Making sure loan players actually get playing time

In FM2015, I often had the problem that my young player will go on loan somewhere and will end up being on the bench or in reserve squad, starting very rarely.

Of course I'm trying to only let them go when the loaning club promises "first team" or "key player" status, but too often even with such status the guy ends up not playing a lot, and I feel it's a bug on AI manager - most likely he shouldn't have loaned this player in the first place.

I often would go into team report and make sure that there is no more than 1 another decent guy for the same position already in the team, but it is too time-consuming if I have 20 different teams asking about the same player.

I hope FM16 will be better in this regard and AI team would loan a player as "first team" only if they will end up playing him.

You really should spend the time reviewing the players already at clubs making loan offers, the tactics used by that club & any tendencies that the manger might have then reject bids from clubs that you feel will not stick to their offer of using the player on a regular basis. Another consideration is that sending an otherwise content player out on loan is not always the best option, especially if they are dropping down to a lower standard league or to a club with less than impressive training facilities.

You should also look to make full use of any loan affiliations, whenever you propose sending a player to an affiliate their manager will indicate where in the pecking order your player will likely end up.

Loaning out on first team or key player status I rarely have an issue with the player not getting time on the pitch.

Its happened maybe two or three times in my current save and I've loaned out maybe 40-50 players in that time.

You really should spend the time reviewing the players already at clubs making loan offers, the tactics used by that club & any tendencies that the manger might have then reject bids from clubs that you feel will not stick to their offer of using the player on a regular basis. Another consideration is that sending an otherwise content player out on loan is not always the best option, especially if they are dropping down to a lower standard league or to a club with less than impressive training facilities.

You should also look to make full use of any loan affiliations, whenever you propose sending a player to an affiliate their manager will indicate where in the pecking order your player will likely end up.

Thanks for the suggestions.

I feel that for young players (<22 y.o.) having at least 1 or 2 seasons at loan is very important (at a proper level).

The problem with affiliates is that they are often both playing in non-top league AND they have better players than my loanees. E.g. for United, affiliate is Twente in the Dutch league, and most of my for-loan players will not get game time.

"their manager will indicate where in the pecking order your player will likely end up" - not sure how does this work? I've never seen this happening. Can you clarify?

When I click "send player to affiliate" he usually just goes, I didn't see any discussion with their manager.

When you proposed to send a player to an affiliate club the popup box where you set the loan length & preferred position will include some text detailing the expected squad status for the player, so far it has proven to be pretty spot on on my save although I only have a small sample of affiliate loans out to base that on.

Well the obvious indicator to look for would be the Squad Status that the club making the loan offer has told you they will give to the player.

On top of that you really should be looking at that clubs current squad to see what the competition is like in your players position and what kind of tactics their manager tends to use, because I find that as often as not AI managers will completely ignore the squad status that they promised to your player.

So while you may be told that your player is going to be a Key Player, even if they are the best player in the AI managers team in their position by a mile, if they are for example an AML when the manager never plays a formation that uses an AML then the loan is pointless. However if they are a CM and the manager always uses 2 CMs then even if they would be the 3rd best player in the team it may well still be worth making the loan as they play a position where it is likely they'll still get game time.

Well the obvious indicator to look for would be the Squad Status that the club making the loan offer has told you they will give to the player.

On top of that you really should be looking at that clubs current squad to see what the competition is like in your players position and what kind of tactics their manager tends to use, because I find that as often as not AI managers will completely ignore the squad status that they promised to your player.

So while you may be told that your player is going to be a Key Player, even if they are the best player in the AI managers team in their position by a mile, if they are for example an AML when the manager never plays a formation that uses an AML then the loan is pointless. However if they are a CM and the manager always uses 2 CMs then even if they would be the 3rd best player in the team it may well still be worth making the loan as they play a position where it is likely they'll still get game time.

You are making very good points.

The problem is that it is not scalable. If I'm loaning out 5 players and get 20 loan offers for each, I won't do what you are suggesting a hundred times.

I'm looking for a shortcut here, choosing the best club for the loanee. I know I can take a shortcut by delegating it to assistant, but he just accepts all offers always .

There is no shortcut. If one of your players will be a Key Player, that will be a safe bet, but you'd have to worry at the level of football he'll get. I prefer first team status (but I rarely loan out players) and I check manually whether they will be able to hold down the position by checking the quality of his competition in that spot.

There is no shortcut.

Yeah, as always if you want control you have to do things yourself.

What everyone else said plus: This may be obvious and doesn't help with the problem as such, but I always insist on the option to recall loan players so I can bring them home early if they don't get enough out of it.

In some loans, particularly in Spain, there is a minimum number of appearances a loan signing has to make a set number fo appearances and if he doesn't, the club that loaned him in has to pay an extra fee. One example of this is Marcos Asensio on loan from Real Madrid to Espanyol and if he doesn't make 30 appearances, Espanyol have to pay extra. Might be a good idea to implement a similar system in FM

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2552216-marco-asensio-to-espanyol-latest-loan-details-comments-and-reaction

Might be a good idea to implement a similar system in FM

Sounds like a great idea! Hurry up and post it in the official suggestion thread so we can get that for FM17.

You are making very good points.

The problem is that it is not scalable. If I'm loaning out 5 players and get 20 loan offers for each, I won't do what you are suggesting a hundred times.

I'm looking for a shortcut here, choosing the best club for the loanee. I know I can take a shortcut by delegating it to assistant, but he just accepts all offers always .

I think perhaps the best thing to do here is to re-offer him under slightly more restrictive terms. If a player is drawing more than 20 bids, you've not asked for enough in financial contribution. Or maybe you don't care, and the thing to do then is look through the clubs offering the most favorable squad status, accept the single bid that works best and reject the rest.

Something I've seen mentioned supposedly about the Stoke deal with Chelsea for Van Ginkels loan is that each time he isn't played there is a penalty fee attached and it was suggested this was pretty much standard practice for the majority of the players Chelsea loan out. It's not an enormous amount, but if you're loaning a player out to a team and its going to cost them not to play him, then either he'll be sent back or used which seems to be a win-win situation.

There is no shortcut. If one of your players will be a Key Player, that will be a safe bet, but you'd have to worry at the level of football he'll get. I prefer first team status (but I rarely loan out players) and I check manually whether they will be able to hold down the position by checking the quality of his competition in that spot.

Not always a safe bet. I sent a young lad on loan as a key/first teamer, it was the right level for him, competetive football but a relegation threatened club so he would get games and would face pressure etc.

He never got a look in and I had a massive falling out with that manager to the point that I blacklisted the club from loaning my players again in the following few seasons, which led to their demise (har har!)

Why didn't he play? Literally a week after confirming the loan signing they purchased a permanent signing for the same position. So my lad got demoted down to backup and cup games and keeping the bench warm. Fair enough, they didn't intentionally mislead me (or maybe they did), but I had to think of my lads' future, a year wasted (well half, I called him back in January I think), so that manager was never going to be in my good books from that date on.

Anyway, I don't do loans, they've never ever been beneficial compared to staying at the club (top facilities/Man Utd) and I actually tracked it several seasons with my obsessive spreadsheets back when I ran my Man Utd file. One or two players got slight benefits but nearly everyone else benefited from staying home in terms of pure attributes and CA rises.

Should that be the case? I'm 50/50 on it.

There's a difference between a Key player and a First team player. Key player is a safe bet and a First Team player isn't, imo. Then again, situations like your example can crop up. Probably then better to leave these till closer to the deadline.

True, though that reduces your potential pool of teams as places that might be options bring in other players, leaving you out in the cold.

Something I've seen mentioned supposedly about the Stoke deal with Chelsea for Van Ginkels loan is that each time he isn't played there is a penalty fee attached and it was suggested this was pretty much standard practice for the majority of the players Chelsea loan out. It's not an enormous amount, but if you're loaning a player out to a team and its going to cost them not to play him, then either he'll be sent back or used which seems to be a win-win situation.

Roberto Martinez also confirmed in 2013 when Everton loaned Deulofeu from Barcelona that the more he played, the less he cost.

Problem is, I doubt that such a clause would be effectively incorporated into AI so all that will happen is the playing time wouldn't change but you'd get some cash.

Anyway, I don't do loans, they've never ever been beneficial compared to staying at the club (top facilities/Man Utd) and I actually tracked it several seasons with my obsessive spreadsheets back when I ran my Man Utd file. One or two players got slight benefits but nearly everyone else benefited from staying home in terms of pure attributes and CA rises.

unless you're repeating the same season over and over, you're not making a direct comparison

personally (because I've had stall-central for my youth) all my reserves/u21s are on the loan list waiting to leave (for regular first team football at least)

I think it helps if they're paying a monthly fee, because then they're almost obligated to play him, rather than stick him in the reserves (we're paying 200k per month for you, you're playing)

I'd still like the feature where we can auto-reject those 'backup' status loans, rather than having to go through 50+ offers looking for that ideal status

Anyway, I don't do loans, they've never ever been beneficial compared to staying at the club (top facilities/Man Utd) and I actually tracked it several seasons with my obsessive spreadsheets back when I ran my Man Utd file. One or two players got slight benefits but nearly everyone else benefited from staying home in terms of pure attributes and CA rises.

Should that be the case? I'm 50/50 on it.

Top training facilities > first team football of too low a level.

First team football at a level that suits his ability > Top training facilities

This is why I rarely loan out players. If I have a hot prospect, I use him myself. He then gets the odd first team game or a few sub appearances combined with great training facilities. The decent guys I don't plan on using in the first team, I might give a loan spell to, but it'll depend on his CA. If it is still low (eg. silver stars), my training facilities will benefit him. When it got to 1.5 gold stars (at Ajax, my previous club), he won't improve much more unless he gets game time and that's where loans should be considered, imo.