The youth players/on-loan thread 2016-17

[parklane1]

Loans more often then not are good for youngsters, playing in the reserves, youth teams can only take a player so far. Eventually they have to step up and prove to themselves and others that they have what it takes. The only downside is that the club they go on loan too has to suit the players way of playing if not then loans can be a waste of time for all partys. Prime example was Pritchard going to WBA, it was a bad move and some of us said so at the time.

 

[glorygloryeze]

Loans more often then not are good for youngsters, playing in the reserves, youth teams can only take a player so far. Eventually they have to step up and prove to themselves and others that they have what it takes. The only downside is that the club they go on loan too has to suit the players way of playing if not then loans can be a waste of time for all partys. Prime example was Pritchard going to WBA, it was a bad move and some of us said so at the time.

Yes, i mostly agree; i do wonder if the Pritchard's loan to WBA was to almost for Poch to give him a "final saloon" check to see how much "fighting mentality" he REALLY had...Though we know Pulis is a prized bully/clam perhaps how he did on his loan taught Poch a few things about how much he was prepared to really work at breaking into or squad. Just a thought...

 

[parklane1]

Yes, i mostly agree; i do wonder if the Pritchard's loan to WBA was to almost for Poch to give him a "final saloon" check to see how much "fighting mentality" he REALLY had...Though we know Pulis is a prized bully/clam perhaps how he did on his loan taught Poch a few things about how much he was prepared to really work at breaking into or squad. Just a thought...

Who knows the real truth, but it was never going to work out well and like i said i and others said so at the time.

 

[glorygloryeze]

Who knows the real truth, but it was never going to work out well and like i said i and others said so at the time.

I guess it depends on how "work out well" is defined: maybe it worked out well for Poch/Spurs in that we have got Pritchard off the roster earlier than perhaps we wold have leaving space for others to take his place and perhaps be a better fit for Poch; the fact that Pritchard has been a bit Meh at Norwich maybe vindicates Poch's decision..

 

[parklane1]

I guess it depends on how "work out well" is defined: maybe it worked out well for Poch/Spurs in that we have got Pritchard off the roster earlier than perhaps we wold have leaving space for others to take his place and perhaps be a better fit for Poch; the fact that Pritchard has been a bit Meh at Norwich maybe vindicates Poch's decision..

Well i can not honestly believe that Poch would send a young player anywhere just to get him of our roster, but hey who knows. My point in the first place was that loans are usually beneficial for all partys as long as they have a plan behind them which suits all three parties.

 

[glorygloryeze]

Well i can not honestly believe that Poch would send a young player anywhere just to get him of our roster, but hey who knows. My point in the first place was that loans are usually beneficial for all partys as long as they have a plan behind them which suits all three parties.

I meant to allow Poch to be sure if he should be kept on the roster (or not); that's why imo even the Pritchard loan could be seen as being beneficial: the way it went perhaps allowed Poch to make up his mind whether he should be kept or whether he should be cut loose earlier.
This perhaps allowed Pritchard to concentrate on furthering his professional career elsewhere

 

[DubaiSpur]

Yes, i mostly agree; i do wonder if the Pritchard's loan to WBA was to almost for Poch to give him a "final saloon" check to see how much "fighting mentality" he REALLY had...Though we know Pulis is a prized bully/clam perhaps how he did on his loan taught Poch a few things about how much he was prepared to really work at breaking into or squad. Just a thought...

Yeah, but you won't learn anything about a player's mentality by sending him to a dank, dripping, fetid excuse for a sporting organization that has a bully in charge who favours 30+ long-ball merchants over anything that might disrupt his 'hit 'em high, hit 'em long' approach.

As with the Pau deal, I'm unsure why we went and loaned Pritchard out to *West Brom* last January. Made zero sense then, and still makes no sense now.

 

[JerusalemMan]

Yeah, but you won't learn anything about a player's mentality by sending him to a dank, dripping, fetid excuse for a sporting organization that has a bully in charge who favours 30+ long-ball merchants over anything that might disrupt his 'hit 'em high, hit 'em long' approach.

As with the Pau deal, I'm unsure why we went and loaned Pritchard out to *West Brom* last January. Made zero sense then, and still makes no sense now.

What makes zero sense to you about the Pau deal?
Promising keeper who we bring in for a year to fully assess and acclimatise to what will be expected of him while Vorm continues to deputise. Vorm leaves in the summer, Pau steps up to be Lloris' understudy.

 

[DubaiSpur]

What makes zero sense to you about the Pau deal?
Promising keeper who we bring in for a year to fully assess and acclimatise to what will be expected of him while Vorm continues to deputise. Vorm leaves in the summer, Pau steps up to be Lloris' understudy.

I've said it before, but -

1) Pau is 21. Keepers are legendarily long-lived as far as playing careers relative to outfielders go - thus, he faces the prospect of sitting for Lloris for years on end if Hugo stays for a while, during most of the formative years when experience and regular playing time is key. Alternately, given Lloris' stature and long contract, any more immediate departure would presumably mean a big fee received for Hugo, which would only put pressure on the club to reinvest that money in a similarly high-profile goalkeeping signing - which would again restrict Pau's playing time, even when (if) Lloris does leave.

2) Pau can only be 'assessed' and 'acclimatize' to the league if he *plays* in competitive fixtures in England. He hasn't, at all - so I'm not sure what we've learned from having him lurking behind Lloris and Vorm. His personality? His ability to settle? The former could surely be assessed by the club prior to him coming here (or would otherwise be known to Poch from his time at Espanyol), and the latter surely doesn't justify the expense we're going to in terms of bringing him over here and paying his wages for a full *year* without actually owning him ourselves.

3) The quoted fee we would pay were we to make the move permanent is 6m quid - I find it hard to see Vorm leaving for a fee equivalent to that, so we'd actually be spending more on Pau than we would gain from Vorm's sale. Which, again, seems a bit strange to me given that, despite his year of hanging around Hotspur Way, he still wouldn't be acclimatized to the pace and strength of the English game (due to not having played), wouldn't count as a home-grown player or anything (and backup GKs are a bit of a 'gimme' in terms of filling HG slots) and wouldn't be likely to be our first-choice goalie ahead of Hugo given the factors above.

 

[JerusalemMan]

I've said it before, but -

2) Pau can only be 'assessed' and 'acclimatize' to the league if he *plays* in competitive fixtures in England. He hasn't, at all - so I'm not sure what we've learned from having him lurking behind Lloris and Vorm. His personality? His ability to settle? The former could surely be assessed by the club prior to him coming here (or would otherwise be known to Poch from his time at Espanyol), and the latter surely doesn't justify the expense we're going to in terms of bringing him over here and paying his wages for a full *year* without actually owning him ourselves.

3) The quoted fee we would pay were we to make the move permanent is 6m quid - I find it hard to see Vorm leaving for a fee equivalent to that, so we'd actually be spending more on Pau than we would gain from Vorm's sale. Which, again, seems a bit strange to me given that, despite his year of hanging around Hotspur Way, he still wouldn't be acclimatized to the pace and strength of the English game (due to not having played), wouldn't count as a home-grown player or anything (and backup GKs are a bit of a 'gimme' in terms of filling HG slots) and wouldn't be likely to be our first-choice goalie ahead of Hugo given the factors above.

On the last two points, could it not be that Pochettino wants him to get used to playing within the team in a different style? And games are not necessarily required to effect some of the changes that he feels are for the best?
He sees the raw ability and believes he can be moulded. In a way that Guardiola thought Hart could not be to the system he wished to deploy.

 

[Spur of the moment]

Who knows the real truth, but it was never going to work out well and like i said i and others said so at the time.

I have a lingering suspicion that given Poch's reluctance to send his brightest prospects out on loan he had already come to the conclusion that Pritchard was not for him. And it may have been because, talented though Pritchard undoubtedly is there were certain aspects of his game that were not right for us. I remember one game for the U21s when having lost possession in the middle he not only gave up chasing back but even more worryingly appeared to blame others when it was clearly his responsibility.

The oppo went on to score almost as a direct result and I commented on here at the time that this might be a significant flaw he needed to work on. I would like to stress though that I have also witnessed games where he has been assiduous in chasing back as well as sparkling in possession so it might just have been a one-off, but it did set alarm bells ringing for me.

 

[glorygloryeze]

Yeah, but you won't learn anything about a player's mentality by sending him to a dank, dripping, fetid excuse for a sporting organization that has a bully in charge who favours 30+ long-ball merchants over anything that might disrupt his 'hit 'em high, hit 'em long' approach.

As with the Pau deal, I'm unsure why we went and loaned Pritchard out to *West Brom* last January. Made zero sense then, and still makes no sense now.

I hear your sentiment, BUT Pritchard is by all accounts a very creative player in terms of crosses into the box - which Pulis loves alongside his trogs. Matty Phillips i a winger and thriving there (on the whole). It is not unreasonable to think Pritchard could have made some kind of impact. The fact he didn't (i..e hardly played ANY league games) maybe made up Poch's mind when he got coaching reports (perhaps he didn't get selected much due to not training very hard; i'd imagine for all his love of Trogs, Pulis trains his players VERY hard).

 

[billyiddo]

I hear your sentiment, BUT Pritchard is by all accounts a very creative player in terms of crosses into the box - which Pulis loves alongside his trogs. Matty Phillips i a winger and thriving there (on the whole). It is not unreasonable to think Pritchard could have made some kind of impact. The fact he didn't (i..e hardly played ANY league games) maybe made up Poch's mind when he got coaching reports (perhaps he didn't get selected much due to not training very hard; i'd imagine for all his love of Trogs, Pulis trains his players VERY hard).

i think it was more a case of Pritchard not doing enough on the training pitch to earn game time than anything else - after all it doesn't make sense that Pullis would loan a player he never intended to play or one he didn't think suited his needs and he's only played 630 minutes of football since dropping down to the Championship so maybe he just isn't that good?

 

[Glenda's Legs]

Didn't Pritchard pick up an injury whilst at WBA that sidelined him for a while. By the time he was fit again WBA were fighting to stay up? Or am I confusing that with something/someone else?

 

[billyiddo]

no that's correct iirc

 

[Pandy]

Didn't Pritchard pick up an injury whilst at WBA that sidelined him for a while. By the time he was fit again WBA were fighting to stay up? Or am I confusing that with something/someone else?

That injury came while he was at Spurs and arguably contributed to his loaning out as before that he was involved with match-day squads.

 

[Cochise]

I know it was the injury he picked up playing for the England U21's which ruined his year. When we loaned him out to WBA, he played a game and looked like the best player in their XI (even their fans thought so), but Pullis then kept him off the field and kept quoting fitness problem's. The reality was that they had only got him in as cover in case they got a brick load of injuries, I doubt Pullis even wanted him, but they were in a relegation scrap and Pritchard was untested.

 

[Spur of the moment]

I know it was the injury he picked up playing for the England U21's which ruined his year. When we loaned him out to WBA, he played a game and looked like the best player in their XI (even their fans thought so), but Pullis then kept him off the field and kept quoting fitness problem's. The reality was that they had only got him in as cover in case they got a brick load of injuries, I doubt Pullis even wanted him, but they were in a relegation scrap and Pritchard was untested.

Still it was surprising that no PL club came in for him at the start of the current season. He'd had an outstanding year with Brentford in 2014/15, helping them to a Championship play-off place and winning a place in the Championship PFA Team of the Year as well as being dubbed FL Wonderkid of 2015 by both FourFourTwo and Match.

Maybe there were/are still some lingering doubts about the effects of his injury? Or maybe his true level has turned out to be Norwich, but even there so far he is struggling to hold down a regular first team place having made only six starts in the League from a total of of 15 appearances to date, scoring just the once and providing five assists.

 

[braineclipse]

Loans more often then not are good for youngsters, playing in the reserves, youth teams can only take a player so far. Eventually they have to step up and prove to themselves and others that they have what it takes. The only downside is that the club they go on loan too has to suit the players way of playing if not then loans can be a waste of time for all partys. Prime example was Pritchard going to WBA, it was a bad move and some of us said so at the time.

On the other hand both Bentaleb and Winks have stepped up from our reserves in the last couple of years without going out on loan at all. I know Bentaleb left in the end, but it wasn't a shortage of quality there imo. Seemingly Pochettino is looking to bring CCV and Onomah through in a similar fashion.

Loands can be good, but it's not the only way to get players beyond what reserves and youth teams can do.

I've said it before, but -

1) Pau is 21. Keepers are legendarily long-lived as far as playing careers relative to outfielders go - thus, he faces the prospect of sitting for Lloris for years on end if Hugo stays for a while, during most of the formative years when experience and regular playing time is key. Alternately, given Lloris' stature and long contract, any more immediate departure would presumably mean a big fee received for Hugo, which would only put pressure on the club to reinvest that money in a similarly high-profile goalkeeping signing - which would again restrict Pau's playing time, even when (if) Lloris does leave.

2) Pau can only be 'assessed' and 'acclimatize' to the league if he *plays* in competitive fixtures in England. He hasn't, at all - so I'm not sure what we've learned from having him lurking behind Lloris and Vorm. His personality? His ability to settle? The former could surely be assessed by the club prior to him coming here (or would otherwise be known to Poch from his time at Espanyol), and the latter surely doesn't justify the expense we're going to in terms of bringing him over here and paying his wages for a full *year* without actually owning him ourselves.

3) The quoted fee we would pay were we to make the move permanent is 6m quid - I find it hard to see Vorm leaving for a fee equivalent to that, so we'd actually be spending more on Pau than we would gain from Vorm's sale. Which, again, seems a bit strange to me given that, despite his year of hanging around Hotspur Way, he still wouldn't be acclimatized to the pace and strength of the English game (due to not having played), wouldn't count as a home-grown player or anything (and backup GKs are a bit of a 'gimme' in terms of filling HG slots) and wouldn't be likely to be our first-choice goalie ahead of Hugo given the factors above.

Backup goalie for someone like Lloris is inherently somewhat difficult. I don't think the club is handling it badly at all.

 

[Glenda's Legs]

Interview here with Shayon Harrison
Comes across as a confident, well spoken young man.