Why on earth would we want a 19 yr old keeper from Brighton when we are all lamenting the inexperience of our two 24 yr old keepers? Also the last goalie we loaned from Brighton was probably the worst keeper we have had since Fettis.

Is that before or after Cambridge get their half, player match bonuses are paid, matchday staff are paid and we are taxed? These earliest rounds of the cup don't really spin income for clubs like us unless we get an away tie at an OT or somewhere.

The fact he spent 2 hours saying we would be better without GB, and making out things initiated from before his time are personal triumphs certainly sounds like an agenda to me. I also don't trust very much that Swag says, so I'll be taking his claims with a truck of salt. Logic tells me what's happening here is Swag feels threatened by the DOF model and is hoping to undermine it by spreading discontent towards GB. Wouldn't be surprised if he was happy about the O'Brien debacle that was in part caused by his attending a game instead of negotiations.

We have board meetings?

Although that didn't start with Williams. If I remember rightly, Williams resigned as he felt he was being undermined. It was the next bloke who got potted for sending a letter listing all the problems. I think that was more because it leaked, too, tbf.

Aye, we need a striker too, but the discussion was about whether that's more pressing than our need for a better goalkeeper to stop them at the other end. Since we are doing much worse at keeping them out than we are at putting them in, our goalkeeping situation is equivalent to our striking situation if we didn't have Szmodics in the first place.

We're seldom capable of being 2-0 at 70 mins because the defenders and keeper can't keep the opposition out. And it's a lot to ask to routinely put the game to bed at 20 minutes. One goal would be plenty, more often, if we could stop being the league's 2nd worst for conceding.

I make us 9th in the league for goals scored and 2nd from bottom for goals conceded. It's obvious which end of the pitch has the greatest need for improvement.

But he has a poor injury record, something which is welcome here. He may be in with a chance after all...

Two refreshing aspects of the signings so far... the first has become more common in the last year or so, hearing nothing about a prospective signing until they've actually signed. And also, whilst they're only PL loans, we've become accustomed to hearing we can't get those in until Prem clubs make their minds up near the end of the window. That said, the flipside might be these are two players the Prem clubs were 100% sure they'd have no need of, and therefore aren't as good as some of those who may become available later. But I suspect they were only intended as squad fillers here anyway.

Apart from the 'intelligent runs and very good at popping up in the box unmarked' part. I can see a player described as being technically limited not exactly being JDT's cup of tea.

There's been a few players who were reasonably regarded when loaned out but flopped (often I think clubs not wanting to give them an extended chance if they don't immediately hit the ground running has been a factor). Players like Butterworth and Vale had impressed in patches for the first team and been fairly prolific in PL2. Magloire was considered promising, Markanday had been bought for half a million, Connor McBride had smashed plenty in at PL2 level. Buckley would probably be the best example comparable to Garrett. It's easy enough to say they're all shit in hindsight, but at the time it was hoped they'd all kick on from their loans, and none of them did. Agree, Garrett absolutely can't be dropping to League Two. It would be utterly pointless.

It did, and Wharton too (though it took multiple spells and he has regressed again). But apart from that I'm struggling to think of when loaning one of our young players out has actually reaped the dividends we've expected. Probably Raya to Southport is the last other one I can remember being a clear success. The vast majority of the young players who have broken into our first team from the academy have done so by staying here and biding their time for their chances. The vast majority of our loanees outwards have failed to impress or to subsequently kick on.

That really would be a disgrace on the back of Travis leaving, if there aren't one or two replacements coming in for that role. I certainly feel Garrett can play a part here.

Ah, we already have one of those, and he'll be back soon.

All I can find is an article from a week ago saying they turned down a loan offer from us. Not surprising considering he is a key player for them and signed a new deal last month. The article says they 'will not entertain any loan offers whatsoever for their star striker'. So I'd assume no, it doesn't mean a deal for him is done. I know they're in the offseason, but surely they'd rather rest him. Maybe some other deal for a striker has come to fruition. Shame, that might have been a decent gambit...13 goals and 3 assists in 15.4 full matches worth of game time, MLS Rookie of the Year, looking to break into the US national team.

What American deal?

I never said it was. I never even said the word 'hamstring'. It remains to be seen whether he is injured or not, so I repeat, will you agree it was bad management if it turns out it did result in or worsen an injury to our talisman when we were already basically victorious? I still like JDT, but I'd have to say it definitely would be.

Aye, he may be far from a guaranteed starter, but letting any of our striker options leave without bringing in a striker has to be considered totally unacceptable, as we're already ill-equipped there, regardless of Gallagher's return (which could promptly end in another injury anyway). I'd also expect them to be in the building and signed before Leonard is allowed to leave, tbh.

Personally, I think it's disgraceful we only gave a 15 year old their debut and made them the youngest player in the club's history. Where are all the 14 and 13 year olds we're developing?

Completing most of the game still running doesn't mean he hasn't injured himself. Adrenaline is powerful, and Sammie clearly has a lot of it. There are loads of examples of players completing a game then turning out to have injured themselves. The longer a player stays on with an injury, the worse the injury generally gets. If it turns out Szmodics has indeed picked up an injury, will you revise the statement in bold?

It wasn't a paradox for Brentford. The missing ingredient is competence.

I'd still like Jesurun Rak-Sakyi for the wing (once GK and striker are sorted, although even just those two being done seems wildly optimistic without a sale). Palace kept him around in the summer, but he's only played 130 minutes for them in the league, so you have to think he'd be available. Smashed League One last season with Charlton and a few of us wanted him in the summer.

Thing is, Adam is a fan...can't be said for Ashley or Rory, so I have an unfortunate suspicion which way this will pan out...

Yes, that would've been helpful! 🤣 So Rory is the youngest by quite a distance then. Good for him. That would make it especially frustrating if our youngest ever debutant got poached by a top Prem side for sod all before he even got going for us. Hopefully he sees it's better for him to break into a Championship side and earn a move to a club actually willing to pay a proper fee for him.