Would be good for him.
55
- Status
And this will be the last we seen of him.
Is it just me or do this loans never work out in our favor? When was the last time a player came back and cemented his place in the first team? I have always had the idea that a loan was a way of saying "you're not good enough" so we let you go.
Good for the boy though, if he wants to become a pro player (options enough in England with 92 professional clubs) he needs game time. It should have happened earlier.
Is it just me or do this loans never work out in our favor? When was the last time a player came back and cemented his place in the first team? I have always had the idea that a loan was a way of saying "you're not good enough" so we let you go.
Good for the boy though, if he wants to become a pro player (options enough in England with 92 professional clubs) he needs game time. It should have happened earlier.
Technically Dalot.
The other top clubs all have success stories with players returning from loans though. It's a tried and tested method of developing players. The likes of Chelsea have had it down to an art. It's just us who seems to be absolutely rubbish at it.
Didn't Fletcher go on the official website last season to explain his main role as Technical Director is to be in charge of player pathways? Surely that would involve loaning players and reintroducing them into the team.
I hope so. I really was impressed with Iqbal's control and footballing judgement in preseason, definitely looks like a keeper to me (and I don't mean a goalkeeper). I'd love to see the kid get some chances again.
Looks like the placements this year are working out well so well done to him.
Yep, my mate in work is a Birmingham fan and was absolutely raving about Hannibal the other day. Seems like Fernandez and Diallo are doing alright too. Be awesome if Iqbal could get a good loan too.
One major difference between Utd and Chelsea though is that over the last decade or so Utd have tended to keep their own better prospects such as Rashford, Greenwood, McTominay, Elanga at the club to give them first team minutes. They've been able to develop without the need for a loan.
Chelsea have basically not given their youth players of similar ability a chance - prioritising short-term results - loaning them instead until they're a bit more developed. James, Mount, Gallagher etc. all loaned out early. Had someone like Rashford or McTominay been at Chelsea they'd have probably loaned him out initially as well!
Utd have tended to be more willing to loan out youth players when it's not as clear-cut that they'll be Utd first team level, which is why the loanee success rate may have appeared less good than Chelsea's.
Jesse Lingard maybe if you're talking about an academy player. But yeah, once they go on loan it always seems to be the beginning of the end.
There was a dude called Diogo or something, but I struggle to remember his full name, too long ago
Fernandez , Hannibal and to a lesser extent Laird and Diallo are all having decent loans and getting game time in the championship .
Laird is at no lesser an extent.
Last edited:
If anything, Laird is having the best campaign of the lot. 12 starts for a side 1st in the league.
Where was Dalot loaned too? I honestly have no clue. Let him be the exception then!
Iqbal has fallen into the limbo of not getting any game time for the U21s nor the first team - wasting time on the bench at the moment
Once Van De Beek is back he'll have even less opportunity so loan in Jan is for the best
Once Van De Beek is back he'll have even less opportunity so loan in Jan is for the best
I thought he had missed a few games through injury
I generally don't agree with this idea we're rubbish with youth but the bolded is definitely something we do.
We repeatedly have young players doing nothing but training for a season. Really sets them back.
Think he missed one game through injury. Possibly two. Been a mainstay in one of the best sides in the division to date. The most successful loan out of the bunch so far, along with Fernandez.
I think this season is maybe a bit different. I'd of course like to see him get minutes when possible and I'm hoping he starts with Garnacho tomorrow. But with ETH coming in it was always going to be important for him to find a relatively settled XI to ensure continuity given they are being coached for the first time in years. That the young players will be at the club during the 5-6 week break for the World Cup, where I hope we slot in some practice games (whilst also monitoring the market given the long time we have to get ready for January) will help them get accustomed to ETH's style instead of playing a few matches for a Championship team. Or loans have for the most part been really badly prepared. These boys are now a part of a first team squad that is building encouraging team spirit and we're seeing the first signs of a team that is capable of sustaining a progressive style of play for a full match, something I cannot remember against strong sides.
But why not play all the U23 games as well as the above? Which in itself isn't that many games.
I just don't like having footballers who don't play football.
The other top clubs like Chelsea? Wasn't it when Lampard became a manager that Tomori, Mount, Abraham, Reese all had their chances? Before that Chelsea never gave youth a chance and was ridiculed for loaning so many players and selling potential good ones like De Bruyne, Salah, Lukaku etc.
Let's not rewrite history.
We used to be better at this. I seem to recall the likes of Beckham, O'Shea, Evans, Danny Wellbeck, all having loan spells before becoming first team players
People comparing this to Chelsea is interesting. Yes, it's always romantic and a proud moment when you have a few academy players come into the first team if not start. But if you look at who has won the league recently, those teams don't have many academy players playing a huge part in their success. It's usually just 1 or 2 at most.
Chelsea might have won CL last year or whatever, but they haven't challenge for the league since Conte(?) and are in a boat where their youth players a nice, but just not good enough to get them challenging at the very top year over year.
Tomori, Abraham, Livramento...all sold. Mount is a nice player. Gallagher is lost a bit in the shuffle now. RLC took years to establish himself as a reliable first team player, but he's also not good enough to where Chelsea wants to be considering their spend and expectations as a cup team. Reese James is their best youth player to first team player.
Where as United have allowed their youth players, whoever could make the grade, be part of the first team from the off such as Marcus, McTominay, former 11, Elanga now, etc.
Iqbal is what, 18/19, so he has plenty of time to develop and truly make the jump in the coming years. Same with Galbraith. They may not mature into a good enough first team player right now, but over the course of their career, they might and that's okay if they aren't good enough for United now or within the next couple of years. It's not easy.
Chelsea might have won CL last year or whatever, but they haven't challenge for the league since Conte(?) and are in a boat where their youth players a nice, but just not good enough to get them challenging at the very top year over year.
Tomori, Abraham, Livramento...all sold. Mount is a nice player. Gallagher is lost a bit in the shuffle now. RLC took years to establish himself as a reliable first team player, but he's also not good enough to where Chelsea wants to be considering their spend and expectations as a cup team. Reese James is their best youth player to first team player.
Where as United have allowed their youth players, whoever could make the grade, be part of the first team from the off such as Marcus, McTominay, former 11, Elanga now, etc.
Iqbal is what, 18/19, so he has plenty of time to develop and truly make the jump in the coming years. Same with Galbraith. They may not mature into a good enough first team player right now, but over the course of their career, they might and that's okay if they aren't good enough for United now or within the next couple of years. It's not easy.
Yeah that’s not true at all really.
Chelsea have actually made a complete hash of things in recent years losing Lamptey, Guehi, Liveramento, Tomori and Tammy as they thought they weren’t good enough.
Instead they threw away millions on various fixes which still haven’t worked out.
Not such which other clubs have fantastic success stories from loans? Liverpool have only really embedded Trent in their team (and he’s not that great really), City have Foden, Arsenal Saka and Spurs Kane.
United are currently having some success this season with Hannibal, Laird, Fernandes and to a lesser degree Diallo. All in the Championship. Dalot has also took his chance following his loan in Milan whilst the likes of Rashford, Mctominay and Elanga have all embedded themselves in and around the first team.
AC Milan. Wasn’t great there though
Hope the loan goes through. Been surprising to see him get no chances after an impressive preseason.
Plus Laird is a certain starter for the Rs.
Henderson had a decent loan. Then Pereira who turns into a very decent player (and might have a role under ETH. Probably).
Andreas? Hasn't he been sold to Fulham?
Yeh. He's pretty decent at Fulham after those loans, and perhaps might have a role under ETH.
our recent lack of success with loans says more about our failings as a club than the legitimacy of loaning players as a strategy
I mean, first off we've picked some shite loans where the players haven't featured enough
and secondly, for the past 10 years our expensive first-teamers have all struggled to do well so it stands to reason it isn't a good environment for youngsters to thrive either
it's definitely the right approach, we just need to be better at it
our loans this season look more promising and I hope Zidane goes too, would love to see how he does with regular games
I mean, first off we've picked some shite loans where the players haven't featured enough
and secondly, for the past 10 years our expensive first-teamers have all struggled to do well so it stands to reason it isn't a good environment for youngsters to thrive either
it's definitely the right approach, we just need to be better at it
our loans this season look more promising and I hope Zidane goes too, would love to see how he does with regular games
Harsh to count Lamptey and Liveramento. It's not Chelsea's fault that three high quality options all came through in the same position, and they (rightfully) decided to keep the best of them in Reece James.
It was Diogo Pereira. I remember him clearly because he had an afro. I think he was Dutch.
Fair enough, but at least Chelsea's loanees actually improved as players thanks to their loans and many got sold for good money to fund other transfers even if they failed to establish themselves at Chelsea. United seems to either release our youngsters on a free or sell them for pittance either immediately after or within a year of their loans.
Here's the last 3 seasons of loanees from Man Utd according to Transfermarkt, the arrow at the end of each row indicates whether their market value increased or decreased as the result of the loan:
ps: Looks like the Transfermarkt list above only includes players already training with the first team squad going on loan. For balance, the reserves list looks a bit better with James Garner,
Ethan Laird & Di'Shon Bernard increasing their values last season, and Dean Henderson before that. The rest of the reserves didn't do any better though.
Last edited:
The loan argument has always been rubbish. We have had plenty of success stories, they just haven't been good enough for United in the end. James Garner last season, for example, and this season most of our loanees are doing well. I think a more interesting point, that someone brought up is that we always have a lot of players who don't play football at all. Amad, Hannibal, now Iqbal, and Garnacho, are amongst them.
Would be a good move for him. I'd be tempted to let him have Garnacho on loan too, who badly needs regular football.
We’re one of the top big sides in Europe that produce players who actually have a top flight career. Fletcher has been doing the job for 18 months, bit early to judge him. Plus as we’ve been a tad lax (Owners fault) we’ve allowed City to become the main local attraction to youth players as their facilities are much better. When you say the likes of Chelsea, you mean Chelsea alone. Rashford, Scotty, nor Elanga went on loan, maybe it’s overrated?
There's also the possibility Chelsea just had a good batch of young players come through in the random way it can happen sometimes.
Can just be luck sometimes. Doesn't necessarily mean they're better at it.
Our issue is and has been for a while that progression into our first team is based on luck. If there's injuries you might play or be raised up to the first team but otherwise you'll sit unused on the bench or go on loan and disappear.
Quite simply talent hasn't been the deciding factor on whether someone becomes a first team player. You get your chance due to injuries and bam you're first team otherwise tough luck.
I look forward to seeing how Ten Hag handles this in the future as right now it's simply not his focus.
Quite simply talent hasn't been the deciding factor on whether someone becomes a first team player. You get your chance due to injuries and bam you're first team otherwise tough luck.
I look forward to seeing how Ten Hag handles this in the future as right now it's simply not his focus.
- Status