2022/23 ins & outs discussion

[Coatsy]

If we have so many good youngsters you have got to ask the question why they have not been getting 1st team game time, looks like we have dropped the ball on contracting these players.

[wellwell91]

1 hour ago, Coatsy said:

If we have so many good youngsters you have got to ask the question why they have not been getting 1st team game time, looks like we have dropped the ball on contracting these players.

Lennon Miller is in a 3 year deal

Young boy Beattie is not 17 so we can’t put him on a pro contract Just like Bailey Rice who fucked off to the h**s. 
Will just have to wait and see what happens to Max Johnston although think he will be guided by his old man about what’s best for his footballing career 

[dennyc]

11 minutes ago, wellwell91 said:

Lennon Miller is in a 3 year deal

Young boy Beattie is not 17 so we can’t put him on a pro contract Just like Bailey Rice who fucked off to the h**s. 
Will just have to wait and see what happens to Max Johnston although think he will be guided by his old man about what’s best for his footballing career 

Exactly this

And as the article says, Motherwell have offered Beattie a pro contract when he turns 17. So they are protected as far as development fees are concerned. Might be better to negotiate terms with his new club rather than rely on development fees though as that can include profitable add ons. As happened with Rice who made is Rangers first team debut last weekend.

Not a lot any Scottish Club (including Rangers and Celtic) can do if an English team convinces a youngster to join their scholarship programme at age 16 with the promise of a full time contract at 17. So other than ensuring their entitlement to Development Fees I'm not sure that Motherwell could have done anything more or that they have "dropped the ball" as was suggested.

In reality the chances of a Turnbull like pay out are becoming less and less likely as the bigger clubs increase their raids on Youth Academies. And that really hurts clubs like us who rely on youth development income. I would not imagine there are many like Miller who is able to resist such approaches. Credit to him for that.

[Coatsy]

1 hour ago, wellwell91 said:

Lennon Miller is in a 3 year deal

Young boy Beattie is not 17 so we can’t put him on a pro contract Just like Bailey Rice who fucked off to the h**s. 
Will just have to wait and see what happens to Max Johnston although think he will be guided by his old man about what’s best for his footballing career 

Thanks for confirming the contract situation i believe if there good enough then get them into the first team i feel we have been too slow in promoting the youth

[Coatsy]

49 minutes ago, dennyc said:

Exactly this

And as the article says, Motherwell have offered Beattie a pro contract when he turns 17. So they are protected as far as development fees are concerned. Might be better to negotiate terms with his new club rather than rely on development fees though as that can include profitable add ons. As happened with Rice who made is Rangers first team debut last weekend.

Not a lot any Scottish Club (including Rangers and Celtic) can do if an English team convinces a youngster to join their scholarship programme at age 16 with the promise of a full time contract at 17. So other than ensuring their entitlement to Development Fees I'm not sure that Motherwell could have done anything more or that they have "dropped the ball" as was suggested.

In reality the chances of a Turnbull like pay out are becoming less and less likely as the bigger clubs increase their raids on Youth Academies. And that really hurts clubs like us who rely on youth development income. I would not imagine there are many like Miller who is able to resist such approaches. Credit to him for that.

You have got to wonder what the benefit in spending out on a youth academy players and coaches have for a club like ours now, other than provide a path for our next manager

[weeyin]

8 minutes ago, Coatsy said:

You have got to wonder what the benefit in spending out on a youth academy players and coaches have for a club like ours now, other than provide a path for our next manager

We can pick up decent compensation fees for players that move without every playing for us - the deals for guys like McKinstry and McAlear were beneficial and there is a chance we get even more income from add-ons if they move again.

If we manage to keep them for a season or two then guys like Campbell and Turnbull add a level of quality we couldn't afford to buy.

[dennyc]

21 minutes ago, Coatsy said:

You have got to wonder what the benefit in spending out on a youth academy players and coaches have for a club like ours now, other than provide a path for our next manager

In fairness the financial rewards that come our way from youngsters that are poached are substantial. £300k/£400k is pretty common as an up front payment. I can recall at least four that brought in that amount in the past three years. And that's not including Scott, Turnbull or Hastie who were all a bit older. Plus you can negotiate future payments based on a variety of events such as first team appearances, international call ups and future transfers. Most clubs try to negotiate terms rather than rely on the set Dev Fee. in my opinion Motherwell are pretty astute in their dealings.

So, even with the disappointment of youngsters not staying with us long enough to reach the first team, youth development is worth the investment as it generates substantial income. Also to fully benefit from solidarity payments  from UEFA related to the performance of other Scottish Clubs in Europe, a Club must have a qualifying youth programme in place. it is a bit annoying that the more successful the youth programme is, the more likely it is that players will be drawn from us. If it helps to make it more palatable, even Rangers and Celtic lose excellent prospects to England. Rory Wilson to Villa for £400k being a recent example

 

[fizoxy]

The academy can also produce players that will be decent for us, and perform well at our level without being superstars. Not everyone that comes through needs to be the next Turnbull. Even producing players that can give us 50+ appearances of 6/10 performances would save us on bringing in lower league joirneyment from England.

As for playing the younger players, just because there's interest from elsewhere doesn't mean they are good enough to play in our first team yet. The clubs that are taking these young players have no intention of putting them in their first team any time soon, and are instead adding them to their academies.

Even at that, us telling them they can play in actual games can only go so far in encouraging them to stay. When the option of increasing their income by a silly amount, as well as joining a bigger academy with facilities that are way better than ours, getting a few run outs at fir park probably won't move the needle.

[Richie]

With the exception  of Patterson and Tierney, I cant really think of any (Home Grown) youth thats been developed and sold on far any amount of money by Celtic/Rangers.

Possibly Hutton, but that was about 15-20 years ago.

[Wishielad]

On 2/18/2023 at 3:54 PM, David said:

That's true in some cases, but you also find that often agents are very wary of appearing to put their interests first in the slightest, simply because if a player gets a whiff of that they dump the agent in question and move to someone else. Any player with a hint of a decent future will have other agents and agencies hovering around waiting for the slightest hint of a relationship breakdown so they can try to snap them up.

Also, players talk to each other. If there's an agent or agency that starts to get a reputation for looking after themselves first and trying to railroad players into deals they maybe aren't keen on it doesn't take long for the word to spread and said agent to start losing business. 

There is a general view among fans that players are these gullible, naive happy-go-lucky guys who are being taken advantage of by evil agents, but the truth more often than not is that the agent is a stressed out, exasperated individual who is trying to bend over backwards to accommodate a player who thinks he should be getting the kind of treatment and respect afforded to world class players.

Nah, the players end up doing exactly what they want to do. I'd wager that more often than not the player will force through his own ideas even if the agent is giving him solid advice to the contrary.

A recent former 'Well player with whom I'm acquainted told me, frequently, that the players who make most (financially) from their careers are the ones who move most often. It's the same in some non-football careers, too.

[Mad Dog]

2 hours ago, Wishielad said:

A recent former 'Well player with whom I'm acquainted told me, frequently, that the players who make most (financially) from their careers are the ones who move most often. It's the same in some non-football careers, too.

Tony Watt must be minted.

[weeyin]

34 minutes ago, Mad Dog said:

Tony Watt must be minted.

He's still an amateur compared to Henrik Ojamaa.

[dennyc]

18 hours ago, Richie said:

With the exception  of Patterson and Tierney, I cant really think of any (Home Grown) youth thats been developed and sold on far any amount of money by Celtic/Rangers.

Possibly Hutton, but that was about 15-20 years ago.

I think Celtic and Rangers tend to fill their first team with relatively unknown foreigners and then hope to sell them on for fees we can only dream about. Bassey, Ajer, Edouard, Van Dijk as prime examples that brought in astronomical fees. I expect Celtic to cash in on their Japanese imports before too long. That strategy limits the opportunity for youth prospects to progress to the first team. Add to that the fact they, like us, lose youngsters to England before they reach first team level. For Celtic,  Doak to Liverpool for £600k a few seasons ago. This season,  Sule to West Brom, Morrison and Hepburn to Bayern Munich. Fees not released. Billy Gilmour from Rangers.

I guess Forrest and McGregor are two that made it at Celtic and the Rangers squad currently includes Devine, King, Lowrie who have featured this season. Allan MacGregor was a Rangers youth player.  The McCrorie brothers? None of them sold for huge money though.

I suppose Celtic and Rangers have the best of both worlds. Owing to finances they can pilfer Scotland for youth as well as established first team players. They can also afford fairly sizeable transfer fees to bring in top level players from overseas. Both tactics have earned them big bucks in recent years. And, unlike us, they can cope financially with the odd transfer disaster. Boerrigter and Scheidt was £7.5m wasted by Celtic. 

It will be interesting to see if Bailey Rice and Murray Miller become first team regulars at Ibrox. Both have done well so far but that is no guarantee they will be at Rangers long term. Credit to Lennon Miller for sticking with us and hopefully earning us a fortune.

It's the football world we live in. frustrating though.

 

[grizzlyg]

You could always tell Bassey was going to earn rangers big money........the minute he walked through the joint!!! 🤪🤪

[SteelmaninOZ]

14 hours ago, grizzlyg said:

You could always tell Bassey was going to earn rangers big money........the minute he walked through the joint!!! 🤪🤪

[AllyMax]

14 hours ago, grizzlyg said:

You could always tell Bassey was going to earn rangers big money........the minute he walked through the joint!!! 🤪🤪

Whoever bought him was clearly a real big spender.......I'll get your coat for you....

 

[Mad Dog]

Two goals and an assist for Connor Shields as Queen's Park smashed the Haccies on their plastic pitch in front of their plastic fans.

[Spiderpig]

1 minute ago, Mad Dog said:

Two goals and an assist for Connor Shields as Queen's Park smashed the Haccies on their plastic pitch in front of their plastic fans.

Shields was good at championship level, thats why we signed him, but turned out to be not up to premiership standard.

[wellman]

1 hour ago, Spiderpig said:

Shields was good at championship level, thats why we signed him, but turned out to be not up to premiership standard.

They're probably playing him as a striker not a winger 

[Stuwell2]

On 2/25/2023 at 5:18 PM, Spiderpig said:

Shields was good at championship level, thats why we signed him, but turned out to be not up to premiership standard.

I’m sure a few Aberdeen fans said the same about Shankland when he was with them. 

[pretzel]

On 2/25/2023 at 7:03 PM, wellman said:

They're probably playing him as a striker not a winger 

I'm happy to see that his loan spell is going well at Queen's Park but tbf he has played as a striker on numerous occasions for us, it might sound harsh but I think he lacks the quality to play in the top flight. I don't know if it was a confidence thing or that but some of his efforts on goal i.e. in games versus Dundee United, Killie and Livingston were absolutely wild.

6 hours ago, Stuwell2 said:

I’m sure a few Aberdeen fans said the same about Shankland when he was with them. 

I think Shankland was only a teenager when he joined them and was constantly farmed out on loan, I think he had a great spell with St Mirren but when he rejoined them for a second spell he struggled. Before this season kicked off I think he only had 7 or 8 top-flight goals. I didn't realise Shields is two years younger than him so there might be hope yet.

[wellfan]

4 hours ago, pretzel said:

I'm happy to see that his loan spell is going well at Queen's Park but tbf he has played as a striker on numerous occasions for us, it might sound harsh but I think he lacks the quality to play in the top flight. I don't know if it was a confidence thing or that but some of his efforts on goal i.e. in games versus Dundee United, Killie and Livingston were absolutely wild.

If Shields returns from the loan, is given a chance to play through the middle again and continues to flop, it will re-confirm for me that he is not good enough for this level.

[Kmcalpin]

I think the jury is still out on him although I'm tending towards the view that he isn't quite good enough at this level. If he returns and is given a last chance its important that he is played in natural position i.e. in the centre. However there are 2 other relevant factors at play. What is Queens Park's favoured set up (according to the BBC they played a 5-2-3-1 on Saturday)? Secondly, what type of players sit in support of him?

[mfc]

I've nothing against shields,he always tried his best but just isn't good enough,I hope he does really well between now and the end of the season for himself and also the better he does the chances are someone will take him off our hands in the summer.we are most likely in for a squad overall in the summer and we don't need someone coming back that has struggled already,it will suit both sides to part ways.

[David]

I always felt his best position was simply as back-up for Van Veen. He never looked comfortable playing on the wing, which is where a few managers decided to use him, so they must have seen something in him or were just incredibly short of options.

This summer we'll definitely be losing Crankshaw and Obika when their loan periods end, and we could potentially also be losing Efford, Aitchison, and Mandron who are all out of contract. If Kettlewell likes the look of him and he continues scoring in the Championship he could still have a future here if he wanted it.