Premier League wants Championship to house loan players in n

[KiwiScot 1,684]

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2022/jul/26/premier-league-wants-championship-to-house-loan-players-in-new-finance-deal

Check this out. Premier League want to turn us all into their feeder clubs.

[DraytonBoy 249]

Could be the end of 'parachute payments'.

[cornish sam 1,039]

Why don't they just introduce a quota if u23 players at all levels and stop the big teams stockpiling young talent that are never going to play for them? (Which I recognise we are doing to a lesser extent these days)

[Monty13 2,736]

Sounds like potentially positive changes, I don’t think an u23 quota in the Championship is a terrible idea, devil will be in the detail no doubt.

[BroadstairsR 2,273]

I don't like the sound of it. Reeks of the arrangement surrounding the 'play or pay' Gilmour deal that some have mentioned may have been the case last saeson.

So some beleaguered Chumps manager fighting for his job is unable to select his preferred eleven because some over-hyped, overpaid young future superstar of dubious value to him has to be utilised week in week out, or whatever.  

PL using their financial clout again to lord it over the rest?

We'll need to see the detail beyond the headlines, there might be something acceptable there, but I doubt it.

Also, the much derided parachute payments are there for a reason. City certainly have and, hopefully, will do in the future, benefited enormously from them. Yet we are still a bit cash strapped, or so we are told. You need to get promoted in the first place to be relegated.

Our club was pilloried in certain quarters for not employing a host of very highly paid superstars in order to justify its presence at the top level. Now some of these same critics want to remove the safety net for the massive wages bill that would have ensued should we have failed to survive in any case.  

Parachute payments. Luverly stuff. Bring 'em on.

Besides, the binners hate them to a man. That's enough for me to want their continuation forever and forever.

I might think differently if we're stuck in the Chumps for a few years, but, then, I'm a footie supporter, and we're allowed to be totally biased after all.

Edited July 27, 2022 by BroadstairsR

[Worthy Nigelton 1,299]

This is a terrible idea and just further entrenches the power the big clubs have. Can't we just bring in a wage cap for players and be done with it? That's the easiest way of making the playing field more fair.

[YellowSubmarine 43]

So the champ clubs loan the players, pay their loan fees and wages, develop them with plenty of game time and then send them back as a player that either starts for their PL team or gets sold on for a significant amount.

And if you’re a Champ team that doesn’t go up you gain sweet FA from that. 

[Capt. Pants 5,008]

Would like to see a bit more detail first. The obligation to play has another side to it in that who allocates the young players to the EFL clubs? You wouldn't want to be obliged to play someone if you didn't want them in the first place and who has first dibs on the youngsters from the top 6?

It does focus on young British players which is a positive in my mind.

Again, the possible removal of parachute payments would need a lot more detail.

[horsefly 5,301]

This is yet another example of the malign influence that the PL has had on football in this country. Football teams play an important role in communities across the nation, often forming the main focus of social identity within them. Only 20 of those teams get to play in the PL. This proposal effectively promotes the  idea that all those clubs outside of the PL serve no real purpose other than to supply potential talent for the PL. Turning non-PL clubs into training centres for transient young players with no commitment to those clubs, would strip them of an important source of their identity.

The sooner the top six F-off to some boring European super league the better, as far as I am concerned. I would much rather see a financially poorer but fairer top division in this country that is genuinely competitive. Frankly I'm sick of the top division of football being used by dubious billionaires to sportswash their corrupt activities, turning the game into a financial sewer to the disadvantage of other teams across the land. 

[ZLF 335]

If the prem teams didnt charge extortionate loan fees and the wage burden adding quality youngster isnt a bad thing - if removing those burdens gives youngsters a competitive edge its not a bad thing.

However too precious for league one and twos physicality,  just what those players need,  and obliged to play concerns - would there be an appearance expectation - thats unacceptable.

I am not opposed to an u23 quota - as long as it includes our own developed players and not a forced EPL signee.  

EPL owners thinking of their own needs again.  

  

[BurwellCanary 255]

1 hour ago, YellowSubmarine said:

So the champ clubs loan the players, pay their loan fees and wages, develop them with plenty of game time and then send them back as a player that either starts for their PL team or gets sold on for a significant amount.

And if you’re a Champ team that doesn’t go up you gain sweet FA from that. 

Or indeed a Champ team that goes up with loan players who then get recalled to the parent club leaving us in the lurch ( Skipp etc )

Dangerous scenario

 

[Christoph Stiepermann 1,261]

Absolute rubbish. Why should be be obliged to develop richer clubs young talent? The scrapping of parachute payments is nonsese as well and would only complete gate off the current PL clubs and stop any new club from ever being able to compete. If you go up and want to spend any money to be even remotely competitive with the other clubs without parachute payments in the high likelihood that the promoted club is relegated all that money spend would have to be subsadised by the owners which would make any club not owned by a billionaire sugar daddy completely unable to ever have a fair shake at staying up. If parachute payments were removed and we got promoted again we literally wouldn't be able to spend more than a few million at most.

I don't see how parachute payments are unfair on other clubs in this league either, it's something earned through sporting success. None of the likes of QPR, Brighton, Bournemouth and Southampton etc were shedding a tear for us when they could use their owners vast wealth earned outside of football to gain a financial advantage over us so why is it suddenly unfair that we can't use parachute payments to have even a remote chance when we get promoted without risking financial ruin? All these clubs moaning about parachute payments are just annoyed that because of FFP they can't buy their way out of the league anymore. 

Parachute payments clubs are generally more successful in this league now because they had a squad good enough to be promoted, then added to it using PL tv money, the parachute payments are just a way to stop those clubs going into financial meltdown if they get relegated with that more expensive squad, but if the alternative is removing them it stops clubs from being able to improve their teams upon promotion and just makes the PL a closed shop for those already there because you just can't compete. It would also make relegation for any established club even more of a disaster which is just going to result in more teams in the bottom half of the PL becoming even more 'pragmatic' and most bottom half PL games are already dull enough to watch as it is 

[YellowSubmarine 43]

2 hours ago, BurwellCanary said:

Or indeed a Champ team that goes up with loan players who then get recalled to the parent club leaving us in the lurch ( Skipp etc )

Dangerous scenario

 

Yep and leaves you with a 20m pound gap in midfield that’s impossible to fill…

[Capt. Pants 5,008]

24 minutes ago, YellowSubmarine said:

Yep and leaves you with a 20m pound gap in midfield that’s impossible to fill…

To be fair we chose to spend a lot more than £20m on the players we brought in, but still failed to replace Skipp.

[keelansgrandad 6,680]

Any idea from the EPL clubs is not to help anyone but themselves.

[CrankyCanary 32]

14 hours ago, KiwiScot said:

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2022/jul/26/premier-league-wants-championship-to-house-loan-players-in-new-finance-deal

Check this out. Premier League want to turn us all into their feeder clubs.

It's inevitable that we end up with a system similar to Rugby Unions Pro 14 (Now United Rugby Championship) it's not a question of if but when. And a lot will rely on whether the rest of Football is willing to put their foot down and say no.

Edited July 27, 2022 by CrankyCanary

[Attleborough_Canary 96]

Just gives PL clubs more incentive to flip players. Buy cheap, a full season in the Championship developing them, value increases if they do even reasonably well then sell. Would be a terrible introduction for the game.

[Nuff Said 5,960]

2 hours ago, keelansgrandad said:

Any idea from the EPL clubs is not to help anyone but themselves.

Nuff said KG!

[Ulfotto 798]

Can’t help but think it would be better to stop Premier League clubs hoovering all the talent in the first place. Rather than forcing other teams to develop talent for them.

Too many example of players who are now stuck in the loan system but who were bought before 16 years old by premier league teams. Stop that happening. I’m still yet to be convinced that it helps to leave first team football to move to a premier league academy benefits anyone but the premier league team.

Take wee Billy Gilmour left Rangers at 15 for 2-3 years at Chelsea and a year on loan at Norwich. If he would have stayed at Rangers he would be at over 100 first team appearances plus European competition.

[wcorkcanary 4,784]

1 hour ago, Ulfotto said:

Take wee Billy Gilmour left Rangers at 15 for 2-3 years at Chelsea and a year on loan at Norwich. If he would have stayed at Rangers he would be at over 100 first team appearances plus European competition.

That's very true.But I bet Chelsea pay him more than Rangers could. Not saying it's right or fair, just is.

[Mr Angry 2,016]

I have a couple of alternative suggestions-

1. Have the U23 quota, but apply it to the teams in the EPL instead.

2. Restrict the number of players that each team in the EPL can buy.

[TeemuVanBasten 3,328]

1 hour ago, Ulfotto said:

Can’t help but think it would be better to stop Premier League clubs hoovering all the talent in the first place. Rather than forcing other teams to develop talent for them.

Too many example of players who are now stuck in the loan system but who were bought before 16 years old by premier league teams. Stop that happening. I’m still yet to be convinced that it helps to leave first team football to move to a premier league academy benefits anyone but the premier league team.

Take wee Billy Gilmour left Rangers at 15 for 2-3 years at Chelsea and a year on loan at Norwich. If he would have stayed at Rangers he would be at over 100 first team appearances plus European competition.

Possibly, or they'd have worked out that he's nothing special and Kamara and Jack would have kept him out of the side. 

I honestly don't see Gilmour having a great career.

[Yellow Wal 315]

How about the Premiership sides develop their own players in Reserve teams and leave the rest to look after their own players. 

If there were no loans the top sides would not be able to have as many players on their books and, as a consequence, many lower clubs would have access, that they do not have at the moment, to some of the better, younger players.

If implemented the new proposals would banish some of the previously greatest teams in the game to life in the lower divisions for ever. League One teams such as Bolton, Derby, Portsmouth, Sheffield Wednesday and, dare I mention, Ipswich would have little hope of returning to the top flight where they have spent so much of their history. Similarly few Championship clubs would manage to get sustainable Premiership membership, instead all of those clubs would exist only to benefit the most wealthy clubs.

The only way any club would be able to compete, and it is almost this way now, would be with extremely large influxes of (some very dubious) money.

The game has already been ruined by money, this would make sure, and confirm, that money means more than football.