The on topic thread

[chef]

So 8 more than non-Football factory Leicester. And two of those loans are Salah and Torres who won't play for Chelsea again.

Torres is on loan from Milan. Thank god.

 

[Jatz]

You're absolutely right SM. Leicester are just Chelsea lite. We're clearly doing exactly the same thing.

 

[elhadjihenry]

Had this discussion a while back (after Lukaku signed for Everton iirc), my 2 cents is that as long as the players know what they are getting themselves into then there is nothing wrong with the Chelsea system. If they are being signed on the expectation they will make the Chelsea first team one day and this isn't realistic then its a bit seedy. It certainly doesn't seem to be halting the development of the players, some go on to better things (KDB for example) and some don't make it because they just aren't good enough (McEachran etc).

Better than staying at Chelsea and playing for their under 21s until they are too old to make it anywhere else I guess, which has happened to a number of our youth signings.

 

[Jatz]

26.

Right. Do you draw the line anywhere? Or do you continue to purchase youth to loan out? I would keep going if I was Chelsea. You have the means, you may as well make a massive go at it. Could be incredibly beneficial for your bottom line.

I'm actually surprised Arsenal/United/City don't do the same tbh.

 

[SM]

Torres is on loan from Milan. Thank god.

Ah forgot about that, so just Salah as a loan who won't be coming back.

 

[SM]

You're absolutely right SM. Leicester are just Chelsea lite. We're clearly doing exactly the same thing.

You're the one who said it, don't put words in my mouth.

 

[Jatz]

Can you link me to our list of on loan players SM ? I would love to have a look.

 

[SM]

Can you link me to our list of on loan players SM ? I would love to have a look.

Pretty easy to find on your Wikipedia page, but here you go:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014–15_Leicester_City_F.C._season#Loans_out

You've gotta feel for guys like Barmby who were bought this season and then loaned out without getting a look in at Leicester's first team. Typical football factory move.

 

[Jatz]

Pretty easy to find on your Wikipedia page, but here you go:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014–15_Leicester_City_F.C._season#Loans_out

You've gotta feel for guys like Barmby who were bought this season and then loaned out without getting a look in at Leicester's first team. Typical football factory move.

Well straight off, 18 is incredibly misleading. 4 were emergency loans. Moore and Wood were on loan all of a month. Not really the same as sending them off to other leagues for multiple seasons.

Another 4 players are in the last year of their contract, set to be released on a free. Again, nothing like Chelsea.

The remaining players are playing in a mixture of conference and League 2 teams. I don't think we acquired them to turn a profit...

 

[SM]

Well straight off, 18 is incredibly misleading. 4 were emergency loans. Moore and Wood were on loan all of a month. Not really the same as sending them off to other leagues for multiple seasons.

Another 4 players are in the last year of their contract, set to be released on a free. Again, nothing like Chelsea.

The remaining players are playing in a mixture of conference and League 2 teams. I don't think we acquired them to turn a profit...

Why have them at all? They aren't playing for Leicester and are just going to be churned out and sold to League 2 Clubs. Why not let the League 2 clubs buy them from the start so they can make some sort of profit on them?

 

[Jatz]

Why have them at all? They aren't playing for Leicester and are just going to be churned out and sold to League 2 Clubs. Why not let the League 2 clubs buy them from the start so they can make some sort of profit on them?

We should. I agree with that.

 

[Jatz]

Why have them at all? They aren't playing for Leicester and are just going to be churned out and sold to League 2 Clubs. Why not let the League 2 clubs buy them from the start so they can make some sort of profit on them?

Btw, some of them are academy products.

 

[chef]

Right. Do you draw the line anywhere? Or do you continue to purchase youth to loan out? I would keep going if I was Chelsea. You have the means, you may as well make a massive go at it. Could be incredibly beneficial for your bottom line.

I'm actually surprised Arsenal/United/City don't do the same tbh.

Apparently we've made over £60m from our loan system since it was over hauled a 4 or 5 seasons ago.

I definitely want us to keep going with it because its a smart way to make money and find the occasional diamond on the cheap.

 

[SM]

We should. I agree with that.

So you accept it's not just Chelsea who sees loaning players out as an opportunity to develop the players to the point where they can either play in that teams first team, or sold at a profit for the parent club?

 

[Jatz]

So you accept it's not just Chelsea who sees loaning players out as an opportunity to develop the players to the point where they can either play in that teams first team, or sold at a profit for the parent club?

We aren't doing that though. We aren't going to be making a profit on Gallagher, Logan, Wood etc. They also won't be playing in the first team.

I actually don't think any club is utilising the loan system anywhere near as well as Chelsea. I've noted they aren't doing anything wrong, I just don't personally agree with it.

 

[NUFC Tiger]

Think buying and immediately loaning players to other club's is fine - as long as club's are spending beyond their means, I'm not sure why it should be an issue? Big clubs like Chelsea (even the lower level PL teams) will always buy promising youth players with the hope they 'kick on' and become future players for the club. For a variety of reasons, players don't always fulfill their potential and promise so the club will try and recoup or profit from the purchase by selling the player on to a lower level club.

Besides, if you are that player, you're probably more likely to get a second chance somewhere (and at a higher rated club) if you 'failed to make the grade' at Chelsea compared to say Luton Town.

I remember reading an article a few months ago and I don't think Chelsea were even in the top 6 in Europe for farming players out.

It's not like they are Parma...who IIRC had 110 players out on loan!

As for official partnerships, I much prefer that then having the big teams playing 'B' teams in the lower leagues like some European clubs/leagues do and taking the place of a lower league club. I believe most 'official' partnerships also include the parent club paying an annual fee to the feeder club (so there is a financial incentive involved for those teams, who in turn potentially get the benefit of another player at no/low cost to them).

 

[SM]

We aren't doing that though. We aren't going to be making a profit on Gallagher, Logan, Wood etc. They also won't be playing in the first team.

I actually don't think any club is utilising the loan system anywhere near as well as Chelsea. I've noted they aren't doing anything wrong, I just don't personally agree with it.

So they're using a system well and you have an issue with it? We've had this discussion before and I still don't understand your issue with it.

 

[Jatz]

So they're using a system well and you have an issue with it? We've had this discussion before and I still don't understand your issue with it.

Yep.

That's fine, let's just leave it as I have an issue with it and you don't understand/disagree with it.

 

[Fryer Tuck]

Well, interesting topic about the loan systems. I don’t think anyone can deny it does wonders for the clubs (Chelsea have done very well). The question is the players themselves. Do they really benefit? Some would argue yes, others would say its squandered potential. Let’s be honest though: Not everyone is going to be a star player for Chelsea, or whatever other top club. It’s about how fulfilling a career you make for yourself.

As a hot prospect player that's the next 'big thing' going to a top club, do you expect to be playing for a top league in your career, or are you going to spend it in a 2nd tier league for the majority of your years? Never really getting the chance to go to a prestigious league with a respectable club?

I’m OK with players loaned by the big clubs if it means they will get top tier experience shortly afterwards, playing for a respectable club. I think that’s one reason why Man Utd’s academy was well respected, even their 'rejects' became productive members elsewhere. As you already know, we have a few of their products in our team. They’re worked hard and are now getting valuable first team experience in a prestigious league. After all, I think ‘experienced Premier League player’ is more credible than ‘Chelsea youth player.’ It certainly would be when said Chelsea youth player is playing in the Bosnian League or in a feeder club in the Netherlands.

Being one of the biggest clubs in England, Chelsea's youth players are expected to become experienced top tier (PL, Serie A, ect.) players for respectable clubs. Anything less is wasted potential. I would like to see more Ryan Bertrands than I would Josh McEachrans (to be fair, McEachran was there from the start, he wasn't poached).

If Chelsea manage to link up with Marseille, that would be excellent for both of them.

Ultimately, it's up to the player on what he wants to do. No one is forcing him to go to Chelsea (Although he might have a few voices in his ear). He has a choice to go elsewhere if he wants to. If he gets to Chelsea, it's up to him to show why he deserves a spot, or failing that, impress a top tier league team to be a regular there. You can have cases of players spraying all the way due to some stupid antics after all...

 

[TooUglyForFugly]

Barca facing charges of tax fraud with regards to the Neymar transfer?

 

[moomba]

I think the loan system should be overhauled. Minimum year at a club/academy before being loaned out. Maximum lengths (1 year) of loans and restrictions on how many players can go to the same club.

I also like something similar baseballs rule 5 where if a person of a certain age, who has been in a clubs system for a certain number of years can't get onto the parent clubs senior squad list they can be picked up for free by any other club on the proviso that they go onto their senior list.

Chelsea arent doing anything against the rules but theres something doesnt sit right when a player can be bought and sold a few years later without really setting foot in the club over that time.

 

[moomba]

He he

From our local paper (but a United supporter wrote it).

Karl-Heinz Rummenigge has said he cannot imagine that Pep Guardiola would go to a “club like City”.

Ignoring the fact that he is chairman of Bayern Munich, a club that stood by its tax-dodging criminal of a president last year, you have to wonder what he was talking about.

As Herr Rummenigge did not expand on his nasty little slur, we can only imagine.

The usual insult that gets thrown at City, by the ignorant and the arrogant, is that they are a club with “no history”.

It is usually said by the kind of person who does not know the difference between “history” and “winning trophies” - the type who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing.

The fact is that EVERY club, from Atherton Collieries to Real Madrid, has its own rich history. Anyone who can’t see that has the depth of a pancake.

But if they ever got round to studying football history, rather than being obsessed with the present, they would discover some interesting stuff.

For instance, City were founded 20 years before Bayern, they won their first trophy 28 years before the German club, and won a European trophy four years before they did.

Football is cyclical, or it was before certain wealthy clubs – with Bayern central among them – ensured they cornered the market, becoming domestic flat-track bullies and using their wealth and influence to ensure Uefa’s rules are in their favour.

City, understandably, are generally seen as second fiddle in Manchester, by dint of United’s phenomenal success.

But the Blues were the bigger club up until World War Two, briefly dominated again in the early Seventies, and are once again top of the heap.

Maybe Herr Rummenigge wasn’t having a go at a perceived lack of history, but at City’s new-found riches.

In 2011 Rummenigge urged Uefa to ban City from Europe if found guilty of financial fair play breaches. He was upset because at Bayern “the rule is not to spend more than we make” he said.

Which is an easy thing to say when your income is nearly twice that of your nearest domestic rival. He wants “fair play” as long as Bayern are so rich and powerful that few in Europe can touch them.

Cue the argument about City’s money being “given” rather than “earned”, which is nonsense.

The takeover WAS a business deal, no matter what the critics say. It was just the best business deal in history, providing City with funds to compete.

Rummenigge wasn’t whingeing when Bayern did massive, lucrative deals with adidas and Audi – he needs to spend less time whining and more with his head in the history books

 

[jod23]

We needs a state of the art stadium with more capacity and more corporate room to keep up with the big boys.

Yeah of course, but id rather expand Anfield than build a new sparkly stadium. You guys cant expand Stamford Bridge though can you? No room to move or what?

 

[jod23]

I think the loan system should be overhauled. Minimum year at a club/academy before being loaned out. Maximum lengths (1 year) of loans and restrictions on how many players can go to the same club.

I also like something similar baseballs rule 5 where if a person of a certain age, who has been in a clubs system for a certain number of years can't get onto the parent clubs senior squad list they can be picked up for free by any other club on the proviso that they go onto their senior list.

Chelsea arent doing anything against the rules but theres something doesnt sit right when a player can be bought and sold a few years later without really setting foot in the club over that time.

I agree with this. It scares me that I agree with Moomba.

 

[moomba]

You dippers are all starting to see the light.