should we extend patterson and brennans loan if possible?

[liampie]

should we extend patterson and brennans loan if possible?

brennans loan expires on 27th November.

patterson loan expires on 26th October.

i think its clear we thought patterson was a short term option but i think slocombe having someone to push him for his place would help, i dont think it makes sense to rely on just slocombe. its obvious the club dont want to recall brooks, so i wonder would sunderland allow patterson to remain if he was to sit behind another experienced keeper without much game time?

brennan for me is less important, although a useful player to have. if rawlinson and lacey remains fit, where would brennan fit in? i dont see him getting much game time if we arent expiring injuries at the back.

[menzinho]

I can’t see Patterson staying. With the five-sub rule he’s not to even going to get on the bench so the chance of any game time is very low. I agree with you about the competition for Slocombe though, it would be useful. Just got to hope Brooks is keeping him on his toes in training!

You could make more of a case for Brennan, for me that will depend on how serious Lacey’s issue is.

The one bonus is the NL has no transfer window so if we did have a similar situation we would be able to bring players in.

[Fozzy]

No, send them both back when their loans expire as neither are better than players we already have. I would have Slocombe every day of the week over Patterson and the same goes for any of our 3 centre backs over Brennan. I would rather we brought in a high energy midfielder or striker personally.

[CliftonMagpie]

I would like us to keep both if possible, Sunderland might not want him to play second fiddle but there is a chance Notts could rotate him in at times in order to avoid injury or inconsistency with Slocombe.

Brennan is fine as a rotational player, with Rawlinson returning and Lacey too. I think it's important to have cover just in case.

[Chris]

If Sunderland would allow Patterson to stay, even though there's limited game time on offer - I would keep him.

As for Brennan I can't say, I haven't seen him enough and there's chance that someone better for us (not overall) could come up. I would leave this one open, see what occurs as things open up a little.

[Joshua]

I'm not bothered about either play, I think each one is replaceable if needed.

If we had to keep one rather than the other, I would choose Brennan because he looks a decent prospect who can cover as a backup/rotational player.

[heraldmagpie]

I haven't seen enough of the pair to judge, but I have faith Ian Burchnall will review and make the right choice for Notts when the time is right.

[Chris]

Patterson's loan has been extended until the 9th of Jan, 2022.

https://www.nottscountyfc.co.uk/news/2021/october/patterson-loan-extended-141021/?fbclid=IwAR0KeAuTBw6UjMR5QPjA3PuPbGlZcC3_r1RaXIIUXb9CC_aK1sPXASnkx1w

[liampie]

extended now.

[Chris]

I am glad we have cover, I also hope Tiernan Brooks will form part of our squad next season and get more game time. Anthony Patterson might only cover once Sam Slocombe returns, yet I feel more confident about having that competition.

[themightymagpies]

I am glad to see Patterson extend his stay, Brennan is a useful player to have a round if his parent club doesn't mind he won't be playing as often.

[RetroPie]

I do think Patterson is worth keeping, its good to have a backup. I am not sure a different loan would work out better and it avoids the club signing someone who will only be released at the end of the season.

[menzinho]

Maybe Slocombe isn't just going to walk straight back into the first team! I didn't think his loan would be extended but I'm pleased it has been.

[allardyces tash]

@menzinho Competition is always good, Slocombe shouldn't walk straight back into the team but he's obviously the clear number 1 at the club.