Unsuccessful loans

[Alemar]

We can currently see that loads of our loans are unsuccessful ones: players don’t get much game time, perform poorly and are recalled (or about to be recalled)

- Chong. Plays badly, not getting many minutes
- Dalot. Not getting many minutes
- Pereira. Plays badly, not getting minutes
- Levitt. Recalled, did badly
- Kovar. Recalled, awful stats

Only Garner is probably an “Ok” loan and even then he’s not a guaranteed starter for Watford (far from it).

What happens, wrong choice of loan destinations, overhyped average players? There shall be reasons

 

[el3mel]

Well, I'm hardly surprised about Chong, Dalot and Periera. They are just not that good.

 

[ClaytonBlackmoorLeftPeg]

We can currently see that loads of our loans are unsuccessful ones: players don’t get much game time, perform poorly and are recalled (or about to be recalled)

- Chong. Plays badly, not getting many minutes
- Dalot. Not getting many minutes
- Pereira. Plays badly, not getting minutes
- Levitt. Recalled, did badly
- Kovar. Recalled, awful stats

Only Garner is probably an “Ok” loan and even then he’s not a guaranteed starter for Watford (far from it).

What happens, wrong choice of loan destinations, overhyped average players? There shall be reasons

I don’t see any of those players making it.

The problem with loans is that we want game time for the players, and for them to develop.

the club we are loaning to doesn’t care about that. Instead they have a cheap way of bolstering their squad, and no incentive to play them.

 

[Bastian]

Probably not doing due diligence. If it's anything like our transfer window, which ended with a scattergun approach after wasting months, then it's not surprising that it wasn't well thought through. With Pereira and Dalot, it looks as if we were desperate to get them out so the group isn't bloated.

I'd rather we pay a decent portion of their wages still and ensure they get a club where the manager fancies them and we're given assurances of their match time. Especially with the young ones, but with the more established players, maybe we just need to sell them on the cheap. Look at West Ham, spent 45m on Haller and bit the bullet, sold him for 50% less. I can't imagine Dalot or Pereira will come back into the side.

 

[Tallis]

Dalot and Chong were different type of loans vs the academy players - those guys are on the way out and probably had a lot of say in where they wanted to go.

I think given enough time Chong will do well. He is probably not going to turn into a Man Utd senior team player though.

Garner has got a fair bit of playing time.Think he has shown enough for Man Utd to invest more in him especially given CM’s take time to develop. Could turn into a useful squad player in the future.

Levitt and Kovar - unfortunate Loan spells didn’t work out at all. Not sure if there is much else that club could have done.

 

[FrankDrebin]

I think Axel was the last player we sent out who had a decent loan spell.

 

[TwoSheds]

Bernard is doing very well at Salford.

 

[matt23]

Deano did alright

 

[Gopher Brown]

I think Axel was the last player we sent out who had a decent loan spell.

Henderson?

 

[Nick7]

Dalot and Pereira are both bad players so I'm not shocked with that. Chong, I feel is a good player but just hasn't been able to come to terms with senior football. I didn't expect much more than we're getting from those three loans. None of them will feature in the future of the club.

 

[Gopher Brown]

Loans are by-and-large a waste of time and always have been.

“Yeah, but Becks at Preston” - no, for every one worthwhile one there are 15 failures.

The best way to fix it is to arrange 2-3 year loans so a player has time to establish themselves, or sell with buy-back arrangements.

There’s a reason why Rashford and Greenwood never went on loan - because they were good enough. Most youngsters aren’t.

 

[FrankDrebin]

Henderson?

Whoops.

 

[Gopher Brown]

Whoops.

You could argue that it hasn’t been successful though because I don’t see him displacing de Gea any time soon and I expect he will move on before that opportunity arises.

 

[Dve]

We can currently see that loads of our loans are unsuccessful ones: players don’t get much game time, perform poorly and are recalled (or about to be recalled)

- Chong. Plays badly, not getting many minutes
- Dalot. Not getting many minutes
- Pereira. Plays badly, not getting minutes
- Levitt. Recalled, did badly
- Kovar. Recalled, awful stats

Only Garner is probably an “Ok” loan and even then he’s not a guaranteed starter for Watford (far from it).

What happens, wrong choice of loan destinations, overhyped average players? There shall be reasons

I think one of the problems is that unless the player immediately comes in and clearly improves the team, managers will rather give game time to someone part of the plans long term. Why bother contributing to the development of a player that will soon be gone anyway.

 

[Sean_RedDevil]

Every loan deal has his own story but i would say only the loan for Joel Pereira was a bad from the start (AGAIN) and the loan for Andreas Pereira was a weird for his price.

All other players have had a fair chance to find good playing-time.

 

[Mickson]

Very harsh saying that Dalot doesn't play. Has started the last two games for the best team in Serie A, has been playing a lot. Garner has played a lot. Kovar has played a lot. Bernard has been excellent, Max Taylor has been playing a lot, Carney has been playing, Traore started the last game... so it probably hasn't been so bad after all.

 

[Tom Cato]

I think Axel was the last player we sent out who had a decent loan spell.

Dean Henderson wasn't too bad during his loan spell.

 

[Chipper]

I don’t see any of those players making it.

The problem with loans is that we want game time for the players, and for them to develop.

the club we are loaning to doesn’t care about that. Instead they have a cheap way of bolstering their squad, and no incentive to play them.

Don't clubs discuss how much playing time they envisage a loan player getting? I know there'd be nothing to hold them to that, or to force them into playing someone but a general chat about that kind of thing. No player really gets guaranteed time anywhere, but I'm sure when signing for a club a player will often have a general conversation about where they'll likely fit in, just thinking it would apply to loans too. Clubs and/or managers who tell United a loan player will likely play a lot and then go on to pick him often would forge a good relationship with us. Those who don't, not as much.

I think those who play Football Manager will recognise that I do too as it's a feature on there when loaning players or loaning them out.

Mind you, not every loan is equal. Some clubs might have told us they were loaning certain players as just a squad option if such discussions do in fact take place. There are circumstances where we could feasibly be happy with that if we don't see a future for them here, they're paying some/all of the wages and nobody else at a good level wanted to loan them and play them often.

 

[ClaytonBlackmoorLeftPeg]

Don't clubs discuss how much playing time they envisage a loan player getting? I know there'd be nothing to hold them to that, or to force them into playing someone but a general chat about that kind of thing. No player really gets guaranteed time anywhere, but I'm sure when signing for a club a player will often have a general conversation about where they'll likely fit in, just thinking it would apply to loans too. Clubs and/or managers who tell United a loan player will likely play a lot and then go on to pick him often would forge a good relationship with us. Those who don't, not as much.

I think those who play Football Manager will recognise that I do too as it's a feature on there when loaning players or loaning them out.

Mind you, not every loan is equal. Some clubs might have told us they were loaning certain players as just a squad option if such discussions do in fact take place. There are circumstances where we could feasibly be happy with that if we don't see a future for them here, they're paying some/all of the wages and nobody else at a good level wanted to loan them and play them often.

I’m sure they do. But I’m sure the reality is also very different when they hit the training ground.

unfortunately managers get no time at any stage of the pyramid - and so are just going to to what they need to do to get a result, and often that’s not going to be with a youngster - especially one that they don’t get to have the benefit of in subsequent seasons.

 

[RuudTom83]

Instead of loans, a sale with a buy-back clause might be more beneficial to both sides. Or some financial rewards if the loanee hets a certain amount of minutes (but that might not sit well in the dressing room)

 

[MyOnlySolskjaer]

A reality check for those who overrated them. Many on this forum were saying Dalot for first team right winger.

 

[galwayfa]

Harry kane and Beckham are the only notable lads that went out on loan and turned out world class, going out on loan doesn't mean your finished as a player but odds are youbare not going to be a top player, the utd lads mentioned above, will live a life more comfortable than us but most here knew they are not above the mid card level as a footballer

 

[Zen]

Harry kane and Beckham are the only notable lads that went out on loan and turned out world class, going out on loan doesn't mean your finished as a player but odds are youbare not going to be a top player, the utd lads mentioned above, will live a life more comfortable than us but most here knew they are not above the mid card level as a footballer

Lampard? Cashley? Terry? Carrick? Rio?...... all I've done here is consider England's golden generation so not sure why Beckham got this odd shout.

 

[Trequarista10]

Dalot has played a fair bit. 9 starts and 3 sub appearances (6 of the 9 starts in the Europa League). About as expected as he's always likely to be first replacement at a big club like Milan. Maybe it would be slightly more beneficial to be first choice at a lower level but not sure its a huge difference.

Chong is a lot less experienced and a move to a Bundesliga side always seemed a bit overly optimistic. Would have been better loaning him to an Eredivisie side IMO.

Periera to Lazio was just a weird one.

The younger ones/lads straight from the academy I don't think it's as important. In a sense going on lower to a smaller club, playing with men, being away from the comfy environment at United, is all part of the learning experience. A tough or unsuccessful loan could be beneficial long term if they can learn and grow from it, or use it as motivation, or a reality check.

 

[galwayfa]

Lampard? Cashley? Terry? Carrick? Rio?...... all I've done here is consider England's golden generation so not sure why Beckham got this odd shout.

Yep in hindsight they all have been, 16 games played the most of those players for Loan team but il hold off till further judgement on our players for a bit so,

 

[ClaytonBlackmoorLeftPeg]

Harry kane and Beckham are the only notable lads that went out on loan and turned out world class, going out on loan doesn't mean your finished as a player but odds are youbare not going to be a top player, the utd lads mentioned above, will live a life more comfortable than us but most here knew they are not above the mid card level as a footballer

Kane is the best example, as he really gained from his loans, and would have been far less likely to make it if he hadn’t.

Beckham, I suggest would have made it no matter whether he went out on loan or not.

have we not mentioned Lingard? Was it 4 goals on his debut for Birmingham?

 

[sunama]

I don’t see any of those players making it.

The problem with loans is that we want game time for the players, and for them to develop.

the club we are loaning to doesn’t care about that. Instead they have a cheap way of bolstering their squad, and no incentive to play them.

If the players are good and can help win their adopted side a match, that will be the incentive to play them.
The problem is that most of our youngsters simply aren't good enough. They are rated highly by MUFC fans, but when they go to lesser teams to gain experience we find out that they aren't good enough to get regular game time.
I still think that we should persist with sending them on loan, as it may give these players experience. At MUFC, these players probably wouldn't even make the bench.

 

[Ekeke]

Milan are top of the league. Why is it surprising Dalot isnt starting a lot?

Having said that he's played 3 mins less than Hauge

 

[ClaytonBlackmoorLeftPeg]

Milan are top of the league. Why is it surprising Dalot isnt starting a lot?

Having said that he's played 3 mins less than Hauge

it’s not surprising based on the 2 years he’s spent at the club, no matter where Milan are. He’s really not good enough to be playing at that level. Looks like a misjudged loan.

 

[KeanoMagicHat]

Not sure what you expect from Dalot for a team that's trying to win Serie A, he's played a few more games than he would here probably and has played all the Europa League games. Still only a 21-year-old right-back, there's a good career in it for him yet.

 

[Mickson]

it’s not surprising based on the 2 years he’s spent at the club, no matter where Milan are. He’s really not good enough to be playing at that level. Looks like a misjudged loan.

He just gave you black and white that Dalot has played a lot, and he has started the last two league games. So what are you talking about? United will have no problem selling him after this either.

 

[Ekeke]

it’s not surprising based on the 2 years he’s spent at the club, no matter where Milan are. He’s really not good enough to be playing at that level. Looks like a misjudged loan.

If they were 6th he might be playing. Its pretty simple, you have to be at a certain level to be in a team top of the league and I dont think anyone expected him to be starting at the top team in the league. If Milan fall back down to the europa league places thats when he might start

 

[sillwuka]

It's a reality check for alot of fans on how highly they rate our academy products.

They are now doing the same with Laird, Levitt, Garner but infact they are nowhere near our first team and may never be.

 

[Sparky Rhiwabon]

Kane is the best example, as he really gained from his loans, and would have been far less likely to make it if he hadn’t.

Beckham, I suggest would have made it no matter whether he went out on loan or not.

have we not mentioned Lingard? Was it 4 goals on his debut for Birmingham?

And Lingard went on to make 133 appearances for United and 24 caps for England. Not bad.

 

[Amir]

Lampard? Cashley? Terry? Carrick? Rio?...... all I've done here is consider England's golden generation so not sure why Beckham got this odd shout.

Because his four-week stint (or something like) at Preston somehow became famous and overrated as the loan that changed everything for him and opened his eyes as to what exists outside United.

 

[Wittmann45]

Chong and Andreas both seemed like loan moves in preparation for a permanent transfer somewhere else. I don't know how the process works and the number of offers that were out there, but if Chong's was a developmental loan, perhaps he would have gone somewhere more his level where he would have been guaranteed minutes.

Andreas probably couldn't accept the fact that he wasn't good enough for a big club and thus he went to Lazio where he probably was going to find it difficult. If there is any "reality check" there, it is with him alone

Also, I generally do not have a lot of confidence in loans, although from the current squad, Axel's and Henderson's seemed really successful, TFM not so much. I wonder what United's record is with "successful" loans versus someone like Chelsea who seems to use loans as a money making opportunity as much as something for development.