Are the loan signings a signal that Hughton will be on his way in the Summer? Have the board lost trust in his vision for the future have ruled out permanent signings so to make as much available to the next man? Are they so wary of relegation that permanent contracts have been ruled out until our position is clear? Or is it that they are just for emergency cover until the end of the season? Or is it that we have very little money left to spend? Regardless of which (if any), the decision to opt for loans I'd say is the best one. I'm pleased that the players are experienced because we certainly need it, whether they are the types of players we need (and positions) thats where I disagree. I'm also glad we have not gone overboard, two is plenty to freshen things up a little and keep things ticking over. Roll on the Summer to make the real team building deals.
I've been reading that the bored is only prepared to shell out money for player who would improve the first team. As we don't seem to have been able to find any of those, not to mention the January inflation, we're using loans to cover gaps in the squad. I do think there's a reticence to provide Hughton with funds and the change to buy more players which suggests his position will be under serious scrutiny come the summer. This means a new manager could be drawn in with the largest transfer fund our club has ever seen.
I'm not sure I'm altogether convinced that this seemingly unchallenged view that all transfers are inflated in January is actually correct. Many examples of hugely inflated fees in the summer. Bargains in January? Suarez, Cahill, Vidic.......
Seems like a good signing , good cover for Turner, would be foolish to rush him back on heavy wet pitches............... well done CH !!
I'd suggest that most people, whatever their initial reaction, will wake tomorrow and think that a loan deal for an experienced covering CB is actually quite a good thing. If nothing else, a seasoned campaigner who may add a bit of steel and resolve which I feel we could badly use.
I think loan signings are a wise move, and the correct thing for the board to be sanctioning. We've no idea what league we'll be in come the summer, who will be in charge, and what players will be off to pastures new. Why pay overinflated fees now for players that will probably be no better than what we've got now, when we can wait until the summer and put that money towards players a cut above what we currently have?
I'm going to be brutally honest Carrabuh. I know you can take it. A lot of what you say is unadulterated big fat sweaty bollocks (and, for the avoidance of doubt, that's not a great thing from a serious point of view, though you can be highly entertaining). Some of your opinions range from the illogically absurd or unrealistic to the downright contradictory and you are often guilty of making up facts to suit your opinions or unashamedly denying the facts before your eyes. BUT, the reason you are a valued contributor is that, with reasonable regularity interspersed amongst the garbage, you bring up points that are fresh, interesting and profound. This is one of those outstanding moments. I agree wholeheartedly with your interpretation of this transfer window in this post, both implicit and explicit. (Or at least I think I do). The board has made their decision, load and clear. I don't fully agree, but I think it will keep us in the Prem for another season. As a footballing spectacle, I've accepted that this season may be a write-off and any improvement will be a bonus. It's a shame, but I'm patient and any transformation can wait at least until the summer. I'd be delighted to be proved wrong, so unless we get relegated, it's a win-win situation for me.
Why did the OP fail to mention the other pretty obvious explanation, namely that no player(s) (1) of the right age, (2) with the quality we need, (3) in the positions we most need them and (4) who are willing to make the move when relegation still threatens, have been available this January at a price we are prepared to pay? Given that the board's primary objective is to avoid relegation, it would make no sense at all to reduce the chances of survival by refusing to make a signing that would significantly strengthen the team. Doing so would not in any way preclude reviewing CH's position in the summer and replacing him with a view to the longer term. Right now though the short term is what matters. If we could make the right sort of signing, we surely would.
when i read the headline 'yobo in talks with norwich' i was half expecting hughton to be reunited with a mr joseph barton i think carrabuh's points are all valid theories at this stage. the summer will be a big one for the club. i'm not sure which path they will chose - i imagine the board are still somewhat undecided and will be influenced by the remainder of the current season. are they backing him this january? well, you'd have to say yes - if they weren't backing him he wouldn't be at the club. do we have the funds available to buy? definitely, we do - but mcnally has long been on record stating that he dislikes january and will only move for players under circumstances which suit us, and the only way we will be able to sign players who will improve our team is to buy players who are already doing good jobs at their own clubs, therefore availability is a huge issue, prices will be inflated etc. the signings of gutierrez and yobo both go down as sensible squad fillers and are the kind of characters and leaders we have sorely lacked so far this season since holt's departure. whether we can sign the creative force in the middle of the park that every single one of us would like to see is another matter. i would think the chances of signing one today is extremely slim. i still think we need a midfielder, even if he's not the creative one, and danny guthrie fits the bill for me. he can fill in while jonny howson is on the treatment table. he gets stuck in, he can keep the ball, he's a leader. he might not be 'mr glamorous' who many will want (and expect) but he would fill a rather gaping hole for a reasonable price (i would have thought).
The loan signings we've made are primarily sensible insurance against our vulnerability to recurrent injuries (to Pilkingiton and Turner). Same would apply if a stop-gap midfielder were brought in (Howson out, Hoolahan being silly). If a suitable creative player were available, I've absolutely no doubt we would be signing him on a 3-4 year contract before 11 pm tonight. The question of CH's future is a separate issue.
Surely we have some idea don't we? It's going to be one of two, can't realistically see us turning out in the Hungarian ladies 2nd division - though I imagine that would be lots of fun!
Here's a question: if teams were consigned to the league their supporters deserve, which league would we be in?
I can't imagine more 'entertainment' than the Hungarian ladies 2nd division, but it's a helluva way to go for away matches! Seriously, City now have two more players than they had previously with no player leaving to make room for Jonas and only the non-featuring Ayala making way for the experience of Yobo. I'd still like to see an ACM come in, but I think we can manage without.
