There seems to be two trains of thought here:
1) Those that recognise that age level football is a better standard than perceived, with playing styles more approximating what the player will actually experience in the first team, also that the parent club is going to have better coaching, and the game in 2023 is such that there is not a massive need to have someone have the shit kicked out of them at a lower level
2) Those that liken footballers to electricians, builders etc who think that young players are on an apprenticeship, and that unless they've served multiple years with subbies doing "on the job training" they're never going to be actually any good at the end job - regardless of whether where they are doing said training is actually teaching them any better than what can be done in house, if even the same thing
It's pretty fucking obvious which camp I'm in. Loans basically serve two purposes - one where a player is very close to the first team picture, but not quite there and you need to see them play in something approximating the first team (cf. Jebbison/Osula outgoing, Doyle/McAtee incoming), and then loans where the player is clearly not going to get close to the first team ever, so you're putting them in the shop window at a level more closely aligned to their actual ability, either for the eventual loaning club to buy, or at least to advertise to the same level (and dump wages in the process). Loans for the sake of loans aren't useful. If I want someone to eventually play for Sheffield United then I want them to be learning in SUFC's own setup with their own better coaches, not at Port Vale because "mens football... minutes"
1) Those that recognise that age level football is a better standard than perceived, with playing styles more approximating what the player will actually experience in the first team, also that the parent club is going to have better coaching, and the game in 2023 is such that there is not a massive need to have someone have the shit kicked out of them at a lower level
2) Those that liken footballers to electricians, builders etc who think that young players are on an apprenticeship, and that unless they've served multiple years with subbies doing "on the job training" they're never going to be actually any good at the end job - regardless of whether where they are doing said training is actually teaching them any better than what can be done in house, if even the same thing
It's pretty fucking obvious which camp I'm in. Loans basically serve two purposes - one where a player is very close to the first team picture, but not quite there and you need to see them play in something approximating the first team (cf. Jebbison/Osula outgoing, Doyle/McAtee incoming), and then loans where the player is clearly not going to get close to the first team ever, so you're putting them in the shop window at a level more closely aligned to their actual ability, either for the eventual loaning club to buy, or at least to advertise to the same level (and dump wages in the process). Loans for the sake of loans aren't useful. If I want someone to eventually play for Sheffield United then I want them to be learning in SUFC's own setup with their own better coaches, not at Port Vale because "mens football... minutes"