What if we cut out loan deals for a season?

[PauloPerth]

On 22/06/2019 at 15:04, Jeremiah Cole said:

 

You preferred the old system where clubs could sign players anytime they liked?

 

There might be some merit in it.

At present, there is a big perception of 'must sign players, it's the transfer window' which probably comes as much from the media and supporters desperate for news, especially in this time of social media and folks desperate need for things going on. Would being able to sign a player when a club felt he was required really be such a bad thing? Should a club not happy with a player, and vice versa, have to wait 4 months before he can move on?

It might also put a bit more money back into smaller clubs in terms of transfer fees.. Instead of clubs having to wait until a target was out of contract in January or June, buyers might offer cash to beat the competition and get in sooner, taking PCA's out of the equation.

I'm not desperately for it by the way, just wondering out loud if it would be such a negative thing.  Has the introduction of the transfer window system provided any significant benefits?

 

[PauloPerth]

In terms of loans, the subject of the thread(!), agree with those that say not between clubs in same league, but overall it's a positive outwith same divisions.  E.g. developing a younger player a division or two lower, who makes a positive contribution to that team's performances. Win win.

[Monkey socks]

Lots of healthy debate on this topic. I started the thread because I dislike the loan system. The theory that you are/ maybe getting a better player in than you have on your books currently I think can be counter productive. In reality the only people the loanee wants to impress is his current bosses who will pay a substantial part if not all of their wages. It will also scunner the existing fringe staff who will see their first team chances diminish with each loan signing. is getting loan time at a lower division club who could be getting skelped each week, really helping development?

 

[TheScarf]

If loans were banned, Falkirk would end up in the EOS league.

[blueone]

Think last season was the first in a while that we had zero loans in. Probably going to be the same this season barring emergencies.

The main problem we had at our level is we had guys signed but not getting a game as the loanee was expected to play.

We have had, in the past, players training with their own club all week and turning up on match day to go straight into the team.

 

[coprolite]

In many ways, the current laissez faire economy in player development is probably pretty good for developing players compared to a more equal restricted situation. 

There are clear economies of scale in training youngsters. 1 coach can train 5 or 15 kids without losing much. Top clubs can afford all the Ivan drago style training facilities, while our youngsters use the beach if Seaton Park is frosty. 

A smaller team can then blood 1-2 youngsters on loan per season, getting more better trained players who would otherwise be on mega club ltd's training pitch. 

If all squads were restricted, more late developers would end up being trained by part time coaches in parks and proportionally more of the expensively trained players would be duds. This would result in reduced investment in training. This could be arguably (but not likely due to economies of scale) offset by diddies increasing their development budgets. 

While small clubs could benefit from having more talent, the overall standard would reduce. Competition might be better but elite level would be lower. 

Kudos to MT for the adverb/adjective pedantry, that was class.