Jump to content

Calvin Ramsay


Recommended Posts


2 hours ago, thurso said:

I’d be surprised if he was that low in choice we are already missing some players. Same thing happened when hickey was called up. 
Unless his injury is worse than we thought and he wasn’t left out because a deal to Liverpool was already done. 
I’m just surprised he’s not in the under 21s squad 

He’s not in because he’s not played for weeks & is carrying an injury allegedly.

Games are meaningless anyway so no point risking making it worse. 

Link to comment

The thing I struggle to understand about Liverpool's interest is they already have young Conor Bradley who is a tremendous young right back and the same age as Calvin. He is already an Northern Ireland international, player of the year in premier League 2 so basically rated one of the top talents amongst all the EPL clubs development teams, he is still contracted for another year and has already started for the Liverpool first team in about half a dozen games, and is someone who Klopp called a wonderful talent just a couple of months ago.  

Would Calvin be joining them as 3rd/4th choice right back behind TTA, Williams / Milner sometimes and Bradley? or are they planning to sell both Williams and Bradley?  

If we do make a deal with them hopefully we either get a loan back of Calvin for next season, or maybe they would be willing to loan us Bradley for the season as part of any deal.  

Link to comment
37 minutes ago, SupportmeansSUPPORT said:

The thing I struggle to understand about Liverpool's interest is they already have young Conor Bradley who is a tremendous young right back and the same age as Calvin. He is already an Northern Ireland international, player of the year in premier League 2 so basically rated one of the top talents amongst all the EPL clubs development teams, he is still contracted for another year and has already started for the Liverpool first team in about half a dozen games, and is someone who Klopp called a wonderful talent just a couple of months ago.  

Would Calvin be joining them as 3rd/4th choice right back behind TTA, Williams / Milner sometimes and Bradley? or are they planning to sell both Williams and Bradley?  

If we do make a deal with them hopefully we either get a loan back of Calvin for next season, or maybe they would be willing to loan us Bradley for the season as part of any deal.  

They’re basically speculating to accumulate. 
Good FB’s are a pretty rare breed & very sought after. 
They will likely assess them all. Keep best two & punt any spares for profit.

Makes perfect sense for bigger sides that can afford to do so.

Link to comment
51 minutes ago, SupportmeansSUPPORT said:

The thing I struggle to understand about Liverpool's interest is they already have young Conor Bradley who is a tremendous young right back and the same age as Calvin. He is already an Northern Ireland international, player of the year in premier League 2 so basically rated one of the top talents amongst all the EPL clubs development teams, he is still contracted for another year and has already started for the Liverpool first team in about half a dozen games, and is someone who Klopp called a wonderful talent just a couple of months ago.  

Would Calvin be joining them as 3rd/4th choice right back behind TTA, Williams / Milner sometimes and Bradley? or are they planning to sell both Williams and Bradley?  

If we do make a deal with them hopefully we either get a loan back of Calvin for next season, or maybe they would be willing to loan us Bradley for the season as part of any deal.  

As FND said the top clubs will just look to hoover up talent they can, with no garuntee they'll make it anywhere near the first team.

They'll probably look to loan Bradley out and "develop" Ramsay for a few years then sell him on for a decent profit, like what they did with Danny Ward to an extent

Link to comment
32 minutes ago, fine-n-dandy said:

They’re basically speculating to accumulate. 
Good FB’s are a pretty rare breed & very sought after. 
They will likely assess them all. Keep best two & punt any spares for profit.

Makes perfect sense for bigger sides that can afford to do so.

Liverpool have got more than 50 players in their under 23 squad. 

Chelsea have even more than that. 

These clubs can afford to stockpile young players. Keep them for a few years and they count as home grown. 

If they make it, brilliant.  If not then they can sell enough on at a decent profit to make the whole u23 system sustainable. 

 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, aberdeen1970 said:

Liverpool have got more than 50 players in their under 23 squad. 

Chelsea have even more than that. 

These clubs can afford to stockpile young players. Keep them for a few years and they count as home grown. 

If they make it, brilliant.  If not then they can sell enough on at a decent profit to make the whole u23 system sustainable. 

 

This bothers me.  If those players were actually getting game time in a first team anywhere they would develop better.  When you do see some of the EPL u23s going out on loan (e.g. Jenks, Longstaff, etc) it is obvious they've never played first team football.  Most of them don't make it past the u23 level but still potentially leave the game with a tidy bank account, if they haven't blown it on cars, drugs and hookers.  The big clubs make their money back through loan fees and sales of the decent players.  Few make it to their first teams.  If these clubs didn't stockpile these players then there would be a better chance of them making it at clubs further down the divisions, improving their chances and the fortunes of those clubs they play for.

I've seen numerous claims that the problem is the number of players a team can loan in.  If you flip that and limit the number of players a team can loan out, then it could prevent rich clubs from stockpiling talent which would then go on to develop at "smaller" clubs, improving the players chance of making it, their clubs' chance of making better money, and the quality on play on show at stadiums around the continent.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
1 hour ago, RabidGiraffe said:

This bothers me.  If those players were actually getting game time in a first team anywhere they would develop better.  When you do see some of the EPL u23s going out on loan (e.g. Jenks, Longstaff, etc) it is obvious they've never played first team football.  Most of them don't make it past the u23 level but still potentially leave the game with a tidy bank account, if they haven't blown it on cars, drugs and hookers.  The big clubs make their money back through loan fees and sales of the decent players.  Few make it to their first teams.  If these clubs didn't stockpile these players then there would be a better chance of them making it at clubs further down the divisions, improving their chances and the fortunes of those clubs they play for.

I've seen numerous claims that the problem is the number of players a team can loan in.  If you flip that and limit the number of players a team can loan out, then it could prevent rich clubs from stockpiling talent which would then go on to develop at "smaller" clubs, improving the players chance of making it, their clubs' chance of making better money, and the quality on play on show at stadiums around the continent.

Aye, big clubs stockpiling talent just dilutes the quality at the next level of competition below.  

It's the modern football way, the rich get richer and the divide gets bigger every year 

 

Link to comment

Should definitely be a rule introduced to reduce the squad numbers that teams can have. Regardless of age. As soon as they are old enough to sign a pro contract. 
Fair enough teams having as many U16’s/18’s maybe but once they pass 18, clubs should be limited on numbers to prevent stock piling & stalling young players progress. 
 

Fact that bigger clubs can easily afford to pay players they don’t really need so much more than clubs like us means we are completely priced out of a better quality market & this is what is helping to reduce quality in so many ‘less attractive’ countries leagues. 
 

UEFA should be cracking down on it but they don’t give a shite as long as the ‘more attractive’ countries big leagues are kept happy.  England, France,Germany, Spain, Italy & Portugal/Netherlands etc.

Link to comment
On 5/20/2022 at 5:13 PM, aberdeen1970 said:

Liverpool have got more than 50 players in their under 23 squad. 

Chelsea have even more than that. 

These clubs can afford to stockpile young players. Keep them for a few years and they count as home grown. 

If they make it, brilliant.  If not then they can sell enough on at a decent profit to make the whole u23 system sustainable. 

 

According to the report that we going to be one of Juventus feeder clubs,  they have 123 players between first team and u23s . The game is truly f@cked 

Link to comment
18 minutes ago, Kiriakov33 said:

According to the report that we going to be one of Juventus feeder clubs,  they have 123 players between first team and u23s . The game is truly f@cked 

Excellent, we'll be getting the 123rd choice player then, from their 11th choice team. Something to look forward to.

Link to comment
9 hours ago, aberdeen1970 said:

Unless it's up to a maximum of 120 there's going to be a lot of young Italian players on the dole 

Or they will just do as the arse cheeks do & enter under 23 teams in lower leagues & slowly work their way up manipulating the rules until they are in the second division/championship

 

For the good of the game don’t you know

Link to comment
12 hours ago, Don_Corleone said:

Excellent, we'll be getting the 123rd choice player then, from their 11th choice team. Something to look forward to.

Wasn’t the boy Hernandez ranked about 123rd in the Norwegian league when we signed him as a ‘world class signing’. 
 

otherwise known as a massive lie 

Link to comment
13 hours ago, Kiriakov33 said:

According to the report that we going to be one of Juventus feeder clubs,  they have 123 players between first team and u23s . The game is truly f@cked 

Find that hard to believe looking at the squads on their website? Doesn't look to be anything like 123 players? 

Link to comment
47 minutes ago, G31DON said:

Correct. New laws coming into effect massively cutting the number of players allowed to be loaned out by one club. 

8 next season 

7 the following season 

then finally down to 6 for season 24/25

 

So less chance of us getting loans from the bigger clubs as they will prefer to loan to a level above us with limited loans available. 
 

We will get the loans from shite in 2nd division ?

Link to comment

https://khelnow.com/football/fifa-new-loan-regulations-effects-on-football
 

Chelsea had 21 players out on loan last season

 

Atalanta had SIXTY FKN THREEEEEEEE! ??
 

still loads o fkn loop holes in it that clubs can abuse. 
 

U21 players don’t count & neither do ‘club trained’ players ?

load o fkn shite.

 

Liverpool can sign Ramsay & loan him out without it affecting their ‘rations’ ?

Link to comment

The new loan limit ‘rules’ to prevent ‘talent hoarding’ really are a complete load of BS as it does absolutely NOTHING to change things regarding U21’s (clubs will still be able to Hoover all them up & loan out as many as they want) they can also snap up all the young talent early enough such as Ramsay, keep them at club a wee while until they become ‘club trained’ then loan them out also without it counting as one of their ‘official’ loans 

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...