Which was quite an annoying turn of phrase given most fans quite like to get excited during the transfer window
Patrick Roberts....loan deal from Man City. Was at loan last season at Celtic. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I think he meant it along the same lines as when he was asked why Saints wouldn't take a 'punt' on a player, a couple of years ago. He said that we don't take punts. In the sense that Saints build the squad through quiet planning and thorough research. Boring perhaps, but no chance of doing a Pompey or Leeds, and maximising the chance of succeeding. So I'm expecting great things from Sofiane Boufal this season, because he wasn't a punt, yet he delivered perhaps only two or three moments of magic last season. The kind of thing that gets people excited.
I'd be happy with this. Another option up top without much risk. Saves the cash for dm and am* *he hopes.
I see a proper defensive midfielder as a specialist position that requires a lot of self discipline and tactical intelligence and trying to force your normal box to box midfielder into that position doesn't work particularly well as we saw last season when Puel finally got the message that playing 4-2-3-1 was our best bet. He tried th shove all the above and Steve Davis into that role and all looked very uncomfortable as well as ineffectual. We have had some very good DMs over recent years (Cork, Snidders, Victor and Oriel) and getting a second specialist into the squad for me is essentially to add depth and balance so we have the opportunity to play 4-2-3-1 or as a stand in for when Oroel is suspended. I do support your suggestion about Jack Stephens as I have been banging on about this as I see him moving forward into DM rather like Eric Dier of Spurs.
I really don't think we should be doing loans unless there is an option to buy. Basically, we're just doing a coaching job for another club. It is unlikely that a young loanee is going to make a significant difference to the team.
Pointless going for Roberts. He's not an improvement at all on what we have. He'd be behind our 3 main strikers.
Yeah, that's my thinking LFF. It's so easy for City to send him here for a season then cash in on our effort. Just more disruption for the following season if we allow that.
The article said it would give Roberts a chance of first team football....really? He'd have a better chance at Celtic. We have a bunch of strikers....of course every team needs a brilliant striker that will jump above others, but is Roberts that? I could understand it if we see him as one for the future, but what/s the point of a loan? And where does that leave Gallagher?
Why is everyone mentioning strikers? He's a winger isn't he? Think he'd provide good competition to Tadic/Boufal personally. Also allows actual money to be spent where it's more needed. I'm all for it personally.
That would make more sense....I heard him described as a forward. I think definitions are changing....as in my personal bugbear, calling a defender a stopper which makes him sound like a goalkeeper.
Does it though? On average we seem to make money from our transfers and we would still have to pay his wages. I reckon we lose money on loan deals if we don't have a sure way of buying them at the end of it. Would rather spend money on signing somebody where the gametime we invest into them doesnt go to waste.
