FIFA to limit the amount of players clubs can loan out

It just means they cut back on youth spending and have more money to buy bigger signings/build infrastructure. Only people it hurts are the smaller clubs who rely on the loan system to progress up the leagues.

Reply 3

Jimmy Seville

16

Italian clubs are worse. Juve have almost twice as many out as Chelsea.

Reply 4

Guru Jason

Big clubs hoade all the talent so that no one else can have them then loan them out to places where half of the youngsters don't even benefit or play. This would stop that so its good in my book.

Reply 5

Original post by bj27

Only people it hurts are the smaller clubs who rely on the loan system to progress up the leagues.

Surely it means the smaller clubs will be able to afford to buy the junior players, rather than rely on crumbs from the top table.

Reply 6

S.G.

22

Original post by Good bloke

Surely it means the smaller clubs will be able to afford to buy the junior players, rather than rely on crumbs from the top table.

As an example, Chelsea are more than happy to loan Mount to Derby, who is one of their best players, but won’t sell him to them. Derby lose out on a great player for their team and the player loses out on development.

Reply 7

Original post by S.G.

As an example, Chelsea are more than happy to loan Mount to Derby, who is one of their best players, but won’t sell him to them. Derby lose out on a great player for their team and the player loses out on development.

As an example, Chelsea, inhibited by the new rules, do not make a bid beyond the reach of smaller clubs and Derby County are able to employ the player directly, thereby ensuring that neither the player nor the lesser club loses out but that Chelsea lose a source of revenue and have one less opportunity to make money count..

Reply 8

Nope because a guy of Mason mounts talent is not staying at Derby County permanently while they are in the championship when they could get 30k a week for being at Chelsea and sitting in their reserves.

Reply 9

Drewski

No loans, but what about having B and C teams playing in the lower leagues...?

Reply 10

Original post by Drewski

No loans, but what about having B and C teams playing in the lower leagues...?

You mean get rid of the problem by getting rid of the lesser clubs totally? Who wouldn't want to see a Russian oligarch's corrupt money decimate British football?

Reply 11

Drewski

Original post by Good bloke

You mean get rid of the problem by getting rid of the lesser clubs totally? Who wouldn't want to see a Russian oligarch's corrupt money decimate British football?

It works in the Spanish and, I think, the German leagues.

And who's had a lot of international success through the years? Spain and Germany.

And it's not getting rid of the lower league teams. In many cases you can use them as feeder clubs.

The point is valid because it's the bigger clubs that can afford the academies and taking the players on when they're younger, giving them the education alongside the training, and then provide playing opportunities when they're old enough. Something a smaller club isn't capable of / doesn't have the money for.

Reply 12

Original post by Drewski

It works in the Spanish and, I think, the German leagues.

And who's had a lot of international success through the years? Spain and Germany.

And it's not getting rid of the lower league teams. In many cases you can use them as feeder clubs.

The point is valid because it's the bigger clubs that can afford the academies and taking the players on when they're younger, giving them the education alongside the training, and then provide playing opportunities when they're old enough. Something a smaller club isn't capable of / doesn't have the money for.

Those leagues do not have the PL's riches. I'd bring in a UEFA-wide salary cap alongside a total running five year spending limit and a ban on agents being paid by both sides of a transaction to try to even things up. The Americans have the right idea in trying to keep the playing field for NFL, say, as even as possible in the interests of close competition, and they generate more revenue that way by making sure the audience is always interested.

Reply 13

Drewski

Original post by Good bloke

Those leagues do not have the PL's riches. I'd bring in a UEFA-wide salary cap alongside a total running five year spending limit and a ban on agents being paid by both sides of a transaction to try to even things up. The Americans have the right idea in trying to keep the playing field for NFL, say, as even as possible in the interests of close competition, and they generate more revenue that way by making sure the audience is always interested.

No need for a cap, just make the financial fair play rules actually work, give them actual teeth.

And the American model is not to be lauded. No promotion / relegation, limited franchise numbers allowed, and nothing short of abuse of the amateur athletes on their way up.

Reply 14

Found the communist. And golden state warriors basically said screw the American model to sport. At most they stop inflation of wages and the players at the top will just focus more on endorsement deals. It will not make anything fairer. Gsw have won 3 out of the last 4 nba titles for a reason and will definitely win it this year.

(edited 5 years ago)

Reply 15