robf

Well, we could be seeing one of these: We sign a striker in October and sell him in January for a decent fee, bringing in a replacement, and that looks like good business. On the flip side, allowing him to move for next to nothing when we could have kept him till the end of the season and having no replacement would be bad business. So, on that logic it's all about: 1) Will we get a bigger than expected fee (perhaps because JCH's deal to Charlton has stalled and they need a replacement)? Obviously I don't think we'd be getting £500k (the fee agreed for JCH) for Uche but a fee in the region of say £100k+ would be handy for someone who's only been here for months. Will Charlton be tempted to pay a bit over the odds in their desperation to get a striker? If so, that fee could put a dent in Bradford's asking price for Jake Young and make that move more realistic. 2) Have we got a good replacement lined up? If we haven't it would seem extremely short-sighted to let him go now especially if it's only for a small fee.

@Fosse69 is right. Looking at the reports, Clarke-Harris' move to Charlton has reportedly stalled as the player has rejected two contract offers. Perhaps Uche is Charlton's back-up option if JCH doesn't happen? The reports also say the JCH fee is £500k, not £580k as mentioned earlier on this thread. Just a moment... WWW.LONDONWORLD.COM

I think that IF the story is true (and that's a big if) then it will be down to what Vale get for Uche that would determine if he goes or not. I would hope the approach will be - we don't have to sell him now and clubs will need to be prepared to pay over the odds if they want him.

Hmmm... You're complaining that the club has a media team that plans questions for interviews in advance? You're complaining that they've come up with a idea of using some of interview answers as good PR to encourage other loanees to select the club? You're complaining about a video clip that you really don't have to watch if you don't want to? Bizarre. It's the official club channel. If you want unfiltered, spontaneous, not toeing the party line Vale content there's podcasts, newsletters and vlogs you can get that sort of content. But it's not the club's job to do it - it's surely their job to produce professional content that portrays the club in a good light. It seems downright odd to criticise the media team for doing a professional job.

Was it? I must have missed that. I've seen plenty of football "experts" saying that business in January is difficult because it's a seller's market. The price for Jake Young by Bradford is a good example - they don't need to sell him so they are asking a lot (Carlisle pulled out today saying it was too much and they've got new owners splashing the cash). I don't think that's the case in the summer though. I think it's different in the summer due to retained lists, so there's many more free agents to choose from than there is in January. So, for me, I don't think the Vale are in a position (or particularly need to) pay over the odds right now. I reckon it's likely to be one in/one out. Loans to replace the departed loans. Perhaps no permanent additions but if there is, one to replace the departed Conlon (and perhaps two if Cass goes).

I would agree to some extent but this summer we also brought in Ripley and Chislett. Both are Port Vale players, not loans - both are improvements on what we used to have in those positions. I realise it's only two players but it's still two, good, permanent signings. That's a small progression, I would argue. I would imagine that in the long-term, the club would also hope to get another couple (at least) of "James Plants" to make the switch from youth ranks to regular first team. I would imagine Shorrock, Lomax, Dipepa and Walters (if he stays) are at the top of the list. Giving them all game time this season is also potentially progression if it helps some of them make the step up. I do get (and agree) with the point that we need to be self-sufficient. For me, loans need to compliment the squad not be the backbone. However, this is also the January window when lots of people say it's not a buyers market so clubs put inflated prices on players. So, if Vale simply rotate the loan players (out of necessity due to recalls) it's possibly a more sensible option than paying over the odds.

Yep, my post was more to point out that he was missing in people's lists of central midfield options rather than saying he should be first choice. I think he's a useful option off the bench, if we're trying to close out a game for instance.

I guess Lowe could move into central midfield as well.

Devine has been linked with a move to Plymouth now: Alfie Devine recalled from Port Vale, set for Championship move - Spurs Web - Tottenham Hotspur Football News WWW.SPURS-WEB.COM

There's this report here. I know it's just a rumour at the moment, but it would be a bit worrying if signed given that injury record during the first half of the season... Why Liverpool loanee still hasn't debuted for his new club WWW.THISISANFIELD.COM

Thought I'd post this as he was one of the summer rumours: Lyle Taylor: Cambridge United sign former Wycombe Wanderers striker for rest of season - BBC Sport WWW.BBC.CO.UK

I think with Wilson it's really important there is some cover in the ranks. Not only do we know he can be out injured for spells but I would imagine the club would like the option to take him off if we've got games in quick succession (i.e. the pitches are not going to be great at this time of the year and they may want to option to take him off after an hour if there's another game in a few days). I think Baylee Dipepa has done brilliantly for a 16 year-old lad but he's not the experienced option that can potentially help close down games, he's still learning.

I would imagine the last one was Lucas Covolon wasn't it? I think certainly recent seasons (especially the influx under Askey - Kieran Kennedy, Fitzpatrick, Trickett-Smith, Rawlinson, Callum Evans, Jordan Archer, Jonny Maddison the list goes on) may have skewed some opinions (perhaps deservedly) on concentrating too much on non-league 'bargains'. That list shows you need decent scouting to select the wheat from the chaff. However, the likes of Peterborough have shown it can be done if you do it properly and pick out only the top prospects. For me, I wouldn't want to see a sudden influx of half a dozen non-league players like Askey brought in, but I wouldn't be unhappy if the club bring in the odd one to see if they can develop them.

Aren't you both right? Moor Green are now Solihull Moors.

I think there's no hard and fast rule over "club legends" - we have a sprinkling of non-league signings (Andy Jones, Ian Taylor, Stuart Talbot), we also have homegrown heroes (Roy Sproson or Andy Porter), we have signings who started off at bigger clubs (Guppy or Foyle) and we have signings from rival clubs (Tony Naylor for instance). I don't think there's any hard or fast rule - it's much more about the player and the quality of your scouting. I don't think you should exclusively concentrate on non-league signings but neither should you rule it out. After all, our current top scorer didn't learn his trade at a big club. He learnt it in the NW non-league scene.

It's something that has served Posh well over the years. It's not their exclusive route (and nor should it be ours) but they've had numerous signings from there and their current in-demand player (Ronnie Edwards) rumoured to be worth £10m was snapped up from Barnet.

What's Ruben's job? Football agent?

I would imagine it's more to cover Garrity being out long-term than a sale. I can't imagine anyone (other than Vale of course) signing a crocked player in the January window.

It's interesting that the Brighton fans, on hearing of his loan ending at Blackpool, think he'll never make it there. And that's fair enough, it takes a lot to break into a top PL side. So, you could be right although I guess wages and if there's interest from clubs higher up the ladder would be a big factor.

Booing them when they are entering the pitch as a sub and haven't even touched the ball is even more reprehensible. It's fair enough to criticise someone if you feel they haven't put the effort in, but how can you possibly come to that conclusion when they are just coming onto the pitch?

100% agree.

Rumours that Joe Taylor is off to Lincoln City on loan. Lincoln City agree deal to sign Luton Town star Joe Taylor - Sources WWW.FOOTBALLINSIDER247.COM

I don't think Harratt will be on his way to Vale Park. Firstly, he's injured and secondly when he was injured he was a first-team pick so when he does recover there's every chance he'll get back into the Huddersfield squad.

Yep - but I still reckon Uche had more chances in the Charlton game alone than I've seen Loft have in twenty appearances so it is possible for some of our attackers to be, well, attacking...

I'm afraid that I'm with you on this one. I usually try and adopt a "glass half-full" approach and give a player a dozen games (to account for adapting to the geographical move, new team mates, gaining match fitness if injured etc) but his record for Vale (I'm not concerned about what he did for other clubs) is one goal in twenty appearances. Even only counting starts it's one in eight. However, stats aside, it's the lack of goal threat which worries me. If you compare with Uche then he has had been shots blazed over, headers go narrowly over, runs into the box etc. I genuinely can't recall Loft having more than about two or three attempts on goal in those 20 appearances. That's awful! To be fair to Loft, he does ping a decent pass from time-to-time but he's not there for that - he's there to provide a goal threat and he's just not done that. I would add that I would dearly wish to be eating humble pie and for him to suddenly find form. I don't want any player in a Vale shirt to fail. But twenty games, one goal and a handful of attempts on goal are dreadful stats for what's supposed to be an important striker signing.