As well as pumping obscene amounts of money into the game, you could also argue that the likes of Chelski, with their 60 odd loanees are not only wrecking young lads careers, they are also stifling development of our national talent pool (players always play better in settled, stable environments) which contributes to the **** England performance. Bamford is a good example. The next big thing they said...
I think banning loans is a bit extreme but there should be a limit of say 5 and there should maybe also be a limit on how many players can be in an academy set up, or kids brought in from outside a catchment area, or something like that.
If it was enforceable. Could imagine the likes of Chelsea getting round it by agreeing to "sell" teams a year of their players' contract for a pathetically small fee or something. Agree on the catchment area rule. Too many players are laid waste by signing up to big teams at a young age, on what appears healthy wages at the time, only to never play on a PL pitch and drop down the leagues.
Doing well babes. You? Sanches only cost us £4m in loan fees by the way. Voldermoot ready for next week?
Yes and no. No in the sense we will have to replace Sanches and Abraham next season, on top of strengthening other areas. Saying that, if they are succesful, we will most likely stay up thus generating another £100m+ for the club and another season in the PL. As for Sanches, unless it's a fluke signing, like Michu and Gylfi, it's the only way a club like ours will get that sort of player.
