Jump to content

2016/17 Ins & Outs


David
 Share

Recommended Posts

 

I think "get rid of" sounds a bit harsh.

 

I also find it amusing that we give teams like Dundee Utd credit for talking up their players, but criticize our club when they do exactly the same thing.

 

It's almost as if fans will only be happy if we sell players for as little as possible - presumably so they can moan about how poor we are at selling players.

 

I'd be quite happy if we could sell one player for 2-300k every season. Anything more than that is a nice bonus.

Agreed...it was meant in the nicest possible manner though, clearly if we weren't a 'selling club' we'd be delighted to keep him, but we're not.

 

Our support loves criticizing our Club...to my mind they've gone about this thing the right way, unfortunately, a) nobody has taken the bait and b) the player has had his head turned and acted like a fanny through an agent

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I applaud the club for standing firm here and I don't think we should be selling him on the cheap. For me circa £750k is a reasonable value for Marvin given he has 2 years left on his contract, his age and the going rate for players of similar ability in Scotland.

 

If this was Dundee Utd or Hibs it would no doubt be double the figures we are talking. If a team wants him, they will have to pay our valuation. Simple.

 

His agent is miles out - although maybe not as much as Steelboy - and first time I've ever heard an agent talk down one of his clients! If/when he goes, he will do so with my full blessing and thanks although anything less than £500k and all the talk from the club about playing hardball will prove to be a steaming pile of shite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My biggest irk, from your original comment was how you blamed McGhee, when clearly this is a Club effort to get rid of Marvin...

.

To me it looks like McGhee sets the agenda at the club nowadays.

 

Just trying to think of a player brought up from England by a (non OF) club then sold back down for a good profit. Any examples?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me it looks like McGhee sets the agenda at the club nowadays.

 

Just trying to think of a player brought up from England by a (non OF) club then sold back down for a good profit. Any examples?

Seeing what you want to see mucker...why would McGhee want to lose one of his (on his day) best players, unless 'cajoled' into doing so by the powerbrokers at the Club, we all know the club needs the cash, so to lay the blame (if there is any blame to be handed out) at McGhees door is poor in my opinion. He's far from perfect, but he is a more than competent manager at our level

 

I've got a shite memory, and not much of a statto these days, so can't think of any profits made as you describe

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seeing what you want to see mucker...why would McGhee want to lose one of his (on his day) best players, unless 'cajoled' into doing so by the powerbrokers at the Club, we all know the club needs the cash, so to lay the blame (if there is any blame to be handed out) at McGhees door is poor in my opinion. He's far from perfect, but he is a more than competent manager at our level

 

I've got a shite memory, and not much of a statto these days, so can't think of any profits made as you describe

Sake, man. You're worse than my weans. Do what you're telt.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As my old man used to call them, big Marv is a daisy player....daisys good other daisys fucking garbage.

 

I was always a bit sceptical of the £1m price tag and based upon present trend, I never started to think about ways of spending it. And I think that's the difference.

 

In terms of talent, Marvin is not the hell raiser that a championship club would feel comfortable shelling out a 7 figure sum on and in terms of fitness, doesn't have that engrained resilience that the league 1 fixture card gives a player.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's going to need to be some quick movement today or tomorrow if he goes before the window. There's been some pretty strong stuff said on both sides the past couple of days and I wonder if a sulk would come and it could be particularly damaging considering the wedge his agent seems to have drawn between him and the fans with his statement. However, McDonald was livid in January 2007 that we rejected a bid from Rangers and didn't mince his words in telling us, yet he scored vital goals to keep us up between then and the end of the season. Could go either way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As my old man used to call them, big Marv is a daisy player....daisys good other daisys fucking garbage.

 

I was always a bit sceptical of the £1m price tag and based upon present trend, I never started to think about ways of spending it. And I think that's the difference.

 

In terms of talent, Marvin is not the hell raiser that a championship club would feel comfortable shelling out a 7 figure sum on and in terms of fitness, doesn't have that engrained resilience that the league 1 fixture card gives a player.

I like that ... Daisys Player ... that sums him up perfectly. Hes over rated by many Motherwell fans. Sure the club can chance their arm for £750,00 but frankly anything North of £450,000 will be a good deal for a player of questionable ability at the top level. He looks great against p1sh but put him up against a half decent Aberdeen, St Johnstone team he doesnt look so hot, never mind against the OF. Cadden is the real deal not Johnston.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's odd that the consistent criticisms of the club over the years have been the fact that they didn't talk players up and (apparently) took the first offer that came in for players. Now they've talked players up, given them profile and knocked back bids they're being criticised for that as well. It's a hypothetical but do you reckon Cadden would have been called up for the u21s if there hadn't been comments made publicly re: his omission? I find the club & manager talking up players to be a positive. Certainly there will be circumstances where it'll come back to bite them on the arse but I'd rather they were vocal about things than talking them down.

 

Ultimately both parties want the same thing here, the club want to sell the player and the player wants to move on, earn more money and (if possible) play at a higher level. Everyone wants to make money and that's fine. It's amusing that the agent seems to have taken umbrage at the club stating their case publicly in a situation that he brought into the public domain.

 

For all the agent's statement is blunt and arsey I can understand their position. Motherwell's business model is to sell players for profit, Johnson (and others) have been brought to the club on that promise. The issue or dispute here seems to be "what is reasonable?". Is it reasonable for Motherwell to be holding out for a fee that on the face of it, seems unrealistic? If they've been quoting £1m for the player yet the only concrete offer there's been is £300k from a League 1 side in England then that shows there is a definite disconnect between market value and Motherwell's valuation.

 

Equally given all the chat from McGhee about Johnson having the quality to play at Championship level then if the bid then again speaking hypothetically, if the bid on the table is from a Championship side but the cash offer doesn't match MFC's valuation but is still offering a significant profit on the outlay is it reasonable to kb that? Strictly speaking, given he's a contracted player then of course it is but perhaps less so if you've been recruiting players on the promise of "we'll offer you a platform and if good offers come in we'll move you on." Again though in a circumstance such as this if there's no minimum release clause then it really needs both parties to agree on what constitutes a "good offer". There's quid pro quo there somewhere.

 

I got the feeling that the £1m figure quoted was really to dissuade teams such as Oxford while not completely putting the player out of the reach of Championship sides. From the agent's point of view though it looks like clubs are being put off by whatever valuation Motherwell have for the player. There's not really much an agent can do to negotiate a deal if the buying club are looking at the fee and going "nah, you're all right." If the club genuinely wants to sell the player then there needs to be movement one way or another in terms of their position.

 

For what it's worth though, I think the club have handled things pretty well. They've fought their corner robustly and they've not capitulated. They absolutely deserve credit for that IMO. The way they've handled the Johnson speculation and the McDonald approach has been refreshing and encouraging. I think they may well have misjudged demand/interest/value with regards Johnson but I'd much rather they were over-valuing our players than under-valuing.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was always a bit sceptical of the £1m price tag and based upon present trend, I never started to think about ways of spending it. And I think that's the difference.

 

The £1 million tag is probably our starting point for serious discussions, where we'd hope to end up with a deal worth around £700,000-£750,000 with maybe a sell-on clause or a promotion clause for an extra hundred thousand or something.

 

We're doing the right thing by valuing him at that price. Truth is, if we'd come out and said "Johnson is a real talent, and we value him at.....£200,000" we'd likely have been getting hit with all the shitey offers under the sun from £50,000 to £100,000.

 

Value him highly, then negotiate with the highest bidder.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The agent has previous for this as tweeted by Scott Burns. If the intention was always to sell for first decent amount of money why sign a 3 year extension.

 

We will get our price or he will remain here for the foreseeable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I forsee him being a stroppy wee bitch if he doesn't get his way.

 

If he does, he'll quickly be the forgotten man come January, and it'll also not do his reputation any favours with buying clubs. No one likes the idea of buying someone who's a complete arsehole.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our Gino is getting roasted on Twitter and despite his account being largely dormant since 2012, he's on a crusade to block anyone and everyone on twitter who identifies as a 'Well fan.

 

What an absolute banger.

 

:nyam::fuck::haha:

 

Screen Shot 2016-08-30 at 18.02.35.png

 

I literally favourited a tweet mentioning him.

 

WHAT A BELTER.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The agent has previous for this as tweeted by Scott Burns. If the intention was always to sell for first decent amount of money why sign a 3 year extension.

 

We will get our price or he will remain here for the foreseeable.

Yep - here is the article. You could lift parts of that and it would be the same as his recent statement.

 

http://m.kidderminstershuttle.co.uk/sport/10469403.Agent_defends_Johnson_talks/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The agent has previous for this as tweeted by Scott Burns. If the intention was always to sell for first decent amount of money why sign a 3 year extension.

 

We will get our price or he will remain here for the foreseeable.

Just read the article Scott Burns linked to. That's hilarious. Almost a cut & paste job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...