RUMOUR - Mancienne link at last!

[Dirk Gently]

Pure short-termism. Why allow ourselves to be a nursery for bigger clubs?

All it really means is that any success is short-lived, because as soon as the bigger club takes their player away we're stuffed, because our players have been denied the opportunity of learning to play in our team.

And if a player does stay all season and we go up because of it, there's an even bigger hole to fill teh follwoing season.

Loans - I hate 'em!!!!

[Hoop Blah]

I think I'm probably on my own in this, but I've never been that impressed with Mancienne to be honest. Not to the extent that he's progressed to be around the England senior team and get all the praise he does.

He's a good reader of the game and decent enough footballer, but I don't think he's strong enough to be a top centre back and he sometimes looks a bit tentative (certainly did in the opening U21's game and I've seen similar incidents the few times I saw him for Wolves).

Talented no doubt, that expceptional that I'd be overly excitted about him coming on loan? Not really unfortunately.

[Row Z Royal]

Pure short-termism. Why allow ourselves to be a nursery for bigger clubs?

All it really means is that any success is short-lived, because as soon as the bigger club takes their player away we're stuffed, because our players have been denied the opportunity of learning to play in our team.

And if a player does stay all season and we go up because of it, there's an even bigger hole to fill teh follwoing season.

Loans - I hate 'em!!!!

[wickedwhispers]

Do we really want to be known as Chelsea reserves?

[Deathy]

Pure short-termism. Why allow ourselves to be a nursery for bigger clubs?

All it really means is that any success is short-lived

Like our recent success then.

We don't have a chairman that can sustain top flight football, so relying on loan players is a decent step forward IMO.

[Dirk Gently]

Pure short-termism. Why allow ourselves to be a nursery for bigger clubs?

All it really means is that any success is short-lived, because as soon as the bigger club takes their player away we're stuffed, because our players have been denied the opportunity of learning to play in our team.

And if a player does stay all season and we go up because of it, there's an even bigger hole to fill teh follwoing season.

Loans - I hate 'em!!!!

If that's really what SC thinks he's a bloody hypocrite, because he was quite happy to patronise smaller clubs by sending our young players out to them.

[Dirk Gently]

Pure short-termism. Why allow ourselves to be a nursery for bigger clubs?

All it really means is that any success is short-lived

Like our recent success then.

We don't have a chairman that can sustain top flight football, so relying on loan players is a decent step forward IMO.

Don't think so - the success (and failure) we had was based on our own players. Let's say we'd got Doyle on loan when he joined us. We'd have had an explosive season with him up front, gone up and then we'd be in the PL with a massive great hole to fill. And the more we rely on loan players then the more holes we have to fill.

[Alan Partridge]

I think the loan market has it's purpose but it's abused by so many clubs, half through neccessity sadly with finances. One that instantly springs to mind is Hereford, who were promoted on the back of having 5 or 6 loan players in the team who got them promotion, the next season without them, relegated.

Matthew Upson springs to mind of someone whose career was on the decline after a load of injuries and he came here and rejuvanted himself. He wouldn't be where he is today without the loan stint with Reading.

[Terminal Boardom]

I think the loan market has it's purpose but it's abused by so many clubs, half through neccessity sadly with finances. One that instantly springs to mind is Hereford, who were promoted on the back of having 5 or 6 loan players in the team who got them promotion, the next season without them, relegated.

Matthew Upson springs to mind of someone whose career was on the decline after a load of injuries and he came here and rejuvanted himself. He wouldn't be where he is today without the loan stint with Reading.

Another successful loan spell had to be Dave Kitson last season

maybe not

[Smoking Kills Dancing Doe]

Thought it was a bit much when he was called up to the full squad. But certainly a very, very good player at this level.

Can play right back too, so with any luck we'll be showing Rosenior the door asap when Ivar is back.

A signing who would improve the team, how long as it been?!

[Ian Royal]

Since we bought NHunt and Arstrong you mean? Less than a year I believe.

[Royalwaster]

Since we bought NHunt and Arstrong you mean? Less than a year I believe.

Haha great response - love those super pessimists.

[Royalee]

Since we bought NHunt and Arstrong you mean? Less than a year I believe.

Yeah, I'd much rather have Armstrong than Shorey...

[Ian Royal]

Since we bought NHunt and Arstrong you mean? Less than a year I believe.

Yeah, I'd much rather have Armstrong than Shorey...

The way Shorey was playing? I certainly would.

Besides SHunt was playing left back at the time we bought Armstrong. Argue that didn't improve the squad!

On a serious note no one said anything about improving on the player we sold to bring them in, just improving the squad, which I took to mean the squad they came into.

If I'm not allowed them, I'll have Matejovsky, (some would want Rosenior, I don't) Seol, Lita, Doyle, Duberry... Sorry were we talking squad or team, I forget?

[Southbank Old Boy]

Since we bought NHunt and Arstrong you mean? Less than a year I believe.

Yeah, I'd much rather have Armstrong than Shorey...

The way Shorey was playing? I certainly would.

Besides SHunt was playing left back at the time we bought Armstrong. Argue that didn't improve the squad!

On a serious note no one said anything about improving on the player we sold to bring them in, just improving the squad, which I took to mean the squad they came into.

If I'm not allowed them, I'll have Matejovsky, (some would want Rosenior, I don't) Seol, Lita, Doyle, Duberry... Sorry were we talking squad or team, I forget?

Duberry I would give you because Sonko was out injured and so Doobs was probably an improvement on the team

Matejovsky didnt really improve the side. If he did he would have won his place and kept it wouldnt he?

I think SKDDs original point was that we havent signed many players, at a guess from the time we won promotion, who you would say strengthened our first choice starting XI from those two glory seasons

[Ian Royal]

oh well. we'll just have to go utter shit under Rodgers so we can be sure to sign players who improve the first 11 in a couple of seasons then.

[rg6royal]

I wouldn't want us loaning too many players but the likes of Mancienne would be excellent.

[Stranded]

Thought he looked absolutely shocking at times in the U21s....but was solid enough at Wolves last year - I wouldn't mind us getting him if we have the ability to buy at the end of the year.

[Sun Tzu]

A few press comments about Mancienne make me a bit conerened about taking him on loan (not that me being concerned has any real relevance).

Sounds like we could leave ourselves open to a bit of an ego issue, which would be very bad news. I'd rather have a slightly lesser player with a better attitude than a 'star' in the making who disrupts the squad.

Of course he may be a great bloke who would be just the thing we need.

[West Stand Man]

There is no harm in a few egos in any team, so long as the manager, coaches and team captain are strong enough to handle them effectively. One rather hopes that years of massaging developing youth egos in the academies has helped BR to develop his strength of character and his leadership.