Nico Hamaleinen is back

[Abseits]

His loan spell in MLS has ended. I assume he'll be loaned out again but maybe Warbs could chuck him in the FA Cup game to have a look at him before deciding anything?

[stainrod67]

Taxi for Nico , not good enough , sorry

[FurtiveFox]

Have to agree, not even sure League 1. Whilst no doubt cheap no idea why they gave him four year deal. Should have been two years max if they thought he could develop further.

[SheepRanger]

Have to agree, not even sure League 1. Whilst no doubt cheap no idea why they gave him four year deal. Should have been two years max if they thought he could develop further.

Must have thought we could sell him to the MLS and make a profit on the deal. Or, the weekly wage was so low ot would be cost neutral when loaned out?

[QPROslo]

A lot of people where skeptical when we gave Dieng, Kakay and Nico 4 years contracts 1.5 years ago, albeit at very modest wages. All of them had decent loan spells behind them, but there was doubt whether they could make the next step. Kakay had played for Partick Thistle in the Scottish Championship, Nico for Kilmarnock in the Scottish Premier League and Dieng for Doncaster in League 1. Nico has performed on the highest level of these three and was even a candidate for Team of the Year in Scotland. Kakay was first to sign, but Dieng and Nico stalled, probably because they had to sign long term contracts on modest salaries. Warburton refused to pick Dieng and Nico before they had committed to the club. QPR was afraid that these players, all on outgoing contracts, would leave on the cheap if they were selected and played well.

In hindsight, the tough approach with long term contract paid off. 1 out of 3 becoming a multi million asset is fantastic reward. I think there is no reason to critisize the club if the two others turn out to be unsuccessful - this is part of the gamble in football. If we turn 1 out of 3 fringe players in their 20s coming back from loans into top Champion players on a consistent basis, we would soon be heading for Premier League. However, it is a number game, and you will inevitably sign a few that do not make it. However, it can hardly be labeled a mistake. If you sign these sort of players on short contract (1 or 2 years) and they do well, they are eventually lost, leaving for nothing.

By the way, I do not think we will loose money on Nico. I suppose he earns in the area of £2000 a week, meaning £100.000 over a year. The loan fee we have received from LA Galaxy is probably covering one year cost alone, and if we send him on another loan we will probably recoup the salary ones again. If he leaves on a free, which isn't unlikely, I think we do not need to pay him up to cancel the contract, as the salary is limited. So what is there to lose?