Too many loan signings

[DetroitHibs]

This new lad Hyndman, makes four loan signings already. Surely we are in a position to start properly investing in our own talent. They might be great short term, but when they leave we are back to square one. The club has never been in a better position to invest in good talent and really kick on and distance ourselves from the rest of the pack.

The fans have shown that when the product on the park is good, we will show up in record numbers. Financially the purse strings need loosened and good quality players signed permanently.

[RobR27]

We've got an option for permanent deal on Maclaren, Bogdan is a backup anyway.

We need another player or two (Scotty Allan would be a big step) but it feels different to the loan signings we had in different years. It feels more like it's giving us depth than plugging holes.

Hopefully now the McGinn money is in the bank we can complete the job.

[blackpoolhibs]

This new lad Hyndman, makes four loan signings already. Surely we are in a position to start properly investing in our own talent. They might be great short term, but when they leave we are back to square one. The club has never been in a better position to invest in good talent and really kick on and distance ourselves from the rest of the pack.

The fans have shown that when the product on the park is good, we will show up in record numbers. Financially the purse strings need loosened and good quality players signed permanently.

The fans will still turn up in good numbers if we have 11 of the first team on loan and they do the business.

The core of the side are signed on deals more than 1 year, and some of the loans are then made into longer deals.

I suppose after a great start to the season, we've gone from being under prepared to having too many loans, god i long for the days we were moaning about fighting relegation, and signing Rowan Vine and Tudor ****in Jones.

[adhibs]

Weve got a deal to sign maclaren permanantly and got kamberi and mallan on 4 year deals (i think). Fans might be out in numbers but were still seriously damaged by the tv deal we recieve when were competing for players.

I'd also say our loan signings are ones 'the rest of the pack' wouldn't manage to get on loan.

[Mon Dieu4]

I trust Lennon, if he's happy then so am I

[Smartie]

This new lad Hyndman, makes four loan signings already. Surely we are in a position to start properly investing in our own talent. They might be great short term, but when they leave we are back to square one. The club has never been in a better position to invest in good talent and really kick on and distance ourselves from the rest of the pack.

The fans have shown that when the product on the park is good, we will show up in record numbers. Financially the purse strings need loosened and good quality players signed permanently.

The team of the second half of last season could sometimes contain 4 loan players - Barker, Allan, Kamberi and McLaren (never less than 3 of them) and that was one of the best Hibs teams I've seen.

If the payers are right, it works.

Kamberi and Mallan have signed decent length contracts this summer so are committed to being here for a while, and McLaren has been here before so shouldn't take too long to slot back in.

The continued emergence of Porteous and Shaw (who are both presumably on decent length contracts) will help our stability.

We continue to have a solid core of players who are on longer contracts, a few here for a couple of years and then complementing that with some real quality via the loan system seems to me to be an ideal way to build an effective team and squad.

I'm all for it.

The key though is to be adding these players to an already strong base, rather than attempting to apply sticking plasters to a crap team Fenlon-style.

[Bob Box Fish]

I can see where you are coming from it’s great to get players such as barker on loan but we need to reinvest season ticket money / UEFA / Mcginn money back into permanent contracts or it will be the same merry go round every summer.

Still plenty time tho and the hibs bank balance will be busting now so no excuses.

[SlickShoes]

False

Trust the manager and people in charge, some people said the same in January and look at the last 7/8 months.

[Allant1981]

dont care how many loan players we have as long as we win

[RN Hibee]

We had 4 players who featured significantly in the first team for the second half of last season in Allan, Kamberi, Maclaren and Barker and I don't remember there being too much fuss caused. Besides, Bogdan was only brought in as backup to play until Marciano is fit and we have an option to sign Maclaren on a permanent deal at the end of his current loan.

Agyepong fills the hole left by Barker and Hyndman gives us an extra option in midfield. Provided the rest of our acquisitions are permanent deals I see no problem, and personally if the players we are getting in on loan are of a better quality than what is available on permanent deals I don't have an issue with it.

[DetroitHibs]

Weve got a deal to sign maclaren permanantly and got kamberi and mallan on 4 year deals (i think). Fans might be out in numbers but were still seriously damaged by the tv deal we recieve when were competing for players.

I'd also say our loan signings are ones 'the rest of the pack' wouldn't manage to get on loan.

With McGinn's money, season ticket sales and the money from Europe, we have money to spend. So far we have signed Mallan and Kamberi. Two players and the rest on loan. It should be the opposite way around when bringing players in.

[Hibernia&Alba]

Not as bad with loans as it was several years ago, when we'd start with a new team each season. We've been much more unsettled with the squad in the past.

[WhileTheChief..]

Maybe we can loan players who are way better than we can afford to buy by paying a bigger chunk of their wages.

I dont care. The loans we’ve had under Lennon have been brilliant for us. It’s been covered in one of the other threads.

[Bostonhibby]

The fans will still turn up in good numbers if we have 11 of the first team on loan and they do the business.

The core of the side are signed on deals more than 1 year, and some of the loans are then made into longer deals.

I suppose after a great start to the season, we've gone from being under prepared to having too many loans, god i long for the days we were moaning about fighting relegation, and signing Rowan Vine and Tudor ****in Jones.[emoji106]

At least we could get the likes of vine and Joe keenan on permanent deals. Those were the days.

Sent from my SM-J320FN using Tapatalk

[hibs#1]

Loans are big part of football now with all the rich clubs stockpiling players. Even big clubs sign players on loan. I trust Lennon and Dempster know what they are doing and have made good use of the loan market ie Kamberi and MacLaren plus others. For what it's worth I think Hyndman is a good player from what recall of him from the Huns.

[DetroitHibs]

As it stands NOW, we have a weaker squad than the one that finished last season. We have the same two up top, but the midfield has severely been weakened. Dylan Allan and now SJM are all gone. If your happy to keep bringing in loan players, great, I'd much rather we brought our own players in.

[O'Rourke3]

We could always go down the route of our esteemed neighbours and sign about 15 while taking more on loans.

I'm sure our managment team identified the type of player we wanted and the funds available to secure on a contract. Step 2 consided if we can or cannot afford to buy if available or borrow if the price was too high or the club didn't want to sell.
What we are seeing is a number of loans and a significant number of longer term signings bolstering the team and making the changes necessary in the close season less and less difficult over the longer term.

I'm sure by the end of this year there will be less all round betwetting as some more of us see that the plan is working.

[wpj]

There also seems to be a good team spirit at Hibs with players keen to play for each other which is good management. News gets out its a good club to go to and yes the fans play a massive part in that too.If they play well then its all good.
Some previous loanees were more interested in George street than Easter road.

[RoslinInstHibby]

As it stands NOW, we have a weaker squad than the one that finished last season. We have the same two up top, but the midfield has severely been weakened. Dylan Allan and now SJM are all gone. If your happy to keep bringing in loan players, great, I'd much rather we brought our own players in.

We have brought in Mallan who hasn't started to badly, now we have cash I would expect a few faces in. Our window doesn't close tomorrow so still time

[CapitalGreen]

DetroitHibs loves a negative post about Hibs 🤔

Joint top of the league and still in Europe, unbeaten winning 4 of our first 5 competitive fixtures, big crowds for midweek games at ER - we are doing something right.

[therealgavmac]

As it stands NOW, we have a weaker squad than the one that finished last season. We have the same two up top, but the midfield has severely been weakened. Dylan Allan and now SJM are all gone. If your happy to keep bringing in loan players, great, I'd much rather we brought our own players in.

So far this season, we’ve won 3 and drawn 1 Europa game and won our opening league game handsomely. Maybe wait and see how more results go before spouting pish about weaker squads and midfields...... you never know eh, we may get some great results..... mind you, after a few bad ones you’ll be happy saying I told you so

[GordonHFC]

With McGinn's money, season ticket sales and the money from Europe, we have money to spend. So far we have signed Mallan and Kamberi. Two players and the rest on loan. It should be the opposite way around when bringing players in.

Remember we also brought in money with the sale of Murray.

[DetroitHibs]

So far this season, we’ve won 3 and drawn 1 Europa game and won our opening league game handsomely. Maybe wait and see how more results go before spouting pish about weaker squads and midfields...... you never know eh, we may get some great results..... mind you, after a few bad ones you’ll be happy saying I told you so

Spouting pish. Is this squad better than the one that finished last year? Yes or no? Think your the one spouting pish.

[CapitalGreen]

Spouting pish. Is this squad better than the one that finished last year? Yes or no? Think your the one spouting pish.

That squad took until the end of January to construct, we are currently only 1 week into the new league season.

[Mibbes Aye]

This new lad Hyndman, makes four loan signings already. Surely we are in a position to start properly investing in our own talent. They might be great short term, but when they leave we are back to square one. The club has never been in a better position to invest in good talent and really kick on and distance ourselves from the rest of the pack.

The fans have shown that when the product on the park is good, we will show up in record numbers. Financially the purse strings need loosened and good quality players signed permanently.

The football market has changed in the last couple of years. There are a lot more deals to be made where clubs pay a fee for the loan and then have a set price to buy, or first option.

That reflects the longer-term impact of Bosman, but also player ownership arrangements. That is often at a higher level than Hibs but there is a knock-on effect.

As it stands, we do properly invest in our own talent - it's based at East Mains. I've seen enough youth and dev sides to know how difficult it is to predict who might make the breakthrough, but I'm confident that Shaw and Porteous are there, Murray potentially, and in the current dev line-up there are a good few who have the potential to make it. The big caveat is that even getting one player out of an age group is a success - Hanlon was fast-tracked out his group who contained some great young players who nevertheless didn't make it with us.

[Zazu62]

Doesn’t bother me tbh. Would like us to buy a replacement for SJM tho.

[Kavinho]

Spouting pish. Is this squad better than the one that finished last year? Yes or no? Think your the one spouting pish.


Settle....

[cleanyman]

We were always going to be a in a weaker position. We have lost our best midfield in many a year but its now about getting the right players in to get us to where we want to be. Everyone knew Dylan and SJM were going so lets move on and support the team.

Come on ma bonnie boys

[SideBurns]

For me, it's more the quality of the player that's important rather than the terms of the deal. Of course, I'd prefer to get every signing on 3-4 year contracts but it simply isn't possible.

As long as we continue to bring through youth players such as Shaw and Porteous, and there is a balance between permanent and loan signings while the quality remains high, I'll be happy.

[RN Hibee]

As it stands NOW, we have a weaker squad than the one that finished last season. We have the same two up top, but the midfield has severely been weakened. Dylan Allan and now SJM are all gone. If your happy to keep bringing in loan players, great, I'd much rather we brought our own players in.

Think you're doing the midfielders we have a disservice by saying that its 'severely' weakened, though I expect you were exaggerating to drive home your point. Yes we all loved Dylan, Allan and McGinn but Mallan has hit the ground running and Hyndman is a pretty tidy player from what I remember of him, would also expect it would be the #1 area we look to invest in with the McGinn money. Also worth pointing out that despite your adversity to bringing in loan players you're happy to wax lyrical about a midfield with Scott Allan in it, who was on loan at the time.

[Cocaine&Caviar]

What a stupid thread

[stoneyburn hibs]

Totally negative op. It's been said enough times regarding how previous loanees have enhanced us over the last few seasons. If that's the way it continues, then so be it.

[Hibernia&Alba]

As it stands NOW, we have a weaker squad than the one that finished last season. We have the same two up top, but the midfield has severely been weakened. Dylan Allan and now SJM are all gone. If your happy to keep bringing in loan players, great, I'd much rather we brought our own players in.

Those three leave a huge hole, no question. We've been victims of our own success in this regard: our strong performances last season didn't go unnoticed. It's difficult for a club our size to replace talent like that, but we have some money to spend and a good manager who has an eye for spotting a good player. Fingers crossed we minimise the impact of losing those three players.

[Hibernia&Alba]

What a stupid thread

I think it's a fair point to raise, in all honesty.

[Jim44]

Maybe we can loan players who are way better than we can afford to buy by paying a bigger chunk of their wages.

I dont care. The loans we’ve had under Lennon have been brilliant for us. It’s been covered in one of the other threads.

Exactly.

[madhatter]

Think we can all agree we have a weaker squad than that which finished last season. I think the club will look to spend some of the money from McGinn transfer, hope it is on the correct players - players that can develop and flourish, youthful rather than journeyman. With regards to loans, this debate is largely down to our scouting and recruitment, if they are good and we get good loans that fit perfectly within the team, great. I don't think any of us would complain at that. I think the problem arises when the scouting and recruitment dries up and something similar to the Barker situation happens - a player that has a good season with us but then moves elsewhere the following season. This problem is the same with permanent signings but I guess the comparison would be Scott Allan as a permanent Hibs player on a 4 year contract vs Scott Allan on loan from Celtic for a year...both are good but I think most would prefer the first scenario! If we can turn good loans into permanent signings then that is superb, I have a feeling we've had an element of luck on a few of the deals though (obviously together with great work from Leeann, Graeme and George).

Another way to look at it, Agyepong has an unfair start in his loan spell - the vast proportion of Hibs fans will compare him to Barker. If he doesn't reach those heights then he'll likely be seen as a failure. Previous loan player is still fresh in people's heads and fans will probably do the normal "why couldn't we have got Barker?" etc. should Agyepong have a poor start to his spell.

[SideBurns]

Those three leave a huge hole, no question. We've been victims of our own success in this regard: our strong performances last season didn't go unnoticed. It's difficult for a club our size to replace talent like that, but we have some money to spend and a good manager who has an eye for spotting a good player. Fingers crossed we minimise the impact of losing those three players.

One of several reasons I didn't want last season to end was the realisation that the brilliant midfield 3 might all be leaving. However, one of them was on loan and another came to Hibs on loan initially, which kind of tears up the OP's argument.

On a wider point, they aren't going to be easily replaced and we're going to have to be patient with the new boys (assuming Allan isn't coming back, of course). Mallan has made a decent enough start though....

[jabis]

I think it's a fair point to raise, in all honesty.

In all honesty,I don't.

Squads change every season.You can't say this squad is guff until you've seen them play for a couple of months.

[DetroitHibs]

:blah:
2mins after SJM is away,the money from Europe won't be received for a few months,season tickets sales not finalised.And you're greetin like a wee bairn.
It's not pocket money ya dobber.

You sound like a daft 12 year old wee laddie throwing around words like "dobber" Nae bodies greetin, merely stating that I'd rather have players sign for us permanently than bringing in loan players.

[Speedy]

We seem to be structuring them well over the last few years.

Kamberi and Marciano turned permanent. McLaren is back too and looks like going perm at the end.

[neil7908]

I'm inclined to agree but think we need to see how the squad looks come 31st August.

I'm hoping now McGinn has gone we have the funds to look for permanent signings. Too many players on loan isn't a great idea and wouldn't be keen on any more unless their top quality.

[madhatter]

Biggest problems will arise in 3-4 years if we rely too heavily on loans (and being unable to make them permanent) - our squad harmony and spirit will dilute. The core of this squad fight for each other, loans can buy into that but lets not forget Matt Doherty and loans like that - they don't give a toss and just view it as getting game time. Imagine when Hanlon, McGregor, Stevenson and Gray are retired or reaching retirement. Loans aren't the answer to that. Loans are necessary but we got to enjoy McGinn for so long because we signed a talented youngster and developed him. We've got money into the club as part of his departure. Loans come and go (if we can't make them permanent), no money comes into club and we can't be assured of how they will gel with the squad - Feruz.

Loans can be great, it isn't a guarantee though. Safer than signing players on long contracts if unsure of their ability but garbage if player performs brilliantly. One I remember well is Marc Libbra, comes on loan does really well and is gone same season.

[Hibernia&Alba]

In all honesty,I don't.

Squads change every season.You can't say this squad is guff until you've seen them play for a couple of months.

I don't think the OP is saying the squad is guff but is expressing the issue of how many loan players it's healthy to have: too many and you never get a settled squad. It's a reasonable debate.

[Cocaine&Caviar]

4 loan signings. 1 of which being an emergency keeper.

The other 3, all with the potential to be made permanent if successful.

[SonOfDavidFrancey]

This time last year was celebrating signing of stokes - permanent.
January was worrying about binning him in favour of Kamberi/ Maclaren. Both loans.

Enough said?

[Carheenlea]

Those three leave a huge hole, no question. We've been victims of our own success in this regard: our strong performances last season didn't go unnoticed. It's difficult for a club our size to replace talent like that, but we have some money to spend and a good manager who has an eye for spotting a good player. Fingers crossed we minimise the impact of losing those three players.

Last seasons midfield was as good a midfield as we have seen at Hibs - almost impossible to replace like for like, but as you say, our recruitment has been pretty largely positive in recent years so excited to see how this new chapter for the club develops.

[brog]

You sound like a daft 12 year old wee laddie throwing around words like "dobber" Nae bodies greetin, merely stating that I'd rather have players sign for us permanently than bringing in loan players.

I know & you've said it many times on other threads so now you decide to start a new thread on the subject. Loans are a fact of life, some of the biggest clubs in the world have players on loan. Another fact of life is that Hibs turnover for a season is less than some EPL players are picking up in wages. We need loans to get quality in without busting the bank & hopefully, like Kamberi, Dylan, Efe & Rocky they then become permanent. Even then permanency is overrated, A 2 year contract means you're in the shop window 9 months after the start of the season & you can sign a pre contract 9 months later. Effectively everyone is a loan player now, only the length of time varies. I would love to have a 1st team squad of 22+ players all on Hibs contracts but I would also love to have Harry Kane up front for us. Neither are realistic options.

[jabis]

You sound like a daft 12 year old wee laddie throwing around words like "dobber" Nae bodies greetin, merely stating that I'd rather have players sign for us permanently than bringing in loan players.

Dear Dobber

You are 40 years out in your age estimate.As for having players on permanent contracts that we are unsure about,I refer my Detroit dobber to various kickback threads,and indeed the entire tynecastle debacle,as to the soundness of his proposition.

Yours sincerely


Jabis

[Mibbes Aye]

A couple of posters seem to be ignoring the fact that it isn't directly in Hibs' control about whether we sign players on long-term perms as opposed to a loan or a short-term deal.

Players and agents, understandably, want to give themselves every opportunity to maximise their earnings and give themselves the most choice. That predicates itself to shorter-term deals or loans, which they can then re-negotiate to their advantage.

The market has changed - it changed post-Bosman but shifted again in the last couple of years and it will never go back to the Jim McLean days of securing players for years, regardless of their thoughts.

Thibaut Courtois has just reminded his second club that player power counts.

[madhatter]

4 loan signings. 1 of which being an emergency keeper.

The other 3, all with the potential to be made permanent if successful.

I think our chances of signing all three of Maclaren, Hyndman and Agyepong after their loans is pretty slim. Hyndman and Agyepong will be on very decent wages I'd assume and if they do well for Hibs the interest from English clubs will be very high due to who their parent clubs are...

[CapitalGreen]

Biggest problems will arise in 3-4 years if we rely too heavily on loans (and being unable to make them permanent) - our squad harmony and spirit will dilute. The core of this squad fight for each other, loans can buy into that but lets not forget Matt Doherty and loans like that - they don't give a toss and just view it as getting game time. Imagine when Hanlon, McGregor, Stevenson and Gray are retired or reaching retirement. Loans aren't the answer to that. Loans are necessary but we got to enjoy McGinn for so long because we signed a talented youngster and developed him. We've got money into the club as part of his departure. Loans come and go (if we can't make them permanent), no money comes into club and we can't be assured of how they will gel with the squad - Feruz.

Loans can be great, it isn't a guarantee though. Safer than signing players on long contracts if unsure of their ability but garbage if player performs brilliantly. One I remember well is Marc Libbra, comes on loan does really well and is gone same season.

More negativity from you, I’m shocked.

Did Liam Henderson give a toss?

What about our loan deals for Kamberi, MacLaren, Allan, Ambrose, Marciano, Shinnie, McGeouch - did they give a toss?

Hanlon and MacGregor are getting older but we have O’Connor and Porteous coming through, gaining experience who have the potential to be better than both those players.

No signing is a guarantee loan or permanent but a loan deal might allow us to bring in more quality on our limited budget. Since 2014, for 4 consecutive seasons we have improved year on year supplemented with quality loan signings. This model has been proven successful and I trust our recruitment team to continue that success.

[Dancehibs]

I think our chances of signing all three of Maclaren, Hyndman and Agyepong after their loans is pretty slim. Hyndman and Agyepong will be on very decent wages I'd assume and if they do well for Hibs the interest from English clubs will be very high due to who their parent clubs are...

Do you know how much we are contributing to thier wages?

[jabis]

I don't think the OP is saying the squad is guff but is expressing the issue of how many loan players it's healthy to have: too many and you never get a settled squad. It's a reasonable debate.

We have a very settled squad by all accounts,she did say the team was weaker NOW,so I'm assuming that she thinks we will finish bottom six.
Bad day at work and having a blow out 😇🍷

[Paisley Hibby]

I'm inclined to agree but think we need to see how the squad looks come 31st August.

I'm hoping now McGinn has gone we have the funds to look for permanent signings. Too many players on loan isn't a great idea and wouldn't be keen on any more unless their top quality.

Signing players on long term contracts might also not be a good idea - eg Colin Harris & Danny Handling to name just two recent examples...

[Jdawg]

This new lad Hyndman, makes four loan signings already. Surely we are in a position to start properly investing in our own talent. They might be great short term, but when they leave we are back to square one. The club has never been in a better position to invest in good talent and really kick on and distance ourselves from the rest of the pack.

The fans have shown that when the product on the park is good, we will show up in record numbers. Financially the purse strings need loosened and good quality players signed permanently.

We have had Rocky, Efe, Barker, Allan, Flo, Jamie Mac on loan ergo loans are good with the correct manager. We have signed 3 of them and maybe Jamie Mac next year.

Look at the difference Flo and Jamie Mac made last January. We also got a first option to purchase Flo and for 100k, absolute steal.

[A Hi-Bee]

I don't think the OP is saying the squad is guff but is expressing the issue of how many loan players it's healthy to have: too many and you never get a settled squad. It's a reasonable debate.

You can never have to much quality.

[madhatter]

More negativity from you, I’m shocked.

Did Liam Henderson give a toss?

What about our loan deals for Kamberi, MacLaren, Allan, Ambrose, Marciano, Shinnie, McGeouch - did they give a toss?

Hanlon and MacGregor are getting older but we have O’Connor and Porteous coming through, gaining experience who have the potential to be better than both those players.

No signing is a guarantee loan or permanent but a loan deal might allow us to bring in more quality on our limited budget. Since 2014, for 4 consecutive seasons we have improved year on year supplemented with quality loan signings. This model has been proven successful and I trust our recruitment team to continue that success.

Negativity? I've added to a debate, I haven't been abusive towards anyone (like some on this thread) but yet my "negativity" is something you feel the need to highlight...Genuinely not meaning to be negative, I'm simply giving an opinion based on my experience and memory, as you are by the looks of things.

I haven't pointed to those loans. I clearly pointed to players that I remember being on loan that I didn't view as giving their all. Regardless of how good our recruitment is, there is still a chance we get a loan that couldn't care less about how Hibs do - Rherras last season probably didn't care much for instance. I'd be surprised if a player on a permanent contract didn't try their all, that's where the dressing room comes in - permanent signings who have been at the club for years will ensure everyone pulls their weight and manage each other to an extent - McGregor, Gray, Stevenson, Hanlon. I'd also suggest that loans require Hibs to be more "delicate" with any dealings as the player power nowadays would likely mean the player can negotiate gardening leave or the cancellation of the loan via contacting their parent club.

[madhatter]

Do you know how much we are contributing to thier wages?

No but if we were to sign them permanently after their loan spells I can categorically say Hibs will be contributing 100% to their wages!

[Brightside]

This new lad Hyndman, makes four loan signings already. Surely we are in a position to start properly investing in our own talent. They might be great short term, but when they leave we are back to square one. The club has never been in a better position to invest in good talent and really kick on and distance ourselves from the rest of the pack.

The fans have shown that when the product on the park is good, we will show up in record numbers. Financially the purse strings need loosened and good quality players signed permanently.

Id rather have the best team we can get on the park thanks.

[Captain Trips]

I am not concerned as most are for 1 season. The trouble in past was too many that were simply not good enough or not arsed and they were short term.

This is a million miles away from the dross loans from 5+ years ago.

[Dancehibs]

No but if we were to sign them permanently after their loan spells I can categorically say Hibs will be contributing 100% to their wages!

Not sure that’s always the case. For example Man U were still contributing to Rooneys wages st Man U. There are other examples. We could be getting our recent loan signings at a very competitive rate

[madhatter]

Not sure that’s always the case. For example Man U were still contributing to Rooneys wages st Man U. There are other examples. We could be getting our recent loan signings at a very competitive rate

Are you suggesting we've signed Kamberi on a cheap deal from Grasshopper after a loan spell and also had it in the transfer agreement that they pay part of his wages after he moves to us permanently? Think they need a Leeann then because they are destined for trouble using that model!

[marinello59]

I am not concerned as most are for 1 season. The trouble in past was too many that were simply not good enough or not arsed and they were short term.

This is a million miles away from the dross loans from 5+ years ago.

Exactly.
And the success recent young loan signings have had with us makes us an attractive destination for some really talented young players we couldn’t normally afford. Happy days.

[Dancehibs]

Are you suggesting we've signed Kamberi on a cheap deal from Grasshopper after a loan spell and also had it in the transfer agreement that they pay part of his wages after he moves to us permanently? Think they need a Leeann then because they are destined for trouble using that model!

No I didn’t suggest that

[madhatter]

No I didn’t suggest that

I possibly put my point across poorly then, I tried to state that I have no idea what Hibs contribution to the loans' wages are. However, I do know if we make them permanent that we will be paying 100% of their wages. The point being is, I don't think we could entertain the expectation of making Hyndman, Agyepong and Maclaren permanent signings at the end of this season (if successful) simply based on Hyndman and Agyepong being at EPL clubs (likely paid high wages). Think we've got caught in cross purposes due to my previous post's poor punctuation and wording.

[21sMay]

a lot of the loan deals nowadays are with a figure in place for a permanent transfer at the end of the loan, it's how football is going. even the biggest of teams do it as a way to get around ffp

[cmcd]

In all honesty,I don't.

Squads change every season.You can't say this squad is guff until you've seen them play for a couple of months.

This

[Mibbes Aye]

I think our chances of signing all three of Maclaren, Hyndman and Agyepong after their loans is pretty slim. Hyndman and Agyepong will be on very decent wages I'd assume and if they do well for Hibs the interest from English clubs will be very high due to who their parent clubs are...

I think that misses the point about actually getting game time on a regular basis.

Without fail, Hibs produce an age group year on year and the better ones get contracts and invariably get loaned out to lower league clubs, to get experience but also to test out whether they can hack it.

Invariably very few make it to regular appearances for Hibs, or a career in the top-flight in Scotland.

Those who can, find contracts at a lower level, on lesser wages than they would have got with Hibs first team, and that's assuming they are fortunate enough to find full-time football. For many, it will be part-time, or ending up in the Juniors.

There's a massive cliff-edge when it comes to making the transition to first-team, and while you might have been a star in an elite academy side, the leap to playing first-team on a wet Wednesday in the Carabao Cup away to Port Vale, let alone playing at Old Trafford or the Etihad, is huge.

Clubs like Man City or Chelsea, let alone the lesser clubs, will release countless players at this age, almost all of whom can be expected to be looking for a chance to play football and will accept that their wage will depend on the club that takes them.

And in the same way, we release players who wanted to play for us but end up playing in League 2 or the Lowland League, and accept that's the level of club and wage they can command.

[madhatter]

I think that misses the point about actually getting game time on a regular basis.

Without fail, Hibs produce an age group year on year and the better ones get contracts and invariably get loaned out to lower league clubs, to get experience but also to test out whether they can hack it.

Invariably very few make it to regular appearances for Hibs, or a career in the top-flight in Scotland.

Those who can, find contracts at a lower level, on lesser wages than they would have got with Hibs first team, and that's assuming they are fortunate enough to find full-time football. For many, it will be part-time, or ending up in the Juniors.

There's a massive cliff-edge when it comes to making the transition to first-team, and while you might have been a star in an elite academy side, the leap to playing first-team on a wet Wednesday in the Carabao Cup away to Port Vale, let alone playing at Old Trafford or the Etihad, is huge.

Clubs like Man City or Chelsea, let alone the lesser clubs, will release countless players at this age, almost all of whom can be expected to be looking for a chance to play football and will accept that their wage will depend on the club that takes them.

And in the same way, we release players who wanted to play for us but end up playing in League 2 or the Lowland League, and accept that's the level of club and wage they can command.

You make valid points but with regards to Hyndman, it looks like Bournemouth fans rate him quite highly and so do Rangers fans (probably not now though). I’d assume if he did well at Hibs on loan, Bournemouth would consider him for first team, or if not, English Championship or League One teams would be interested. The fact he is on an EPL club’s books at the moment will increase his perceived quality even if he doesn’t make it at Bournemouth. Much in the same way one of our youth players could be rotten but viewed as an “ex-Hibs player” by clubs beneath us in our game.

It’s not so much drop in wages based on what level of football they have dropped to. It’s the fact they have a reputation in English football which in turn creates an interest, clubs will be monitoring his performances at Hibs. English football is awash with money so clubs that we’d perceive as underneath us in terms of footballing heritage etc. will be able to offer him a better wage which always seems to draw the player.

Kamberi and MacLaren are different, they have reputations in leagues that don’t have such inflated values and, in MacLaren’s case, he was vocal about his desire to leave Darmstadt. Worked in our favour for many reasons. Both are potentially using us as an avenue to get into the English game.

Signing youngsters from EPL clubs permanently isn’t as easy but it is possible - Glen Kamara for Dundee. However, Kamara never had a successful loan spell before leaving Arsenal, Dundee picked him up when his stock was low. We’re hoping Agyepong and Hyndman have great loan spells which will likely mean we have no chance of signing them permanently, simply due to the exposure they already have in the English game (Hyndman especially).

[Unseen work]

Although I would prefer permanent deals, it’s a good way for hibs to get players to the club that would normally be too expensive to buy.

It also is a good way of seeing how good a player is with no commitment

[Gibby the Hibby]

I do not mind us getting 2-3 loan signings for the first team squad a season, especially from the english premiership teams,if they are def better than player we have already.; there is always the chance the player gets attached and we can get him in future, even just flo as im sure many have said, a good example, mclaren, we now have a priice for if we want him,

though id agree , far too many loan in general, and we shouldnt have more than 2or 3. but the reason , is the same answer as most in football, also,,,i
Money... benzema even had to go on loan due to money.,it will happen more and more,

any young lads on 5yr deals at bug clubs in prem, on 8-10 k a week upwards,, wont leave until that deal expires,, even if they know they will get first team football elsewhere, because..they know, the club will loan them to the team interested, anyway, who can only afford half his wage and the parent club will pay the other 50% .

thats why man city and chelsea who buy plenty of youths every transfer window end up with 20-30 players loaned out, even when they are 4 years into a contract and clearly never going to be man city first team level(mcgivern) they need to loan out, and the game will likely have more and more, as the bug teams transfer fees and wages increase, bad part of football

good to have now done a few deals with man city, they ee us as a club who produce good youths, and treat them very well, or we wouldnt get these players.

[CapitalGreen]

if he did well at Hibs on loan


Your post was really long and rambling so I have singled out the most important part. If our loan players do well, the team is probably doing well and the team doing well means we are winning games.

You can fret and predict disastrous scenarios where we end up with no players but the fact of the matter is that if we keep putting together the best squad of players possible (including loans if necessary) we’ll keep winning games.

[heidtheba]

There's also the brilliant atmosphere everyone talks about around the club and during the season. I can't attend matches but I hope that we all play a role in riding the inevitable bumps in the squad assembly period. Two difficult European ties (aren't they always?) and an SPL game in a short space of time. Would be very easy to have a couple of things go against us and some people to really panic. I panicked when Lennon got rid of Stokes. I thought that was crazy. He also brought in two utter nobodies to replace them.
I learned an important lesson after that!

[Hibbyradge]

I couldn't be ersed reading the same old arguments again, but I think our management know what they're doing.

Pretty much all the players are just on loan, really.

SJM was on loan. We just returned him to a different club.

[madhatter]

Your post was really long and rambling so I have singled out the most important part. If our loan players do well, the team is probably doing well and the team doing well means we are winning games.

You can fret and predict disastrous scenarios where we end up with no players but the fact of the matter is that if we keep putting together the best squad of players possible (including loans if necessary) we’ll keep winning games.

Thanks for the negative critique of my post, some people don’t see irony clearly. Not sure why you take such a tone to my posts, ignoring me would be better, no? The way you have responded to my last 2 posts it’s almost like I’ve offended you...

Only you have stated “disastrous scenarios where we end up with no players”. Think I pointed to biggest problems with relying on loans too heavily being the diluting of team spirit through the years especially when the captain etc. leave. The other being, unless you can make players permanent additions, it doesn’t make the club money and doesn’t give a reliable long term plan when it comes to furthering the squad. People can point to performances and money earned through sporting achievements but McGinn sale alone amounts to a lot of cash that would potentially take us 1-2 seasons of sporting achievements to make. Players get bonuses for sporting achievements so what people see publicised for league positions won’t be what hits the bank!

Keep putting together the best squad of players? If Lennon himself stated that player recruitment is not an exact science why would you want players leaving on an annual basis after their loan term ends? We can only try to put together best squad (loans included) there are no guarantees. loans from EPL doesn’t automatically mean we’ve secured a higher quality player and they’ll help us win matches.

Sorry for my ramblings...

[BoomtownHibees]

I couldn't be ersed reading the same old arguments again, but I think our management know what they're doing.

Pretty much all the players are just on loan, really.

SJM was on loan. We just returned him to a different club.

And made £2m-£3m on it

[Hibbyradge]

I know & you've said it many times on other threads so now you decide to start a new thread on the subject. Loans are a fact of life, some of the biggest clubs in the world have players on loan. Another fact of life is that Hibs turnover for a season is less than some EPL players are picking up in wages. We need loans to get quality in without busting the bank & hopefully, like Kamberi, Dylan, Efe & Rocky they then become permanent. Even then permanency is overrated, A 2 year contract means you're in the shop window 9 months after the start of the season & you can sign a pre contract 9 months later. Effectively everyone is a loan player now, only the length of time varies. I would love to have a 1st team squad of 22+ players all on Hibs contracts but I would also love to have Harry Kane up front for us. Neither are realistic options.

Good points.

[Hibbyradge]

And made £2m-£3m on it

Indeed.

We also paid all his wages throughout the period he played for us.

We can't afford to pay the loan guys' wages, but they're playing for Hibs.

I doubt anyone wants us to sign players on longer contracts so we can sell them at a profit!

[Shrekko]

Loans allow us to bring in a quality of player we sometimes couldn’t dream of signing permanently. Ridiculous to not do it.

[CapitalGreen]

Thanks for the negative critique of my post, some people don’t see irony clearly. Not sure why you take such a tone to my posts, ignoring me would be better, no? The way you have responded to my last 2 posts it’s almost like I’ve offended you...

Only you have stated “disastrous scenarios where we end up with no players”. Think I pointed to biggest problems with relying on loans too heavily being the diluting of team spirit through the years especially when the captain etc. leave. The other being, unless you can make players permanent additions, it doesn’t make the club money and doesn’t give a reliable long term plan when it comes to furthering the squad. People can point to performances and money earned through sporting achievements but McGinn sale alone amounts to a lot of cash that would potentially take us 1-2 seasons of sporting achievements to make. Players get bonuses for sporting achievements so what people see publicised for league positions won’t be what hits the bank!

Keep putting together the best squad of players? If Lennon himself stated that player recruitment is not an exact science why would you want players leaving on an annual basis after their loan term ends? We can only try to put together best squad (loans included) there are no guarantees. loans from EPL doesn’t automatically mean we’ve secured a higher quality player and they’ll help us win matches.

Sorry for my ramblings...

We’ve had 25 loanees in the 4 year ‘renaissance’ period since LD took over as CEO and I can honestly say this is best period I can think of for team spirit. Of our recent loanees, how many can you say had a negative impact on team spirit or didn’t buy into Hibs in anyway? Henderson? Shinnie? Ambrose? Allan? Kamberi? MacLaren? Marciano? Barker?

You refer to loan players not making Hibs money. The purpose of Hibs isn’t to make money, the purpose of Hibs is to win football games. As you rightly point out, making money is a by-product of winning football games. To prioritise making money over winning football games is wrong and is a mistake we made in the decade prior to 2014.

[FitbaFolkKen]

I've seen the point raised that loanees that don't care but I think that is more related to the atmosphere in the dressing room. You go into a dressing room with Gray, McGregor, Hanlon, Stevenson and the rest of the guys all pulling in the same direction for each other then it is infectious. If you have a fragmented dressing room then I could see the loanees thinking "only 6/12 months then I'm out of here".

I think thats the big difference with the current squad and loans compared to when Butcher brought in Haynes, Watmore and Boateng hoping to save us. Now we are bringing in players to compliment and cover a strong team.

[madhatter]

We’ve had 25 loanees in the 4 year ‘renaissance’ period since LD took over as CEO and I can honestly say this is best period I can think of for team spirit. Of our recent loanees, how many can you say had a negative impact on team spirit or didn’t buy into Hibs in anyway? Henderson? Shinnie? Ambrose? Allan? Kamberi? MacLaren? Marciano? Barker?

You refer to loan players not making Hibs money. The purpose of Hibs isn’t to make money, the purpose of Hibs is to win football games. As you rightly point out, making money is a by-product of winning football games. To prioritise making money over winning football games is wrong and is a mistake we made in the decade prior to 2014.

I’m not prioritising money. Money builds football clubs though. We have a professional training centre due to players being sold. Not due to us winning football games. Imagine where we’d be if we hadn’t given the golden generation games because we brought loans in and played them instead.

Loans can serve us well, I’ve never said that wasn’t the case. Also I’m not talking of loans coming in and having a negative effect on team spirit, I’m talking about the spirit diminishing as the “band” splits up. We’ve been fortunate that the core of our team have remained for 3-4 years, that’s built us to what we are now, loans have contributed a lot but that core group has provided unity and stability as loans come and go. When that core group splits up - McGeouch and McGinn gone - there will be changes in the dressing room. Do loans fill that void, maybe. Do loans stay longer than a year, maybe. When the loans leave will we have to go through the “not exact science” procedure of recruiting again, yes.

Get loans in but make plans for permanent signings, we can’t go season to season relying on loans. 4 loans is quite a lot and I wouldn’t be surprised if we got at least 1 more in. If we do get 1 more loan in, almost half our starting line-up could be loans depending on tactics and injuries.

[FitbaFolkKen]

I’m not prioritising money. Money builds football clubs though. We have a professional training centre due to players being sold. Not due to us winning football games. Imagine where we’d be if we hadn’t given the golden generation games because we brought loans in and played them instead.

Loans can serve us well, I’ve never said that wasn’t the case. Also I’m not talking of loans coming in and having a negative effect on team spirit, I’m talking about the spirit diminishing as the “band” splits up. We’ve been fortunate that the core of our team have remained for 3-4 years, that’s built us to what we are now, loans have contributed a lot but that core group has provided unity and stability as loans come and go. When that core group splits up - McGeouch and McGinn gone - there will be changes in the dressing room. Do loans fill that void, maybe. Do loans stay longer than a year, maybe. When the loans leave will we have to go through the “not exact science” procedure of recruiting again, yes.

Get loans in but make plans for permanent signings, we can’t go season to season relying on loans. 4 loans is quite a lot and I wouldn’t be surprised if we got at least 1 more in. If we do get 1 more loan in, almost half our starting line-up could be loans depending on tactics and injuries.

I would not suggest that loans are stifling our talent, look at Porteous and Shaw breaking through. If the young players are good enough to step up then the management team will be well aware of that.

The signings we have made in Mallan and Kamberi are young and in a similar mould to McGinn. Players that look like they will flourish at Easter Road with our training centre and I expect we will recoup a larger fee for in the future.

On one hand you say we have been fortunate that the core of our team has remained stable for 3/4 years yet you say we go season to season relying on loans. Could it just be that the recruitment team are aware of the current structure of the squad and that loans compliment that core structure? I think it is being a little disrespectful to the recruitment team that have helped us improve year upon year to describe the squad building as fortunate. Look at the permanent signings that we have spent money on recently. Players such as Marciano, Slivka, Mallan and Kamberi and extending contracts of Hanlon,Stevenson etc... these will be the core group for the next couple of years. Young hungry players with some Hibs boys in the mix.

In the last 5 years recruitment there has been a lot of movement yet we have retained that core group and spirit. The perception that loans provide the bulk of the movement is inaccurate. We will always have to go through the recruiting procedure.

14/15 16 signings 6 were loans - 20 out 2 on loan
15/16 21 signings 5 were loans - 15 out 5 on loan
16/17 11 signings 4 were loans - 12 out 4 on loan
17/18 15 signings 6 were loans - 21 out 5 on loan
18/19 6 signings 4 are loans - 5 out

I'm confident that if the opportunity was there to sign some of these players permanently we would. We have moved to sign a number of our loanees in recent years such as Boyle, Oxley, McGeouch, Stokes(year gap), Kamberi, Marciano and Ambrose when the opportunity arose.

As an aside last year there were 45 loans in the 12 teams in the top flight. 4/5 isn't excessive by any means it is just indicative of the wage gap that exists between Scotland and England.

[cocteautwin]

Loan signings have been fine. Must be an opportunity in the next 3 weeks to get another 1 or 2 from EPL due to their early transfer window closure.

[SquashedFrogg]

Loans allow us to bring in a quality of player we sometimes couldn’t dream of signing permanently. Ridiculous to not do it.

This

[DetroitHibs]

I'm not against loans, I'd just rather see 2-3 loan deals and sign 4-5 on permanent deals. If these loan players come in and are phenomenal, what are the chances we see them back next year? Then it's the same all over again. Playing in Europe without a settled team trying to find the next gems to loan. I'd rather see us put a marker down and spend 2-3 million of that money and build. Try and finish 2nd, try and make the Europa league stages, win a cup.

[SirDavidsNapper]

Who did we have on loan last season?

Barker
Maclaren
Allan
Kamberi

This season

Bogdan
Hyndmann
Agyepong
Maclaren

Not really much different so far.

[lyonhibs]

How anyone with half a brain can rail against how we've used the loan system over the past couple of years is absolutely beyond me.

In Lennon we trust.

[madhatter]

How anyone with half a brain can rail against how we've used the loan system over the past couple of years is absolutely beyond me.

In Lennon we trust.

We’ve used the loan system well but I think people are overlooking some of the awful loans Stubbs got in. Even recently we’ve had loans that clearly weren’t great - Rherras last season and so on...

While a lot of work goes into recruitment, I’m not sure why luck hasn’t been considered a factor. We need to be ready to pounce on loans when they become available (good work), but we still require them to become available and for competition to be low (luck). That’s the nature of it, we can use the loan system as best we can but mistakes will be made and wrong players signed, players will go elsewhere and players will become unavailable.

I think the point with loans is - we’ve had a great run recently, they’ve gelled well with our core squad (who have been here 3-4 years) and probably 50-60% of those players have had a really big impact. However, player recruitment isn’t an exact science so we can do the scouting etc. but still get it wrong. I’d argue the level of scouting etc. for a loan signing wouldn’t necessarily be as intensive as the scouting you do on a player youre going to hand a 4 year contract to.

I’ve never stated loans are bad, I have no problem with them coming to add depth but trying to build for multiple seasons with loans is difficult. We had a great season last year, loans leave, we then have to try to negotiate returns and permanent signings where possible and have massive European matches coming thick and fast. We’ve done great so far this year but loans don’t provide continuity, Barker and Agyepong aren’t same player, maybe Agyepong will prove better for us, maybe he won’t. By all accounts he wasn’t our first target so is he better than Horgan? Who knows. There is luck like with any signings but with a reasonably high number of loans and a turnover of loanees every year, there is a high amount of luck that they all join and reach the same heights of the successful loans from the past season. That’s not to say there isn’t a huge amount of good work done by our recruitment department, just the truth of the matter. If Man Utd can recruit the wrong player, I’m pretty sure we can. They can only strive to get it right, having a recent good run doesn’t mean it’s a guarantee, that goes for loans and permanent. Only difference with permanent is that players develop and stay here for a longer period, e.g. Boyle didn’t look great when he first joined.

[Onceinawhile]

Rather have 3 5 star loan signings than 5 3 star permanent transfers.

[The Modfather]

We’ve used the loan market well and there’s always a place for loans.

The downside to it is that it means there’s there’s a high turnover each season and it takes time to get quality in. Which in turn makes it harder to progress in Europe, but not impossible as a kind draw and this season proves.

[Blaster]

Who did we have on loan last season?

Barker
Maclaren
Allan
Kamberi

This season

Bogdan
Hyndmann
Agyepong
Maclaren

Not really much different so far.

Scott Bain for half an hour

[CapitalGreen]

We’ve made 25 loan signings since LD came in, how many haven’t contributed?
Sinclair - Summer 2014
Feruz - Summer 2015
Anier - January 2016
Rherras - January 2018 (brought in as emergency cover, not required)

I’ve left off Bain for obvious reasons.

[blackpoolhibs]

Because the core of the team is strong, we are looking now for the cherries to top the cake off. And of course when you see we've taken Kamberi on loan then signed him permanently, it can work well.

Mclaren has effectively been on a 2 year loan, thats a 2 year loan of a player we couldnt afford to buy, we've signed lots of players on 2 year deals in the past, although it is nice to get players on 3 years and longer if they are good enough.

Clubs all over the world are using the loan system to their benefit, why shouldn't we?

[CockneyRebel]

Rather have 3 5 star loan signings than 5 3 star permanent transfers.


That's my conclusion also.

[Winston Ingram]

In our position loan signings are standard and they don’t bother me one bit.

With our budget it enables us to get quality we could otherwise not afford, I.e, Brandon Barker, Scott Allan.

We usually sign most our players on 1 or 2 year deals. If I can get an average player on a 2 year deal or a great 1 on a 1 year loan, i’m taking the loan deal all day long