Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Happy enough with a loan. Final piece for the defence and leaves more money for sorting out the creative midfield side we're sorely missing.

 

Also, with our record with injuries, if he picks up a bad one, we can send him back can't we ?

Posted

A little disappointed it’s a loan, a lot of talk about is using loans from city and connection. They one of them an a player I thought was perm. Oh well

Posted

Almost pleasing that there's no option in a way. It means either City want him or he backs himself. Both are a good thing.

  • Like 1
Posted

How many loans are we allowed? With Doyle coming on loan and Steffen allegedly joining on loan.
 

Could have done with a few Man City academy wingers also.

Posted
2 minutes ago, Tony1784 said:

How many loans are we allowed? With Doyle coming on loan and Steffen allegedly joining on loan.
 

Could have done with a few Man City academy wingers also.

We could yet still buy players from them, with a buyback clause inserted into the contract.

 

It seems like initially we were trying to do that with Doyle, but seems like that was changed. So we could still get more of their players that end up going back there in some way.

 

We have a decent number of defenders now: Coady, Souttar, Faes, Vestergaard, Doyle, Nelson. I imagine we try and move Vesty out at minimum, though I think he'd probably be amazing in this division.

Posted

Got to use the loan market sensibly and this seems a good deal.

 

Shame not permanent but sure if we go up and he does well we'll be putting a bid in

 

Hopefully means our available funds can go on creative players which we desperately need.

  • Like 2
Posted

It is disappointing it's not a permanent move for now, but it might just be a smart move from us, given the length of time other deals are taking.

 

Pure speculation, but we've only sold Maddison so far, so perhaps we'd have preferred to buy Doyle, but given other players aren't being sold very quickly to top up our kitty, we've elected to get him in ASAP for pre-season. That would chime with the theory from many that we haven't bought many players because we're waiting for sales to go through first. With this, we don't have to, and can at least start the season with a decent back line.

Posted
41 minutes ago, CosbehFox said:

Yeah, hardly gets you excited. 

 

Must admit and may be overly critical. Simply not getting the vibe of a proper rebuild. Just meh. 

Perhaps Man City didn’t want to sell him? Isn’t always a bad thing to loan at this level. Simply because you’ve got more scope for business when you go up. 

  • Like 1
Posted
1 minute ago, CloudFox said:

It is disappointing it's not a permanent move for now, but it might just be a smart move from us, given the length of time other deals are taking.

 

Pure speculation, but we've only sold Maddison so far, so perhaps we'd have preferred to buy Doyle, but given other players aren't being sold very quickly to top up our kitty, we've elected to get him in ASAP for pre-season. That would chime with the theory from many that we haven't bought many players because we're waiting for sales to go through first. With this, we don't have to, and can at least start the season with a decent back line.

Surely that’s down to the parent club? If they want to sell him they would have just waiting for a club to come in with a fee? 
 

We don’t need to sell to buy, I’d argue Man City don’t want to sell, and have only agreed a loan. 

Posted

Happy with this 

He comes in and does the business, we get promoted then bid next summer if all goes well 

All goes to pot, he goes back to Man City and we aren't a few million short on a player who didn't cut the mustard 

Having said that from reviews and comments regarding the lad, it appears he will be absolute different class 

Posted (edited)

Any permanent move would have included a buy back, which is something I'm not too keen on. Feels like your developing someone else's player and then if he makes it, Man City activate the buy back clause at a minimal fee. 

Edited by scinnell
Posted
4 minutes ago, Pliskin said:

Surely that’s down to the parent club? If they want to sell him they would have just waiting for a club to come in with a fee? 
 

We don’t need to sell to buy, I’d argue Man City don’t want to sell, and have only agreed a loan. 

Who knows? They may well not want to sell him, or they may feel that a buyback is essentially a loan if they rate him that highly :P. I think it's less about them wanting to sell their youngsters, and more about if people are willing to buy them. They aren't that fussed about selling them, it would seem—if they're good enough, they'll be back.

Posted

Apologies if this has already been addressed but is it still max 2 x loans from one club in EFL?

 

Slightly disappointed if it is as I guess Steffen would complete our quota from Man City. 

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...