Martin Samuel's loan market articles

[Khalekan]

This is the ridiculous bit. The rich clubs have spent years stockpiling talent, spending as much money as they possibly can to get europes top talent nto their doors. Taking huge risks with players and ruining their future prospects by shutting them out. While the club deem these players not currently good enough to be part of their team, they loand them out for them to gain experience. All the while this players value is rising, meaning thet the rich club can sell at a profit to the club that has become dependent and use this as income, allowing them to spend more on established players under the FFP rules set out by the friends of the rich clubs.

To be fair I haven't heard any of the "rich clubs" squealing about this......nor indeed UEFA.

As you say, they benefit by the players gaining experience and maybe adding to their value in the process.

It is tabloid journalists, always on the lookout to provoke one more controversy, who are trying to stir things up.

 

[Dharma]

I'll just leave this here.

 

[sd_1992]

funny how wenger wasn't complaining about loans when they tried to loan Ba at the start of the season....

 

[Muzumbu]

We should be ashamed that we don't have a sugar daddy to inject millions of oil money into our club...
Martin Samuel you horrid ogre OMG I WANNA KILL YOU

look at his face ffs FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFUU

 

[canuckblue]

Personally my main issue with article and its follow up is the conclusion that because there are flaws in the loan system the whole thing should be abolished rather than reformed. Its such a knee jerk reaction and he doesn't even bother to sketch out what the situation would be if it was abolished.

Clubs would have squads that accurately reflected their finances but this would only further entrench the superiority of those that currently have money. Short of a sugar daddy the only way a club like Everton can get a huge boost in revenue is to get into Europe but that is very hard to do without the players. Even if we develop a great youngster like Rooney, day to day survival often means we have to sell them.

He claims that it would stop the stockpiling of kids at the big clubs but provides no evidence as to why this would be the case. Perhaps they would still collect them due to the attraction of high wages but even less would ever get to play football for any club.

And for all the problems associated with them, at least the big clubs can afford quality coaches, training equipment and medical staff to make the most of a kids talent. Players like Ricky Lambert and Ian Wright have made it through without the support of an academy but there are not many of them.

If teams couldn't stockpile kids, they wouldn't sign them in the first place --or they'd sign a lot fewer -- as they're not going to waste money on players who won't see the pitch. Not even the sheikhs or Abramovich is that stupid. The [Poor language removed]'s owners, maybe.

 

[canuckblue]

funny how wenger wasn't complaining about loans when they tried to loan Ba at the start of the season....

Problem was they tried to do it on the sheep.

 

[toffee matt]

Problem was they tried to do it on the sheep.

On the sheep , you welsh lid or you from Aberdeen

 

[Winci]

I also agree with Samuel, as much as the loan system has helped us, without a loan system we would have probably been capable of signing all three of them (Barry, Lukaku and Deulofue) on permanents.

If you are a player and you are being frozen out or you know you are not going to get the playing time you wan't, you'll let everyone know you wan't out. It forces the rich clubs hands into selling for reasonable prices because you either sell the players for whatever others club are offering or you are stuck with an unhappy player who'll barely play collecting millions in wages.

The loan system needs to out or reelly get looked at. Introduce an age cap, squad size, loans to lower leagues or something along those lines.

 

[LinekersLegs]

If teams couldn't stockpile kids, they wouldn't sign them in the first place --or they'd sign a lot fewer -- as they're not going to waste money on players who won't see the pitch. Not even the sheikhs or Abramovich is that stupid. The [Poor language removed]'s owners, maybe.

You are probably right although I'd never have thought Fulham would spend 11m on a striker that they haven't played so never underestimate some teams idiocy!

tbh think the way to address the stockpiling issue is to put hard caps either on the number of kids signed or the total transfer fees or salaries you are able to offer them.

 

[Kiwi]

If they capped the number of foreign u21s signed that would help it. IMO. Because otherwise you end up with chelsea having 30 players on loan, most of who are foreign and signed for a few million but havent even trained with the first team. make it so that foreign players that have come through the academy are all good, but that you can only sign 8 u21 foreign players or so on.

 

[toffeejack]

I'll just leave this here.

View attachment 680

god barry looks like baines in that pic.

tbf to samuel, he's stated that he's never been a fan of the loan system and pointed to an article years back when he stated that, nothing wrong with someone having an opinion and sticking to it - his wording of the whole thing is pretty tragic though.

 

[Dymak]

I don't think there is anything wrong with the loan system, and I don't think it needs to be changed in any shape, way, or form.

 

[chicoazul]

Martin Samuel is fat and has a bad beard.

That's all you need to not take him seriously. Advertising clicks = money for the bell.

 

[chicoazul]

HANG ON a minute.

I'm fat and have a beard too. FFS.

 

[toffeejack]

HANG ON a minute.

I'm fat and have a beard too. FFS.

...so we shouldn't take you seriously?