fold; I don’t see the point of having Eaves back with us & I think we should move on once he goes – plus; if we still are to add another in on loan; I’d rather that be a striker with goals & experience to their name already to add the side; rather than just ‘potential’; as we have 3 players on our books who fall under that bracket so we don’t need another 1 in on loan who offers the same thing IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davebuckley06 Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 For a club in our financial position the money is here and now...guaranteed, there's no certainty that he will ever become a premiership quality player and we have to negotiate with that in mind. Anything over £300K with add-ons has to be a good deal surely! i do see your point and i would guess it is our financial situation that is the reason we are in talks to sell him. it would be a risk to hold onto him i no. i would want 500k minimum tbh with the inflated market we have at the minute Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobOAFC Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 IF we do sell him, and then their is a sell on clause say 20% then if we get the option from whichever team signs him e.g. Bolton then it is in our interests for him to develop as much as possible. I personally would like to see him back here on a season-long-loan if we do sell him (obviously i would rather he stays). Also included in the deal i would like too see a buy-back-clause inserted in it (or first option), incase it turns out he isnt good enough for the prem in the next few years and wants to move to a different club. All about opinions really, but i hope he doesnt go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
underdog Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 Apparently Bolton "have flashed the scash"...according to the chron what worries me is what "scash" is? Any ideas? Spelling right out of the window...doh!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueJazzer Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 I agree with Sly. Once he's gone he's gone and loaning him back wont benefit us unless he scores every week, which cant be guaranteed. Much better bringing our own players through. Still think we should keep hold till xmas and let him impress all the teams in the Prem with 20 goals by the time the window opens! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
De_La_Vega Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 Tend to agree - there's no guarantee that Eaves would have been a Latics starter this year so if he goes then that has to be that for my money. If Bolton want to loan him back to us next year then I'd be more amenable, when he's maybe got a year of development in the presence of first-rate coaches under his belt. If he stays though, then he has to be getting games in order to bring him through properly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarryBosch Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 The fact I wouldn't want him back on loan illustrates perfectly why we should take any decent offer for him. He may well turn out a world beater, and I hope he does, but he's done nothing so far. Nothing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crusoe Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 Yeah, I'm with Sly on this. Sell if we get the right bid & don't look back. Bring through our own players, not someone else's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.