Swans make bid for striker

[Darran]

If it happens it will be a long overdue partnership IMO, especially since relegation means our academy players are not getting fewer challenges they need to prepare them to step into senior football.
Cons - difficulty keeping track of player development, less physical games.
Pros - regular first team football on good pitches where clogging is less likely, world class facilities to look after players.
Apparently Hispanic and Afro-American heritage players are not getting the chances they deserve beyond development level and could well be an untapped resource, alongside European heritage players particularly if Brexit favours US / UK reciprocation.
However, in this case we don't know if the suggestion is true; we don't know if the loan agreement would cover the player's wages and how much of any transfer fee.
If Kelman isn't expected to play for the señor side yet and is purchase for the future going to the USA could provide a higher level of football than loan to another L1 side and almost certainly reduce the overall cost to the club.
On the other had the Americans could be looking to use Swansea to buy players just like they didn't do with Wayne Rooney.

You think we should be spending money we haven’t got on players to send on loan to other clubs?

 

[magicdaps10]

Supposedly Spurs bid about 1.5m for him in Jan, if that were true then I would have expected Southend to have accepted.
Reality is that if the story were true in the first instance, I would suspect a 6 figure fee would be involved.... Be it 100k or 500k, I would still think that any fee paid would be to strengthen our first team.

 

[Risc]

If it happens it will be a long overdue partnership IMO, especially since relegation means our academy players are not getting fewer challenges they need to prepare them to step into senior football.
Cons - difficulty keeping track of player development, less physical games.
Pros - regular first team football on good pitches where clogging is less likely, world class facilities to look after players.
Apparently Hispanic and Afro-American heritage players are not getting the chances they deserve beyond development level and could well be an untapped resource, alongside European heritage players particularly if Brexit favours US / UK reciprocation.
However, in this case we don't know if the suggestion is true; we don't know if the loan agreement would cover the player's wages and how much of any transfer fee.
If Kelman isn't expected to play for the señor side yet and is purchase for the future going to the USA could provide a higher level of football than loan to another L1 side and almost certainly reduce the overall cost to the club.
On the other had the Americans could be looking to use Swansea to buy players just like they didn't do with Wayne Rooney.

I enjoy reading your posts about football, but you're really exposing yourself with your support of the yanks at every turn. I haven't got a clue who you are but Lisa in the past has hinted she thinks you get fed bits of information and I'm starting to think the same.

We are skint, Cooper has said we have zero money to spend, on what planet can it be acceptable for fans of Swansea City to be happy with our owners spending money out of our club to strengthen their other club in DC?

 

[Badlands]

If it happens it will be a long overdue partnership IMO, especially since relegation means our academy players are not getting fewer challenges they need to prepare them to step into senior football.
Cons - difficulty keeping track of player development, less physical games.
Pros - regular first team football on good pitches where clogging is less likely, world class facilities to look after players.
Apparently Hispanic and Afro-American heritage players are not getting the chances they deserve beyond development level and could well be an untapped resource, alongside European heritage players particularly if Brexit favours US / UK reciprocation.
However, in this case we don't know if the suggestion is true; we don't know if the loan agreement would cover the player's wages and how much of any transfer fee.
If Kelman isn't expected to play for the señor side yet and is purchase for the future going to the USA could provide a higher level of football than loan to another L1 side and almost certainly reduce the overall cost to the club.
On the other had the Americans could be looking to use Swansea to buy players just like they didn't do with Wayne Rooney.

You think we should be spending money we haven’t got on players to send on loan to other clubs?

Since c2014 have spent money we didn't have buying players who went out on loan including foreign clubs.
The only difference here is the possibility of the player being in a better environment than TNS, Shrewsbury or Groningen.

 

[Londonlisa2001]

You think we should be spending money we haven’t got on players to send on loan to other clubs?

Since c2014 have spent money we didn't have buying players who went out on loan including foreign clubs.
The only difference here is the possibility of the player being in a better environment than TNS, Shrewsbury or Groningen.

No we haven’t. We’ve bought players that haven’t worked out and sent them on loan. We’ve also had youth players that have gone on loan as part of their development. Name the players ‘since 2014’ we have bought with the specific intention of sending them on loan immediately.

 

[Dr. Winston]

The only difference here is the possibility of the player being in a better environment than TNS, Shrewsbury or Groningen.

I wouldn't suggest that MLS is a better environment than the Eredivisie.

Signing an eighteen year old with the expectation that he'll go out on loan for a bit before becoming part of the first team squad isn't all that big of a deal. Naturally people are automatically assuming the worst (If Birch took a ream of photocopier paper home no doubt some would scream asset stripping) but this is something we have done quite a bit in the past.

The question is is this something we can afford to do right now. Are we trying to sign a young player for the future in the expectation that the current gaps in the squad will be filled by loanees rather than permanent, experienced and therefore expensive players.

 

[Risc]

The only difference here is the possibility of the player being in a better environment than TNS, Shrewsbury or Groningen.

I wouldn't suggest that MLS is a better environment than the Eredivisie.

Signing an eighteen year old with the expectation that he'll go out on loan for a bit before becoming part of the first team squad isn't all that big of a deal. Naturally people are automatically assuming the worst (If Birch took a ream of photocopier paper home no doubt some would scream asset stripping) but this is something we have done quite a bit in the past.

The question is is this something we can afford to do right now. Are we trying to sign a young player for the future in the expectation that the current gaps in the squad will be filled by loanees rather than permanent, experienced and therefore expensive players.

It's natural to expect the worse when the manager has made clear there isn't a penny to spend and we are in the market for free agents and loans. I have no issue with us shopping in that market, we know the situation we are in, but when suddenly money becomes available and we are shipping players out to the owners other club then that becomes a big issue. It isn't exactly pennies either if reports are true.

 

[Badlands]

Since c2014 have spent money we didn't have buying players who went out on loan including foreign clubs.
The only difference here is the possibility of the player being in a better environment than TNS, Shrewsbury or Groningen.

No we haven’t. We’ve bought players that haven’t worked out and sent them on loan. We’ve also had youth players that have gone on loan as part of their development. Name the players ‘since 2014’ we have bought with the specific intention of sending them on loan immediately.

You added the word immediately ... I didn't.
As I mentioned earlier our 18 year old purchases spent time in the Under / academy being prepared to have meaningful loans. This player may not be ready for us and time with the unders would only delay his preparation as he's already spent some time in a senior team.
As you nor I know if any of these rumours are true all this s speculation. But if my version happens than I see it as good practice and makes economic sense.

 

[Badlands]

The only difference here is the possibility of the player being in a better environment than TNS, Shrewsbury or Groningen.

I wouldn't suggest that MLS is a better environment than the Eredivisie.

Signing an eighteen year old with the expectation that he'll go out on loan for a bit before becoming part of the first team squad isn't all that big of a deal. Naturally people are automatically assuming the worst (If Birch took a ream of photocopier paper home no doubt some would scream asset stripping) but this is something we have done quite a bit in the past.

The question is is this something we can afford to do right now. Are we trying to sign a young player for the future in the expectation that the current gaps in the squad will be filled by loanees rather than permanent, experienced and therefore expensive players.

How would fans scream about lack of ambition if Kelman was snapped up by another club and after a season or half returned form a loan period to become top scorer in the Championship?
Let's be honest, this discussion has little to do with the player, the process or the money.

 

[Woody Woodpecker Song]

If DC can afford 300k a week for Rooney why cant they buy the player and send him to us on loan aftet a year out there.

 

[Longlostjack]

No we haven’t. We’ve bought players that haven’t worked out and sent them on loan. We’ve also had youth players that have gone on loan as part of their development. Name the players ‘since 2014’ we have bought with the specific intention of sending them on loan immediately.

You added the word immediately ... I didn't.
As I mentioned earlier our 18 year old purchases spent time in the Under / academy being prepared to have meaningful loans. This player may not be ready for us and time with the unders would only delay his preparation as he's already spent some time in a senior team.
As you nor I know if any of these rumours are true all this s speculation. But if my version happens than I see it as good practice and makes economic sense.

Makes economic sense for who?