Chelmsford Swimmer wrote: ↑Sat Jun 29, 2024 10:44 pm
Playing for Orient Kelman has scored 3 goals in 625 minutes, a goal every 208 minutes. Throughout his career Devante Cole has scored 106 goals in 25473 minutes, a goal every 240 minutes, less prolific than Kelman, but all feel free to slag off Kelman and sing Cole's praises.
I watched the LOFC highlights vid of all Kelman's goals for us earlier and there was far more than 3 so his numbers may be even better than that?
The two players would be required in different roles though so it's not an either / or scenario imo.
I’m really not sure what Kelmans role is. He’s not big enough, strong enough or fast enough to lead the line on his own which we need as we play one up top. And he’s not really a wide player or a 10.
faith1234 wrote: ↑Sat Jun 29, 2024 11:54 pm
So we ha e no money so another loanee great
What difference does it make. Can't see the problem in having a player probably costing than less than the wage he is earning. Plus if he gets a bad injury he goes back to his other club and not our problem. I don't see a downside.
Come on. The main downside to loaning players is you are developing them for other teams. They then take the profit when they sell.
faith1234 wrote: ↑Sat Jun 29, 2024 11:54 pm
So we ha e no money so another loanee great
What difference does it make. Can't see the problem in having a player probably costing than less than the wage he is earning. Plus if he gets a bad injury he goes back to his other club and not our problem. I don't see a downside.
Come on. The main downside to loaning players is you are developing them for other teams. They then take the profit when they sell.
To be fair , all our on loan players last season were good . I was especially hoping to get El-Miz and Forde back but that now seems unlikely
Last edited by RedDwarf 1881 on Sun Jun 30, 2024 8:59 am, edited 1 time in total.
What difference does it make. Can't see the problem in having a player probably costing than less than the wage he is earning. Plus if he gets a bad injury he goes back to his other club and not our problem. I don't see a downside.
Come on. The main downside to loaning players is you are developing them for other teams. They then take the profit when they sell.
To be fair , all our on loan players last season were good .
faith1234 wrote: ↑Sat Jun 29, 2024 11:54 pm
So we ha e no money so another loanee great
What difference does it make. Can't see the problem in having a player probably costing than less than the wage he is earning. Plus if he gets a bad injury he goes back to his other club and not our problem. I don't see a downside.
Come on. The main downside to loaning players is you are developing them for other teams. They then take the profit when they sell.
I understand what the use of loan players are but it would be nice to buy our own players instead of loaning very good players and if we get a loan player that scores sh*t load of goal and then there own club recalls them so we miss out
faith1234 wrote: ↑Sat Jun 29, 2024 11:54 pm
So we ha e no money so another loanee great
What difference does it make. Can't see the problem in having a player probably costing than less than the wage he is earning. Plus if he gets a bad injury he goes back to his other club and not our problem. I don't see a downside.
Come on. The main downside to loaning players is you are developing them for other teams. They then take the profit when they sell.
There is no downside then to signing permanents on expensive 2 or 3 years contracts and then realising you signed a duffer. The answer is to sign the duffers on loan and the good players on contract, if only we had a crystal ball.
