2023/24 ins & outs discussion

[GazzyB]

Which other players out on loan right now who have made one or two appearances maximum for the first team are we also annoyed haven’t been tied down on longer term deals, or is it maybe just a hindsight thing with Max?

[Wellfan91]

One thing I would point out, he wasn't a regular at Cove he played 11 games or something and a few of them were at LB as well - it obviously done him well however definitely think hes kicked on another level since returning in January bearing in mind when we recalled him he never featured even on the bench at Livi.

[steelboy]

12 hours ago, Spit_It_Out said:

 

Don't agree with you considering he was coming off a fantastic season with QOTS Played 25 games scored 2 with 2 assists that tells me he was ready for first team.

They finished bottom. 

 

 

[Onthefringes]

8 hours ago, joewarkfanclub said:

I really dont understand this logic.

Even if we had played Max from the beginning of the season, he was still out of contract at the end of it. 

So even if a club had come in for him in January, how were we going to extract a transfer fee larger than the one we will get as a development fee?

Chances are we still get in the region of £400k for him and still only get the benefit of 6 months first team action out of him. 

The best we could have hoped for is not to get a bid in January and benefit from 12 months first team football.

Like others have said repeatedly on here, you can offer a young player an improved / longer term contract. But you cant make them sign it.

They are not all Motherwell minded like David Turnbull.

Lots of variables in an ever difficult process. Hypothetical for now as we don’t know players’ intention.

I’d expect those with the grasp on development football and particularly those involved in this player would argue club haven’t moved enough to protect their asset. In reality, it’s more than signing of a contract which you’ve correctly said can’t be forced.

Any development monies are questionable despite set fees as the terms of future incomes are negotiable. I’ll rely on club accounting.

David Turnbull was David Turnbull minded.

[Wellfan91]

Ollie Crankshaw back at Stockport, nothing confirmed by us but maybe one for Kettlewell to answer on this week's presser....makes sense to be honest he doesn't fit the new style of play so to speak!

[Mad Dog]

1 hour ago, Wellfan91 said:

Ollie Crankshaw back at Stockport, nothing confirmed by us but maybe one for Kettlewell to answer on this week's presser....makes sense to be honest he doesn't fit the new style of play so to speak!

I liked him and he did fairly well at our lowest ebb this season so wish him all the best for the future.

[Spit_It_Out]

1 hour ago, steelboy said:

They finished bottom. 

 

 

I ment him personally had what it seems a good season or that not allowed if yer team goes down?

[wellsince75]

6 hours ago, Onthefringes said:

 

David Turnbull was David Turnbull minded.

apologies if I'm taking this out of context.  After injury DT resigned for us on a 2.5 year contract which took him back to the same position as when Celtic first agreed to sign him. 

He could easily have not done this , which ultimately earned us our highest ever transfer. 

Appreciate all players need to look out for themselves hence Max Jonhstone who's only played at handful of games is causing a stir. 

DT did us a turn, a very decent guy who ensured the club he followed and played for over his early years were well looked after.  Not too many would or have done this. 

[Onthefringes]

33 minutes ago, wellsince75 said:

apologies if I'm taking this out of context.  After injury DT resigned for us on a 2.5 year contract which took him back to the same position as when Celtic first agreed to sign him. 

He could easily have not done this , which ultimately earned us our highest ever transfer. 

Appreciate all players need to look out for themselves hence Max Jonhstone who's only played at handful of games is causing a stir. 

DT did us a turn, a very decent guy who ensured the club he followed and played for over his early years were well looked after.  Not too many would or have done this. 

Yeah, out of context. Not disputing all of what you’ve said either, certainly not a slight on the player himself.

His signing of that contract protected his interests post injury every bit as much as ensuring the club who developed him were looked after. He didn’t walk away from that contract for nil for example, hence, David Turnbull was David Turnbull minded.

[gilmour]

Rumour Chinese club ready to offer £800,000 plus add ons taking over £1M for KVV with a 15% sell on fee. They will multiply his wages 10x. He’s keen to go as he’s hinted a lot going on in his personal life. I’ve heard a reason but not fair to post on the internet. 

[Yabba's Turd]

Because he's family.

[Onthefringes]

17 minutes ago, Robbos boy said:

Absolute nonsense, why you are still allowed to post on hear I'll never know. The boy stood by the club, who had looked after him, which sometimes we do too much. Just have a look at some of the players on our books at the moment who are picking up a wage for sitting in the house. 100% the lad did the right thing by the club and support rather than walk away for compensation money. Well done David, hopefully you get moved on and make more money for us!!!!!!!!!.

🤣 Nae bother.

Read what is being said and not just look at the words…

Nothing said was a slight on the person.

To think he didn’t look after himself to fit the narrative of being Motherwell minded is a bit of a stretch.

[joewarkfanclub]

1 hour ago, Onthefringes said:

🤣 Nae bother.

Read what is being said and not just look at the words…

Nothing said was a slight on the person.

To think he didn’t look after himself to fit the narrative of being Motherwell minded is a bit of a stretch.

Reading between the lines, I see what you are saying.

However, it is possible that he did both.

Unlike a certain other player that used rules and regulations to get himself a move and ensure that the parent club didnt have to pay us anything.

Theres a kick back in both examples.

[smiddy]

2 hours ago, gilmour said:

Rumour Chinese club ready to offer £800,000 plus add ons taking over £1M for KVV with a 15% sell on fee. They will multiply his wages 10x. He’s keen to go as he’s hinted a lot going on in his personal life. I’ve heard a reason but not fair to post on the internet. 

i bet you will

[Onthefringes]

41 minutes ago, joewarkfanclub said:

Reading between the lines, I see what you are saying.

However, it is possible that he did both.

Unlike a certain other player that used rules and regulations to get himself a move and ensure that the parent club didnt have to pay us anything.

Theres a kick back in both examples.

Fair comment.

Worked in our favour.

[wellfan]

The conjecture re. Turnbull is staggering. Tell me more. 

[Kmcalpin]

15 hours ago, gilmour said:

Rumour Chinese club ready to offer £800,000 plus add ons taking over £1M for KVV with a 15% sell on fee. They will multiply his wages 10x. He’s keen to go as he’s hinted a lot going on in his personal life. I’ve heard a reason but not fair to post on the internet. 

I've no information whatsoever about this rumour but a 15% sell on clause for a player who is just about to turn 32 might not be a good idea.

[wellsince75]

15 hours ago, Onthefringes said:

Yeah, out of context. Not disputing all of what you’ve said either, certainly not a slight on the player himself.

His signing of that contract protected his interests post injury every bit as much as ensuring the club who developed him were looked after. He didn’t walk away from that contract for nil for example, hence, David Turnbull was David Turnbull minded.

Thanks for clarifying @Onthefringes. Apologies for the misunderstanding. 

You make a solid point, all players need to look after themselves first and foremost. Nothing wrong with that. 

re Max Johnstone suspect he picked Motherwell due to our reputation of giving players the opportunity rather than a deep desire to one day play for the mighty well.  He's also been wise enough to keep his options open to get a bigger move now he's in the spotlight. He may be the next big thing but too early to say.  

The system isn't geared up to clubs being able to hold on to the talent that they develop but I do believe it's good for us to continue to help develop and grow talent.

The ugly sisters won't and therefore we have a solid catchment area to help young talent develop. Some we'll win financially with, many we wont but if we can help local youngsters better themselves that's a good thing to be associated with and for our broader social impact of wellbeing. 
 

[joewarkfanclub]

I think the big problem for clubs like ours nowadays is the size of the academies at bigger clubs down south (and further afield for that matter). 

It used to be that a young player at Motherwell would come in play 100 games or so and if they impressed they got a big money move down south.

Nowadays there is so much money in the English game that even clubs like Leeds can come in and pay the development fee for someone who hasnt even played a first team game.

They have so much money its barely a risk for them to hoover up the best talent in the hope that a percentage of that makes good.

And it starves us of the opportunity to see out talent develop in the first team and give us the benefit of the "higher quality player we cant afford" for even just a short period.

[wellsince75]

58 minutes ago, joewarkfanclub said:

I think the big problem for clubs like ours nowadays is the size of the academies at bigger clubs down south (and further afield for that matter). 

It used to be that a young player at Motherwell would come in play 100 games or so and if they impressed they got a big money move down south.

Nowadays there is so much money in the English game that even clubs like Leeds can come in and pay the development fee for someone who hasnt even played a first team game.

They have so much money its barely a risk for them to hoover up the best talent in the hope that a percentage of that makes good.

And it starves us of the opportunity to see out talent develop in the first team and give us the benefit of the "higher quality player we cant afford" for even just a shirt period.

That's a really good point . It's relative buttons to many of the clubs down south with their financial reach. Still hope the bubble bursts but that's 2+ decades now. 
 

[gilmour]

9 hours ago, Kmcalpin said:

I've no information whatsoever about this rumour but a 15% sell on clause for a player who is just about to turn 32 might not be a good idea.

I don’t post often and only when I’m sure it’s good information. Personally I’d take the money given that  he’s desperate for it to happen. 

[Kmcalpin]

17 minutes ago, gilmour said:

I don’t post often and only when I’m sure it’s good information. Personally I’d take the money given that  he’s desperate for it to happen. 

I'm not doubting your take on this as I simply don't know, but would want to make sure we were safe from relegation before allowing him to move on. 

[joewarkfanclub]

Surely he isnt moving until the end of the season?

Dont want to stand in his way, but he is under contract.

If they want him now, make it 7 figures and we can discuss.......

[thewelllfan]

1 million for Van Veen id let him go hes not getting any younger and gives us some cash to re-invest come the summer we realistically should be safe if we win 2 more games this season.

[grizzlyg]

If there is any truth in this then I would wait till end of games before top 6. If we are safe and it's £1,000,000 it's a no brainer in my opinion...only because of his age, not because I would be wanting to get rid of him