Jump to content

Jake Vokins - Official: Loan to Woking

SuperSAINT

By SuperSAINT
in The Saints

 Share

Recommended Posts

VectisSaint

VectisSaint

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Matthew Le God said:

Why is it strange? He isn't good enough for the Premier Legue and Saints are being linked to loaning other fullbacks.

Strange to send him to Sunderland. Is Lee Johnson considered a good coach (he might be, I don't know) who will help Vokins develop? Surely there was a more local club or somewhere a bit higher up (Championship) where we could have kept an eye on him more easily and even got him back to Southampton on occasions as we used to do with with Stephens and the other guy when they were at Swindon. A lot of our other loans have been to Gillingham (where ironically Sunderland are playing this weekend). True Joush Sims went to Donny, but Sunderland, thats almost a foreign country 🙂

 

By the way I don't think Vokins did too much to be worried about on Tuesday, sure, made one (big) mistake, but really looked quite reasonable otherwise (better than Valery, who also wasn't really that bad). I think people expect too much when one of the younger players is drafted in, unless they score a hattrick (striker), make a couple of goals or get a clean sheet they seem to be considered failures. It takes time to get up to speed (as Ralph has told us several times). 

egg

egg

Posted
Posted
34 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

All seems reasonable enough to me. Last season the club were confident Vokins would be at least competent enough to be a backup to the first team (I.e. as good as Targett, Pied, Valery and Fox etc. have been in the last) but clearly he hasn’t developed to the extent we had hope. Now we’re clearly confident of bringing in someone much better, either as cover for Bertrand or with a view to taking his place long term.

I don’t see how anyone could be upset about replacing Vokins with AMN.

I don't think anyone has said that they don't mind Vokins being upgraded. The point is that he hasn't. If someone better comes in then all is cool. 

Sidney Fudpucker the 3rd

Sidney Fudpucker the 3rd

Posted
Posted

I get sending him out on loan to give him game time and experience. However, I don't understand the logic in sending a player away when there's a good few injuries and no cover at all for the LB position. 

I can only assume that they're very confident of landing someone as cover? I just read that Maitland-Niles could be on his way, with RB going the other way. Again, this seems odd as we'd have a relatively inexperienced LB starting, and again no real cover. 

Lighthouse

Lighthouse

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, egg said:

I don't think anyone has said that they don't mind Vokins being upgraded. The point is that he hasn't. If someone better comes in then all is cool. 

I’m prepared to be surprised but honestly I’d be amazed if there’s nobody else coming in.

S-Clarke

S-Clarke

Posted
Posted

I think that is pretty solid confirmation that we have managed to secure a full back. Maybe we're not sure which one yet, but I'd say 99% we've got someone.

Ralph has already been saying his full back positions aren't strong enough, so in no world is he going to send one of them out and not replace!

Vokins wasn't ready, he does need games...so we'll see how he does. Not sure what his future holds, he's not had the impact of other left backs who have come through the academy.

Hodgey

Hodgey

Posted
Posted

MLG - after your statement that our young players were significantly better than l1 standard - this perhaps another indicator that they are not ?.

My take is that sadly this crop of youngsters are some way short of the mark, aside from Smallbone I don’t see any of them being Prem level and most will end up in l1. Using the loan system makes sense if that is the case until either they improve or new talent comes through - we can’t afford to buy.

also assuming Vest or Salisu are fit shortly then Stephens could be used at full back as an option who we know can defend at this level.

 

Matthew Le God

Matthew Le God

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Hodgey said:

MLG - after your statement that our young players were significantly better than l1 standard - this perhaps another indicator that they are not ?.

I did not say that. You have twisted my words. I said a team of our backup players were good enough to beat a bottom half League one team in a one off cup game... and they proved that vs Shrewsbury. I did not say all our young players were significantly better that League One standard.

Edited by Matthew Le God
Hodgey

Hodgey

Posted
Posted

Fair enough MLG if I misunderstood. Just out of interest - do you think our youngsters (ie trying to come through our youth system now) are better than l1 standard or not ?. 

SaintJackoInHurworth

SaintJackoInHurworth

Posted
Posted

I agree with those who are saying that it is strange that we have agreed to loan out Vokins BEFORE signing a replacement. Hopefully this does mean that the loan signing of either Brandon Williams or Ainsley Maitland-Niles is imminent.

One thought that no-one has expressed is whether there may be some chance that Sam McQueen could also soon begin training in his return from injury. It has been a long time (and I know that ACL injuries take a long time), but it would be great to hear that he is on the road to returning.

If we don't sign anyone and if McQueen is not likely to be fit any time soon, then I guess we will just have to go with any of the following options as cover for left back:

  • Kayne Ramsay
  • Diallo
  • Ward-Prowse (potentially with KWP switching to the left)
  • Jack Stephens (as above)
Matthew Le God

Matthew Le God

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, SaintJackoInHurworth said:

One thought that no-one has expressed is whether there may be some chance that Sam McQueen could also soon begin training in his return from injury. It has been a long time (and I know that ACL injuries take a long time), but it would be great to hear that he is on the road to returning.

McQueen's injury was over 2 years ago. That is far longer than most knee injuries. If he does return to training it will be a long time before he is match fit. More likely he'll be released when his contract ends.

egg

egg

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, SaintJackoInHurworth said:

I agree with those who are saying that it is strange that we have agreed to loan out Vokins BEFORE signing a replacement. Hopefully this does mean that the loan signing of either Brandon Williams or Ainsley Maitland-Niles is imminent.

One thought that no-one has expressed is whether there may be some chance that Sam McQueen could also soon begin training in his return from injury. It has been a long time (and I know that ACL injuries take a long time), but it would be great to hear that he is on the road to returning.

If we don't sign anyone and if McQueen is not likely to be fit any time soon, then I guess we will just have to go with any of the following options as cover for left back:

  • Kayne Ramsay
  • Diallo
  • Ward-Prowse (potentially with KWP switching to the left)
  • Jack Stephens (as above)

All very valid but I fear that McQueen won't come back, although I hope I'm wrong. 

I wander whether, bizarre as this sounds, that all this ties in with Jankewitz transfer request. The club would be mad to lose him, so if Diallo or JWP provide the FB cover, that could push Jankewitz up the list as midfield cover. 

I may be off way beam, but if we see Diallo or JWP at full back tonight and Jankewitz on the bench, this could be the way we're going for the time being. 

  • Like 1
Turkish

Turkish

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, egg said:

All very valid but I fear that McQueen won't come back, although I hope I'm wrong. 

I wander whether, bizarre as this sounds, that all this ties in with Jankewitz transfer request. The club would be mad to lose him, so if Diallo or JWP provide the FB cover, that could push Jankewitz up the list as midfield cover. 

I may be off way beam, but if we see Diallo or JWP at full back tonight and Jankewitz on the bench, this could be the way we're going for the time being. 

Looks like your beam aim is correct sir.

SaintJackoInHurworth

SaintJackoInHurworth

Posted
Posted
10 hours ago, egg said:

All very valid but I fear that McQueen won't come back, although I hope I'm wrong. 

I wander whether, bizarre as this sounds, that all this ties in with Jankewitz transfer request. The club would be mad to lose him, so if Diallo or JWP provide the FB cover, that could push Jankewitz up the list as midfield cover. 

I may be off way beam, but if we see Diallo or JWP at full back tonight and Jankewitz on the bench, this could be the way we're going for the time being. 

Interesting stuff... Are you ITK?!!

Despite the uncanny nature of your prediction, though, I think it is fair to point out that Jankewitz only came on for a few minutes at the end and didn't look like he was ready to provide cover this season... yet! :)

Saint_clark

Saint_clark

Posted
Posted

Feel bad for McQueen, looked like he would have had a career as a lower Prem/upper championship player and now may well end up retiring early. 2 years out injured is horrendous. 

sadoldgit

sadoldgit

Posted
Posted
On 30/01/2021 at 15:57, Matthew Le God said:

McQueen's injury was over 2 years ago. That is far longer than most knee injuries. If he does return to training it will be a long time before he is match fit. More likely he'll be released when his contract ends.

Didn’t he have an infection in the knee after the surgery which set the rehabilitation back a while?

egg

egg

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

Didn’t he have an infection in the knee after the surgery which set the rehabilitation back a while?

Yes he did. There was an article, I think in The Athletic, a while ago. If I recall correctly they had to undo the surgery and rebuild again. Horrible injury.

Ted Bates Statue

Ted Bates Statue

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, egg said:

Yes he did. There was an article, I think in The Athletic, a while ago. If I recall correctly they had to undo the surgery and rebuild again. Horrible injury.

Big shame to lose him, it seemed like he was preferred by the club over Targett and he would have been ideally placed to fight for Bertrand's place. We're fortunate to have not had to worry too much about that position since Shaw came through.

  • 2 weeks later...
Dusic

Dusic

Posted
Posted

Lots of comments on Twitter that he was continuously caught out of position.

Interesting because many here have said the same in his handful of first team apps - he always seems to be a little too high, and then if a move breaks down he gets caught out.

Potentially something that can be worked on, but as Ralph hinted recently, Vokins isn't really a natural defender.

Will be interesting to see how he does there. For someone who is one of our highest rated prospects and who is considered quite close to our first team, he needs to do well - otherwise how can he seriously be considered as being our back up LB next season?

Lighthouse

Lighthouse

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Dusic said:

Dropped today and they were 3-0 up at HT.

Would be an awful loan move if he ends up on the bench most weeks.

Why? He wouldn’t have played here either.

Fan The Flames

Fan The Flames

Posted
Posted (edited)
18 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

Why? He wouldn’t have played here either.

It's not just a choice between one or the other. 

Anyway he can learn from this knock back, let's see how he responds.

Edited by Fan The Flames
Lighthouse

Lighthouse

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, SuperSAINT said:

You don’t think it’s a bad loan move if he doesn’t play?

I think being on loan in League 1 is as good as it’s going to get for him right now. If he isn’t getting a game there then he certainly isn’t going to here, so he hasn’t lost anything.

VectisSaint

VectisSaint

Posted
Posted
35 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

I think being on loan in League 1 is as good as it’s going to get for him right now. If he isn’t getting a game there then he certainly isn’t going to here, so he hasn’t lost anything.

But we have. If he has a good loan spell then he becomes more of an asset that we could potentially sell. If he doesn't play he won't get in the shop window, and if he has a disaster then his stock would be even lower. 

Dusic

Dusic

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Lighthouse said:

Why? He wouldn’t have played here either.

Why? Because the whole point of him going on loan to experience playing regular games.

If he sits on the bench for Sunderland he doesn't that so it helps nobody and certainly doesn't help Vokins develop and come back a better player.

Would have thought that was obvious.

Billy the Kidd

Billy the Kidd

Posted
Posted
15 hours ago, waylander said:

He'll get better coaching with us which makes improvement more likely

How do you work that out - I mean we have coached him this far and he is at the standard he is.  

Some players just aren’t good enough, maybe we need to accept our academy isn’t anywhere near good enough at present, and it will likely take us 3-5 years for that to correct itself, which I’m confident it will.

Ralph obvs didnt think him good enough, even with our lack of full backs. At least he isn’t taking up space in training to allow someone else (~Finnigan I think) and the small wages he is on will be covered by Sunderland too.

See, to me this is a bit similar to my game of Monopoly I played with the family last night. In a desperate attempt to take down my nearest rival, as they had houses across the Strand... I sold them Park Lane, Regents Street and 2 others for £1.  All of them were mortgaged, so when they accepted, they had to pay the fees, and they only had £4.  The end result was they had to sell their houses to pay the fees. Game opened up, and I’m now sleeping on the couch 🤑

Billy the Kidd

Billy the Kidd

Posted
Posted (edited)
14 hours ago, Dusic said:

Why? Because the whole point of him going on loan to experience playing regular games.

If he sits on the bench for Sunderland he doesn't that so it helps nobody and certainly doesn't help Vokins develop and come back a better player.

Would have thought that was obvious.

You for sure have a valid point, and I agree IF it were our intention for him to be playing for us in the future.  Now, I dont know for sure, but I can see a situation where ~Ralph doesn’t want him playing for us in the future, cos maybe he doesn’t think he is good enough.  We are a club that has said we dont do loads outside the club, as they wont learn how we want them to play.  Maybe this is telling, if you look at all our loans out over the last couple of years, how many came back?  I cant think of many who have and then are on the periphery of the team.  Maybe I’m wrong, so happy to be corrected, maybe we do have others who have come back.

Edited by Billy the Kidd
  • Like 1
WALK DMC

WALK DMC

Posted
Posted
25 minutes ago, Billy the Kidd said:

You for sure have a valid point, and I agree IF it were our intention for him to be playing for us in the future.  Now, I dont know for sure, but I can see a situation where ~Ralph doesn’t want him playing for us in the future, cos maybe he doesn’t think he is good enough.  We are a club that has said we dont do loads outside the club, as they wont learn how we want them to play.  Maybe this is telling, if you look at all our loans out over the last couple of years, how many came back?  I cant think of many who have and then are on the periphery of the team.  Maybe I’m wrong, so happy to be corrected, maybe we do have others who have come back.

This is true if the only reason for letting them go on loan is to develop them as players, but it is also a way of putting them in the shop window. Clearly we wouldn't get much for Vokins, but if Valery did well and combined with his age and premiership experience it would be possible to get a decent transfer fee which could go towards other players. 

Sam Gallagher is the obvious example of a player who didn't have a consistent run of games at Saints but did well on loan and we received multiple millions for him. I'm not suggesting either Vokins or Valery would generate as much cash, merely that this loan could be the first step in adding to their market value. 

I get the impression that we are pretty desperate to generate income at the moment so we'd bite the hand off any Championship team that offered any real money for Valery .......

  • Like 1
Billy the Kidd

Billy the Kidd

Posted
Posted (edited)
38 minutes ago, WALK DMC said:

This is true if the only reason for letting them go on loan is to develop them as players, but it is also a way of putting them in the shop window. Clearly we wouldn't get much for Vokins, but if Valery did well and combined with his age and premiership experience it would be possible to get a decent transfer fee which could go towards other players. 

Sam Gallagher is the obvious example of a player who didn't have a consistent run of games at Saints but did well on loan and we received multiple millions for him. I'm not suggesting either Vokins or Valery would generate as much cash, merely that this loan could be the first step in adding to their market value. 

I get the impression that we are pretty desperate to generate income at the moment so we'd bite the hand off any Championship team that offered any real money for Valery .......

So yeah, shop window and maximising revenue was the bit i forgot to include in my post, and youre spot on. Pretty sure we will be doing the same with Fraser too, see if we can shift in the summer.  I wouldn’t be surprised if we look for another keeper or try Gunn again next season.  He let in 4 yesterday, but importantly he is back in the team after injury.  Does anyone know how he has performed?

Edited by Billy the Kidd
  • 1 month later...
Fan The Flames

Fan The Flames

Posted
Posted
On 13/02/2021 at 16:35, Fan The Flames said:

Anyway he can learn from this knock back, let's see how he responds.

I'm glad he responded, he will learn a lot about himself from this experience. He's now got to put in a run of decent performance's.

  • 2 weeks later...
VectisSaint

VectisSaint

Posted
Posted

Now we know what happened to Vokins (though it became fairly obvious before it came out officially)m anyone any idea what has happened to Valery at Brum? Hasn't been in a squad now for a few games, and isn't listed as injured or sus[pended. He did make some strange comments a while back about the team needing to make more effort, and hasn't been seen since, coincidence?

  • Like 1
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 months later...
  • Lighthouse changed the title to Jake Vokins
ErwinK1961

ErwinK1961

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, SuperSAINT said:

 

Really needs a good loan if he's going to kick on and make it at a decent level. Hopefully it's somewhere he will play every week, as not sure he got that at Sunderland. 

VectisSaint

VectisSaint

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, ErwinK1961 said:

Hopefully it's somewhere he will play every week, as not sure he got that at Sunderland. 

He got Covid at Sunderland. Then heart murmurs as he was recovering. Think he would have got game time otherwise even though he didn't get off to an auspicious start. 

screechio

screechio

Posted
Posted

I always thought he looked the business attacking but needs minutes to become a prem level defender. He's in a similar position to Targett when he broke through. Needs the game time to become a first teamer, but we can't afford him the time to learn and make mistakes like Leicester did with Chilwell

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
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...