https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/newcastle-united-matty-longstaff-loan-21327603 Matty Longstaff linked on loan, three club rule in place though.

It seems that we dont have the money to even afford freebies, but there are some bog standard Championship players still available. Looking at that list, the below stick out, but I am sure that many will have lingering injury issues, hence why they havent been snapped up yet such as Bennett and Brady, or perhaps other question marks such as Mendez-Laing. Players like Wilshire, Sturridge, Dann etc are likely unrealistic for a mixture of injury and financial reasons, and there will be others who could be wild card options like Ntcham and Izquidero who again are likely to be unrealistic. LB: Yuri Ribiero, Joe Bennett, Neil Taylor CB: Kean Bryan Attacking Midfield: Marco Stiepermann Winger: Kadeem Harris, Robbie Brady, Nathaniel Mendez-Laing, Junior Hoilett Most of the useful ones will have been snapped up by now, but with some, they may have less risk than say a Khadra who is a total stab in the dark, simply because whilst we know that they might not be stand outs, they are proven to be able to do a solid job at this level.

Not seen enough of him to know either way really to be honest, only once or twice. He is a left footed centre back.

When I saw him for Sheffield United once or twice, he seemed to be comfortable on the ball rather than a brute.

Kean Bryan would be an interesting one, a permanent player, and covers a few places, centre back especially on the left of a 3 and at left back where we are very short. That being said, his career has been a little curious. I remember that he (if I recall correctly) scored the winner at Old Trafford last season, but spent much of his time at Sheffield United on the sidelines and he had a brief loan spell at Bolton when they were struggling for players the season before. If its us v Boro, I can't see him coming here.

Waggott might be useless in every other way but if you want the autograph of either our 2nd or 4th choice keepers...

To clarify, I share the feeling that a flurry of kids on loan deals is rather underwhelming. Indeed I would be amazed if this transfer window ends us being judged as anything other than desperately poor, with our best player leaving a huge void and experience replaced by inexperience. But it seems that based on Mowbrays interviews in the last few weeks, we are currently operating exclusively in the loan market because we cant afford anything else. He specifically said at the weekend that he would like experience but that will be impossible due to salary levels. Loaning players with the parent club footing the majority of the bill can be mutually beneficial if done correctly. We have had 4 players in the last 3 years that massively improved us to an extent that simply wouldnt have been possible if we wanted an equally effective player on a permanent basis. Indeed it was the rest of the puzzle being wrong that caused us to rot in mediocrity. Obviously the parent club then benefits from a player who has matured, indeed we have been on the other side of that process with Wharton, Lenihan, Raya etc. It is not just us at this level that looks to use the loan market, look at Norwich who were promoted last year with Skipp in midfield, or Swansea getting into the play offs in successive seasons with the likes of Guehi and Woodman being central to that. The risk perhaps falls in the lack of gametime making signing a loanee such a stab in the dark. The main argument against that I regularly see is that they will block the development of our own youngsters. It is something I disagree with, we should want to make the team better in the short term too, and that can be in tandem with our younger players, especially considering how light in numbers we are.

I was too young to fully appreciate the title win but still I grew up watching the likes of Tugay and Dunn every week. It is crazy that based on his age, he would have grown up watching players like Lee Williamson, Jason Lowe and Corry Evans. Thanks Venkys.

My point is more that not everything can be focused on the long term, and it cant be taken for granted that we are set for another season of mediocrity, when we could be much lower than that. If the loanees are better than what we have, which of course is a big assumption, then that is the only market that we are in, then we should get them in. Either way, there will be plenty of game time for our own young players, we have a young squad, if anything we need experience but that seemingly isnt possible, but our squad is not only lacking in quality but it is tiny. Out of interest, if the loanees were experienced players on year long contracts, would you equally be against that?

I don't think that we built our team around Elliott, and his signing was an undoubted success. This theory also implies that a mid table finish is guaranteed either way, which is not true in general, especially this season when the loans might be needed to help us stay in the division. Our own assets will still get plenty of game time, but we don't have enough players, plus it may allow a couple of the more raw ones to get regular game time on loan themselves rather than being 3rd or 4th choice here. Signing 2 or 3 loans of a quality you couldnt normally afford is a very useful method of improving the team. 5 is too many, and seemingly the result of aggressive budget cuts. People wouldnt suggest dropping Nyambe and Rothwell for being in the last year of their contracts when in reality, they would have as long left at the club as any loanees.

If Clarkson signs, I would give him a debut instead of Buckley with Rothwell being allowed to play further forward than on Saturday. I would also play Gallagher central, with Dolan dropped and perhaps Butterworth (or Chapman) coming in down one of the sides. The other 9 players being the same.

They did, but there is a recurring theme with Buckley against a particular type of opponent. Did you watch and what did you make of Buckley if so?

It would not be unanimous criticism even if it was £1000 for 1 game.

To be fair, Elliott, Harwood-Bellis, Adarabioyo and Reed never received such an accusation but indeed like all 4, Clarkson is very much using us as a stepping stone.

https://footballleagueworld.co.uk/sources-fulham-make-transfer-enquiry-for-southampton-player/ Obafemi linked with Fulham now.

Clarkson would not be a signing that on the face of it I would be over enthusiastic about, it is a stab in the dark because of his minimal senior experience. It seems that it is the only market that we are dealing in. Some of our loans in the last 3 years have proven to be successful and we do need a central midfielder so lets hope that he can come in and do a good job. Who he supports is an irrelevance too. I find this common obsession dismissing loan players on the basis that they will "block" our own graduates to be nonsensical, the key issue should be whether Clarkson or indeed any loanee improves our team, something which I am unsure of based on my above analysis, but something that a few loanees have in the last 3 years. If anything, a couple of loanees can give the green light for a couple of our own more untested young players who if they stayed instead of the loanees would seldom play anyway to go out on loan and play regularly themselves, rather than being 3rd/4th/5th choice in their position. One thing that Mowbray cannot be criticised about is giving younger players a chance, whether they are internally sourced or externally sourced, of which there is a mixture, our team and squad are very young at the moment, if anything for me too young. Garrett is a total wild card in that hes never kicked a senior ball of football, will Clarkson be better, we dont know for sure, but I suspect that Garrett would have been let go by Liverpool by now and wouldnt ever make their matchday squad or start a Champions League game. Loan signings are a very useful way of signing player that we could not usually afford. Of course, there is a balance to be had, the loanees have to be successful (like any signing, but can be more difficult to gauge if they have no or minimal first team experience) and having to sign 5 due to budget cut backs is becoming overly reliant, but a sprinkling of extra talent can be key. You mention Davenport, he still massively failed to convince me in his cameos and I can sort of understand Mowbrays lack of trust in him, which of course reflects badly on the man who signed him in the first place. He is all energy but it often spills out into over eagerness and rashness and a lack of positional discipline, as seen last Tuesday when he charged in to a typical aggressive foul when we had Morecambe penned in. Johnson is currently injured but although I wanted him to be released, due to budget restrictions his experience in a young squad likely to be closer to the bottom could be crucial. We also need the depth, we are so short in options that another option in the role that Clarkson plays is really important. Quality? Time will tell I suppose, I have reservations regarding inexperience, but no one has any clue on his ability at Championship level.

My point was that fairly predictably, he was invisible against a more pragmatic midfield as he often is. Until he is capable of impacting games like on Saturday, instead of only being of any use some of the time, he cannot be relied upon and trusted as a regular.

I don't think that Lenihan is anything special, but we are definitely worse when he doesn't play. I also dont get how anyone could see him as anything other than a centre back, he was really poor in midfield a few years back, and is so limited on the ball, his strengths are his bravery and aeriel ability which suit him as a warrior at centre back.

McAvoy did a very good job as a caretaker manager but it happens so often, a caretaker comes in, does well leaving the club little option but to appoint permanently and the good run isnt sustainable. Suppose it happened here with Bowyer. Preston have never had a goalscorer for years but usually have a number of experienced Championship midfielders/wingers all contributing decent amounts each, the likes of Browne, Johnson, Barkhuizen and Sinclair, the latter 2 may be hindered by attempts to play 2 up front and wing backs. I suppose quite a few teams in this league lack a goalscorer, us included. Huddersfield are absolutely shit, they could really struggle.

https://www.nottinghampost.com/sport/football/football-news/nottingham-forest-transfers-morgan-rogers-5789339 Morgan Rodgers was at Forest yesterday ahead of a potential loan. He impressed me when I saw Lincoln last season and contributed both goals and assists. I would much prefer him who has shown at least at some level that he is capable of scoring and assisting over a stab in the dark like Khadra. Would it not make more sense to loan Sandler in for a season, and loan Carter out in January? We do need Carter around mainly for cover before then, at which point I think regular football in League 1 (ideally at a Promotion chasing side) would allow him to get more regular game time rather than having a whole season as 4th choice. That would also leave him in a better position ahead of next season in which him and Wharton could become even more important, especially if Lenihan leaves.

I still think that at the moment that his reputation has been massively blown out of proportion by the fairytale Copa America story and its sheer bizarreness. Had that not happened, there wouldn't be half as much optimism regarding him, and to be honest I am unsure what his performance level and his goals tally will look like at the end of the season. I don't think that his general performance level has been particularly high in the first 3 games, he was really poor v Morecambe, he was really poor yesterday for 70 minutes and even on the opening day, he wasn't great. But the crucial thing regarding an attacking player is always the number of goals that he gets, and it is even more critical in the absence of Armstrong that he kicks on with his new found confidence and hopefully can get above double figures. It was good to see him score his penalty v Swansea and I thought that his header yesterday was excellent and not something I recall seeing from him before.

Again, I can't comment directly on Sandler as I have never seen him, at least he has senior experience of some sort, although his injury record is a worry. We are in a sticky situation though with our central defence, baring in mind that we (bar up front) seem to be solely reliant on the loan market and you can only have up to 5 in a squad. If we got one, say Sandler, he himself probably wouldn't play from the off until an injury to one of the current 2 (most likely) which itself may cause problems with City if he isnt playing, to loan 2 would likely double that problem. Reverting constantly to a back 3 just to play loanees would be annoying. Wharton is seemingly well off fitness to the point that anything pre January may be a bonus, especially as with centre backs you cant really give them 15/20 minute cameos at first like you can with attacking players. Carter as third choice behind an injury prone Ayala is not something I am convinced that he is capable of, ideally he could with a loan higher up in League 1. That being said, with loan spaces at a premium, I think the best bet would be to loan one in, perhaps Sandler I dont know, have Lenihan, Ayala and keep Carter until January, assuming Wharton is back by then, then loan him out. We need to ensure we have 4 centre backs. We do definitely need the loan places elsewhere unless we can have the flexibility to sign permanent players. We definitely need another left back, not only is Pickering struggling to adapt but more importantly, if he got a knock this week say, I have literally no idea who else we could play there. We definitely need a deeper central midfielder, and I think that we need at least a couple of wide men as well as a goalscoring midfielder, so there will already have to compromise there. So unless this bizarrely rigid transfer compromise of 1 permanent striker and 5 loans can become a little more flexible, I think the priorities would have to be a left back, a centre back, a central midfielder, a winger, and then either another winger/attacking midfielder who can score goals. In which case, Carter will need to stay until January, although Magloire, Garrett and Butterworth could all perhaps be loaned out.

I also watched the full game and he was essentially invisible, he won one free kick with a nice run but otherwise, totally anonymous, something which is far from a first. I am not comfortable with the idea of regularly changing things because individuals cannot play their game against numerous opponents, it is not conducive to consistency to keep having to take him back out anytime we come up against a more pragmatic opponent. Savile, Keiftenfeld and Evans are all experienced Championship midfielders but all are fairly limited, there is no reason why Buckley should be anonymous against such players. Until he can regularly impact games then he cannot become a player that we can trust to be relied upon with regularity. I take issue to that last sentence though. I have never given Buckley anything other than full support on a match day, but when he performs poorly, I state my opinion as such on an internet messageboard thread discussing the game in question. Can you please explain how that is treating our young players bafflingly? Carter is a player who I praised for his performance after coming on, so it is not some sort of scourge on young players.

Not sure if mentioned but Obafemi wasnt on the Southampton 9 man bench today.

Gallagher has never and will never be a wide man, but you can understand why he didnt play centrally when we had Armstrong who was far better and more prolific. Now, there is no reason. He should only be considered as a central striker.