[Archived] Franco Di Santo

[Hughesy]

After all the noises Crouch has made this weekend about pompey being a joke and that if he feels they will be relegation threatened then he will look to leave this summer - im sure he will be Big Sams target should RSC go.

[47er]

Don't like this loan deal. If he does well, he'll want to move to a bigger club. If he doesn't - well he doesn't. Also, I wonder what sort of word Carlos will put in .

What a stupid post! He won't want to move to a bigger club because he's already at one------Chelsea! This is a LOAN DEAL! Its a fill-in for a year while the manager sorts out evrything else that needs fixing-------like mid-field! We couldn't afford him so we do the best we can. Response from so-called fan------------moan, moan, moan!

[Lathund]

I really can't see the negative side of this. The Mr X hype made me think it'd be someone more established, but that doesn't mean this can't be a good deal.

I have to laugh at some of the comments in here, such as those along the lines of "I saw Carlos on YouTube and he was poor, so this guy will be too". Because surely that's the only relevant fact, right? The fact that one played in the Chilean league and one plays for Chelsea isn't relevant at all is it? He's also very highly rated at Chelsea. But he happens to have two of the best strikers in the league ahead of him in Drogba and Anelka, so naturally won't play much.

I could understand the disappointment about there being no option to buy, but only if it was a case of this transfer being instead of other transfers, and not in addition to. Essentially what this does is give us more time to find a striker for the long term, and instead allowing us to spend this summer strengthening in midfield, where it's sorely needed. Derbyshire leaves for £3-4m, signing Di Santo on a free (No fee, probably on less than Derbs, certainly not much more) gives us more to spend in midfield.

Some will point out that we'll still need another striker next summer, and that's true. But remember that there's a finite amount of money to spend this summer. We can either spend that money on, say, four players, or we can spend it on three slightly better players and loan one. It will leave us one man short next season, but will leave us with a higher average quality of players. Us paying too many mediocre players too much money was one of the problems we had this year, and now some are complaining that we're doing something to correct that??

Now, will he be a success? I don't know. He's talented and highly rated, so he could be a big hit. He could also flop, but it's a low-risk move.

[saxo1man30]

I really can't see the negative side of this. The Mr X hype made me think it'd be someone more established, but that doesn't mean this can't be a good deal.

I have to laugh at some of the comments in here, such as those along the lines of "I saw Carlos on YouTube and he was poor, so this guy will be too". Because surely that's the only relevant fact, right? The fact that one played in the Chilean league and one plays for Chelsea isn't relevant at all is it? He's also very highly rated at Chelsea. But he happens to have two of the best strikers in the league ahead of him in Drogba and Anelka, so naturally won't play much.

I could understand the disappointment about there being no option to buy, but only if it was a case of this transfer being instead of other transfers, and not in addition to. Essentially what this does is give us more time to find a striker for the long term, and instead allowing us to spend this summer strengthening in midfield, where it's sorely needed. Derbyshire leaves for £3-4m, signing Di Santo on a free (No fee, probably on less than Derbs, certainly not much more) gives us more to spend in midfield.

Some will point out that we'll still need another striker next summer, and that's true. But remember that there's a finite amount of money to spend this summer. We can either spend that money on, say, four players, or we can spend it on three slightly better players and loan one. It will leave us one man short next season, but will leave us with a higher average quality of players. Us paying too many mediocre players too much money was one of the problems we had this year, and now some are complaining that we're doing something to correct that??

Now, will he be a success? I don't know. He's talented and highly rated, so he could be a big hit. He could also flop, but it's a low-risk move.

my question would be, how is this guy who nobody has heard of, who`s not played more than 8 games in a league of note, who`s not won an international cap above under 20 level and who`s not scored a goal(for a side like chelsea) in any of his premier league appearances a better striker than kevin kuranyi? simple answer is that he isn`t. if nicko`s opinion is that he`s better then facts say differantly.

imo it`s also a desparatly disappointing move for the club to be replacing a proven english young goalscorer(at home and abroad) with a temporary unproven foreign player.

i believe sam is going the wrong way on this one anyway, his policy of older experienced proven players(as with bolton) was crucial to his success and he really is moving into unchartered territory for him by doing this. imo if it ain`t broken then don`t fix it, and in changing tack from how he did things previously i just hope he isn`t gambling on our clubs future in trying to prove he ain`t a one trick pony. the sam allardyce i wanted at rovers was the same one that did the job at bolton. if we are going to get somebody for one season, i`d prefer it to be a 30 something year old proven striker that we know will score goals ala sam`s loan signing of freddie bobic for bolton a few years back.

[braddock]

my question would be, how is this guy who nobody has heard of, who`s not played more than 8 games in a league of note, who`s not won an international cap above under 20 level and who`s not scored a goal in any of his premier league appearances a better striker than kevin kuranyi? simple answer is that he isn`t. if nicko`s opinion is that he`s better then facts say differantly. imo it`s a desperatly disappointing move for the club to be replacing a proven english young goalscorer with a temporary unproven foreign player.

i believe sam is going the wrong way on this one anyway, his policy of older experienced proven players(as with bolton) was crucial to his success and he really is moving into unchartered territory for him by doing this. imo if it ain`t broken then don`t fix it, and in changing tack from how he did things previously i just hope he isn`t gambling on our clubs future in trying to prove he ain`t a one trick pony. the sam allardyce i wanted at rovers was the same one that did the job at bolton.

you sir are a fool

edit: in fact ignore the bold, all of it was dreadful

the worst post i've seen on this board ever

[saxo1man30]

you sir are a fool

edit: in fact ignore the bold, all of it was dreadful

the worst post i've seen on this board ever

why? because i disagree with nicko? laughable

[braddock]

why? because i disagree with nicko? laughable

no, because i disagree with you

[saxo1man30]

no, because i disagree with you

so i`m a fool because you disagree with me? ok mate, good logic there

[braddock]

so i`m a fool because you disagree with me? ok mate, good logic there

but i am a genius

anyway, let's stop clogging up the thread

[saxo1man30]

let's stop clogging up the thread

ok, agree on that last bit then at least

[RoversSG]

Does anyone know if there will be an option to buy at the end of the season? I don't think the deal makes any sense if there isn't.

If we're going to develop this guy by playing him in the first team, we should gain the benefits if he improves.

I can understand the arguements that midfield is the priority now but i wouldn't go for a loan unless it's for a squad player brought in as cover.

[TimmyJimmy]

I really can't see the negative side of this. The Mr X hype made me think it'd be someone more established, but that doesn't mean this can't be a good deal.

I have to laugh at some of the comments in here, such as those along the lines of "I saw Carlos on YouTube and he was poor, so this guy will be too". Because surely that's the only relevant fact, right? The fact that one played in the Chilean league and one plays for Chelsea isn't relevant at all is it? He's also very highly rated at Chelsea. But he happens to have two of the best strikers in the league ahead of him in Drogba and Anelka, so naturally won't play much.

I could understand the disappointment about there being no option to buy, but only if it was a case of this transfer being instead of other transfers, and not in addition to. Essentially what this does is give us more time to find a striker for the long term, and instead allowing us to spend this summer strengthening in midfield, where it's sorely needed. Derbyshire leaves for £3-4m, signing Di Santo on a free (No fee, probably on less than Derbs, certainly not much more) gives us more to spend in midfield.

Some will point out that we'll still need another striker next summer, and that's true. But remember that there's a finite amount of money to spend this summer. We can either spend that money on, say, four players, or we can spend it on three slightly better players and loan one. It will leave us one man short next season, but will leave us with a higher average quality of players. Us paying too many mediocre players too much money was one of the problems we had this year, and now some are complaining that we're doing something to correct that??

Now, will he be a success? I don't know. He's talented and highly rated, so he could be a big hit. He could also flop, but it's a low-risk move.

It's easy to find a negative in something if you just look hard enough. I was looking for one and was about to post when I read this excellent contribution. You're right, there is no downside to this deal. I was a little worried about turning the guy into a massive star and then not getting anything for him and worst still trying to replace him for next season as we have no right to buy. That kind of development/shop window/transfer fee stuff has been good for us in the past. This feels a bit like turning off the tap for future revenues, BUT, you are right, I was overlooking the fact that this is an additional freebie and we will be able to spend elsewhere to cover more important positions. Still feels kind of odd that Rovers have to have hand-me-downs, I always thought that was for scrubby desperate outfits like Portsmouth not us. Given that Sam has his hands tied behind his back this is a really smart move, there is no downside, just feels kind of awkward thats all.

[Driftpeasant]

Does anyone know if there will be an option to buy at the end of the season? I don't think the deal makes any sense if there isn't.

If we're going to develop this guy by playing him in the first team, we should gain the benefits if he improves.

I can understand the arguements that midfield is the priority now but i wouldn't go for a loan unless it's for a squad player brought in as cover.

...and that we're cash poor because of the poor finish.

If we get this kid, and he plays well, we'll no doubt try to buy him. But if he could help us to a top 10 finish, and 5 or 6m more in revenue, I'd consider that worthwhile for us, since we could use the money to buy another striker.

Honestly until we start finishing top 10 again, our finances are going to be quite poor, unless we find another Bentley or RSC out there.

[Stuart]

...and that we're cash poor because of the poor finish.

We're cash poor because of the poor start.

[gumboots]

But you've still not answered the question - where have you seen him play to know how good he is? As I said, I've seen lots of players on youtube who look sensational in those little 3 minute edited highlights things, and turn out to be nowhere near as good really. I've also seen plenty of apparently very good young players in youth cups and academy leagues who reach the age of 20 and don't develop any further. I want you to be right about the deal but can you please, somebody, just tell me where you've seen enough of him to base this optimism about him on!

[Ninjathunder]

The only negative I can see to this deal, should it come off, is my objection to loan deals between premier league clubs where the arrangement prevents the player playing against their parent club, putting us at a disadvantage if he fits into our system and is playing well. With Abramovich's cash there was always the potential that he could buy up the 'best of the rest' i.e. those players that would not get into Chelsea's first team (the token Russian he signed when he took over springs to mind) but could do a perfectly good job at a club outside the top 4.

As far as I'm concerned, if you're prepared to say that you're not currently good enough to get into your own team, you should be prepared to put your money where your mouth is and see how they get on against your best. The only one I can recall in the Premier league is Lua Lua who played against Newcastle when on loan at Portsmouth. He scored against his parent club and I think that put an end to any further deals at the top level. I've seen Simon Grayson and Jonathan Douglas play for opposition when on loan from us and don't see the problem. For me it's another form of bias in favour of the champions league teams that makes this league ever more predictable and the Premier League should act to prevent clauses preventing these arrangements when loaning players out.

[CrazyIvan]

The only negative is that the player will go back at the end of the season. I was hoping for a signing not a loan but this is not a bad deal for Rovers. If he does really well and scores lots of goals then he'll be a star and we'll move up the league, if he doesn't then he'll go back with nothing gained apart from a years experience and nothing lost as we haven't laid out significant amounts of money on signing him.

[The Rover of Finland]

Di Santo is top prospect and very potential 15 goal scorer next season. There´s no way we ever sign him because Chelsea won´t let that happen. But even if he scores 15 for us he will still struggle to get first team football at Chelsea. I think he could play another season on loan for us. Still hope waiting Ancelotti´s decicion won´t force delay other signings.

[T4E]

I'm not sure that there's "no way" we could ever sign him. If Chelsea get Sturridge and a bigger name this Summer (linked to Tevez this morning) and go on to win the league next year, Di Santo will find it very very difficult to break in to that side.

In an ideal World he shows plenty of potential next season without standing out too much, Chelsea have a storming season and we look to make it permanent next year. Anythings possible.

[Hughesy]

Its a great move for the club. Only wages to pay! The way I see it is that If I had Roberts, Derbyshire & Gallagher - id rather have this lad over them 3.

You never know if Chelsea sign a couple more then they may be willing to sell him next summer (although if he does well he may cost us £6m+).

If RSC goes then we will probably sign someone like Crouch. That leaves with Benni, Crouch, Di Santo, Roberts & maybe another youngster. Thats not bad compared to Benni, Roberts & Samba which we had for half a season.

[modes98]

I really can't see an issue with this. Even if there is an obligation to play him, if he isn't playing well then we just terminate the loan or more than likely Chelsea aren't really that bothered and let him stay.

He was highly rated and goals even at a reserve level are a good sign. Definately worth a season and assuming Rocky Di Santa Cruz leaves then we can bring in another good striker to partner him.

[den]

The risk is that he's crap and will cost us points until he finds his feet - could be a match, could be a month, could be the entire season.

If he's not good enough, then he wont play, unless you believe the argument that we have to play him! So - no more of a risk, than signing any player. That's the point.

Isn't that why you say we should never play youth?

Why do you continually mis-represent what people say American?

[thenodrog]

But you've still not answered the question - where have you seen him play to know how good he is?

........... I want you to be right about the deal but can you please, somebody, just tell me where you've seen enough of him to base this optimism about him on!

It's the job of the manager and his team to run the rule over players gumboots. At all times too not just in a transfer window. No matter how much hot air is blown on here we simply don't have a part to play in it. Who had seen much of Samba or RSC 4 years ago? Warnock was a Lpool reserve going nowhere too... Bentley? The list is long.

Like Hughes and unlike Ince I think SA will get it right more times than he will get it wrong.

[Kelbo]

.

imo it`s also a desparatly disappointing move for the club to be replacing a proven english young goalscorer(at home and abroad) with a temporary unproven foreign player.

i believe sam is going the wrong way on this one anyway, his policy of older experienced proven players(as with bolton) was crucial to his success and he really is moving into unchartered territory for him by doing this. imo if it ain`t broken then don`t fix it, and in changing tack from how he did things previously i just hope he isn`t gambling on our clubs future in trying to prove he ain`t a one trick pony. the sam allardyce i wanted at rovers was the same one that did the job at bolton. if we are going to get somebody for one season, i`d prefer it to be a 30 something year old proven striker that we know will score goals ala sam`s loan signing of freddie bobic for bolton a few years back.

I would say this, we were too sluggissh last year, lots of aging bodies around the park and Sam wanted to put some vibrancy around the place, pace, young players who can dop the legwork, then we can bring in the experienced loan/free signing player but dont forget, a top player on a free is going to cost a packet in wages and so it has to be the right one!!

Looks like Sam is addressing this problem!!

He will have an idea where the money will have to be spent and for me it has to be in the midfield department, we need a top man in there and Sam has said he wants a box to box player!! Sam does seem to know what he wants and the positions he needs to fill, whether he gets the players he wants remains to be seen, but he does seem to be working and doing things early.

Good luck Sam, I trust you and I think others should too, he is no mug, is a good motivator, clever tactician and make no mistake, his job in ensuring Rovers were a premiership club next season was simply brilliant, he set his targets, which like Hughes did allowed them to continually assess where the club were.

Rest assured, I believe in the fella, you should too!

[Guest benmaxwell]

As long as we get a decent replacement for Roque, i'm not that bothered. This loan signing should be a temp replacement for Derbs, nothing more...

If we sell Roque, we need to replace him with a biggish (for us) name signing...