Charlie Lakin

[GazLaz]

Another player who shares the same agent as DS. Probably not a sustainable approach to transfer business!

[NickDRFC]

Pib - personally I don’t think 4 loanees is excessive, but I can see where you’re coming from. We stated that our strategy would be to move away from loanees, and now it looks like we’re moving back towards it. We stated that loanees should be star players, and now we’re padding out the squad with them. That suggests to me that either the strategy doesn’t work, the strategy has changed or we’re kind of making it up as we go along and not following a strategy. And it’s the last bit that concerns me a bit. We have a very well run club off the field but even after we’ve changed our recruitment structure things all seem a bit ad-hoc and reactive. We’ve lost 2 first team players and our captain but I’m not sure there was a contingency plan in place for that other than let’s raid DS’ agency network.

That being said, I think it’s too early to really judge things. I can see why we’d be cautious to commit to longer term contracts based on the last couple of Januarys so loans do make sense from that perspective. And if the squad is in that bad a state, it will take more than one window to fix it.

[pib]

Pib - personally I don’t think 4 loanees is excessive, but I can see where you’re coming from. We stated that our strategy would be to move away from loanees, and now it looks like we’re moving back towards it. We stated that loanees should be star players, and now we’re padding out the squad with them. That suggests to me that either the strategy doesn’t work, the strategy has changed or we’re kind of making it up as we go along and not following a strategy. And it’s the last bit that concerns me a bit. We have a very well run club off the field but even after we’ve changed our recruitment structure things all seem a bit ad-hoc and reactive. We’ve lost 2 first team players and our captain but I’m not sure there was a contingency plan in place for that other than let’s raid DS’ agency network.

That being said, I think it’s too early to really judge things. I can see why we’d be cautious to commit to longer term contracts based on the last couple of Januarys so loans do make sense from that perspective. And if the squad is in that bad a state, it will take more than one window to fix it.

Yep, agree with that Nick. You've articulated what I'm trying to say better than I have.

[Campsall rover]

We have brought in loans who have something to prove.
Their careers are at stake. If they aren’t good enough we haven’t lost anything.
There will be a lot more fish in the sea come the summer.

Only 1 from the Premier League this time.

[KC_DRFC]

Not knocking the player as I don't know much about him (or knocking anything at all really) but a genuine query - I thought the club were trying to move away from a heavy reliance on loans? It's been said on here before from those more ITK than most that the club were aware of the way the core squad had been decimated by an over-reliance on loans previously.

Would I be misguided to point out that that policy seems to have lapsed very quickly, with now 4 loans and 1 permanent joining in this window, considering since the summer window closed we have lost three permanently contracted players who were all regulars in the first team?

Define heavy reliance. I think you know the difference. In the first half of the season, quite often the starting XI included all permanent players.

It was a resource that we've now tapped without saddling ourselves with more players who might not make the grade.

Hopefully a couple of these loans will be in the 'try before you buy' category whilst the spine of the team remain contracted players.

In my view, it's shrewd.

Fair points made, but I will push back on the "try before you buy" comment - how many examples of this have we actually had in recent years that have been any good? Whiteman, Anderson and John aside I can't think of any (which is not many when you consider we've loaned 30 players in the past 3-and-a-bit years!). If they excel, most of them end up getting a better permanent move than coming to DRFC which you can't blame them for.

As for a definition of "heavy reliance" - I think you know what I mean, but you can ask GB for his definition at MTO as he's admitted that we've been too reliant on them, and he's the CEO, that's not just coming from me.

Just to add to other poster comments above. Things aren't that black and white. As said, I hope you can tell the difference between the over reliance GB referred to when DM left with loan players in key positions. This is entirely different with loan players supplementing the established first team squad.

Of course not all loan players convert into permanent signings. There's a number of categories.

1. Stocking fillers
2. Development players destined for bigger things
3. Try before you buy, although that may also depend on us achieving a promotion for example or not being relegated.
4. Those that don't perform.

5. A favour for the same Agents as the manager.  Putting the players in a shop window kind of deal.

[sedwardsdrfc]

The odd player with the same agent isn’t  too concerning but if it’s to become a common theme I’d be wanting us to look into it.

Not so worried about loans in Jan so long as we do good business in the summer. Then use the flexibility of loans in Jan.

We have an allotted space for 5 loans which we should use throughout the season it’s when we get 6-7 or 5 in the starting 11 that it looks silly.

Think we struggle to get loans who will be star players in this division. The best younger players will get a loan at L1 from day 1. We have to settle for the next lot down who maybe aren’t as highly thought of. Anyway we should aim for our start players been our own so we can keep them or at least sell for a decent fee

[BobG]

What's wrong with using contacts with influence?

BobG

[LincolnDonny]

Or these are loans with a view to buy in the summer

Just wondering if any know how many we have had on loan and then signed the player.?.......
maybe in the last 10 years?


please this is not a go at anyone just asking a question .

[DonnyBazR0ver]

Pib - personally I don’t think 4 loanees is excessive, but I can see where you’re coming from. We stated that our strategy would be to move away from loanees, and now it looks like we’re moving back towards it. We stated that loanees should be star players, and now we’re padding out the squad with them. That suggests to me that either the strategy doesn’t work, the strategy has changed or we’re kind of making it up as we go along and not following a strategy. And it’s the last bit that concerns me a bit. We have a very well run club off the field but even after we’ve changed our recruitment structure things all seem a bit ad-hoc and reactive. We’ve lost 2 first team players and our captain but I’m not sure there was a contingency plan in place for that other than let’s raid DS’ agency network.

That being said, I think it’s too early to really judge things. I can see why we’d be cautious to commit to longer term contracts based on the last couple of Januarys so loans do make sense from that perspective. And if the squad is in that bad a state, it will take more than one window to fix it.

Yep, agree with that Nick. You've articulated what I'm trying to say better than I have.

You've got to allow the manager and HoF some flexibility otherwise your handcuffing them to a specific strategy throughout the season. Things happen quickly in football and despite best efforts, we need to change things around.

We've heard DS talk about competition for places and two players for each position. At the start of the season, only two loans so the aim was to assemble a team of permanent players, supplemented by a couple of loans. That's the aim but,  like other clubs you suffer injuries, players leave or don't perform so you have the opportunity in January to tweak things about. That doesn't mean you lose sight of where you want to be as a squad.

For example, if we'd have gone down the DM route at the start of the season and been maxed out on loans, then we've less wriggle room in Janaury, particularly if we wanted to keep all the loans.

That said, football is getting more short term these days so it's very difficult to keep the balance right.

You've got to allow for contingencies and give them some flexibility in shaping the squad the best way they see fit and with whom they can get at the time.

No doubt we'll be having similar conversations in the summer and beyond.

Hopefully Copps will break his silence very soon.

[Campsall rover]

Don’t have the facts but would be surprised if there are any clubs in League 2 who don’t have at least 3 loan players on their books by the end of this window.
The majority I would think have 4/5

[Wade Falana]

https://www.staffordshire-live.co.uk/sport/football/albion-boss-names-names-those-8064771

[Glyn_Wigley]

What's wrong with using contacts with influence?

BobG

Apparently some people have the notion that because they happen to have the same agent, that DS's agent must be foisting shit players on DS against his will and therefore trying to sabotage his own client's managerial career. Can't see the logic of that, myself. It's the same twisted logic that argues that the owners of a football club want to destroy their own property to reduce how much they have to spend on it instead of walking away and not spending anything on it ever again.

[steve@dcfd]

I have no problem loaning players our record signing good standard permanent players is average at best. Otherwise we wouldn’t have been relegated and sitting 12 th in league 2

[pib]

What's wrong with using contacts with influence?

BobG

Apparently some people have the notion that because they happen to have the same agent, that DS's agent must be foisting shit players on DS against his will and therefore trying to sabotage his own client's managerial career. Can't see the logic of that, myself. It's the same twisted logic that argues that the owners of a football club want to destroy their own property to reduce how much they have to spend on it instead of walking away and not spending anything on it ever again.

Where has anybody said that first bit about DS’s agent trying to sabotage him? Genuinely?

[jmt23]

There is a huge difference to how DM had us, to how we are now. The club, or a combination of club and managers have changed that reliance.
It does make sense that we get loans in now though, and not throw contracts out to players. We have no understanding where we may be next year. Let’s hope we make a surge and get up there! It’s within our grasp.

I am sure if DS had identified his targets and they were available ,we would have signed them now though.

[Sammy Chung was King]

I seem to think there are a couple of free agents attached to Schofield’s agent. Might be more to come.

[DonnyBazR0ver]

There is a huge difference to how DM had us, to how we are now. The club, or a combination of club and managers have changed that reliance.
It does make sense that we get loans in now though, and not throw contracts out to players. We have no understanding where we may be next year. Let’s hope we make a surge and get up there! It’s within our grasp.

I am sure if DS had identified his targets and they were available ,we would have signed them now though.

Quite right.

I'm an advocate of the loan system, although I do think lower league clubs should have access to short term loans as well as long term.

If I'm the manager, and I'm given access good young players who we might not otherwise get, then I want the best players in my team. That said, I learned in hindsight DM predominantly wanted the best for DM not necessarily Doncaster Rovers.

That said, you have to assess the consequences of filling that talent void at the end of the season, plus the usual turnover of contracted players. In DMs case, he didn't plan to be here to deal  with that. This is one of main advantages of having the HoF now.

[sedwardsdrfc]

What's wrong with using contacts with influence?

BobG

Apparently some people have the notion that because they happen to have the same agent, that DS's agent must be foisting shit players on DS against his will and therefore trying to sabotage his own client's managerial career. Can't see the logic of that, myself. It's the same twisted logic that argues that the owners of a football club want to destroy their own property to reduce how much they have to spend on it instead of walking away and not spending anything on it ever again.

Bit over the top. A few players is fine and that’s where we are at. So no worries.

But if it carry’s on in the summer with with say a good number of permanent signings on 2-3 year contracts I’d be a little worried. 1 that we aren’t spreading our net wide enough and 2 that there could be a bit of foul play going on. Agent stands to gain a lot from getting his players contracts and a manager can arrange those. A bit of s conflict of interest imo.

We’re a very above board club so I’d be surprised if point 2 would ever be allowed to happen but I bet it has at other clubs.

[Sammy Chung was King]

Darren Moore used what funding he was given by the board, in the way he thought best. How he left wasn’t great but he went to a side that had ambitions to improve. You can’t blame him really.

[sedwardsdrfc]

Darren Moore used what funding he was given by the board, in the way he thought best. How he left wasn’t great but he went to a side that had ambitions to improve. You can’t blame him really.

Moore was gambling that he wouldn’t be at the club long. It paid off but always worrying if a manager acts like that.

[roversdude]

Darren Moore used what funding he was given by the board, in the way he thought best. How he left wasn’t great but he went to a side that had ambitions to improve. You can’t blame him really.

Surely we had ambition to improve as highlighted by backing DM to bring in who he wanted ie Bogle

[mushRTID]

Another player who shares the same agent as DS. Probably not a sustainable approach to transfer business!

If he’s an improvement on those that have left, does it really matter?

[pib]

Another player who shares the same agent as DS. Probably not a sustainable approach to transfer business!

If he’s an improvement on those that have left, does it really matter?

Kind of, because then when DS goes what do we do? The same as we’ve done in recent years and dismantle the squad again and rebuild it in another manager’s image?

Or would we be better off having a recruitment process and a structure that isn’t reliant on the Head Coach or manager, so that when the HC/manager changes we can find someone else to work with those players, rather than starting again every time?

In a roundabout way I’m trying to say, the reliance on the manager/HC’s own recruitment preferences rather than having a club-centric focus is partly what has got us into the position we’re in, in my opinion. And madness would be to keep repeating that and expecting different results.

So to me, and it seems others, it is a bit of a concern that we seem to be recruiting in this way.

Edit - I’d just like to add that this hasn’t all come from me and my fantasy land of how I’d like the club to be run. Baldwin and the board themselves have talked about trying to create an identity and recruit managers and players around that.

[5minstogo]

Another player who shares the same agent as DS. Probably not a sustainable approach to transfer business!

If he’s an improvement on those that have left, does it really matter?

Kind of, because then when DS goes what do we do? The same as we’ve done in recent years and dismantle the squad again and rebuild it in another manager’s image?

Or would we be better off having a recruitment process and a structure that isn’t reliant on the Head Coach or manager, so that when the HC/manager changes we can find someone else to work with those players, rather than starting again every time?

In a roundabout way I’m trying to say, the reliance on the manager/HC’s own recruitment preferences rather than having a club-centric focus is partly what has got us into the position we’re in, in my opinion. And madness would be to keep repeating that and expecting different results.

So to me, and it seems others, it is a bit of a concern that we seem to be recruiting in this way.

Edit - I’d just like to add that this hasn’t all come from me and my fantasy land of how I’d like the club to be run. Baldwin and the board themselves have talked about trying to create an identity and recruit managers and players around that.

Spot on.

[sedwardsdrfc]

Another player who shares the same agent as DS. Probably not a sustainable approach to transfer business!

If he’s an improvement on those that have left, does it really matter?

Kind of, because then when DS goes what do we do? The same as we’ve done in recent years and dismantle the squad again and rebuild it in another manager’s image?

Or would we be better off having a recruitment process and a structure that isn’t reliant on the Head Coach or manager, so that when the HC/manager changes we can find someone else to work with those players, rather than starting again every time?

In a roundabout way I’m trying to say, the reliance on the manager/HC’s own recruitment preferences rather than having a club-centric focus is partly what has got us into the position we’re in, in my opinion. And madness would be to keep repeating that and expecting different results.

So to me, and it seems others, it is a bit of a concern that we seem to be recruiting in this way.

Edit - I’d just like to add that this hasn’t all come from me and my fantasy land of how I’d like the club to be run. Baldwin and the board themselves have talked about trying to create an identity and recruit managers and players around that.

This exactly. Few posts on twitter about turnover of players. That’s all because we’ve had a turnover of managers that every time leads to a rebalancing of the squad

[normal rules]

Another player who shares the same agent as DS. Probably not a sustainable approach to transfer business!

I share the same concerns.
This doesn’t inspire me to think there is genuine talent spotting going on.
It smacks of a rookie manager looking after his mates at the same agency.

[Retdon1]

Signing reserve players from Burton. Wow how far we have fallen

[TheFunk]

Brace yourselves for the rush when no doubt the early bird season tickets are released next month.

[Sammy Chung was King]

Darren Moore used what funding he was given by the board, in the way he thought best. How he left wasn’t great but he went to a side that had ambitions to improve. You can’t blame him really.

Surely we had ambition to improve as highlighted by backing DM to bring in who he wanted ie Bogle

Yes we did show some ambition, but Wednesday have big revenue coming in from crowds etc that we don’t. We can’t only do things in our own way, the board couldn’t match what he would get there.

[Padge_DRFC]

Brace yourselves for the rush when no doubt the early bird season tickets are released next month.

Club need to employ the greatest sales person in the world. They're not going to sell well at all. January statement and this window has ruined that.