Once the solution to the problem of the Premier League, this January transfer window was defined by loans and a lack of transactions

At least from scratch, this January window shows that Premier League clubs have long since pbaded the stage where they see the transfer market as the first solution to any problem. Many did not see it as a solution at all.

Tottenham Hotspur was the most notable in this regard given the recent problems with his team, given that they were one of eight out of twenty clubs that had not brought in a single player, in what appeared to be the quietest window for some time.

Manchester United did not choose the half-time they needed, neither Manchester City nor the left midfield nor the required defensive midfielder. And, of the transfers that took place, none was absolutely staggering.

The most important can best be described as "clever" – or "interesting". These conditions certainly apply to the return of Samir Nasri and Ryan Babel in the Premier League respectively for West Ham United and Fulham. Even the two biggest moves – both involving Chelsea – were not really about now.

One of them, for Christian Pulisic Borussia Dortmund, was not even for the moment. It will arrive in summer and is for the future. Gonzalo Higuain, meanwhile, has mostly signed for his reputation and his work with Maurizio Sarri, rather than in a recent form.

This speaks volumes about the need to break with Chelsea's usual policy of not recruiting players over the age of 30, which has also deviated from their overall approach to major signings – buying something. One of rich and fit.

Higuain's signature certainly did not give the kind of waves she could have had if the club had already shown interest in Argentina at another time in recent seasons.

And this window certainly did not offer a Virgil van Dijk, an Andriy Arshavin, or even a Lucas Moura. Similarly, nothing in the drama nor in the narrative plot of the exchange between Alexis Sanchez and Henrikh Mkhitaryan. Everything was so much more discreet than that, even in the nature of many transactions.

Denis Suarez might well have a major impact on Arsenal and, beyond Higuain, he was probably closest to one of the big clubs bringing the specific type of player they needed. Just like Higuain, however, he was another loan.

Such temporary agreements have prevailed, in a way that we have not seen for some time, or at least since the 2015 agreements with television.

This raises a key question as to why this has been relatively quiet, especially because of the absence of big contracts in the other direction. Nor is it a Philippe Coutinho, nor any other similar purchase from one of the Spanish giants.

Barcelona has instead opted for its "astute" and "interesting" offer to Kevin Prince-Boateng.

This is partly due to the "lack of value in the market" in January, the difficulty of finding the type of players you need in January. But the very fact that big clubs are strongly influenced by these factors indicates something broader.

It's notoriously never known so much money in the game – especially in the top rankings – but there has rarely been such reluctance to spend.

While two of City and United's richest were just reluctant, Barcelona, ​​Madrid, Arsenal, Tottenham Hotspur, Chelsea and even Juventus were mostly looking for loans.

Kieron O'Connor, a football finance expert, has been very concerned in recent days about his lack of money and cash. Swiss Ramble twitter account.

He points out that this apparent contradiction really derives from accounting calculations. This is due to the very nature of player accounting, which can give the impression that the profits of a football club are misleading. This certainly explains the fact that Premier League receipts amounting to £ 4.6 billion in 2016-2017 generated only an operating profit of £ 119 million, although the highly visible share payroll of £ 2.5 billion.

The size of the payroll is one of the main reasons why Barcelona has been so quiet, and it applies to a lesser extent in Madrid, but it is mainly focused on a broad summer reform.

O'Connor stresses in the Premier League a problem: even if all transfer sales are 100% booked by the seller club during the year, no matter when the money is actually paid, the purchases are rather amortized. So it seems superficially that more things come in than go out.

This shows how surprisingly even the wealthiest clubs have become dependent on player sales – notably Arsenal and Chelsea – and O'Connor has argued that perhaps a little more rethinking of commercial projects is needed. It can be argued that the huge television deals have created an element of complacency in this regard.

Anyway, that means that at present there is not the same cash available, which is one of the reasons why there is not as much cash flowing into the market for transfers.

And for now, this means that clubs are looking beyond the transfer market to explain their teams.

Keep up-to-date with the latest transfer news, rumors and offers throughout the January window