The thing with the Cadden deal is...
I'm not naive enough to think we get loan players who want anything more than a stepping stone. That's fine and par for the course here. But to have a player that explicitly knows they are moving on, regardless if we are top of the table or scrapping relegation isn't right.
I always felt that, with some loanees, if we went up, those deals may go permanent, there was always a chance, and the player and club knows it.
But there is a different commitment here. With other young loanees, who are playing for their future, they commit because they are playing in the shop window, with a reward of game time with their parent club or an other contract with a bigger club (or, in rare cases, with the loaning club)
In Caddens case, come December, he's going to be planning his move, hoping to stay fit, looking forward to a season of soccerball. Wonder how thay might affect his commitment if we're in a scrap, knowing he already has a contract with another club to fulfil. Will he risk injury for the sake of OUFC?
For me, I'd have rather the club went for a lesser squad defender, for cover, who signed a more traditional deal. I don't see what the club stands to gain more than that from the Cadden one.