Following Chelsea's loans

[Sabrina F.]

Another failure of a loan for one of the 2023 prospect buying spree.

Going by the loan reports, this has been essentially one of the worst loan army classes in the club's (modern) history.

So, the few successes are essentially the exiled senior players and some of the highly touted Cobham academy players like Harvey Vale and Bashir Humphreys.

Either our football structure is not very good at developing prospects (setting up the farm system/picking loans) or they're not very good at evaluating prospects and talents (deemed not good enough to play by a lot of these clubs with average teams).

The entire project's success relies on talent evaluation at a young age and talent development, so either way, there are very bad signs so far.

[xceleryx]

10 hours ago, Sabrina F. said:

Another failure of a loan for one of the 2023 prospect buying spree.

In fairness to D. Fofana, Union have fallen off an absolute cliff this season compared to how they performed last campaign. He hasn't necessarily been bad when he has played by all reports, but also not spectacular either. As somewhat expected with a player of his age and experience level, his decision making at times leaves a lot to be desired. Did score in a win a couple weeks ago though after returning to the side. 

10 hours ago, Sabrina F. said:

Going by the loan reports, this has been essentially one of the worst loan army classes in the club's (modern) history.

So, the few successes are essentially the exiled senior players and some of the highly touted Cobham academy players like Harvey Vale and Bashir Humphreys.

Either our football structure is not very good at developing prospects (setting up the farm system/picking loans) or they're not very good at evaluating prospects and talents (deemed not good enough to play by a lot of these clubs with average teams).

The entire project's success relies on talent evaluation at a young age and talent development, so either way, there are very bad signs so far.

It could also be neither of these reasons.

A lot of it also hinges on finding the right club or league level for these players to join. This is always a tough element to get right because there's an array of variables that can change at any given time, from managerial changes to teams underperforming and trying to find immediate fixes and results. 

The players themselves may also struggle with making the transition to senior football in some cases. For those who do have some senior experience it could be a matter of not adjusting as smoothly into a new environment. 

End of the day loans are always more about getting these kids exposure. Even "bad loans" can still have benefits to them. In fact, sometimes they're probably more beneficial as you learn things that may not have been likely in more successful situation. 

[Dwmh]

19 minutes ago, xceleryx said:

A lot of it also hinges on finding the right club or league level for these players to join. This is always a tough element to get right because there's an array of variables that can change at any given time, from managerial changes to teams underperforming and trying to find immediate fixes and results. 

That woudl be a club management / development team failure then.

20 minutes ago, xceleryx said:

The players themselves may also struggle with making the transition to senior football in some cases. For those who do have some senior experience it could be a matter of not adjusting as smoothly into a new environment. 

That would be a scouting failure then.

20 minutes ago, xceleryx said:

End of the day loans are always more about getting these kids exposure. Even "bad loans" can still have benefits to them. In fact, sometimes they're probably more beneficial as you learn things that may not have been likely in more successful situation. 

That would be excuse making then.

It is just another set of areas we are getting wrong - like contract length, team experience mix, shirt sponsorship, pissing off the away support, manager choices and on and on.
They are not excuses, they are evidence of incompetence.

[xceleryx]

11 minutes ago, Dwmh said:

That woudl be a club management / development team failure then.

Again, not always. You can pick the "right club" at the time, and then variables kick in that end up changing that dynamic. 

12 minutes ago, Dwmh said:

That would be a scouting failure then.

Again, not always. You can't really scout if a player finds it tough to adapt to a new country, culture, style of football, etc. 

13 minutes ago, Dwmh said:

That would be excuse making then.

It is just another set of areas we are getting wrong - like contract length, team experience mix, shirt sponsorship, pissing off the away support, manager choices and on and on.
They are not excuses, they are evidence of incompetence.

Or simply recognising that not everything is black and white. 

[Sabrina F.]

The issue here is not just the fact that yes, some loans fail because of a fluke.

The loan system cannot be perfected at 100% where every loanee gets games and starts. Usually it's your academy players and some of them will find the transition from youth to big boy football difficult. You live with that.

However, our club did have genuine expertise at this point, a decade long experience and dare I say, some industry-pioneering practices (loan coaches became a thing, 2 year loan plans with a Championshiop spell first have proved incredibly efficient).

To the point that Championship clubs were more than delighted to take the true blue chip talents out of Cobham. A Chelsea Player of The Academy in an immediate value and improvement to a Championship club, as proven by Mount, James, Gallagher at Charlton/Swansea (Swansea wanted him so bad CFC recalled him, not because he wasn't playing enough but because he was playing too much at Charlton!! amazing), and so many others.

Bashir Humphreys and Harvey Vale were standouts at Cobham and they're now succeeding (Vale struggled a bit, took a setback and is now one of the better loanees - second best stats after Lukaku). Omari Hutchnison is playing some role with Ipswich who are in contention for playoff spots - Arsenal's academy is pretty good too.

Do loan clubs trust us with random Brazilians and others we bought for dozens of millions? Moreira at Lyon is a bit of a joke, Andrey was never taken seriously by Nottingham Forest despite talk of him being this budding superstar (at least according to Fabrizio Romano, some agent out there doing all he can for his client).

So, we clearly had figured out a blueprint of the ideal loan plan for the very best Cobham prospects and that's to let them go to clubs they'd immediately improve, even if they might even be too good for them (Mount had a successful loan in the Eredivisie, playing afterwards in the Championship didn't hurt his development certainly).

Even Angelo Gabriel going to 15th place Strasbourg - owned by the same people - couldn't crack more than 40% of starts. I imagine Strasbourg have clear instructions to play the BlueCo players.

Why not be efficient and use what worked? Use the edge CFC had acquired after multiple iterations of the loan army, use the accumulated knowledge and competency. Innovation in companies stems from knowledge and a highly skilled labour force, you would think Americans would emphasize this.

The early signs are not good and the issue here, if new structure was shit with the loan system, it should probably not matter.

But not only the entire project revolves around the talent acquired at high fees for U21 players and their development, the club is carrying the financial risk tied to this, the loan system (the fact they started stockpiling talent before even a network of multi model club should have been a telling sign of that. Imagine how good Carney Chukwuemeka could have gotten on loan last year) has become strategic. Its success is not a nice bonus to a well-functioning club, it is an absolute necessity.

Prospects bought at over-market value cannot afford to tank their value, they need to double/triple it for this to work. So halfway through the season  £18million Andrey Santos has to be recalled and £10million DD Fofana has to be recalled - I'm guessing future ties to Forest & Union Berlin are likely  severed - we've turned the loan system from a net positive (1 or 2 standout loans a year was enough to have fantastic repercussions financially or on the pitch) to a volatile, high-risk stock option market. 

I did not use to care if Matt Miazga was getting enough gametime on loan, but now, if 1 bad Andrey loan becomes 10 bad Andrey loans, I know we, as a club, are in trouble.

[Dwmh]

37 minutes ago, Sabrina F. said:

However, our club did have genuine expertise at this point, a decade long experience and dare I say, some industry-pioneering practices (loan coaches became a thing, 2 year loan plans with a Championshiop spell first have proved incredibly efficient).

Yup, another part of club expertise has largely been thrown out with the bath water.
Interesting to see it has been the long term Academy players (Vale, and last season Maatsen and Colwill) who have done well on loan.

38 minutes ago, Sabrina F. said:

But not only the entire project revolves around the talent acquired at high fees for U21 players and their development, the club is carrying the financial risk tied to this, the loan system...

I did not use to care if Matt Miazga was getting enough gametime on loan, but now, if 1 bad Andrey loan becomes 10 bad Andrey loans, I know we, as a club, are in trouble.

And yes, Buy, loan, promote to first team or sell is core to the new business model so its failure ought to be particulalry worrying.

There was a time when the teenage financial scribblers thought Chelsea had a wonderful business plan where they loaned out all the talend for loan fees which far exceeded their wage costs.  Fortunately no one makes that claim any more.  We know that there are high costs to be covered for us to even break even on an Academy prospect, and even higher on an imported product.

44 minutes ago, Sabrina F. said:

To the point that Championship clubs were more than delighted to take the true blue chip talents out of Cobham. A Chelsea Player of The Academy in an immediate value and improvement to a Championship club, as proven by Mount, James, Gallagher at Charlton/Swansea (Swansea wanted him so bad CFC recalled him, not because he wasn't playing enough but because he was playing too much at Charlton!! amazing), and so many others.

My brother thought he was brilliant at Charlton, and as soon as he went they dropped from mid-table to become relegated.  Swansea had just appointed Steve Cooper the WCU17 winning manager and he immediately grabbed a few of his WC team (Gallagher and a guy from Liverpool too) to join him on loan.  He has since brought Gibbs-White and now CHO to Forest too.
I think the guys at the club realised it was far more important to make 30 Championship starts than 7 or 8 PL starts.
But I can't help sending a youngster earning more than his new teams star striker or team captain can be potentially troublesome.

[Sabrina F.]

22 hours ago, Dwmh said:

But I can't help sending a youngster earning more than his new teams star striker or team captain can be potentially troublesome.

I think that's why it's important you're sending quality players who are genuine blue chip prospects who can immediately contribute - not Diego Moreira at Lyon who barely looked like League One quality in preseason and in the Wimbledon game.  

I don't think Reece James' youth wages bothered anyone at Wigan, when he was so good while they were so bad, that they made him captain before the end of their season.

Clubs remember: Alex Matos starts today vs City in the FA Cup. I bet Huddersfield trust players who shine with the Chelsea U21s after the loans of Anjorin, Colwill, Kasey Palmer, Chalobah etc.

[Ham]

Tenuous link to this topic but fix your eyes on this 👇

 

 

[Blue Moon]

6 minutes ago, Ham said:

Tenuous link to this topic but fix feast your eyes on this

Fixed it for you

[Dwmh]

5 hours ago, Sabrina F. said:

I think that's why it's important you're sending quality players who are genuine blue chip prospects who can immediately contribute - not Diego Moreira at Lyon who barely looked like League One quality in preseason and in the Wimbledon game.  

Yes  and don't give players who are not worth it contracts of £15, 25 or £35k a week

[xceleryx]

6 hours ago, Ham said:

Tenuous link to this topic but fix your eyes on this 👇

 

 

Great strike.

Very Drogba vs Everton esque. 

[Backbiter]

11 hours ago, xceleryx said:

Great strike.

Very Drogba vs Everton esque. 

Assist from Ampadu (who scored his first ever goals in  England, too).

[JaneB]

David Fofana recalled from Union Berlin loan | News | Official Site | Chelsea Football Club (chelseafc.com)

[chrisb]

1 hour ago, JaneB said:

David Fofana recalled from Union Berlin loan | News | Official Site | Chelsea Football Club (chelseafc.com)

Possibly on his way to Sevilla for another loan then. 

[Mark Kelly]

39 minutes ago, chrisb said:

Possibly on his way to Sevilla for another loan then. 

Apparently that's fallen through 

[chrisb]

8 minutes ago, Mark Kelly said:

Apparently that's fallen through 

That’s a shame. Would probably have been good for him.

[Rob B]

David Ornstein reckons we are talking to Burnley about David Fofana.  No mention of it being a loan, so assume a permanent deal!?

[Rob B]

5 minutes ago, Rob B said:

David Ornstein reckons we are talking to Burnley about David Fofana.  No mention of it being a loan, so assume a permanent deal!?

Scrap that, looks like it is a loan.  

Fabrizio has just done the “here we go” tweet

[xceleryx]

1 hour ago, Rob B said:

Scrap that, looks like it is a loan.  

Fabrizio has just done the “here we go” tweet

Being able to get some Premier League reps for the remainder of the season will serve him well. While he is still raw he does have talent, whether that's ultimately good enough to play here in the future remains to be seen, hopefully he can impress at Burnley. 

 

[Bison]

The failed loans are stacking up. 

[My Blood Is Blue]

1 hour ago, Bison said:

The failed loans are stacking up. 

Because he has played for us this season (EFL cup match against AFC Wimbledon), he now can't play for a third club, so will have to stay with us for the remainder of the season. What a wasted season for this young man.

[Dwmh]

11 minutes ago, My Blood Is Blue said:

Because he has played for us this season (EFL cup match against AFC Wimbledon), he now can't play for a third club, so will have to stay with us for the remainder of the season. What a wasted season for this young man.

Another Lesson we learnt about Lukaku 10 years ago not learnt by current management.

[Bison]

30 minutes ago, My Blood Is Blue said:

Because he has played for us this season (EFL cup match against AFC Wimbledon), he now can't play for a third club, so will have to stay with us for the remainder of the season. What a wasted season for this young man.

Just checked and Lyon are two points above the team bottom of the table. He hasn't featured much for them.

He looked bad in pre season too from what I remember. Another young signing I don't think would have made it through Cobham based on ability. 

[xceleryx]

7 hours ago, Bison said:

Just checked and Lyon are two points above the team bottom of the table. He hasn't featured much for them.

He looked bad in pre season too from what I remember. Another young signing I don't think would have made it through Cobham based on ability. 

He was 18 when we signed him and has since turned 19. Joined for peanuts because his contract was ending at Benfica, then we received £2.8m or something around that figure by sending him out on loan to Lyon. 

A low cost punt on a player that did well at a couple of youth tournaments and still has ample time to develop at the mens level. 

There's no real downside here IMO, outside of his time at Lyon not yelling the amount of playing time one would've hoped. Then again, none of us probably had Lyon fighting relegation either on our start of season bingo cards. Which certainly hasn't helped I'm sure.

Based on some what seen from some Lyon fans on other platforms he's still quite raw and not at the standard yet, but showed a good mentality and work rate during his time there. 

Guess he'll have an opportunity here for the rest of the season to train well and maybe get the odd cameo here, I'm not expecting much out of him though short or longer term but we'll see. 

[Dwmh]

1 hour ago, xceleryx said:

He was 18 when we signed him and has since turned 19. Joined for peanuts because his contract was ending at Benfica, then we received £2.8m or something around that figure by sending him out on loan to Lyon. 

A low cost punt on a player that did well at a couple of youth tournaments and still has ample time to develop at the mens level. 

I accept that this is a low cost punt.
But what evidence is there that we received £2.8m from Lyon?
And do we know how big his signing on fee and his agent's fee are?

People love to talk about this profit making buy and loan scheme but no one knows any of the numbers.
Basically some teenage scribbler guesses, and the first one to guess is repeated by everyone else.
If the teenage scribbler believes buy and loan is a profitable business then voila, most by and loan players are defined as being profitable.  That is all the science that goes into it.