| McNally 17:40 - Aug 2 with 2076 views | Cheltenham_Blue |
Just thinking isn’t it likely, given his age, potential for development and the backing we have that McNally was one we were targeting on a permanent deal?
Then maybe we backed out when it became clear Burnley only wanted a loan? |  |
| |  |
| McNally on 17:45 - Aug 2 with 1987 views | Nutkins_Return |
I don't think we backed out of anything honestly. It's possible we wanted perm and last min Stoke offered Burnley a loan solution and this was better for Burnley Vs losing him perm.
I believe Burnley always preferred loan so either the above or more likely we were in for loan as well and either Stoke offer was better to Burnley or player.
Worth remembering McNally is just a bloke and could be as simple as geographically this was much easier for him and closer to friends and family.
Anyway it's done and we move on to other targets |  | | |
| McNally on 17:57 - Aug 2 with 1877 views | Vegtablue |
I'm also confident we just lost out on him. Our more reliable ITKs have said Burnley agreed terms and McNally then had a choice. | | | |
| McNally on 19:40 - Aug 2 with 1473 views | burnbudgiesburn |
I think we definitely missed out, due to location this time.
I'm also surprised we would have wanted a loan player to replace one of our first team tbh. | | | |
| McNally on 19:45 - Aug 2 with 1436 views | Cheltenham_Blue |
| McNally on 19:40 - Aug 2 by burnbudgiesburn |
I think we definitely missed out, due to location this time.
I'm also surprised we would have wanted a loan player to replace one of our first team tbh. |
That’s what makes it a bit of a funny one. I don’t think we are into developing other teams players anymore unless they are a stand out talent. | |
| |
| McNally on 19:59 - Aug 2 with 1347 views | pointofblue |
| McNally on 19:45 - Aug 2 by Cheltenham_Blue |
That’s what makes it a bit of a funny one. I don’t think we are into developing other teams players anymore unless they are a stand out talent. |
Last year we signed John-Jules then Hirst with no guarantee we would then sign either. This season we've brought Hutchinson in on loan. So I think we are still in the market of developing players for other teams. | |
| |
| McNally on 21:00 - Aug 2 with 1156 views | MeltonBlue |
Maybe we decided against the loan as we are going to loan Twine from them instead and you can only have 1 loan players from 1 club? So we were only ever interested in a permanent deal for McNally.. | | | |
| McNally on 21:10 - Aug 2 with 1112 views | HighgateBlue |
| McNally on 21:00 - Aug 2 by MeltonBlue |
Maybe we decided against the loan as we are going to loan Twine from them instead and you can only have 1 loan players from 1 club? So we were only ever interested in a permanent deal for McNally.. |
As much as I love Twine, our squad would be getting verrrry bloated if we were to add him. Who would miss out? He ain't coming here to warm the bench. And if he did, Aluko wouldn't even get a look-in as the car park attendant. |  | | |
| McNally on 00:00 - Aug 3 with 795 views | jayessess |
Think the word was that it was the same deal from Millwall, Stoke and us, with McNally getting the choice.
That said, I think it's likely that McNally will be available for a permanent transfer at some point, so I'm sure we'd have had one eye on that.
It's surprised me slightly that the two centre backs we seem to have prioritised were 23 and 24, with only one season at Championship level. For me, ideally, we'd be getting someone in the 27-32 age range. The Keogh signing last season implies we thought that the defensive unit needed more experience, so with him leaving you'd assume that still stands.
The better defences in the Championship last season tended to have at least one older player in there. [Post edited 3 Aug 2023 0:12]
|  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
