I don't like loan deals. I'd love to see all lower tier clubs refuse to take loanees, thus detering bigger clubs from stockpiling talent. Besides, if he becomes a vital part of the team, he can't play v Chelsea which unsettles the team in two crucial games.
Very good player and looks like it's defo happening now - being reported by Sky too. Think he can play LWB, Left forward and AM and doesn't even take up a squad place.
1. Players like Kennedy and Ake might not join us. 2. We probably can't afford to take on so many players that may or may not work out. I'd love to be able buy all the talent we need, but while the loans continue to make a meaningful contribution with little risk I think it's hard to knock.
Sorry I'm struggling to understand the downside of having one of the brightest young players in Brazil in the squad for a year?
From this highlights vid it looks like he played some games for Chelsea in defence. Looks pretty decent tbf [video]https://youtu.be/9pQ1a_XN3p0[/video]
I'd rather see him have to stay at Chelsea because no one else would take him on loan. If smaller clubs refused to take loanees, players would only go to clubs where they had a realistic chance of playing football. By taking him on loan, we're part of the wider footballing problem, i.e.inflated wages, ridiculous fees, and agents having all the power - all the things supporters moan about. If every team agreed to this, no club would be at any more of an advantage/disadvantage than they are right now. Besides, I just don't feel the same enthusiasm for a Chelsea player dressed up in a Watford shirt as I do for one of our own.
That's a lovely vision of a future world, but players go to these clubs for the money. In a world where a large number of our players come and go each year, there are very few we can really call our own these days anyway. All that matters to me is that we have the best ability available to us on the pitch.
Well, he's got a surname as a first name, plus he's spelt it incorrectly. How can you trust a man like that?
Why would big clubs buy these players, just to have them rotting in the youth teams on megabucks? Supporters of smaller clubs are always complaining that they can't hold onto their promising young players, but then they're happy to go along with the very system that facilitates the exodus of talent. Crazy.
We haven't got any promising young players, and haven't had for some years. We're in the prem, and need the best available players. You may not be happy with the system, but it's been this way for some time. A smart move by the club. Players like this don't sign for us on a permanent basis as we are today.
It's just one player and granted I haven't seen him play but Chelsea leaked a lot of goals especially for a title-defending side, and I find it hard to believe that Ake wouldn't have made the difference. Given they only finished five points above us and we are effectively replacing Ake with a player who played a third of their league games in their massively underperforming side last season, would he be that much of an improvement, if any better?
How can participating in a scheme that hurts football be 'smart' ? The only reason 'players like this don't sign for us on a permanent basis as we are today' is because bigger clubs are able to offer them huge deals, confident that they can be farmed out on loan. And we're helping them! Yep, really smart.
It's what works for Chelsea so let them get on with it! On a needs must basis having Ake on loan last season was a positive as he helped us obtain 13th place and the subsequent prize money which went with it. We may not like the "system" but a small club like ourselves among the Giants of the premier league has to take advantage of every bit of Gino's negotiation skills to aid our attempt to stay in the division!
Were we not called Loanford when the Pozzo's first took over We are one of the clubs who have used the loan system best to our advantage over the last few years whether you like it or not Ake was a great acquisition and we are using loans too for outgoing such as Vydra to Reading, Penarenda now to Udinese, Layun last season, Juan Fran has never played for us etc etc I don't like the way football is going with the amount of money in the game but the loan system helps massively clubs like ours
We need more home grown players, but that's easier said than done, I expect if we stay in the P.L. We will be having this type of conversation at this time of year for evermore.
I don't really have an issue with big clubs hovering up prospects - it's just an investment that may go up or down. What does grate though is the large loan fees and the requirements to pay all of the prospect's inflated wages by the loaning club. In some cases the big club gets the prospect for minimal cost due to the loan fees/covered wages and gets all the massive upside if he shoots the lights out at his loan club. No point complaining though - if the likes of Forest were willing to stump up £40k per week with Chalobah back in the day (or whatever it was) then the big clubs are going to take advantage and there isn't much we can do.
Just because we benefitted from the loan system, it doesn't mean it was good for the game. And if it isn't good for the game then it isn't good for us long term. It's a bad system that ultimately benefits a few top clubs and the players themselves. Something can be done about it, but it requires all the lesser teams to work together. Probably wouldn't happen, as you'll always have selfish clubs (like us) that are happy to make short term gain at the expense of the good of football. But just imagine if they did work together. The whole system would collapse.
If the FA in conjunction with UEFA introduced a rule stating that a club could only loan out a maximum of 10 players, say, then it will bring in a little bit of balance. Currently a club in the EFL can loan in something like 6 players from another English/Welsh club and no more than two from the same club, so while there are curbs on borrowing clubs there are none on lending clubs there will always be an advantage for the bigger clubs to hoover up talent.
So called lesser teams wouldn't,t go for banning loans, it allows them to shore up problem positions in a team when they have long term injuries and also allows them to attract far higher quality players than they would be able to without the loan system being in place
How about the abolishment of loan fees and wage contributions for players under the age of 23? If you're loaning out a senior player then fair enough, but I imagine this rule would be helpful and reflect the fact that the clubs doing loaning are vital for young player development. Big clubs are free to hoover up all the young talent they want, but if they want other clubs to develop them then they pay the bill.
I agree, but can you blame a Championship side for bringing in a Premier League quality player without a fee in order to survive for another season? In the long term, however it is to the detriment of the smaller clubs and to the development of young players, who end up having a stall in their career between the ages of 18 and 23 before eventually finding their actual level once their 5 year, 35k a week contract at the club for whom they never played a league game has expired
I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that Chelsea want Ake playing defensive mid this season anyway, and that they wanted guaranteed gametime for him as a midfielder. If we couldn't offer that then maybe it explains why we didn't go in for him again. From what I've seen of him, Kenedy is much more attacking than Ake, so would offer a different option as wide forward in a 433 or as wing back in a 352. He might even work as a back up CAM, but I dont know how well he can play there. I feel like he is probably being signed as a useful utility player who can change a game, rather than a replacement for Holebas, who has had a pretty solid preseason.
Trouble is that all teams can do this, so they're in exactly the same boat as if no club could borrow players i.e. no advantage gained. Unless you happen to be in our situation of course.
