Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Categories
- 1.5K All Categories
- 1 Site Stuff
- 31 Admin (FAQs, rules, queries etc.)
- The Boleyn Arms
- 34 General Chatter
- 7 Member info & Family Album
- 3 Radio Llama (music videos)
- 415 Fun & Games
- 111 BA Predictor Threads
- 34 Word Games
- 4 Quizzes
- 2 Pun Threads
- 299 Magic Minutes
- 3 Other Fun & Games
- 117 Current West Ham
- 200 Men's First Team
- 3 Women's Team
- 12 PL2 & Academy
- 32 Management & Board
- 15 Stadium & Training Ground
- 27 West Ham Miscellaneous
- West Ham Matches
- 401 Match Threads
- 72 MOTM
- 9 West Ham Nostalgia
- 35 Former Players and Staff
- 4 Past Games & Glories
- 37 Transfers
- 46 Transfer Speculation
- 87 Completed Transfers
- 55 Internationals
- 48 Men's Internationals
- 5 Women's Internationals
- 2 Youth Internationals
- 121 Football Chatter
- 43 Football Chatter
- 270 Other Teams & Matches
- 26 Other Players & Staff
Comments
I'd much rather us (and all clubs) found ways to give young players a chance than fish about for average ones who are a bit older and never really offer us much before slipping away after a season or two.
In the very last game we played a relatively poor Bolton side. It was made substantially poorer because two of their better players this season (according to their supporters forum) were not playing - Messers Burke and Cullen who are on loan from us. Since moving across to them after pre-season (which meant that they missed Bolton's first two league games, due to Slav insiting we keep them until the end of OUR pre-season so he could see/use them) they have played and started every game for Bolton - excepting one game each where they came on as sub, and of course they weren't allowed to play against us.
Those two are getting great experience playing regularly in the championship, and I feel both will be better players from having a season playing regularly in our country's second league rather than being in our U23 league. For me, loans can be a great way to get proper game experience for our youths, we just have to hope (and choose their destination well) they get solid game time.
Regarding Oxford, it is disappointing as it is game time that is important, so if he cannot break through by Dec/Jan, I would look (if we can) to pull him back maybe send him somewhere in the championship at a team who need him and would give him a chance. A shame because Monchengladback gave Chelsea's youth Christensen lots of game time during his loan stay so I was very hopeful for a similar experience for our Reece.
Stam didn't seem to fancy him at Reading. Now he's not getting a game at 'Gladbach (despite the rumoured financial penalties).
As sad as it would be, he may simply not be as good as we hoped he was.
Unfortunately as Aslef already stated Monchengladback have some other very good options in defence so maybe they are just doing better and currently 'hold the shirt'. Time will tell.
I think the majority of loan deals are a waste of time. And I don't think a player not making it on loan or even being sold on/released and not doing well proves they weren't good enough because of the variables that change - coaching levels, new environment, how they deal with it mentally etc.
I'm not sure I believe he's not good enough. He has played very well for our senior team and I think wanting to send him on loan shows they want him to develop. But that should be within our team. We so often fill gaps with weak players brought in in January or by playing people out of position.
Reading were fighting for promotion. Gladbachbh are quite a strong team with experienced defenders, pushing for European spots. They're not going to be as bothered about a payment to us as they are in securing their position.
Developing young players requires risks. Loans are us transferring that risk to someone else, with little guarantee they'll take it either - unless they're as awful as Bolton.
I think our goal with the academy should be Tomkings/Noble level players - dependable, prem-level, if not spectacular. It would mean not having to spend so much plugging holes.
I get there's natural competition at any club, but he hasn't been able to dislodge any first team centre back wherever he's been in the last couple of seasons.
The difference, and in fact the point, is that Oxford isn't playing.
I fully agree that I want academy players to break through for our sides. I also agree in the past we have filled gaps in our squad with poor quality foreign players as opposed to just giving the youth the chance. This needs to change as we move forward IMO.
However, you say we want solid prem level players. Of our most recent to achieve this, most had important loan periods away which were crucial to their development. Noble had a spell at Hull that was going well until an injury, then later had an excellent 3 months at Ipswich, that led to him getting a chance with our first team. Tomkins had a five week spell at Derby, in which he played 7 times, was deemed so good he was called back early to fill in when we had an injury and was in our first squad ever since. Carrick admittedly didn't get much time at his Birmingham loan, but in a short 2 month one to Swindon he played 6 times (scored 2) and got great reviews, again leading him to get a chance with our first team. Lastly Defoe had a phenomenal loan move to Bournemouth, scoring 18 in 29 appearances and was then defined as the 'next big thing'.
Basically what I am saying is that while it is a risk sending them to another club rather than monitoring them 'in house', there is no substitute for proper first team action - reserve team matches just don't cut it to see how they will handle things. To get them to the point of being ready to join our first team in a very competitive Premier League they need to show they can do it where it counts in a professional match and the best way (as proven in all the examples of those who have 'made it' above) is to go on loan to a smaller club, if only for a while, to play in front of good crowds and in proper competitive matches.
And Jorderz - Oxford currently 18 years old. Kane broke through into Spurs side at 21, only becoming a definitive regular at 22. ;ok
As a defender, one mistake and all the blame is on you. One mistake as an attacker and you can try again.
I think they have to extremely carefully picked and if not the right fit, the player should stay. The Bolton deal was good, most others haven't been. If a deal appears to be good but is underwhelming, we need a way to bring them back.
Regarding Tomkins and Noble, I think there's been a change in the nature of football. More money, even in the Chanpionship, means that there's both more to lose and more means to buy in average, experienced players who appear lower-risk than a young loanee from a higher-level club. I think that reduces the space for young players to play while on loan. I don't disagree with principle of loaning for game time, I just can't see it actually happening.
Became a regular'ish in the 96/97 season (born in 1978).
But he was a bit spesh ;carew
I think loans are great but of course must be placed carefully. Young Reece needs a ball playing lower championship or upper league one side if that were available. The big issue here is placement as Gladbach are currently 7th in the Bundaslegue which surely must mean there would be little between them and us in quality, so if he is not ready for first team for us why them?
Last season they loaned Chelsea's Andreas Christensen to play alongside Vestergaard at CB, 43 appearances with 41 starts
What's your lottery numbers pick for tonight? Because I don't want them!
That game against Arsenal had me thinking we had a worldie on our hands.
Is the boys head on straight... ;hmm