PDA

View Full Version : Chelsea's Ridiculous Loan Policy


Ian Hart
27-07-2017, 09:33 PM
Chelsea defender Tomas Kalas has signed a new four-year deal with the Premier League club and rejoined Championship side Fulham on a season-long loan deal.
Kalas made 40 appearances on loan at Craven Cottage last season.
The 24-year-old, capped seven times by the Czech Republic, has featured only four times for Chelsea since signing from Sigma Olomouc in July 2010.

So, he has been with Chelsea for SEVEN years, during which time he has made all of four appearances. And based on that "success", they have now given him a further four-year contract.......before immediately loaning him out again.

Why?

richdeniro
27-07-2017, 10:24 PM
They have stumbled upon a successful business model.

Sign highly rated overseas players using their extensive scouting resources and use EPPP to get the best British based ones. Offer them first team football through their network of overseas feeder clubs and middle ranking Prem or Championship clubs who will cover the players wages and provide a loan fee but don't have the resources to identify them earlier or sign them permanently on high wages when they're so young.

The players value increases and sell at a vast profit.

hong_kong_hg
27-07-2017, 10:43 PM
"stumbled" rich?

the drexciyan
27-07-2017, 10:46 PM
One big player farm. Nothing in the rules to stop it too. Maximum squad size might do something about it but no one seems to have the stomach to take it on.

ElwissAtMemphis
27-07-2017, 11:00 PM
The entire loan system is a farce; I would ban it in an instant. But if you have to allow it, surely there must be a limit on numbers. I read that Chelsea had 30 players out on loan at one point in the past few years. That's just ridiculous.

At a push, I would allow a maximum of 3 under 23's to go out on loan to get first team experience but only to clubs in a lower division and only with the strict condition that they pay their wages in full for an agreed minimum term. Situations where full internationals are being farmed out with subsidized wages to clubs in the same division or when players play for 3 different teams in the same division (we were complicit in that with Sinclair a few years ago) is fundamentally unfair.

I hate it. The whole point of transfer windows and declaring a squad is that ambitious fringe players should be encouraged to take a gamble and move on to further their career. How can it be beneficial for them to continue to pick up their inflated salaries while going through the motions at smaller/lower league clubs.

I find it amazing that we've got to the current situation without anyone seriously questioning it. And I'd happily send Loftus-Cheek packing back to Stamford Bridge; if he's half decent he'll be gone (possibly in January) and if he's crap ... well feck it. Obviously Sakho was good too but I still hate the whole concept. We sneer at America for having franchise teams but this policy essentially condones franchise players.

meee
27-07-2017, 11:28 PM
They have stumbled upon a successful business model.

Sign highly rated overseas players using their extensive scouting resources and use EPPP to get the best British based ones. Offer them first team football through their network of overseas feeder clubs and middle ranking Prem or Championship clubs who will cover the players wages and provide a loan fee but don't have the resources to identify them earlier or sign them permanently on high wages when they're so young.

The players value increases and sell at a vast profit.

This.


OG6kXJl5VQU

Super Mabbutt
27-07-2017, 11:30 PM
One big player farm. Nothing in the rules to stop it too. Maximum squad size might do something about it but no one seems to have the stomach to take it on.

Yup.

Crazy fact - after John Terry's departure, their current 'longest serving player' is a guy called Matej Delac.

He's been at Chelsea for 8 or 9 years. A 24 year old goalkeeper who has played a total of 46 minutes in a pre season friendly for them.

Due to work permit issues, he has spent his entire Chelsea 'career' on loan at clubs across europe.

Kidofwonder
28-07-2017, 12:39 AM
Chelsea's longest serving player has never played for them

Herb
28-07-2017, 12:49 AM
We should've followed suit, instead of signing duds like Mutch

Eagle Kneevil
28-07-2017, 02:23 AM
I've never understood the motivation of players to join. Ethan Ampadu was playing games at Exeter, had a host of Prem clubs after him (many with track records of blooding youngsters in the first team), and still chose Chelsea. Weird.

hughff
28-07-2017, 02:56 AM

And I get that. If Chelsea offers you 25% more than Everton, why would you go north.

tsunamiman
28-07-2017, 10:13 AM
Think they need to bring it a rule where you name all players out on loan on your squad. Can increase the squad size to 30 if you like but the loan system is nonsense at present.

brighton_eagle
28-07-2017, 10:17 AM
"stumbled" rich?

Quite. I don't think this is accidentally, rather a deliberate and cynical approach. There should perhaps be a limit on the number of players you can have loaned out at any one time.

chelmsfordeagle
28-07-2017, 10:18 AM
One big player farm. Nothing in the rules to stop it too. Maximum squad size might do something about it but no one seems to have the stomach to take it on.

Banning all clubs from receiving any money, be it a fee or wages for a loaned player would massively reduce the problem. It would mean the only loaned players are younger ones that have a real future at a club but need some experience and are worth investing in. Every club but the very very richest would benefit from this. Which is why it is unlikely to ever happen.

AJ
28-07-2017, 10:20 AM
I don't see any issues with it, after all Chelsea are the ones taking the risks. If all these loanees fail to go in loan of get long term injuries then Chelsea are on the hook for their wages. Nothing stops any other team doing this. Palace could pick up lower league youngsters for small money and then loan them out in the hope that they either become good enough for the first team or their resale value increases beyond the cost of buying them and paying their wages. We don't as it isn't our model. Yet, we did it with Andersen, Lapado and Appiah to a much lesser extent.

adrenalin john
28-07-2017, 10:25 AM
I agree the loan system is just wrong. Loaning under 21 players out to lower league clubs is OK (subject to say a maximum of 11) loaning tens of players older than that is ridiculous. And loans between premier clubs is farcical and needs banning completely. I mean every club receives how much TV money?

I don't like muliple club ownership either. Obviously you are not allowed to own two clubs in England and you can't stop people owning clubs abroad but you could ban transfers and loans to and from clubs with the same ownership.

Yes Watford I am talking about you and your Ponzi scheme

Shipp Ahoy!
28-07-2017, 10:28 AM
I don't see any issues with it, after all Chelsea are the ones taking the risks. If all these loanees fail to go in loan of get long term injuries then Chelsea are on the hook for their wages. Nothing stops any other team doing this. Palace could pick up lower league youngsters for small money and then loan them out in the hope that they either become good enough for the first team or their resale value increases beyond the cost of buying them and paying their wages. We don't as it isn't our model. Yet, we did it with Andersen, Lapado and Appiah to a much lesser extent.

Serious post? :eek:

Chelsea are not taking risks, they are making absolute millions from the system its why they do it. If they weren't they wouldn't be.

Long term injuries are usually picked up by insurers and if the player is on loan then the loaning club usually is still paying (Remy :sob:)

The problem is Palace CAN'T pick up the cream of the young talent in the lower divisions because Chelsea are the ones doing it and we don't stand a chance - see Michael Hector.

We get what we can...

Chelsea are destroying any talented youngsters in this country. See our under 21's etc, who are doing bloody well at competitions now but will get hardly any decent level action in the near future and certainly not consistently at one club. I would happily wager the majority won't get close to the European football in the future despite winning youth world cups etc.

richdeniro
28-07-2017, 10:36 AM
I don't see any issues with it, after all Chelsea are the ones taking the risks. If all these loanees fail to go in loan of get long term injuries then Chelsea are on the hook for their wages. Nothing stops any other team doing this. Palace could pick up lower league youngsters for small money and then loan them out in the hope that they either become good enough for the first team or their resale value increases beyond the cost of buying them and paying their wages. We don't as it isn't our model. Yet, we did it with Andersen, Lapado and Appiah to a much lesser extent.

What about the integrity of the competition?

It used to be players would drop down a division or two in order to get first team football but now we have gotten to the point where full internationals in the prime of their careers are being loaned out to rival clubs in the same division. This means that the player will not play against his parent club for two games, if 5-6+ clubs all have a Chelsea player on their books that means Chelsea get easier games against those clubs.

It isn't just Chelsea either - Man City will get two easier games than the rest of the division next season when they play West Ham for instance.

eagle mart
28-07-2017, 10:42 AM
Chelsea's longest serving player has never played for them

Testimonial should be fun.

firesign
30-07-2017, 07:18 AM
And here's another one - 23 yr old Croydon-born goalie Jamal Blackman, who signed a senior contract with Chelsea in 2012 has just joined his fourth loan club, Sheffield Utd. He has also recently extended his contract with Chelsea till 2021(!!!) despite never having made a first-team appearance. It's mental.

Adlerhorst
30-07-2017, 08:23 AM
In other sports with 25 man rosters they have ways of dealing with rich teams hogging all the talent. a player has a set period of time to make a 25 man roster. If he doestn't make it, or is taken off the 25 man roster then the player and his existing contract has to be made available for other clubs. Other clubs who want him on his existing contract make a claim him and the Chelsea team have to try and sell him. Where multiple players claim a player then usually a transfer fee is agreed but it is normally pennies on the pound. If the Chelsea club fail to agree terms with any of the clubs for the transfer he is simply given to the one of the clubs for free. If no one claims the player (because his contract is onerous or he is rubbish), he is released and his contract has to still be paid. If another club then signs him, whatever they choose to pay him is deducted against they payout the other club makes against the contract. So usually the clubs offer a player minimum wage and get a valuable piece for essentially bugger all.

Anyway, stops one team keeping a ton of talent as Chelsea are doing here. And the players still get paid etc.

Nth Kent Eagle
30-07-2017, 08:29 AM
Palace have had long enough in the PL now to have a decent scouting network. If we haven't then Mr Parish and Mr Alexander need to address that. Nothing to stop us doing something similar but on a much reduced scale.

elgin eagle
30-07-2017, 09:04 AM
Shame the footballing authorities have no balls or brains really. They could make our national sport much better if they had some.

Eaglesmad123
30-07-2017, 09:20 AM
Serious post? :eek:

Chelsea are not taking risks, they are making absolute millions from the system its why they do it. If they weren't they wouldn't be.

Long term injuries are usually picked up by insurers and if the player is on loan then the loaning club usually is still paying (Remy :sob:)

The problem is Palace CAN'T pick up the cream of the young talent in the lower divisions because Chelsea are the ones doing it and we don't stand a chance - see Michael Hector.

We get what we can...

Chelsea are destroying any talented youngsters in this country. See our under 21's etc, who are doing bloody well at competitions now but will get hardly any decent level action in the near future and certainly not consistently at one club. I would happily wager the majority won't get close to the European football in the future despite winning youth world cups etc.

Have you seen our academy set up. Totally neglected by the board. Surely with all the money we have earnt in the past few years money could be spent on training and academy facilities.

Tim
30-07-2017, 09:21 AM
Palace have had long enough in the PL now to have a decent scouting network. If we haven't then Mr Parish and Mr Alexander need to address that. Nothing to stop us doing something similar but on a much reduced scale.

You really have to question our stouting network if we have one? We seem to be missing players right under our noses. How have so many talented players from Croydon & South London ended up at Chelsea? Loftus Cheek is Leon Corts brother for ****s sake!

Eaglesmad123
30-07-2017, 09:26 AM
Palaces transfer policy is to leave it right to the end of the window and buy over priced journeymen.

JAS78
30-07-2017, 09:27 AM
Palace have had long enough in the PL now to have a decent scouting network. If we haven't then Mr Parish and Mr Alexander need to address that. Nothing to stop us doing something similar but on a much reduced scale.

We won't be offering 4 year, 40k aweek contracts to every young hopeful and there lies the problem

JAS78
30-07-2017, 09:30 AM
Have you seen our academy set up. Totally neglected by the board. Surely with all the money we have earnt in the past few years money could be spent on training and academy facilities.

There are plenty of PL clubs that have been in longer than us, if it's that easy where is their young talent?

Tim
30-07-2017, 09:59 AM
There are plenty of PL clubs that have been in longer than us, if it's that easy where is their young talent?

Parish loves to play on the whole South London thing & rightly so. He's working really hard to connect the club with the South London boroughs but he is clearly not doing enough to scout & recruit young, talented players right on our doorstep. If he's not serious about the academy then why bother with it at all?

the digger
30-07-2017, 10:01 AM
Have you seen our academy set up. Totally neglected by the board. Surely with all the money we have earnt in the past few years money could be spent on training and academy facilities.

Mildly hog-tied by previous owners, administrations and new regulations about the structure and classification of academies. But don't let the facts stand between you and your agenda.

Ralph
30-07-2017, 10:01 AM
Parish loves to play on the whole South London thing & rightly so. He's working really hard to connect the club with the South London boroughs but he is clearly not doing enough to scout & recruit young, talented players right on our doorstep. If he's not serious about the academy then why bother with it at all?


Just out of interest, which young players from the South London area have come through elsewhere that we've missed out on?

Tim
30-07-2017, 10:06 AM
Loftus Cheek, Tammy Abraham. Ian Wrights kids ended up at Man City. Puncheon started out at Wimbledon.

JAS78
30-07-2017, 10:17 AM
Mildly hog-tied by previous owners, administrations and new regulations about the structure and classification of academies. But don't let the facts stand between you and your agenda.

The funny thing is that particular poster was one of the most vocal defending Bostock and his dad dumping us for Tottenham, and now starts criticising our academy and lack of talent coming through :clown:

firesign
30-07-2017, 10:24 AM
Just out of interest, which young players from the South London area have come through elsewhere that we've missed out on?

https://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2016/jan/08/croydon-south-london-football-hot-bed-english-talent-crystal-palace

Article from last year includes this interesting(ish) factoid

Currently 14% of English footballers in the Premier League are from that 10 mile golden square of south London. The borough of Croydon alone home to 0.6% of the population has produced 5% of all active English Premier League players, among them Wilfried Zaha, Victor Moses and Lewis Grabban from Palace and more disparately Jamal Blackman of Chelsea and Jason Puncheon and Kieran Gibbs via the original Wimbledon.

Ralph
30-07-2017, 01:28 PM
Loftus Cheek, Tammy Abraham. Ian Wrights kids ended up at Man City. Puncheon started out at Wimbledon.


Ian Wrights kids and Puncheon starting out at Wimbledon you can hardly fault Parish for.

I agree the lack of opportunities given to youngsters up until now has been poor and the facilities reportedly crap too.

Nonetheless the noises coming out the club in the thinking behind their appointment of De Boer seems a step in the right direction.

Shipp Ahoy!
30-07-2017, 01:32 PM
Have you seen our academy set up. Totally neglected by the board. Surely with all the money we have earnt in the past few years money could be spent on training and academy facilities.

Again I refer you to Hector.

These players would still go to Chelsea. Even if we were cat 1 they would just offer them 20-30k more and never play them.

I can't say I particularly blame Steve for not investing vast monies into a system that is doomed to fail when clubs like that hoover up every scrap of talent going.

I think a lot of people still remember the whole Bostock outcome. As Jordan said at the time, there is little incentive when players can be stolen away for nothing. Now it's a case of players not even reaching us before it happens. EPPP is to blame. Chelsea were the big winners on that.

Ralph
30-07-2017, 01:46 PM
Again I refer you to Hector.

These players would still go to Chelsea. Even if we were cat 1 they would just offer them 20-30k more and never play them.

I can't say I particularly blame Steve for not investing vast monies into a system that is doomed to fail when clubs like that hoover up every scrap of talent going.

I think a lot of people still remember the whole Bostock outcome. As Jordan said at the time, there is little incentive when players can be stolen away for nothing. Now it's a case of players not even reaching us before it happens. EPPP is to blame. Chelsea were the big winners on that.


Good post. I'm not sure the modern template for a strong youth set up of a Premier League Club is (or can be) based around a good academy nowadays.

It's more about scouting academies, poaching the talent at the right time and having players you can nurture and make a profit on.

Reidewald being a key example or hopefully Lokilo too.

GreatGonzo
30-07-2017, 02:02 PM
In other sports with 25 man rosters they have ways of dealing with rich teams hogging all the talent. a player has a set period of time to make a 25 man roster. If he doestn't make it, or is taken off the 25 man roster then the player and his existing contract has to be made available for other clubs. Other clubs who want him on his existing contract make a claim him and the Chelsea team have to try and sell him. Where multiple players claim a player then usually a transfer fee is agreed but it is normally pennies on the pound. If the Chelsea club fail to agree terms with any of the clubs for the transfer he is simply given to the one of the clubs for free. If no one claims the player (because his contract is onerous or he is rubbish), he is released and his contract has to still be paid. If another club then signs him, whatever they choose to pay him is deducted against they payout the other club makes against the contract. So usually the clubs offer a player minimum wage and get a valuable piece for essentially bugger all.

Anyway, stops one team keeping a ton of talent as Chelsea are doing here. And the players still get paid etc.

Given U21 player don't count to the 25 if would make sense to include any player over 21 and they have either 2 or 3 years to make a 25 man squad.

ebyeeckeagle
30-07-2017, 02:18 PM
Loftus Cheek, Tammy Abraham. Ian Wrights kids ended up at Man City. Puncheon started out at Wimbledon.

Not sure that Parish could be blamed for us not scouting Punch or the Wright offspring (or adopted in one case).

Tim
30-07-2017, 02:28 PM
Not sure that Parish could be blamed for us not scouting Punch or the Wright offspring (or adopted in one case).

Fair enough but I was trying to make the point that we don't seem to be learning from it..

Adlerhorst
30-07-2017, 02:34 PM
Given U21 player don't count to the 25 if would make sense to include any player over 21 and they have either 2 or 3 years to make a 25 man squad.

I would go from 19 or 20 and have three option years. So you get three goes at making the squad. So players aged 23 would be claimable

Sir.S.C Remembered
30-07-2017, 02:45 PM
You can't blame Chelsea really. Their model works for them financially.

However, from a footballing point of view it is wasteful and anti competitive. Also, from an English or other youth prospect point of view it is terrible. For those reasons I think intervention is needed to stop is happening. The point of named squads for competitions like the CL or Prem is to stop stock piling.

There are so many examples of Chelsea not utilising players who would be good enough for their bench and signing slightly older average players ahead of them. De Bruyne, Lukaku, Ake... I'd introduce a rule that if a player was not in your named squad and it was not due to a significant injury (confirmed by an independent party) and he was over the age required to be registered, then they should be released or at least have to be made available for transfer for a fee of 5m or something like that. Hector is one of many who are of a certain age and have been loaned out many times and will never make their first team properly but would improve the squad and make the bench for other Prem sides. Same goes for Kalas and Christensen.

The other alternatives would be to downgrade/shutdown their status as an academy or have some other punishments in place.

For the record Man U and Man City have been awful on this front recently too. Others as well. Hell even Palace with the likes of Williams etc. But this is another debate for another time.

JAS78
30-07-2017, 03:05 PM
Unfortunately I don't think any young player is going to agree to being released from a nice comfy 40k aweek contract so he can sit on the bench at West Brom or wherever

I think a ceiling on youth wages needs to come in and would make it a level playing field in the PL atleast, that would ensure most young players would go where they can play rather than become millionaires quicker

That is probably unenforceable though I'd imagine.

JAS78
30-07-2017, 03:09 PM
Ray Parlour said he earnt 38 quid a week at Arsenal youth, on his full debut at 18 he was up to 300 aweek, that was only the 90s and there was still silly money coming into the PL

Where is the motivation for young players now..

jimmy the gent
30-07-2017, 03:21 PM
You really have to question our stouting network if we have one? We seem to be missing players right under our noses. How have so many talented players from Croydon & South London ended up at Chelsea? Loftus Cheek is Leon Corts brother for ****s sake!

Because Chelsea fish in the same waters, and are the more attractive club for youngsters to join. Better facilities, (possibly) better youth coaches, more impressive for their egos to be a Chelsea player etc.

Adlerhorst
30-07-2017, 04:48 PM
Whilst they do, I susupect it would be easier to attract young talent if he had quality training facilities, or even less shit training facilities.

Sir.S.C Remembered
30-07-2017, 04:55 PM
Whilst they do, I susupect it would be easier to attract young talent if he had quality training facilities, or even less shit training facilities.

They need proof of opportunity. Something we have not done in 4-5 years

Tim
30-07-2017, 05:03 PM
Because Chelsea fish in the same waters, and are the more attractive club for youngsters to join. Better facilities, (possibly) better youth coaches, more impressive for their egos to be a Chelsea player etc.

But if a depressing statement. Might as well give up & just loan players from Chelsea then?

Lombardo's hair
30-07-2017, 05:08 PM
I don't see any issues with it, after all Chelsea are the ones taking the risks. If all these loanees fail to go in loan of get long term injuries then Chelsea are on the hook for their wages. Nothing stops any other team doing this. Palace could pick up lower league youngsters for small money and then loan them out in the hope that they either become good enough for the first team or their resale value increases beyond the cost of buying them and paying their wages. We don't as it isn't our model. Yet, we did it with Andersen, Lapado and Appiah to a much lesser extent.

Isn't it also what we are likely to do with Johnny Williams as I can't see any logical reason for giving him a new contract otherwise

bodger
30-07-2017, 06:34 PM
Whilst they do, I susupect it would be easier to attract young talent if he had quality training facilities, or even less shit training facilities.

Do you think they would go to Chelsea if the pay was reversed and they paid the least? We are well behind the London premier league clubs but FDB by giving the young players a chance can give us a better chance of attracting more tallent.

hughff
30-07-2017, 09:52 PM
Shame the footballing authorities have no balls or brains really. They could make our national sport much better if they had some.
It's not the national authorities. If the FA make a rule and FIFA don't, it will cripple English clubs because foreign clubs will continue to exploit the status quo.

hughff
30-07-2017, 10:03 PM
I think a ceiling on youth wages needs to come in and would make it a level playing field in the PL at least, that would ensure most young players would go where they can play rather than become millionaires quicker

That is probably unenforceable though I'd imagine.
Worse than that, it's unjust. In American football, the NFL has rookie contracts like this. Sadly, what that means is that good young players are horribly underpaid (http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2721012-how-the-nfl-is-cheating-rookies-out-of-millions-of-dollars). Half of all NFL production is by players on (relatively) low paying rookie contracts (http://www.footballperspective.com/players-on-rookie-contracts-contribute-half-of-all-nfl-value/). The NFL may be a young player's game but increasingly so is proper football.

Therefore, IMO, the solution is to limit loans. If Chelsea could only make half a dozen or a dozen per season, they wouldn't be as "incentivised" to hoover up young talent. Of course the flip side is that they would be able to pay the top talent even more, arguably increasing the likelihood that they would be able to sign anyone. TBH, I think that particular horse bolted long ago.

richdeniro
30-07-2017, 10:25 PM
Have you seen our academy set up. Totally neglected by the board. Surely with all the money we have earnt in the past few years money could be spent on training and academy facilities.

I agree but what's the point of putting money into a category 2 academy when Chelsea, City and Spurs can come in and poach the best young players you have for a couple of hundred thousand in compensation.

You need to build a category 1 academy which is prohibitive in South London without mega millions. I'm sure Parish and the board are trying but it isn't easy to find land in this part of the country.

As others have also said the big clubs pay their 16-18 year olds anywhere between 20-40k a week. We can't compete with that.

OneSize
31-07-2017, 12:01 AM
The point should be that the club would offer something different. Southampton don't pay megs bucks...in fact they have a set youth contract for all players but they still attract great players. Chelsea and the like we're still doing this thing when we had a load of youngsters come through.

Parish neglecting the academy has got to be the worst thing he has done while in charge...especially when we are located in the best area in the whole country for young talent.

elgin eagle
31-07-2017, 07:25 AM
It's not the national authorities. If the FA make a rule and FIFA don't, it will cripple English clubs because foreign clubs will continue to exploit the status quo.

You are right, it is the footballing authorities who are to blame. Luckily I said footballing authorities as well without specifying our weak willed ones. If they all got together and made some decisions it might prevent such abuses of the system.

cpfc4evandeva
31-07-2017, 07:39 AM
You really have to question our stouting network if we have one? We seem to be missing players right under our noses. How have so many talented players from Croydon & South London ended up at Chelsea? Loftus Cheek is Leon Corts brother for ****s sake!

I'm certainly one for criticising our lack of imagination in the transfer market, and either shit or complete lack of a scouting network... but, in answer to your question:

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

There's a fair chance that we were interested in some of these lads but when you're 16 years old and Chelsea offer you 10k p/w for 2 years, you're not going to turn it down.

But the training and academy facilities have been neglected and when we're raking in the TV millions, there's really not a valid excuse for this. It's all a bit of a mess.

Skintagain
31-07-2017, 07:50 AM
In other sports with 25 man rosters they have ways of dealing with rich teams hogging all the talent. a player has a set period of time to make a 25 man roster. If he doestn't make it, or is taken off the 25 man roster then the player and his existing contract has to be made available for other clubs. Other clubs who want him on his existing contract make a claim him and the Chelsea team have to try and sell him. Where multiple players claim a player then usually a transfer fee is agreed but it is normally pennies on the pound. If the Chelsea club fail to agree terms with any of the clubs for the transfer he is simply given to the one of the clubs for free. If no one claims the player (because his contract is onerous or he is rubbish), he is released and his contract has to still be paid. If another club then signs him, whatever they choose to pay him is deducted against they payout the other club makes against the contract. So usually the clubs offer a player minimum wage and get a valuable piece for essentially bugger all.

Anyway, stops one team keeping a ton of talent as Chelsea are doing here. And the players still get paid etc.

Sounds like a good scheme but would the other prem clubs vote for it.

Skintagain
31-07-2017, 07:51 AM
Palaces transfer policy is to leave it right to the end of the window and buy over priced journeymen.

Too true.

swissroll
31-07-2017, 08:01 AM
There should be a system in place that allows a certain number of players (age 21+)to be 'protected' and anyone not on that list is avail on a free transfer if the buying club can agree terms.

Adlerhorst
31-07-2017, 08:30 AM
Sounds like a good scheme but would the other prem clubs vote for it.

No. It's probably contrary to employment law here in any event as in that system the players don't have a choice in who they work for. i.e. If a claim is made or a trade/transfer made they have to go. They cannot say no.

cpfc4evandeva
31-07-2017, 10:23 AM
There should be a system in place that allows a certain number of players (age 21+)to be 'protected' and anyone not on that list is avail on a free transfer if the buying club can agree terms.

I think that's part of the issue. These guys who are on loan all the time probably don't give a ****. They're getting paid silly sums a week that Championship clubs can't afford.

Isn't Bamford on something mental like 40k p/w?!

Sir.S.C Remembered
31-07-2017, 04:15 PM
There should be a system in place that allows a certain number of players (age 21+)to be 'protected' and anyone not on that list is avail on a free transfer if the buying club can agree terms.

Very much in line with what I am proposing in my post. Agree completely. Although I'd make the 21+ players who are protected VERY low on number. If big clubs want a player down the line when he is ready for their first team/bench then they are very capable of paying the sums to get them back to their club. If they aren't willing to, then they don't actually rate them highly enough to be in their 16/17. So competitive football would dictate they should be elsewhere.