CONFIRMED Romelle Donovan joins on Season Long Loan

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?




If this is the level of signing we have to look forward to. There is nothing to look forward to this season.

Not an upgrade in the slightest, making ourselves weaker. If we were signing him permanently, different story but developing a player for someone else whilst we sold our own. Rubbish.
What do you know about Donovan then? I dont really know enough about him to make a judgement
 
If this is the level of signing we have to look forward to. There is nothing to look forward to this season.

Not an upgrade in the slightest, making ourselves weaker. If we were signing him permanently, different story but developing a player for someone else whilst we sold our own. Rubbish.
Good idea, don't give the lad a chance...
 
If this is the level of signing we have to look forward to. There is nothing to look forward to this season.

Not an upgrade in the slightest, making ourselves weaker. If we were signing him permanently, different story but developing a player for someone else whilst we sold our own. Rubbish.
Just had a peak at their forum and all they care about is that they have a recall option.
Fans dont care about things like that unless they think their player can come back and make a serious impact.

 
Good idea, don't give the lad a chance...

It’s not even about if he’s good or not.

Selling Brooks to get a loan in is disappointing. He might be good? But if it is a loan it should be a proven championship player who we know will be good enough straight away.

It’s a risky signing and if he’s not good yet, it’s simply a waste of a signing. Whereas if this was permanent we would be investing in the team.
 
Just had a peak at their forum and all they care about is that they have a recall option.
Fans dont care about things like that unless they think their player can come back and make a serious impact.


I hope he is good! But this is my point, he plays well we lose him eventually.

Seems short sighted.
 
It’s not even about if he’s good or not.

Selling Brooks to get a loan in is disappointing. He might be good? But if it is a loan it should be a proven championship player who we know will be good enough straight away.

It’s a risky signing and if he’s not good yet, it’s simply a waste of a signing. Whereas if this was permanent we would be investing in the team.
No, I get that.
While it stings more because Brooks was homegrown, it actually makes more sense because financially it was pure profit. We're going to go heavy with the loans, we have to, and while that feels very short term thinking, we will still buy players for other positions. Attackers cost a fortune, maybe the Brooks money might be spent along the back line. Maybe on a giant Aussie.

Wingers are ronins, free spirits. If you're going to have a raw exciting talent anywhere on the pitch, I would 100% prefer it to be on the wing.
 
If this is the level of signing we have to look forward to. There is nothing to look forward to this season.

Not an upgrade in the slightest, making ourselves weaker. If we were signing him permanently, different story but developing a player for someone else whilst we sold our own. Rubbish.
Weve got youngsters but neh bring some other clubs players on!
 
No, I get that.
While it stings more because Brooks was homegrown, it actually makes more sense because financially it was pure profit. We're going to go heavy with the loans, we have to, and while that feels very short term thinking, we will still buy players for other positions. Attackers cost a fortune, maybe the Brooks money might be spent along the back line. Maybe on a giant Aussie.

Wingers are ronins, free spirits. If you're going to have a raw exciting talent anywhere on the pitch, I would 100% prefer it to be on the wing.
Blades connection to Ronins? Your starter for 10
 
It’s not even about if he’s good or not.

Selling Brooks to get a loan in is disappointing. He might be good? But if it is a loan it should be a proven championship player who we know will be good enough straight away.

It’s a risky signing and if he’s not good yet, it’s simply a waste of a signing. Whereas if this was permanent we would be investing in the team.
Financial reality brought on by the sacking off of a set up that got us 90 points post a big rebuild...
 



No, I get that.
While it stings more because Brooks was homegrown, it actually makes more sense because financially it was pure profit. We're going to go heavy with the loans, we have to, and while that feels very short term thinking, we will still buy players for other positions. Attackers cost a fortune, maybe the Brooks money might be spent along the back line. Maybe on a giant Aussie.

Wingers are ronins, free spirits. If you're going to have a raw exciting talent anywhere on the pitch, I would 100% prefer it to be on the wing.

Great point. Hopefully we reinvest somewhere else then.

Just frustrating. I’d rather see us sign someone permanently like Dobbin or Cleary. Then they can be sold on / help us long term.
 
Great point. Hopefully we reinvest somewhere else then.

Just frustrating. I’d rather see us sign someone permanently like Dobbin or Cleary. Then they can be sold on / help us long term.
I like it when we have those respectable debates, exchange of opinions, without anyone getting sulky or bitchy. Good old days.
 
Also those saying we're developing other teams players. Well yes, but presumably we haven't got an equivalent who's ready to step in to replace Brooks just yet. Is Giggs ready for example?! Or maybe he'll go on loan somewhere himself.
 
Also those saying we're developing other teams players. Well yes, but presumably we haven't got an equivalent who's ready to step in to replace Brooks just yet. Is Giggs ready for example?! Or maybe he'll go on loan somewhere himself.
Don't think Giggs jr is a winger anyway more of a defensive or wing back type isn't he?
 



It’s not even about if he’s good or not.

Selling Brooks to get a loan in is disappointing. He might be good? But if it is a loan it should be a proven championship player who we know will be good enough straight away.

It’s a risky signing and if he’s not good yet, it’s simply a waste of a signing. Whereas if this was permanent we would be investing in the team.
What's wrong with signing a couple of players on loan to give us a chance to have a season without the threat of relegation, bring back some excitement to the fans and spend time assessing players over time for full signings in season 27-28?
 

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom