Guest dziekanowski Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 Stan collymore has been talking to a forest fan on his talk sport show. Sounds like they are in same position as city in that they can't afford the wages for top players. Collymore pointed out that premiership teams don't loan out any of there good youngster to championship teams, as they want them to go to Europe and get a big fee for the loan period. Forest fan so mention they are trying to buy Matt smith. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ciderup Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 Stan collymore has been talking to a forest fan on his talk sport show. Sounds like they are in same position as city in that they can't afford the wages for top players. Collymore pointed out that premiership teams don't loan out any of there good youngster to championship teams, as they want them to go to Europe and get a big fee for the loan period. Forest fan so mention they are trying to buy Matt smith. Aren't they still under a transfer embargo? They can't buy anyone if they are (just free signings and loans iirc) and Smith has injured his knee and is out for some time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeAman08 Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 Forest are having problems with loans as well. They were supposed to have Hamer but had issues with embargo. As far as BCFC, think we can only bring in 2 more loans for the squad as we've got 2 already Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Goughy_7 Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 Collymore pointed out that premiership teams don't loan out any of there good youngster to championship teams, as they want them to go to Europe and get a big fee for the loan period Yeah, I mean that Bamford fella is rubbish isn't he. That Caulker lad too. Not to mention Jack Butland, Tomas Kalas, Jordan Ibe, Cleverley, Omeruo, Luongo, pfft, load of rubbish them lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gillies Downs Leeds Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 Forest are having problems with loans as well. They were supposed to have Hamer but had issues with embargo. As far as BCFC, think we can only bring in 2 more loans for the squad as we've got 2 already Think you can have 8 loan players per season, but you can only have 5 in a match day squad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeAman08 Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Portland Bill Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 Think you can have 8 loan players per season, but you can only have 5 in a match day squad. http://soccersouls.com/2014/05/11/exploring-the-loan-system-in-football-the-ups-downs-and-the-facts/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MATT BCFC Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 Yeah, I mean that Bamford fella is rubbish isn't he. That Caulker lad too. Not to mention Jack Butland, Tomas Kalas, Jordan Ibe, Cleverley, Omeruo, Luongo, pfft, load of rubbish them lot. Stan made the point that the more promising youngster command a fee to get them on loan. Which could have happened with all the above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Goughy_7 Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 Stan made the point that the more promising youngster command a fee to get them on loan. Which could have happened with all the above. There's usually only a fee involved when it's players like Lukaku, De Bruyne, Moses, Hazard Jr. Players like the ones I mentioned in my first post are usually free (often in fee and wages) because their parent clubs want them to get match experience. We certainly didn't pay a loan fee for Caulker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeAman08 Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 Chalobah from Chelsea likely to go on loan to Napoli. I would imagine a fee is involved. So maybe not too wrong, dziek. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MATT BCFC Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 There's usually only a fee involved when it's players like Lukaku, De Bruyne, Moses, Hazard Jr. Players like the ones I mentioned in my first post are usually free (often in fee and wages) because their parent clubs want them to get match experience. We certainly didn't pay a loan fee for Caulker.There's usually only a fee involved when it's players like Lukaku, De Bruyne, Moses, Hazard Jr. Players like the ones I mentioned in my first post are usually free (often in fee and wages) because their parent clubs want them to get match experience. We certainly didn't pay a loan fee for Caulker. Free wages really? Ive heard the opposite and teams like Chelsea are making money out of players like Bamford who are unlikely to play much if any games for their first team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Goughy_7 Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 Free wages really? Ive heard the opposite and teams like Chelsea are making money out of players like Bamford who are unlikely to play much if any games for their first team. They will be now because he's on loan to a PL rival. They'll send players out to the Championship (and Vitesse) free of charge. Teams like Chelsea and Utd are paying players 300k a week, they don't care about a 10k a week reserve players wages being paid by a championship club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
citywest30 Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 They will be now because he's on loan to a PL rival. They'll send players out to the Championship (and Vitesse) free of charge. Teams like Chelsea and Utd are paying players 300k a week, they don't care about a 10k a week reserve players wages being paid by a championship club. That sounds to me like you're own assumption based on what you think is logical yet you wrote it as if you know. Do you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Goughy_7 Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 That sounds to me like you're own assumption based on what you think is logical yet you wrote it as if you know. Do you? Well yeah, cause it's how the system works. It's mentioned in articles regarding loan signings more often than not. Never mind the fact that half the teams in the Championship and lower wouldn't be loaning players from PL teams if they had to pay a lot for it, in most cases it would defeat the entire point of the loan. Or do you really think Chelsea are charging teams like Vitesse and Boro for all the players they loan to them? That would be counter productive at that level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
citywest30 Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 Well yeah, cause it's how the system works. It's mentioned in articles regarding loan signings more often than not. Never mind the fact that half the teams in the Championship and lower wouldn't be loaning players from PL teams if they had to pay a lot for it, in most cases it would defeat the entire point of the loan. Or do you really think Chelsea are charging teams like Vitesse and Boro for all the players they loan to them? That would be counter productive at that level. I don't doubt for one second that loan fees are nominal or non-existent for loan players to our League who are not hot prospects (bet Boro paid one for Bamford last season) but to say wages aren't paid is ridiculous in my opinion. The percentage paid may vary but I doubt there is one single loan in league 1 let alone the Championship where the parent club has said don't pay any of the wages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Goughy_7 Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 I don't doubt for one second that loan fees are nominal or non-existent for loan players to our League who are not hot prospects (bet Boro paid one for Bamford last season) but to say wages aren't paid is ridiculous in my opinion. The percentage paid may vary but I doubt there is one single loan in league 1 let alone the Championship where the parent club has said don't pay any of the wages. Hold your horses sonny Jim, I never said all are free from wages. I doubt anyone in the Champ or lower is paying full wages on a loanee but there will be a few who are paying 0 wages and fees. That'll usually be between parent and feeder clubs (like Spurs and Swindon had an agreement of that ilk). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
citywest30 Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 Hold your horses sonny Jim, I never said all are free from wages. I doubt anyone in the Champ or lower is paying full wages on a loanee but there will be a few who are paying 0 wages and fees. That'll usually be between parent and feeder clubs (like Spurs and Swindon had an agreement of that ilk). In a post early you said 'often free from fees and wages' which I disagree with. But if you're now saying that you think wages will be paid to some extent in the loans then I agree now that you've changed it. Like I said I doubt there is a single loan player in the Championship or league 1 where 0% of wages are paid (this would be completely against your often free from quote) but I'm sure there are some bargains out there with a 40-50% wages being paid. But without being in the know, all of my thoughts are assumptions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeAman08 Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 Hold your horses sonny Jim, I never said all are free from wages. I doubt anyone in the Champ or lower is paying full wages on a loanee but there will be a few who are paying 0 wages and fees. That'll usually be between parent and feeder clubs (like Spurs and Swindon had an agreement of that ilk). I imagine Vitesse are paying nothing for the youngsters with the understanding they will get game time. Wouldn't be mad if we had a similar link with a big club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chairman Mao Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 I imagine Vitesse are paying nothing for the youngsters with the understanding they will get game time. Wouldn't be mad if we had a similar link with a big club. yep, Arsenal please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRIAN WILSON Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 yep, Arsenal please. Well, we have certainly recently had the benefit of the Arsenal system (Freeman,Ayling & JET) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eric04 Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 Hold your horses sonny Jim, I never said all are free from wages. I doubt anyone in the Champ or lower is paying full wages on a loanee but there will be a few who are paying 0 wages and fees. That'll usually be between parent and feeder clubs (like Spurs and Swindon had an agreement of that ilk). Swindon paid a % of wages for their Spurs players and are doing so with the Liverpool players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
screech Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 I can't remember where I heard it but, there was an ex pro who talked about Premiership academy players being very reluctant to leave their host club to seek a permanent transfer because at ages 16-20 the vast majority will be earning their biggest salary for their entire career. Barmy if true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.