Loan Signings

[TheBigDog]

Imagine this team starting against Bury:

Cisak, Lee, Diamond, MVoto, Black, Taylor, Furman, Weolowski, Mellor, Kuqi, Morais/Smith

 

not quite the right balance in attack (but we do have Reid and Parker out injured) however all players that are actually on our books.

 

We have Clarke, Adeyemi, Simpson and new loanees Mancini and Scapuzzi - the final two are as yet unknown quantities, but the other three have all added to the options and general team performance. However - all have expiry dates:

Clarke & Adeyemi - both deals expire in January

Simpson - expires this month

Mancini - expires end November

Scapuzzi - expires end December

 

So do we extend or do we look at giving some of our own players a run in the side - I know that we are looking at the JPT as a potential cup run but wouldn't it make sense to start with the team listed above next week? Black gets a start as does Diamond and Mellor gets a chance to play further forward.

 

Also - having too many players on loan simply pushes others further down the pecking order - Tarkowski and Winchester both look decent enough when they get onto the pitch - but does the presence of Simpson and Clarke hold them back?

[Bunty Blue]

You make an interesting point. It's become a perennial dilemma I guess for clubs in the football league, expecially in the bottom two divisions. It feels as though clubs and mangers are damned if they do and damned if they don't. I also find I can't mke my mind up. I really enjoy seeing the lads come through the youth system being given a run and perhaps in an ideal scenario would agree to keeping the squad simply made up of our own players. I just wonder if they would acually see us through the season as we would be a bit threadbare and short of experience. We do seem to pick up more than our fair share of injuries. And fans demand success, often irrationally given the size and stature of Latics and given our finances. And finances also create the need to bring in loan players, some of whom I assume have some or most of their wages paid for by their home club.

 

The loan system also gives us the opportunity to see potential stars of the future and possibly one or two may sign for a season. The downfall of loans appears to be that we can have a succesful start to season only to see some key players go in January which the affects the balance of the team and we seem to fall apart.

 

I really can't make my mind up! I also despair of the annual turn over of players every summer as we then have to watch a squad and team gel. Your notion of just keeping to our own contracted players might help alleviate this issue, although contracts tend to be short term anyway.

 

I think we are stuck with the loan system and have to trust the manager and the directors to make the best of it that they can. And lets hope the new Italian lads not only rip up a few trees but also put some bums on seats (even if it's a few City fans checking their progress - it's still cash for us). I would have liked to see a defender brought in mind - just keen to keep a clean sheet to suppport our new found attacking prowess!

[slystallone]

You make an interesting point. It's become a perennial dilemma I guess for clubs in the football league, expecially in the bottom two divisions. It feels as though clubs and mangers are damned if they do and damned if they don't. I also find I can't mke my mind up. I really enjoy seeing the lads come through the youth system being given a run and perhaps in an ideal scenario would agree to keeping the squad simply made up of our own players. I just wonder if they would acually see us through the season as we would be a bit threadbare and short of experience. We do seem to pick up more than our fair share of injuries. And fans demand success, often irrationally given the size and stature of Latics and given our finances. And finances also create the need to bring in loan players, some of whom I assume have some or most of their wages paid for by their home club.

 

The loan system also gives us the opportunity to see potential stars of the future and possibly one or two may sign for a season. The downfall of loans appears to be that we can have a succesful start to season only to see some key players go in January which the affects the balance of the team and we seem to fall apart.

 

I really can't make my mind up! I also despair of the annual turn over of players every summer as we then have to watch a squad and team gel. Your notion of just keeping to our own contracted players might help alleviate this issue, although contracts tend to be short term anyway.

 

I think we are stuck with the loan system and have to trust the manager and the directors to make the best of it that they can. And lets hope the new Italian lads not only rip up a few trees but also put some bums on seats (even if it's a few City fans checking their progress - it's still cash for us). I would have liked to see a defender brought in mind - just keen to keep a clean sheet to suppport our new found attacking prowess!

Good start to a thread this,

 

I think the loan system has become an integral component of lower league football. Clubs are no longer willing to give out long-term contracts, and players are now seemingly willing to sign on for non-contract terms or 6 month deals; to stay in the league system. 1 year deals that are then extended by another year if both parties agree now look to be the way players will be signed up & contracted. Loans then supplement these players to pad out the squads, or add quality to the starting X1.

 

All I look for in loans is a) are they necessary & b.) will they add to the quality above what we already have in reserve.

I think all too often over recent seasons, the answers to both those have been NO (Price, Guy, Goodwin, Mantom, Lund, Hines, Turner….just a few off the top of my head)

 

This season has bucked the trend somewhat. I thought last season PD signed up Mantom & Lowe unnecessarily as they were IMO no better than what we had from the reserves/youths to come in. This time around, I think most fans would agree that the standard / calibre of the loans has been higher (Lund aside), and they have improved us over & above what we had.

 

Clarke has been a very shrewd signing at the back. He's a solid L1 CB, no nonsense and he's been (Colchester away apart) a very consistent performer.

Adeyami has been hit & miss IMO - good one game; ineffective & anonymous another. He's starting to settle in more now; and his 2 goals have been handy.

Simpson has been a big hit for me - he's far from a world-beater and isn't the most talented player I've ever seen, but what he does he does well, and he's added some solidity & stability to the side. His assists have been very welcome too, and he's been very close to MoM for me in a fair few games.

As mentioned, these 2 young Italians are somewhat unknown quantities; but in Scapuzzi - I think we've signed up a potential star.

 

Is Clarke a better bet than Tarkowski & Carr. Close with young Tarky, but in both case I'd say yes.

Is Adeyami better than Winchester & Burns - again close with young Carl, but I'd say just about yes.

Is Simpson a better bet than Morais - on this season's showing's, yes he is.

Is Scapuzzi going to be a better bet than Smith & Brooke? We'll see won't we, but surely it has to be a yes?

 

Loans are now inevitable at clubs all across the leagues, it's just a question of making sure they add value to what you already have; and aren't just brought in 'just because' or to plug a gap. I think PD has done very well for us so far - guess we'll see what January brings.

Edited November 4, 2011 by slystallone

[opinions4u]

Issues I've had with Latics loans:

 

- players who aren't fully fit.

- players past their peak.

 

I think Dickov has moved on from there.

 

 

Main issue I had last season was Aidy White. Excpetional talent but appeared to lose interest. I suppose that's not just a risk of the loan market though.

[oafc-latics]

Issues I've had with Latics loans:

 

- players who aren't fully fit.

- players past their peak.

 

I think Dickov has moved on from there.

 

 

Main issue I had last season was Aidy White. Excpetional talent but appeared to lose interest. I suppose that's not just a risk of the loan market though.

 

last two seasons though under dickov we've had different types of loans rather than the past-it journeyman, brett ormerod type player.

 

last season we had some good finds in evina, white, m'voto, tounkara and lowe. this season we've had clarke, simpson, adeyemi, scapuzzi. all from good clubs with good managers who you can't say were brought in for no reason or didn't seem worthwhile.

 

i'd prefer these players who are coming on loan for the right reasons under dickov where they want to develop, and then be disappointed that theyve left.

[razza699]

 

Is Scapuzzi going to be a better bet than Smith & Brooke? We'll see won't we, but surely it has to be a yes?

 

Said this in another thread, even if he isnt the next Del Piero he will still be 10 times better than Brooke (going to the Blue Square and scoring 0 said it all) . Smith looks a handful but isnt the striker to gain us promotion

[TheBigDog]

Good start to a thread this,

 

I think the loan system has become an integral component of lower league football. Clubs are no longer willing to give out long-term contracts, and players are now seemingly willing to sign on for non-contract terms or 6 month deals; to stay in the league system. 1 year deals that are then extended by another year if both parties agree now look to be the way players will be signed up & contracted. Loans then supplement these players to pad out the squads, or add quality to the starting X1.

 

All I look for in loans is a) are they necessary & b.) will they add to the quality above what we already have in reserve.

I think all too often over recent seasons, the answers to both those have been NO (Price, Guy, Goodwin, Mantom, Lund, Hines, Turner….just a few off the top of my head)

 

This season has bucked the trend somewhat. I thought last season PD signed up Mantom & Lowe unnecessarily as they were IMO no better than what we had from the reserves/youths to come in. This time around, I think most fans would agree that the standard / calibre of the loans has been higher (Lund aside), and they have improved us over & above what we had.

 

Clarke has been a very shrewd signing at the back. He's a solid L1 CB, no nonsense and he's been (Colchester away apart) a very consistent performer.

Adeyami has been hit & miss IMO - good one game; ineffective & anonymous another. He's starting to settle in more now; and his 2 goals have been handy.

Simpson has been a big hit for me - he's far from a world-beater and isn't the most talented player I've ever seen, but what he does he does well, and he's added some solidity & stability to the side. His assists have been very welcome too, and he's been very close to MoM for me in a fair few games.

As mentioned, these 2 young Italians are somewhat unknown quantities; but in Scapuzzi - I think we've signed up a potential star.

 

Is Clarke a better bet than Tarkowski & Carr. Close with young Tarky, but in both case I'd say yes.

Is Adeyami better than Winchester & Burns - again close with young Carl, but I'd say just about yes.

Is Simpson a better bet than Morais - on this season's showing's, yes he is.

Is Scapuzzi going to be a better bet than Smith & Brooke? We'll see won't we, but surely it has to be a yes?

 

Loans are now inevitable at clubs all across the leagues, it's just a question of making sure they add value to what you already have; and aren't just brought in 'just because' or to plug a gap. I think PD has done very well for us so far - guess we'll see what January brings.

 

Great comments from all on this thread - I suppose one question would be whether players such as Tarkowski and Winchester can learn from the likes of Clarke and Simpson - also interesting to note that Lowe and White have started a number of games this season for Blackburn and Leeds respectively while Tounkara is Sunderland reserves leading scorer with 5 in 7 starts... maybe they got more from the experience than we did?

 

I guess we need to push out one or two of ours on loan and hope that the experience brings them on (although it did not seem to work for Brooke). It may work wonders for Tarkowski to get some competitive games played - and come back a better player too hopefully.

[slystallone]

Great comments from all on this thread - I suppose one question would be whether players such as Tarkowski and Winchester can learn from the likes of Clarke and Simpson - also interesting to note that Lowe and White have started a number of games this season for Blackburn and Leeds respectively while Tounkara is Sunderland reserves leading scorer with 5 in 7 starts... maybe they got more from the experience than we did?

 

I guess we need to push out one or two of ours on loan and hope that the experience brings them on (although it did not seem to work for Brooke). It may work wonders for Tarkowski to get some competitive games played - and come back a better player too hopefully.

This for me Mr Dog,

 

If he's not going to be featuring for us; I would have thought it's a backwards step for him after last season to be merely playing reserve football. Having watched all his appearances last season; I'd have to have that he'd be more than capable of regular L2 football, heck - even L1 really. I think going out & getting a run of games would do the lad the world of good. So too for Winchester, Carr & Burns if they're not going to feature either......

 

Anyone got John Coleman or Jim Bentley's mobile numbers????

[fanakapan]

scapuzzi looked good against Wolves in the Carling up

[grim]

Remember after our great start under Shez he decided to bring Jones in on loan and started him ahead of Lomax who like the rest of the side had been playing well.I dont doubt Jones was a better player but we discovered eventually he couldnt defend and also what does that do for squad morale?Dont mind two or three loans but at the present would have Tarkowski as a starter ahead of all the other center halves,then Winchester ahead of Adeyemi.Reserve judgement on the two Italians but Simpson also looks okay but is he really any better than Morais?Just feel that you should back your own first I guess.