loan players

Blue · Post by **Blue** » Sun Oct 30, 2005 11:36 pm

Tibanu wrote:oh come on Blue.. from your "definition" of realism i understanded that the game in the future should stay as it is now...well you think that... but think at the owners of this game.. if they are paying servers and they have many costs they want to have something from this "bussines" besides of fun and joy... in conclusion... if in the future there will be still 9000 players the game wont have benefits, the game will become old, and in conclusion in the game will remain ME,YOU and 2 guys more...
Nice "reality" you have out there...

You're not reading what I've said, which is typical of someone who thinks they know it all. The game has to develop slowly, otherwise it becomes too complicated to attract new users or even keep the old ones. You seem to think I'm suggesting no changes at all, and I don't know why you thinkl that.

You're also ignoring the fact that I'm FOR this feature. So where's my desire to keep the game exactly as it is?

Tibanu · Post by **Tibanu** » Tue Nov 01, 2005 1:36 pm

1. If i hadn't read your post i hadn't had knew what are you talking about (realism)
2. i have a different "realism" than yours... and i care about mine... yours is=
3. maybe my mystakes... would you accept my apologizes?

//ill stop flaming.

Signed in for This Feature.! (after the speeding of the server ofcourse)
//but about this speed of the server... well at me the page works fine... i click after 2 seconds it opens... O.o wots ur prob?

Blue · Post by **Blue** » Tue Nov 01, 2005 2:08 pm

Tibanu wrote:1. If i hadn't read your post i hadn't had knew what are you talking about (realism)

Rather than you haven't read it, you haven't understood what I mean. I have not at any point said that I want the game to remain unchanged and stagnant. What I do want is for change to be well throught through and implemented at a reasonable rate. Changing things too far too fast can be the death of a game. We know it works as it is, and if things are implemented slowly we find out if it works or not.

Tibanu wrote:2. i have a different "realism" than yours... and i care about mine... yours is=

Such is the nature of selfishness. My realism will continue to be my interpretation of reality. I don't see how we can argue that from this point without delving deep into the philosophical side of things, so I won't go there.

Tibanu wrote:3. maybe my mystakes... would you accept my apologizes?

I see no reason for you to apologies. You have your opinion and I'm glad you expressed it. You do that and I'll continue to do the same.

man.utd · Post by **man.utd** » Tue Nov 01, 2005 3:10 pm

am glad thats sorted now

Aillerrg · Post by **Aillerrg** » Mon Nov 28, 2005 3:33 pm

I think loans are a good idea... but I'd like to see rules on them.. like max 5 in a season, and the club borrowing the player has to pay the wages. That way they can be used in emergancies (like if you have 2 keepers injured/suspended. Something like that.) and not over-exploitable, yet giving advantage to all (small club gets a better player for a week/ big club player has better morale when he returns)

man.utd · Post by **man.utd** » Mon Nov 28, 2005 5:07 pm

Aillerrg wrote:I think loans are a good idea... but I'd like to see rules on them.. like max 5 in a season, and the club borrowing the player has to pay the wages. That way they can be used in emergancies (like if you have 2 keepers injured/suspended. Something like that.) and not over-exploitable, yet giving advantage to all (small club gets a better player for a week/ big club player has better morale when he returns)

yes a nover person who agrees

yes it would beifit small clubs. i posted this topic because i forght it would benifit most managers/clubs on the game.

just_ic3 · Post by **just_ic3** » Mon Jan 30, 2006 7:23 am

It's a good ideea to loan in and out players but what do you think of trading a player for another plus or minus (depends on the player and what the managers work out) some money or simply give two, three players for one. I think that would be even greater then loaning players.

modes98's revenge · Post by **modes98's revenge** » Mon May 22, 2006 5:34 pm

Just thought i would look for a previous topic on Loans, wouldn't be a bad idea for higher teams to list players for loan with the option of a recall or in exchange for some cash.
It would give youth players a chance to go away to teams where they will get first team football

Paul_G · Post by **Paul_G** » Mon May 22, 2006 9:37 pm

I agree with Nistelrooy's early points. I don't see the use of implementing this. Loaning players is a good idea IRL, but Soccerproject differs enough from real life that it wouldn't work here.

First, almost no decent team is that worried about the wages of their players. And even if they were, most backups aren't going to be making that high of a wage anyway. Good teams are troubled more by running out of open roster spots. So if loaning out a player doesn't free up a roster spot then it does little to benefit the lending team. All it would do is make them thinner if an injury strikes.

... and I pay close attention to how one of my players is getting trained. If I were to loan him out I would lose that control.

Plus nearly everyone on my roster, except for my youth players, plays pretty regularly. If everyone started loaning out players it would reduce the amount of players on the team who needed playing, and reduce the amount of people taking part in friendly cups, which is a really good part of this game.

It would also make the transfer value of players even more skewed. Right now, a 25 year old guy who is rated at 80 might get you 3 mil. A 25 year old guy rated at 70, you'd have a hard time giving him away. So with loans, players who weren't outstanding would have even less value on the market than they do now.

Anyway, a G league team can already find players who are in their mid 20's, with ratings in the high 60's, low 70's, for next to nothing on the transfer list. Those players would easily be the stars of a newer G league team. But for whatever reason, hardly anyone ever buys players like that. The options are there already for small, new teams to upgrade their players cheaply, if those teams want to use those options.

ku214 · Post by **ku214** » Tue Oct 03, 2006 12:51 am

i think it's a good idea but limiting the loan to one or two has to take place in order to prevent any excessive stacking of teams, etc....

hanan · Post by **hanan** » Wed Oct 04, 2006 4:14 am

so sjarel how about you, Can you mange it ? about this opinion

C.A. Peñarol · Post by **C.A. Peñarol** » Sun Nov 05, 2006 6:34 am

I like this idea,it makes the game more realistic,everyone wants that.

I had another idea for this, it would be that you could loan a player out but let the other team have an option to buy after the season is over ,if you accept it your player remains in he's loaned team,it would move around good players into lower divisions and giving a chance to lower teams to upper divisions,also creating space for better players in the higher divisions. I do know this would give more possibilitys for cheaters but cheaters are everywhere, if you want to improve the game,might aswell take the risks and find a way to delt with the cheaters,maybe putting tough limits on loans and loan options.