Loan players for next season - should we have any!?

[Bluepeter9 5,167]

I know Bartley is a tremendous prospect - and he has done a decent job for us so far BUT unless we are signing him I would much prefer that we either brought one of our own lads in or signed someone from elsewhere and developed them.

We are a selling club now, we are also a club that is going to have to depend and lean heavily on Murray Park's output.

From a business perspective loan deals make little sense, if the player does well as all we are doing is developing talent for other teams to capitilise on, or if they play badly we have taken the risk. (We also utilise the loan system by farming players out for experience)

I know some of our best players this season have been the loan ones Weiss, Foster (?), Bartley and Diouf (not forgetting Healey) but unless they are on loan with a view to permanent signing I don't think we should be doing this.

Lets look at Weiss - he has a good number of games for us (although inconsistent a wee bit but still young) - but if we had resisted playing him Wylde, who looks just as good, would have got more games and perhaps developed even further.

Davis came on loan and played well but because he played welll for us when we tried to sign him the price was bumped up (£6M was mooted at one point) but the transfer dragged on - because we had showcased his talents but someone else makes the money).

To me loan players should be a last gasp effort to shore up a squad (and maybe thats what these loans were) but given where we are I dont think its the way forward for us, and as good as these players are I think we should resist the temptation.

[Boab 73]

It could have been Wylde and Weiss on the right though... -'Lets look at Weiss - he has a good number of games for us (although inconsistent a wee bit but still young) - but if we had resisted playing him Wylde, who looks just as good, would have got more games and perhaps developed even further.'

I can see where the OP is coming from though but we just have to use the system to some extent.

[Jimfanciesthedude 24,540]

while it doesnt help in the long term, bringing bartley back for another season would help mccoist settle into the job and bring stability to a defence that may well lose its left back and centre half

however the loan signings we bring in must be better than we will have in the summer, or else its a complete waste of wages that we may not afford

if mccoist only gets money from player sales, then we will have to use loan signings, with fullbacks and wide mids the priority

[caseyjones 3,009]

My preference would be to build a team for the long-term, using our own existing young players, supplemented by those who we bring in through scouting, but if the chance arises to bring in quality for a position where we are weak, then we must make best use of the system which is in place.

[Boab 73]

My preference would be to build a team for the long-term, using our own existing young players, supplemented by those who we bring in through scouting, but if the chance arises to bring in quality for a position where we are weak, then we must make best use of the system which is in place.

Agreed.

[Ryan_1 1,136]

I'm not the biggest fan of loan deals, I'd rather players were brought with a long-term thought for the club. Too many loan deals is not good for squad harmony IMO. You'll have too many players who's eye is somewhere else and doesn't have the total commitment to the club.

However they are handy. As you've said, Kyle Bartley and Vladimir Weiss have been a sucess and to an extent as has Richard Foster. It also helps the numbers of the squad for the worst injury crisis and suspensions. So I would have them but I'd limit the numbers to 1 or 2 a season, with a view of them winning a permanent deal at the end of the season.

[Bluepeter9 5,167]

Sorry edited - my bad

[Gillete 1,338]

It's all about money

If you can get a player like Bartley for free or pay £1m for someone not half as good then it's obvious what I'd rather have

[Smile 26,600]

I prefer our own players loans can never be seen as the way forward, it must dishearten reserve players to see us bringing in players from other teams while not getting the chance themselves.

If the reserves arent good enough to step up, scout players who are.

[rfc_watp 1,503]

If the loan players are good and hungry enough, want to give their all for the jersey and win trophys then yes, i would happily take them again.

Its all about winning trophys, id rather we won the SPL with a team of loan players than lose it with a team of contracted players.

As soon as they pull on the jersey, they're as good as Rangers players anyway.

[Blue Forever 179]

I don't mind loan players, but I would like for us to agree a fee as well as first refusal on any loan players we bring in. Then, if they turn out to be good, other clubs can't steal them from under our noses.

[pcbear 10,913]

Its a tight call, you can pay heaps of money for a player that bombs and thats bye bye to the ££s paid out,or you can buy a goodun and make a bit of money,if you get a quality player on loan for a season or more thats good business, parent club picking up most of the wages and if he is unlucky enough to get injured, not our long term problem.

Re -Bartley who imo looks the real deal, he is now playing first team football, in the frame for medals in possibly three competitions, playing in front of large appreciative crowds, i reckon it will be pretty hard for him to go back playing for Arsenal reserves/youths in front of a few hundred spectators, he wont be anywhere near the Arsenal first team on a regular basis, another season long loan is a win win situation all round, bet he is loving life at The Rangers.

[Amac9 2,060]

I would take Weiss and Bartley on loan again.

[simplythebest 11,453]

If loans are the most affordable option again for us to boost the squad then absolutely.

I'd rather not rely on borrowing players but it's better than nothing.

[SirWalterSmithLegend 206]

Obviously. If we cant afford to buy the quality we need but can loan them, then why not? Its a no brainer. If they contribute and give 100% then they are welcome here.

[1st_Jan_1994 4,868]

Not got a problem with loans if they are good enough.

Why pay money for someone we could get on loan for a season and maybe another after that.

[King_gazza 1,065]

Unless we get taken over then i can see ally's budget being 3-4m max,so we won't really have a choice but to bring in 4/5 loan players to boost our threadbare squad unfortunatly.

Would take weiss & bartley in a heartbeat again

[gazza27 15,283]

I would take Weiss and Bartley on loan again.

as would i

both have been here and experienced the spl so will no what to expect and wont need time settling in

[papaguy51 912]

If anyone thinks we can do without loaned players next season then they're completely fucking ignorant to the situation we are in.

I'd be over the moon if we signed our full quota of decent loan players. It's a great way of getting the quality required in for the year, and if we start to show we're successful with it, our reputation will improve no end.

This whole 'we shouldn't sign ANY loan players' idea is complete and utter bullshit.

[bombaybadboy08 15,660]

My preference would be to build a team for the long-term, using our own existing young players, supplemented by those who we bring in through scouting, but if the chance arises to bring in quality for a position where we are weak, then we must make best use of the system which is in place.

In an egg shell