FIFA are proposing to limit the number of players a club can have out on loan, they are proposing 6 but that has to be agreed yet. At the moment we have Dujon Sterling one of FORTY, yes forty Chelsea players currently out on loan, what a joke just stock piling I wonder if they are all fitted with a barcode
Loaning our players restriction ? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Magwitch
- Start date
Sorry wrong Sterling will try again
CovInEssex
Well-Known Member
Yeah something needs to be done, however a restriction on loans would just mean they sit in the youth sides/u23s for longer.
Any player worth his salt would do it themselves, but it’s their job, well paid and they’ll all live to that money. I’d go further and allow any player who has not been part of a first team squad in a season a free transfer, locking these mainly young players into 2,3,4 year contracts is nothing more than slavery.
Liquid Gold
Well-Known Member
Instead of limiting loans they should just limit the size of squads at every age group. In the NFL they have a maximum of 90 players at the start of training camp but this has to be cut down to 53 for the season. I know the sports work differently but I can't see why football teams can't do with 25 man first team squad then say 23 in each age group down. If they find a player they think is better then they can sign them but it means having to drop one already on the books, these can then be picked up by teams lower in the pyramid and actually have the chance to get close to the first team.
Nick
Administrator
I bet the blokes at the car wash would be turning their noses up at a few grand a week for a few hours football training and fingering as many women as they can. Torture.
Winny the Bish
Well-Known Member
I like this idea. You just know clubs would try to counter it by saying "Okay then, well now we've got an Under 19s squad and an Under 21s squad to go along with the 18s and 23s."
JimmyHillsbeard
Well-Known Member
Except the basic- Prem wages a club like Chelsea can offer a 16,17,18 year old mean that their development with the parent club paying the bulk of their wages makes sense for all involved.
If (and it’s a big if) the rumoured wage of Sterling at Chelsea is correct (£18k a week was mentioned) 1) you’ll see why he might not want a free transfer to Rochdale or Shrewsbury and 2) that’s a pretty new definition of the term slavery.
Sky Blue Harry H
Well-Known Member
That really would be a tipping point in ruining our game in my opinion.
Sky Blue Harry H
Well-Known Member
If they limit the number of players the likes of Chelsea can loan out, you would think it would dissuade players from joining them - i.e. nobody would get to hear of most of the players, lack of real game time etc. It may also push up the price of players they do sign, if they aren't spending as much of their budget on such a large squad.
Nick
Administrator
The players won't be that bothered about being loaned out if they are getting 20k a week will they? Why would they pick going to a lower league club at 2k at the most over it?
The best way would be wage caps for youth players.
Was trying to think of how many players at Chelsea in dthe last five years or so have graduated from Acadamy or u23s to first team aand stayed there can’t think of any Are we really having to go back as John Terry ?? that’s over 20 years ago must be others surely
Last edited:
Sky Blue Harry H
Well-Known Member
Maybe, but that's 41.5M a year in wages, with nobody else able to pick up the tab - i.e. clubs they have previously been loaned to. In addition, their value is hardly likely to rise if nobody ever sees them play, they are more likely to get restless if they are never getting a proper game. As clubs will minimise their intake, it will naturally drive down the wages of the others trying to get into clubs (as these will not be able to afford 20lk a week)
Liquid Gold
Well-Known Member
Maybe if there were squad size restrictions clubs would either stop offering stupid wages or be forced into paying off a player on the books when they want to get someone new in.
Covstu
Well-Known Member
not necessarily, I think they would sit in lower leagues for longer. Chelsea rarely grow their own so if a player knows he isn't going to get full game time then they may opt for a chance at a lower league team to prove their worth. Chelsea are a classic example of where their youth players have gone on to better things i.e. De Bruyne, Lukaku etc..
If this comes into play then the players loaned to us should be better quality (or we have to lower our expectations).
Covstu
Well-Known Member
I think if you are in those U23/youth squads then there should be a salary cap, coupled with the reduction in loan moves would make players go to lower league teams to get gametime and probably similar wages down the line.
Nonleagueherewecome
Well-Known Member
Terry is the last one to establish himself as a regular, yep. There was a great show on R5 a few weeks back that had Josh McEachran as the studio guest and he was saying just that: it was his dream and belief that he could become the first Chelsea academy graduate to follow in Terry's footsteps. He made 17 total first team appearances in the 10-11 season, then Ancelotti got the sack and he came back for preseason training to be informed that he was "with the Loan Squad, you're training separately to the first team". He had to ask what that meant and was naturally informed that he wasn't being considered for the first team squad, that he was one of a bunch of players who were expected to be loaned out and that was that. The loan that did transpire, to Swansea, in his own words "killed him" as he couldn't get near the side, didn't want to be there, their manager didn't want him and his head dipped and he never rediscovered the form that had got him into the Chelsea team.
Skyblueweeman
Well-Known Member
Chelsea FC could be replacing DFS on our screens post Boxing Day then...
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
Symptoms rather than causes. The various levels of football authorities are part of the cause, they've completely whored the game to corporate interests. This limit will do nothing to deal with the root of the problem.
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Completely agree, but realistically what can they do at this point? Any attempts at a more equitable share of the cash flowing into the game, or to stem it entirely, would result in a breakaway league at the top. The big clubs have got the FA over a barrel.
Smaller clubs also won’t push it for the same reason working class people vote for tax breaks for millionaires: “It could be me some day”.
robbiekeane
Well-Known Member
This is without doubt the most stupid thing i've ever read on this website.
A bit of a cheap shot at women there Nick
Nick
Administrator
It isn't really a cheap shot at women, just being realistic about what young 18-19 year old lads on thousands per week will be up to.
tisza
Well-Known Member
It is a problem needs sorting.
PL clubs acting like trawlers scooping large amounts of young players in the hope of getting one or two big fish.
With the changes in transfer/development fees a couple of seasons back just made the situation worse. Picking through non_PL clubs academies and basically stealing the best talent.
Looking at Chelsea half of them aren't even British players - they've been imported from around the globe. Most will get nowhere near 1st team squad and end up being sold on after a couple of seasons for a small profit to European clubs.
End up with a ridiculous situation like Parma ?? a couple of years back that had around 220 registered players obviously most of whom were out on loan.
PL clubs acting like trawlers scooping large amounts of young players in the hope of getting one or two big fish.
With the changes in transfer/development fees a couple of seasons back just made the situation worse. Picking through non_PL clubs academies and basically stealing the best talent.
Looking at Chelsea half of them aren't even British players - they've been imported from around the globe. Most will get nowhere near 1st team squad and end up being sold on after a couple of seasons for a small profit to European clubs.
End up with a ridiculous situation like Parma ?? a couple of years back that had around 220 registered players obviously most of whom were out on loan.
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
I'm sure I've mentioned this before, but I don't think salary caps should be enforced, at least not at an individual level. I'm all for the overall wage cap linked to turnover as a means of protecting a club long term financially.
I don't blame the young players for choosing the bigger club and going out on loan - they're probably better than those that sit in U23 sides - because they could play for a L1/2 side on a permanent contract for, say, £2k pw or do exactly the same job as a loanee earning ten times as much and having the chance to get into a bigger team. At least they are getting game time.
With squads, they should be limited to around 40 players on professional contracts. Anyone else has to be released on a free transfer. If a player doesn't make a first team appearance in a season that player will also automatically be available for free transfer. I'm not sure about the loan restriction they've talked about - on its own it's not going to have a great deal of effect (which I think is the point - it looks like the authorities are doing something about the problem but not upsetting the big teams which they don't want to do). I suppose you could have it in addition to the squad cap but with only 40 pro's you can't see many being made available anyway.
I don't blame the young players for choosing the bigger club and going out on loan - they're probably better than those that sit in U23 sides - because they could play for a L1/2 side on a permanent contract for, say, £2k pw or do exactly the same job as a loanee earning ten times as much and having the chance to get into a bigger team. At least they are getting game time.
With squads, they should be limited to around 40 players on professional contracts. Anyone else has to be released on a free transfer. If a player doesn't make a first team appearance in a season that player will also automatically be available for free transfer. I'm not sure about the loan restriction they've talked about - on its own it's not going to have a great deal of effect (which I think is the point - it looks like the authorities are doing something about the problem but not upsetting the big teams which they don't want to do). I suppose you could have it in addition to the squad cap but with only 40 pro's you can't see many being made available anyway.
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
As for the wages, I'd like to see it become more like 'normal' jobs in large organisations with pay scales and grades, which would also add a great more stability to wage bills.
So a first teamer gets a guaranteed set amount as a basic wage, U23 gets say half that, based around guaranteed income like tv money. This is then supplemented by bonuses on variable income like prize money, gate receipts/merchandise etc and split dependent on time spent on the pitch. No goal bonuses/clean sheet bonuses etc as it's a team effort.
Players get paid dependent on the level of performance - you play badly you get less prize money, fans don't turn up - you get paid less. Also good for encouraging fans to more games as you could attract/keep players if they know the fans will continue to come to games even in poor spells. Fans become intrinsically linked to the players remuneration and are so more incentivised to go to matches while the players/management are incentivised to keep the fans onside and get bums on seats.
So a first teamer gets a guaranteed set amount as a basic wage, U23 gets say half that, based around guaranteed income like tv money. This is then supplemented by bonuses on variable income like prize money, gate receipts/merchandise etc and split dependent on time spent on the pitch. No goal bonuses/clean sheet bonuses etc as it's a team effort.
Players get paid dependent on the level of performance - you play badly you get less prize money, fans don't turn up - you get paid less. Also good for encouraging fans to more games as you could attract/keep players if they know the fans will continue to come to games even in poor spells. Fans become intrinsically linked to the players remuneration and are so more incentivised to go to matches while the players/management are incentivised to keep the fans onside and get bums on seats.
stevefloyd
Well-Known Member
The trouble is for emerging 'talent' is that if a club has paid millions for a player the board will almost demand that that player plays and some kid prospect won't get a look in unless they are a very special talent, again its money and the abundance of foreign players that are killing it for home grown talent !!!
stevefloyd
Well-Known Member
The trouble is for emerging 'talent' is that if a club has paid millions for a player the board will almost demand that that player plays and some kid prospect won't get a look in unless they are a very special talent, again its money and the abundance of foreign players that are killing it for home grown talent !!!
stevefloyd
Well-Known Member
I think salary caps SHOULD be enforced with no bonuses or other skulduggery to inflate their already gross wages, 50k maximum per week if the poor loves can't live on that maybe they should get a part time job to make ends meet...Enough is enough for these overpaid cheating wankers, bring the game back to the working man...rant over....beer time now anyone???
Sky Blue Harry H
Well-Known Member
Just been reading in the Pompey rag that they believe it is up to Portsmouth if they allow Conor Chaplin to play against them on Tuesday (if so, there is no way they will allow it) yet MR had stated that he could play in the league (but not in a Cup tie?) Watch this space...….
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
Yes, the top players do get paid grossly inflated wages for something of no consequence, but at the same time if the money is coming into the game why shouldn't the players be the biggest beneficiaries? Stuff like this brings out the worst in people - everyone has worked with someone that pissed them off because they were on the same wages but didn't work as hard. Then it arguably becomes a race to the bottom - if I can't earn more then I'll just skive.
