A January Loan Move Would Be the Death Knell for Chelsea's Ruben Loftus-Cheek

Patrick Bamford recently spoke about Chelsea's loan players having their own WhatsApp group to keep in touch while away from the club.

If there was a similar group for all those who have been cast aside while on loan, Ruben Loftus-Cheek would probably think twice about wanting a temporary move away from Stamford Bridge.

Only Thibaut Courtois has left Chelsea on a loan deal in recent seasons to return and become a first-team regular.

The list of failures outside of him is much longer and includes some high-profile players, namely Manchester City's Kevin De Bruyne.

It's understandable that Loftus-Cheek wants a loan move away from Chelsea in order to get some more first-team action. Equally, it's the wrong option for the midfielder right now.

It was reported this week in the Times that the 19-year-old is becoming disillusioned with his lack of game time under Jose Mourinho.

Only in early October Mourinho had hinted at Loftus-Cheek playing more matches ahead of Chelsea's struggling stars.

That was probably a major boost for the player, yet the result has been a mere 45 minutes against Aston Villa. Since that time, the closest we've been to seeing Loftus-Cheek in action has been him warming up on the sidelines.

Mourinho has gone back to the stars who have been failing him. If we're judging them on results, they still are.

Ian Walton/Getty Images

If Loftus-Cheek is that concerned for his career, it's a permanent move away from west London that's his best option.

After all, returning from loan in the summer, what would have changed?

Too often, young players at Chelsea have been willing to play the long game with the club, moving on loan a number of times in order to build experience and get their opportunity.

Too often, that has backfired.

Josh McEachran was the great hope from Chelsea's academy before Loftus-Cheek, getting the sort of chances under Carlo Ancelotti that his fellow youth team graduate has had under Mourinho.

They were fleeting, blink-and-you'll-miss-them moments.

Clive Mason/Getty Images

Rather than remain with the club and embed himself with the different managers that were passing through the door, McEachran went on a magical mystery tour of the British Isles.

He represented five different clubs. First it was Swansea City, followed by Middlesbrough, Watford and Wigan Athletic.

The obligatory stint at Vitesse Arnhem was McEachran's fifth and final loan stop last season.

Where did it get him? Further and further away from the Chelsea first team.

The problem with ill-judged loan moves is they can easily go awry and damage a player's reputation beyond repair.

There were plenty more besides, but where McEachran was concerned, alarm bells were ringing when he struggled to get in the Swansea side. And when his form wasn't the best in the Championship, his confidence dropped significantly.

JUSTIN TALLIS/Getty Images

Now at 22, he is attempting to rebuild his career with Brentford, although that has been hampered by injury.

We're seeing the same now with Bamford at Crystal Palace. From goal machine with Middlesbrough last term, he hasn't even played a total of 90 minutes in the Premier League for Alan Pardew's side in 2015/16.

There were always questions about whether or not Bamford could make the step up at Chelsea. Now that he's not getting the chances on loan at Palace, it seems they've all but been answered for him.

That's the crying shame here. Bamford has become a worse player in the minds of many simply by not playing.

And all the while he is frustrated, cut adrift at a club who has no long-term plan for him.

Had he stayed at Chelsea, Bamford would be under Mourinho's gaze with every training session, potentially even making the bench given the injuries Radamel Falcao and Loic Remy have suffered at times.

It's by no means a recipe for success, but joining Palace hasn't been, either.

When players move out on loan—young players especially—there is no guarantee of playing time. It's arguably a bigger risk than staying at the parent club.

Where Loftus-Cheek is concerned, he is unique at Chelsea, too. Whereas Chelsea's loan system has been built around funding first-team transfer activity, he isn't part of that.

The plan has never been to send him away from Chelsea like the club has so many others.

Loftus-Cheek shouldn't be looking for a loan as a solution.

After the 2-0 victory against Aston Villa last month, Bleacher Report asked Mourinho why he had played Loftus-Cheek further forward in the No. 10 role when we're more familiar with seeing him in the pivot.

"When he's tactically mature enough to play there, he will," was the manager's response.

Paul Gilham/Getty Images

Maturity counts plenty for Mourinho. Loftus-Cheek needs to show his manager that he's got the tools to perform regularly for Chelsea, but above all else, that he's mature enough to accept the situation.

As a club demanding success season upon season, Chelsea's ethos is in conflict with Roman Abramovich's desire to blood more younger players.

It's a process that takes time and requires patience from all involved: the manager, the owner and the player.

Pushing for a loan move three months into a season where he's been told he'll be important, doesn't read too well for Loftus-Cheek.

It sends out the wrong message.

The fear is that a loan will set him on the wrong track to where so many talented youth stars have got lost.

As De Bruyne has shown, if you doubt your future at Chelsea, it's probably best to rip off the plaster rather than prolong the pain.

Garry Hayes is Bleacher Report's lead Chelsea correspondent. All quotes were obtained firsthand unless otherwise noted. Follow him on Twitter @garryhayes