Goggles & Flippers Posted March 6, 2015 Report Share Posted March 6, 2015 That was nothing to do with him or his contract though. You can almost state as fact that we wouldn't have finished second without him, and if we could have negotiated our way past a pub team over two legs we would have had a five figure crowd and TV money from a Lech Poznan tie and possibly Inter Milan, which would have more than justified his extension. Don't dispute that, we are a selling club though and while it's great to have someone's services secured for the near future, it's also imperative for us to punt them on opposed to letting them leave. However, stuff off the park is looking a lot more tight and professional so I am hopeful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Dog Posted March 7, 2015 Report Share Posted March 7, 2015 Selling club? More like 'releasing'club in recent years, I'm glad to see a change in attitude now and hopefully we can go back to being a selling club. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wellfan1984 Posted March 7, 2015 Report Share Posted March 7, 2015 Have we ever actually been a selling club? Our transfer receipts over the past ten years has been pish. Not sure why, but the likes of the Edinburgh clubs, United, Accies and Livingston all have had receipts we could only dream of. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1991 Posted March 7, 2015 Report Share Posted March 7, 2015 I think the board now realise how poor our transfer dealings have been and are now trying to address the issue Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noah Dosser Posted March 7, 2015 Report Share Posted March 7, 2015 Imho part of the 'losing players for nothing' scenario came about because the club wasn't as media savvy or as cute in a business sense as the teams mentioned earlier. A bit of ' Well set to offer Randolph/ Hutchison/ whoever bumper 4 year deal' or any player ' I want to stay at Steelmen for life' dripped into the press and whispered to various agents would, I feel, at least make interested clubs sound out the club re availability and potential transfer price. We instead gave players 1 and 2 year extensions and as far as I can remember didn't really make a big fuss of it. Football is a dodgy business and maybe we have been a bit too nice and honest when it came to moving on our prize assets. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy_P Posted March 8, 2015 Report Share Posted March 8, 2015 Don't dispute that, we are a selling club though... Selling club? More like 'releasing'club in recent years, I'm glad to see a change in attitude now and hopefully we can go back to being a selling club. Have we ever actually been a selling club? Our transfer receipts over the past ten years has been pish. Not sure why, but the likes of the Edinburgh clubs, United, Accies and Livingston all have had receipts we could only dream of. Imho part of the 'losing players for nothing' scenario came about because the club wasn't as media savvy or as cute in a business sense as the teams mentioned earlier... It's a good debate. For me, building upon what Noah has said, a lot of it is down to perception. If you can get that to point where say Hamilton or Dundee Utd are perceived to be at the moment you have a great chance of coining it in. People might not actually know what talent you have now or further down the line but because you've sold in the past and have managed to do some good business you are automatically perceived to be a rich source and so attention is drawn to your club. The other key point is having the financial muscle to hold your nerve if and when the bids do come in. Accies and Utd have been better placed to name their terms because they aren't under the same pressure to sell. They have the proceeds in the bank from previous sales or have utilised their earnings in ways so that they aren't as hand to mouth as many. You contrast them with us over recent years. Everyone club and their dug knew our financial situation - perhaps a down side from the club so being open, honest and transparent with accounts and finances - and as such most offers we would get would be on the low side knowing that we might be more readily tempted. The difference is now that we have that muscle and we are gaining the reputation. The whole ethos has been changed and well documented about developing youth. That young talent at the club has been talked up. Contracts are of a length that will protect us and draw attention - you don't hand out a three-and-a-half year deal to just any kid. I also think back to Hutchinson's interview shortly after the takeover was confirmed. In a very measured and sobre manner he made it very clear that we wouldn't be messed about when it came to bids on our players any longer. As I say I don't think we've moved at all from the plan of being a selling club. Now we just have the tools in place to do it much much more astutely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ya Bezzer! Posted March 8, 2015 Report Share Posted March 8, 2015 I think it's very difficult to sell English players back to English clubs. The reason these guys ended up at Motherwell was they weren't deemed good enough in England to play at a certain level - the level with the transfer cash - and it's going to take a lot of convincing to get English clubs to buy them back. Our main focus should be on developing our own players or bringing players on from the lower Scottish divisions and that's where we have failed badly in the last ten years or so. Who is our most successful sale over that time? Probably Jamie Murphy who has never played higher than League 1 down south. Livingston, Dundee Utd, Hamilton, they have all produced very good players that have gone on to play at the top level of the English game. If you can get a reputation for producing players like McArthur, McCarthy, Robertson, Snodgrass etc, especially more than one, then clubs are seriously going to look at your home grown players but at the end of the day it comes down to producing quality players that can play at the top level and we just haven't been doing that. There is a good argument for saying Airdrie have brought through more good young players than we have over the past 6 or 7 years and when you consider they have struggled badly over that time with just a few hundred supports that shows just how badly we've got it wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy_P Posted March 8, 2015 Report Share Posted March 8, 2015 Kind of sort of agree with most of it. Whilst there weren't fees attached to all of them, and indeed not all of them are English, there have been several who have joined us from an English side and returned to a higher level from where they started so I wouldn't in any way dismiss that route. Off the top of my head Porter come from League One and went back to the Championship for a £400,000 profit. Randolph came from League One and went to a Championship side. Foran came from League One or Two and went to a Championship side for £175,000 profit. Hutchinson came from nowhere and went to the Championship so there is some demand. The very fact the club have based the chief scout in England suggests they believe there is a market to be developed and exploited there in additional to local recruitment and development. There is also a point about youth development which often gets overlooked when it comes to sales is that you might not necessarily make the money would you like off them but in a lot of cases you get a return on the field from them. Jamie Murphy for example wasn't sitting in the Main Stand picking his arse for 6 years. We might only have got something like £100k, £150k or whatever for him but you got 200 games from him and he was there playing his part in Europe, getting to and in a Cup Final, top half finishes etc. Even, since you mention Airdrie, like Marc Fitzpatrick. You got 120 odd games (of varying degrees of quality of course) at first team level from him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lobey_Dosser Posted March 12, 2015 Report Share Posted March 12, 2015 I like everything about this boy: http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/sport/spfl/motherwell-colt-dom-overcame-celtic-height-snub-to-stand-tall-199918n.120478751 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Well Up For It! Posted March 12, 2015 Report Share Posted March 12, 2015 I like everything about this boy: http://www.eveningti...9918n.120478751 From that interview, seems a very level headed and professional young man. Really hope he goes on to be a star for us for the next few years, he clearly shows the attitude and skill deserving of such. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busta Nut Posted March 12, 2015 Report Share Posted March 12, 2015 I hope that puts to bed we owed Celtic money for him. I was always doubtful of that. Believed it cos I heard it so much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brazilian Posted March 12, 2015 Report Share Posted March 12, 2015 Good , simple , nicely placed interviewed, Lad seems to have some of the stuff we fans love to support. Believed it cos I heard it so much. I believed we had to pay money because our general manager confirmed it, whilst pointing out the sums mentioned on internet forums were off the mark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daver Posted March 12, 2015 Report Share Posted March 12, 2015 Yes, the development fee applies even at that young age and I think they would even be due a small cut of any fee we manage to sell him for. Fortunately he's been with us a good while now and the majority of his development will be attributed to us. Let's just hope his potential is realised. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WishyWell Posted March 13, 2015 Report Share Posted March 13, 2015 My understanding of it is that, if an Academy player is offered a contract for the next season but rejects it and signs for another club, the new club has to pay compensation equivalent to an amount (set by UEFA) for each year the boy has been at the previous club. It used to be 3000 Euros but I've no idea what it is now. It is not uncommon for clubs like Celtic to offer a contract to a boy they have no desire to keep after scunnering him by never playing him for months, so that technically it is him who is choosing to leave and they are due money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busta Nut Posted March 13, 2015 Report Share Posted March 13, 2015 Fair enough then, but if we are having to pay for folk who are 14 the world has gone mad Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weeyin Posted March 13, 2015 Report Share Posted March 13, 2015 Fair enough then, but if we are having to pay for folk who are 14 the world has gone mad Maybe, but post-Bosman, it is a rule that partially protects the smaller teams who put time, effort (and money) into developing a kid who is later poached by one of the big teams. If they aren't getting transfer fees for senior players, then it's better than nothing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busta Nut Posted March 13, 2015 Report Share Posted March 13, 2015 I understand that at say maybe 16 plus when you have an NI number etc. but at 14 it's a bit extreme. How far back can it go? Do Mossend boys club have a shout to fee for any one who played from under 12s to u15s then went on to Celtic? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weeyin Posted March 13, 2015 Report Share Posted March 13, 2015 I understand that at say maybe 16 plus when you have an NI number etc. but at 14 it's a bit extreme. How far back can it go? Do Mossend boys club have a shout to fee for any one who played from under 12s to u15s then went on to Celtic? Aye, that's true enough. I'm not sure what the cut off is, but 14 is a bit young. The entire transfer / development fee system has been a mess since Bosman. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WishyWell Posted March 13, 2015 Report Share Posted March 13, 2015 How far back can it go? Do Mossend boys club have a shout to fee for any one who played from under 12s to u15s then went on to Celtic? Yes, any club (including boys clubs) that they were signed to from the age of 11 onwards get a share based on the number of years they had the boy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WishyWell Posted March 13, 2015 Report Share Posted March 13, 2015 Fair enough then, but if we are having to pay for folk who are 14 the world has gone mad The UEFA guidelines are a minimum payment - it seems clubs can (I don't know the exact mechanics of it) hold out for more if the circumstances dictate it.Celtic regularly pay more for young teenagers than we pay for first team players, as did the previous incarnation of Rangers. A few years back Rangers were reported to have spent £50,000 rebuilding their u14s, and two or three years ago Celtic paid Hamilton up to £150,000 (depending on what story you hear) for three boys who are only now u17s age. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brainier Posted March 13, 2015 Report Share Posted March 13, 2015 Man City have just paid a potential half a million for a 14-year-old. World's gone mad Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MelvinBragg Posted March 13, 2015 Report Share Posted March 13, 2015 Man City have just paid a potential half a million for a 14-year-old. World's gone mad Equally scary is the fact that he's already signed to Nike as well... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kmcalpin Posted March 13, 2015 Report Share Posted March 13, 2015 I wonder what Dundee United pay for youngsters (from professional clubs that is)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busta Nut Posted March 16, 2015 Report Share Posted March 16, 2015 I was a fan of gradually introducing this boy to the first team, but 5 mins at the end of every game is a bit shite. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
something else Posted March 16, 2015 Report Share Posted March 16, 2015 I was a fan of gradually introducing this boy to the first team, but 5 mins at the end of every game is a bit shite. It is shite. if he is good enough get him in the team. Tom Boyd, Fraser Wishart, Andy Walker, Chris McCart, Phil O'Donnell all got flung in under McLean cos they were good enough and never looked back. McFadden and Pearson etc as well under butcher. All this needing to introduce them gradually is modern day football bollocks. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.