Players out on Loan

[whitestomper45]

Eh, not sure some of you understand why young players are sent out on loan.... the club rather than wanting to sell them, want them to get first team experience elsewhere to help their development... it's not a "we think your crap so f off somewhere else, till we work a deal to get rid of you"

Harry Kane was loaned to Orient, Millwall, Norwich and Leicester.................................

[Sniffer999]

Not in the slightest. The loanees may be out there because they weren't getting game time, the only part of this sad tale we might agree on.

"They did right going out on loan"? Not their choice, and I suspect every one of them would prefer to have played for the 1st team (as the likes of Cresswell, Gelhardt, Hjelde and other all did, and accounted very well for themselves!).

As for being "our players", yes, they are contracted to LUFC, but I doubt we would want to see them dictated to as to returning from loan simply to warm subs bench while dross brought in by our sadly departed DoF continue to disgrace the shirt.

So no, not agreeing with you, generally or otherwise.

Going out on loan is a choice. The players don't have to go. But most players, especially young players want first team football experience.
I think it's widely accepted that playing first team football is a good choice rather than bench warming at best. That's why they do right.
With respect I find your points illogical. Maybe it's me....

[LeedsFTW]

At some point, youngsters have to be given an opportunity to show they are good enough to play for the parent club, whilst showing enough to suggest they are or potentially are an upgrade on the current 1st team player.

Going out on loan vs being at the club waiting for that 1st team opportunity to happen, think its a tough call for any youngster to make as neither option gives an automatic right or route to being in the starting 11.

[Monaco_Totty]

Loan experience psychological demands are also part of the 'experience-transition' that are not always seen by those outside of the game too.

Its these secondary factor appraisals after any footballer loan-outs that ultimately decide overall if players stay or go.

Mentally, i'd have expected Charlie Cresswell to have been the one to pass with flying colours regarding necessary technical & psychological advancement from his loan.

So all our returnee's mental coping options will be scrutionised alongside their technical abilities with honest evaluations, for sure.

I know some young players dont always take this important stage well, especially after decisions taken after discussion regarding individuals coping potential & future expectancy upon return to parent clubs.

So, it'll be from that final 'appraisal process' of how the individual emotionally responds alongside all the match & training performance data taken from loan clubs whilst out on loan - i know of 2 current loan players who 'struggled' away from the training grounds this season within their social free-time, sadly.

Playing for Leeds with supporter expectations, the social media demands is not an easy balancing act for young players to cope with.

[WTF11]

Eh, not sure some of you understand why young players are sent out on loan.... the club rather than wanting to sell them, want them to get first team experience elsewhere to help their development... it's not a "we think your crap so f off somewhere else, till we work a deal to get rid of you"

Harry Kane was loaned to Orient, Millwall, Norwich and Leicester.................................

I didn't suggest that the club thought any of the players sent out on loan (I use that set of words advisedly), weren't good, they just didn't fit with the outlook of the new manager and/or his backers (including the 49-ers). This despite the fact that several loanees had played for the 1st team, some like Gelhardt quite often, and by and large acquitted themselves well. Gelhardt is ironically one of those who was a bit "up and down" but given that he was used in a similar fashion to Gnonto this season (last gasp substitute in games that have already gone away from us), it's frankly not surprising that he wasn't the player he could be. That having been said, none of the loanees will look at those that replaced them (e.g. Firpo for Hjelde??????) and think, "yeah, he's a much better player than I would be in that position".

When they return, their view on whether they want to stay will at the very least be influenced by their treatment by LUFC, and as most have received plaudits from the clubs they were loaned out to (many saying they would like to see them come back) it's by no means certain they would want to stay at a club that will be in a period of huge restructuring under (hopefully) new ownership.

[WTF11]

Going out on loan is a choice. The players don't have to go. But most players, especially young players want first team football experience.
I think it's widely accepted that playing first team football is a good choice rather than bench warming at best. That's why they do right.
With respect I find your points illogical. Maybe it's me....

Not saying that players don't have a say, but to be faced with "play in the youth teams and maybe get a place on the 1st team bench, or go to Rotherham, or Millwall or Swansea etc etc" isn't exactly what they would have signed up for/expected when they signed for LUFC. And I repeat, given that many played for the 1st team under Bielsa, and were ejected from consideration because the w4nk and his backers didn't want them, good enough or not, for them to see lesser players taking positions in the 1st team squad that they could (and had) fulfilled satisfactorily must have been a bitter pill to swallow.

As I said in reply to WS, they will return having largely succeeded at the clubs they were loaned to, and most have had comments relating to how much they would be welcome back to those clubs. I doubt they will be overjoyed at the prospect of staying with LUFC, given their treatment and the amount of upheaval that's inevitable come close season.

[whitestomper45]

You can ruin a young players long term career by promoting them too early. A big gap between a good championship player to at least adequate PL. Oor defence with no midfield protection is not a place for a promising young un on a regular basis. Just like Kane, Mount etc they will flourish quicker in a balanced championship side and gain far more experience.

[ozleeds]

What the hell does your statement mean ?

In English it means showing off there skills to get better value as there not required. In Greek it means we don't give a Fck. In oZ it means shell be right mate.

[ozleeds]

Going out on loan is a choice. The players don't have to go. But most players, especially young players want first team football experience.
I think it's widely accepted that playing first team football is a good choice rather than bench warming at best. That's why they do right.
With respect I find your points illogical. Maybe it's me....

Drameh goes out for half a season becomes player of the season. We buy another crap RB and an old Ayling. Drameh cant get a look in goes out on loan again becoming player of the season once again. Does that look like getting experience for you? Does Creswell nearly signing for someone means there out there for experience? Players going out on loan means they are not required eg all the other loans we have out there which is quiet a few.

[ozleeds]

You can ruin a young players long term career by promoting them too early. A big gap between a good championship player to at least adequate PL. Oor defence with no midfield protection is not a place for a promising young un on a regular basis. Just like Kane, Mount etc they will flourish quicker in a balanced championship side and gain far more experience.

How old is too young? 21 22 23 year olds are youngsters? What do you class our players as premier league? Going on your assumption this season coming our team will be completely made up of so called youngsters for the experience so lets wait and see how many actually play my bet is very very few.