2023/24 ins & outs discussion

[smiddy]

was roddie not his bro in law or something

[grizzlyg]

1 hour ago, smiddy said:

was roddie not his bro in law or something

Yup

 

[David]

On 11/24/2023 at 7:22 PM, bobbybingo said:

Your example of a smaller club than Motherwell is Brighton, which you acknowledge is a bigger club than us? Ok.

No, not examples of a smaller club than Motherwell, I said "other smaller clubs," as in clubs like Motherwell, who are smaller than many in their division.

On 11/24/2023 at 7:22 PM, bobbybingo said:

You can throw as much context at that as you like, but when they can spend 30 million quid on a single player, it's reasonable to assume he'll be half decent. What relation that has to our signing policy, I don't know.

Well, context is a significant factor here. Although Brighton might be willing to invest £30 million in a player, they find themselves in direct competition with teams capable of spending upwards of £80 million on a single player. Brighton's wage bill ranks 14th among the 20 teams in the league, providing a clear perspective on the circumstantial challenges they face.

Smaller clubs like Brighton succeed not because of their financial prowess but due to their well-structured systems and unique approaches. Examples of this include:

Data Analytics and Scouting:

• Effective use of data analytics in scouting helps identify players with specific attributes that align with the team's playing style.
• Brighton has been known for employing a data-driven approach, using analytics to identify players who can contribute significantly to the team.

On this point, I feel we've been really poor. I mean, the data analytics were right there for Theo Bair. It didn't take an advanced system to work out how he's likely to perform. I said before a ball was kicked that if he gets regular starts for us we can likely expect maybe 4 goals. Someone dropped the ball big-time on that signing. The fact he was given a 2-year deal was borderline criminal.

Youth Development:

• Developing a strong youth academy can be a cost-effective way to produce talented players who can contribute to the first team or be sold for a profit.
• Brighton's commitment to youth development can be seen in their efforts to nurture talent from a young age.

Our clubs management of our youth department hasn't been the best. We've seen a lot of players leave when they could have been approached earlier about signing a new deal and so on. That's not to say that every young player will want to sign a deal, but I feel we've missed the boat on a few of our players due to us not being on top of things and allowing other clubs to swoop in and take advantage.

Strategic Managerial Appointments:

• Appointing managers with a proven track record of success in developing teams and getting the best out of players.
• Stability in coaching staff can contribute to long-term success by providing continuity and a consistent playing style.

Again, this is a criteria we should be looking at from a lower level. Which managers are doing a good job in the lower reaches of the English, Welsh, or Irish leagues? Who has shown that they can develop a team, improve players, and work with youth? 

An important facet of this section is that the manager needs a competent recruitment and analytics team working with him. Do we have that? I'm not so sure. Which is why I'm not 100% sure that the manager is entirely to blame.

Team Cohesion and Tactical Consistency:

• Building a cohesive team with a strong sense of identity and a consistent playing style can lead to better on-field performance.
• Maintaining tactical consistency, even with changes in personnel, helps players adapt quickly and enhances team performance.

This is something that is a hallmark of Brighton's success, and it really isn't down to finance. They were linked with all manner of different, well-known coaches when Potter left, but they brought in De Zerbi. Their Chief Exec actually said the main reason for his appointment was that he was a "cultural and technical" fit. Sure, he's different in some ways but has a similar philosophy in most areas, which means he doesn't need to completely tear up the squad and start again to fit his own style.

Anyway, a lengthy post, but I think it's important to stress that we can't (and shouldn't) just shrug our shoulders and say "Well, we signed Bair and Obika because we can only afford £20 and a Curly Wurly."

There are a lot of areas we could be better in that don't require tons of money. We can, with some proper oversight, become one of the clubs that catch tomorrow's much sought-after analytics, strategic and tactical geniuses before they hit the radar of bigger clubs. Same with youth players and the management team we have at that level.

[wellsince75]

52 minutes ago, David said:

No, not examples of a smaller club than Motherwell, I said "other smaller clubs," as in clubs like Motherwell, who are smaller than many in their division.

Well, context is a significant factor here. Although Brighton might be willing to invest £30 million in a player, they find themselves in direct competition with teams capable of spending upwards of £80 million on a single player. Brighton's wage bill ranks 14th among the 20 teams in the league, providing a clear perspective on the circumstantial challenges they face.

Smaller clubs like Brighton succeed not because of their financial prowess but due to their well-structured systems and unique approaches. Examples of this include:

Data Analytics and Scouting:

• Effective use of data analytics in scouting helps identify players with specific attributes that align with the team's playing style.
• Brighton has been known for employing a data-driven approach, using analytics to identify players who can contribute significantly to the team.

On this point, I feel we've been really poor. I mean, the data analytics were right there for Theo Bair. It didn't take an advanced system to work out how he's likely to perform. I said before a ball was kicked that if he gets regular starts for us we can likely expect maybe 4 goals. Someone dropped the ball big-time on that signing. The fact he was given a 2-year deal was borderline criminal.

Youth Development:

• Developing a strong youth academy can be a cost-effective way to produce talented players who can contribute to the first team or be sold for a profit.
• Brighton's commitment to youth development can be seen in their efforts to nurture talent from a young age.

Our clubs management of our youth department hasn't been the best. We've seen a lot of players leave when they could have been approached earlier about signing a new deal and so on. That's not to say that every young player will want to sign a deal, but I feel we've missed the boat on a few of our players due to us not being on top of things and allowing other clubs to swoop in and take advantage.

Strategic Managerial Appointments:

• Appointing managers with a proven track record of success in developing teams and getting the best out of players.
• Stability in coaching staff can contribute to long-term success by providing continuity and a consistent playing style.

Again, this is a criteria we should be looking at from a lower level. Which managers are doing a good job in the lower reaches of the English, Welsh, or Irish leagues? Who has shown that they can develop a team, improve players, and work with youth? 

An important facet of this section is that the manager needs a competent recruitment and analytics team working with him. Do we have that? I'm not so sure. Which is why I'm not 100% sure that the manager is entirely to blame.

Team Cohesion and Tactical Consistency:

• Building a cohesive team with a strong sense of identity and a consistent playing style can lead to better on-field performance.
• Maintaining tactical consistency, even with changes in personnel, helps players adapt quickly and enhances team performance.

This is something that is a hallmark of Brighton's success, and it really isn't down to finance. They were linked with all manner of different, well-known coaches when Potter left, but they brought in De Zerbi. Their Chief Exec actually said the main reason for his appointment was that he was a "cultural and technical" fit. Sure, he's different in some ways but has a similar philosophy in most areas, which means he doesn't need to completely tear up the squad and start again to fit his own style.

Anyway, a lengthy post, but I think it's important to stress that we can't (and shouldn't) just shrug our shoulders and say "Well, we signed Bair and Obika because we can only afford £20 and a Curly Wurly."

There are a lot of areas we could be better in that don't require tons of money. We can, with some proper oversight, become one of the clubs that catch tomorrow's much sought-after analytics, strategic and tactical geniuses before they hit the radar of bigger clubs. Same with youth players and the management team we have at that level.

brilliant post @David.  Get your CV in for the CEO role.   You've outlined a very clear vision and strategy that can be adopted .   Really enjoyable read. 

[texanwellfan]

2 hours ago, wellsince75 said:

brilliant post @David.  Get your CV in for the CEO role.   You've outlined a very clear vision and strategy that can be adopted .   Really enjoyable read. 

He doesn’t have a proven track record! 

[David]

1 hour ago, texanwellfan said:

He doesn’t have a proven track record! 

Indeed I do not! But, if I can identify those very basic points off the top of my head on an internet forum, surely the club could find someone who's actually qualified and skilled to do it? 😂

[bobbybingo]

13 hours ago, David said:

No, not examples of a smaller club than Motherwell, I said "other smaller clubs," as in clubs like Motherwell, who are smaller than many in their division.

Well, context is a significant factor here. Although Brighton might be willing to invest £30 million in a player, they find themselves in direct competition with teams capable of spending upwards of £80 million on a single player. Brighton's wage bill ranks 14th among the 20 teams in the league, providing a clear perspective on the circumstantial challenges they face.

Smaller clubs like Brighton succeed not because of their financial prowess but due to their well-structured systems and unique approaches. Examples of this include:

Data Analytics and Scouting:

• Effective use of data analytics in scouting helps identify players with specific attributes that align with the team's playing style.
• Brighton has been known for employing a data-driven approach, using analytics to identify players who can contribute significantly to the team.

On this point, I feel we've been really poor. I mean, the data analytics were right there for Theo Bair. It didn't take an advanced system to work out how he's likely to perform. I said before a ball was kicked that if he gets regular starts for us we can likely expect maybe 4 goals. Someone dropped the ball big-time on that signing. The fact he was given a 2-year deal was borderline criminal.

Youth Development:

• Developing a strong youth academy can be a cost-effective way to produce talented players who can contribute to the first team or be sold for a profit.
• Brighton's commitment to youth development can be seen in their efforts to nurture talent from a young age.

Our clubs management of our youth department hasn't been the best. We've seen a lot of players leave when they could have been approached earlier about signing a new deal and so on. That's not to say that every young player will want to sign a deal, but I feel we've missed the boat on a few of our players due to us not being on top of things and allowing other clubs to swoop in and take advantage.

Strategic Managerial Appointments:

• Appointing managers with a proven track record of success in developing teams and getting the best out of players.
• Stability in coaching staff can contribute to long-term success by providing continuity and a consistent playing style.

Again, this is a criteria we should be looking at from a lower level. Which managers are doing a good job in the lower reaches of the English, Welsh, or Irish leagues? Who has shown that they can develop a team, improve players, and work with youth? 

An important facet of this section is that the manager needs a competent recruitment and analytics team working with him. Do we have that? I'm not so sure. Which is why I'm not 100% sure that the manager is entirely to blame.

Team Cohesion and Tactical Consistency:

• Building a cohesive team with a strong sense of identity and a consistent playing style can lead to better on-field performance.
• Maintaining tactical consistency, even with changes in personnel, helps players adapt quickly and enhances team performance.

This is something that is a hallmark of Brighton's success, and it really isn't down to finance. They were linked with all manner of different, well-known coaches when Potter left, but they brought in De Zerbi. Their Chief Exec actually said the main reason for his appointment was that he was a "cultural and technical" fit. Sure, he's different in some ways but has a similar philosophy in most areas, which means he doesn't need to completely tear up the squad and start again to fit his own style.

Anyway, a lengthy post, but I think it's important to stress that we can't (and shouldn't) just shrug our shoulders and say "Well, we signed Bair and Obika because we can only afford £20 and a Curly Wurly."

There are a lot of areas we could be better in that don't require tons of money. We can, with some proper oversight, become one of the clubs that catch tomorrow's much sought-after analytics, strategic and tactical geniuses before they hit the radar of bigger clubs. Same with youth players and the management team we have at that level.

Yeah, Brighton are smaller than other clubs in their division. They finished 6th last season and sit 8th just now. Sounds familiar.

There's always room for improvement - certainly in our summer recruitment - but I suppose it's a bit easier to run successful youth academies and hand pick (and hold onto) players or managers when you have tens or hundreds of millions to throw at it. 

When you say a lot of youth players have left when they could have been approached about signing a new deal, which ones are you talking about? And did you find an example of a club that's doing these things in Scotland?

[weeyin]

I agree these things always have to be put into context. When you put Brighton's finances into context, however, you can see how disastrous they have been.

After they were promoted back to the EPL in 2017, Brighton managed to lose over £270 million in their first four seasons, putting them into the top 10 loss making clubs in Premiership history.

They required a £427 million investment from chariman Tony Bloom to keep them afloat in tandem with a £37.3 million bank loan.

It's not clear how much of that loss was invested in their youth development programme, but as part of their overall financial model it would be clearly unsustainable for a club like ourselves.

Of course there are things we can do better, and like any business, we should be looking to improve every aspect year after year. Whether that's more data analytics, more aggressive contracts, different scouting methods or something else, it should all be reviewed on a regular basis and changes applied wherever needed.

 

[Spiderpig]

12 hours ago, weeyin said:

I agree these things always have to be put into context. When you put Brighton's finances into context, however, you can see how disastrous they have been.

After they were promoted back to the EPL in 2017, Brighton managed to lose over £270 million in their first four seasons, putting them into the top 10 loss making clubs in Premiership history.

They required a £427 million investment from chariman Tony Bloom to keep them afloat in tandem with a £37.3 million bank loan.

It's not clear how much of that loss was invested in their youth development programme, but as part of their overall financial model it would be clearly unsustainable for a club like ourselves.

Of course there are things we can do better, and like any business, we should be looking to improve every aspect year after year. Whether that's more data analytics, more aggressive contracts, different scouting methods or something else, it should all be reviewed on a regular basis and changes applied wherever needed.

 

And ideally all done within a budget that does not put us on the road to administration again. As for the comparison with an EPL club they all operate in a different universe to us so it a nonsense exercise.

[David]

On 11/28/2023 at 7:56 AM, bobbybingo said:

Yeah, Brighton are smaller than other clubs in their division. They finished 6th last season and sit 8th just now. Sounds familiar.

There's always room for improvement - certainly in our summer recruitment - but I suppose it's a bit easier to run successful youth academies and hand pick (and hold onto) players or managers when you have tens or hundreds of millions to throw at it. 

There is always room for improvement, and as I said, we could be looking to make those improvements rather than doing the exact same thing we always do, which is throwing money away every January trying to rectify ridiculous mistakes made the previous summer.

Saying that it's easier with hundreds of millions of pounds to throw at it is a cop-out in my opinion. Sure, we won't be attracting the real top-level youth talent that those clubs you mention can, but we could look at the way they go about their business and adapt it to fit within our financial capabilities. Some of it will not be doable, but a lot of it will be, or at least a version of it.

A club our size has to box clever, otherwise we will come undone at some point. We cannot continue the process of throwing shite against the wall every summer and hoping some of it sticks. That's not sustainable. 

One area that is a real leveller when used correctly is data analytics. We could be doing way better in that department, with the following being areas I personally think we could improve.

• Integrate Analytics into Decision-Making: Embed data-driven decision-making into the club's culture. This means utilizing analytics not only in player recruitment but also in tactical analysis, injury prevention, and performance optimization.
• Invest in Analytics Tools: Even with limited resources, invest in basic analytics tools that can provide valuable insights. This may include software for performance analysis, player tracking, and statistical modelling.
• Collaborate with Experts: Consider partnerships with external data analytics experts or firms. This can be a cost-effective way to access advanced analytics capabilities without the need for an in-house team.
• Focus on Market Inefficiencies: Smaller clubs can benefit from identifying market inefficiencies that larger clubs might overlook. This could involve targeting players from specific regions, leagues, or age groups where value can be found at a lower cost.
• Monitor Player Progression: Use analytics to track the development of players within the club. This involves not only assessing first-team players but also monitoring the progress of youth academy prospects.
• Feedback Loop: Establish a feedback loop that involves continuous evaluation and refinement of the analytics process. Learn from both successful and unsuccessful player acquisitions to improve the effectiveness of future recruitment efforts.
• Adapt to Changing Trends: Stay abreast of advancements in sports analytics and be flexible in adapting strategies to changing trends. This adaptability is crucial in maximizing the benefits of data analytics in a dynamic football landscape.

I know that some of the above may already be in place, but quite honestly, I've seen very little evidence of this being the case. We could be way better in this area. And we don't need to spend a fortune to get there.

19 hours ago, weeyin said:

I agree these things always have to be put into context. When you put Brighton's finances into context, however, you can see how disastrous they have been.

After they were promoted back to the EPL in 2017, Brighton managed to lose over £270 million in their first four seasons, putting them into the top 10 loss making clubs in Premiership history.

They required a £427 million investment from chariman Tony Bloom to keep them afloat in tandem with a £37.3 million bank loan.

It's not clear how much of that loss was invested in their youth development programme, but as part of their overall financial model it would be clearly unsustainable for a club like ourselves.

I'm not an expert on Brighton, and I never said they were perfect in all aspects. I'm sure they're doing what every team down there is doing, which is spending a lot of money on players. They have to in order to compete with the best teams in the world, but they are also well-known for their ability to identify talent on the upswing before the bigger clubs recognise them. We could certainly look to do that, albeit at a lower level. 

From my research, there wasn't an astronomical amount spent on their youth development or analytics in relation to the league they're in and their competition. There's a ceiling in what those who are experts in that area are paid. It's not as if a Head of Analytics at Brighton is on £5 million a year or anything. 

6 hours ago, Spiderpig said:

And ideally all done within a budget that does not put us on the road to administration again. As for the comparison with an EPL club they all operate in a different universe to us so it a nonsense exercise.

The only nonsense is your claiming that any attempt to be "forward thinking and ambitious" costs serious cash and would have us bankrupt and out of business. That's absolute nonsense.

You refuse to see that there's a middle ground between constantly chasing our tail and trying to rectify poorly thought-out signings and managerial appointments and spending our way to oblivion like John Boyle did.

Absolutely no one I've seen on this forum is advocating for us to spend silly money on players past their best like we did during that era. What we're talking about is looking to change things up and focus on avenues that won't cost a fortune, and that should help us put not just a better team on the park but also set us on a road to being a more consistent, healthy club.

Make no mistake, the points I mention above can be implemented at a club like Motherwell, and we wouldn't need to break the bank to do so. In reality, we're likely spending the money in other, less effective ways already.

 

[bobbybingo]

34 minutes ago, David said:

There is always room for improvement, and as I said, we could be looking to make those improvements rather than doing the exact same thing we always do, which is throwing money away every January trying to rectify ridiculous mistakes made the previous summer.

Saying that it's easier with hundreds of millions of pounds to throw at it is a cop-out in my opinion. Sure, we won't be attracting the real top-level youth talent that those clubs you mention can, but we could look at the way they go about their business and adapt it to fit within our financial capabilities. Some of it will not be doable, but a lot of it will be, or at least a version of it.

A club our size has to box clever, otherwise we will come undone at some point. We cannot continue the process of throwing shite against the wall every summer and hoping some of it sticks. That's not sustainable. 

One area that is a real leveller when used correctly is data analytics. We could be doing way better in that department, with the following being areas I personally think we could improve.

• Integrate Analytics into Decision-Making: Embed data-driven decision-making into the club's culture. This means utilizing analytics not only in player recruitment but also in tactical analysis, injury prevention, and performance optimization.
• Invest in Analytics Tools: Even with limited resources, invest in basic analytics tools that can provide valuable insights. This may include software for performance analysis, player tracking, and statistical modelling.
• Collaborate with Experts: Consider partnerships with external data analytics experts or firms. This can be a cost-effective way to access advanced analytics capabilities without the need for an in-house team.
• Focus on Market Inefficiencies: Smaller clubs can benefit from identifying market inefficiencies that larger clubs might overlook. This could involve targeting players from specific regions, leagues, or age groups where value can be found at a lower cost.
• Monitor Player Progression: Use analytics to track the development of players within the club. This involves not only assessing first-team players but also monitoring the progress of youth academy prospects.
• Feedback Loop: Establish a feedback loop that involves continuous evaluation and refinement of the analytics process. Learn from both successful and unsuccessful player acquisitions to improve the effectiveness of future recruitment efforts.
• Adapt to Changing Trends: Stay abreast of advancements in sports analytics and be flexible in adapting strategies to changing trends. This adaptability is crucial in maximizing the benefits of data analytics in a dynamic football landscape.

I know that some of the above may already be in place, but quite honestly, I've seen very little evidence of this being the case. We could be way better in this area. And we don't need to spend a fortune to get there.

I'm not an expert on Brighton, and I never said they were perfect in all aspects. I'm sure they're doing what every team down there is doing, which is spending a lot of money on players. They have to in order to compete with the best teams in the world, but they are also well-known for their ability to identify talent on the upswing before the bigger clubs recognise them. We could certainly look to do that, albeit at a lower level. 

From my research, there wasn't an astronomical amount spent on their youth development or analytics in relation to the league they're in and their competition. There's a ceiling in what those who are experts in that area are paid. It's not as if a Head of Analytics at Brighton is on £5 million a year or anything. 

The only nonsense is your claiming that any attempt to be "forward thinking and ambitious" costs serious cash and would have us bankrupt and out of business. That's absolute nonsense.

You refuse to see that there's a middle ground between constantly chasing our tail and trying to rectify poorly thought-out signings and managerial appointments and spending our way to oblivion like John Boyle did.

Absolutely no one I've seen on this forum is advocating for us to spend silly money on players past their best like we did during that era. What we're talking about is looking to change things up and focus on avenues that won't cost a fortune, and that should help us put not just a better team on the park but also set us on a road to being a more consistent, healthy club.

Make no mistake, the points I mention above can be implemented at a club like Motherwell, and we wouldn't need to break the bank to do so. In reality, we're likely spending the money in other, less effective ways already.

 

Certain ways of going about things could be adopted, but there is one huge difference between recruitment at clubs like Motherwell and clubs from the world's richest league. Both can use analytics etc to identify top talent, but only one can go out and buy the players they want. The other has to hope those targets become available on loan, then compete with everyone else to land them.

Brighton's previous head of recruitment, Paul Winstanley, moved to Chelsea last year. Funnily enough, given your comment about us failing to tie up youth players on contracts (do you have the names of the guys you were referring to yet?), the owners are apparently not happy at all with him for failing to tie up Emma Hayes on a new contract, as he was instructed to do.

The new guy at Brighton is Sam Jewell, who got the job in February. His previous experience in that role consists of a season at Swindon. He was asked about the difficulties involved in doing that job at a club where money is scarce. He said:

"It makes the loan market really important at that level, so you’ve got to have extensive knowledge of U21 players in the top divisions. There is plenty of competition for such players, but we had a certain style of play which meant clubs wanted to send us their players, and we flourished as a result. We maybe played a bit too much football at times for that level, but it was a really important period in my development..."

Sounds like the kind of thing we should be doing. But I wonder if Swindon fans agree they "flourished" during his time there. They finished 15th in the league that year. The previous season they were 4th, the following they were relegated. Time will tell how he gets on at Brighton.

[David]

Then maybe the answer is to continue as we have been over the past few years? I imagine there'll be a glut of panic buys this January as usual, and we might even be watching a team managed by Stevie Frail if results don't go our way over the next month or so.

Then we get to the summer and rinse and repeat. 

[bobbybingo]

35 minutes ago, David said:

Then maybe the answer is to continue as we have been over the past few years? I imagine there'll be a glut of panic buys this January as usual, and we might even be watching a team managed by Stevie Frail if results don't go our way over the next month or so.

Then we get to the summer and rinse and repeat. 

I'm not advocating doing nothing. There may well be lessons to be learned from other clubs, but the example you gave, Brighton, have spent vast amounts of money to get to the position they're in, so I'm extremely dubious about how well you could adapt their approach on a shoestring budget. 

The best of our summer singings has undoubtedly been Biereth. Is that the future for us, young, hungry players brought in on loan from teams at a higher level? Probably.

That's where someone can earn their corn, identifying targets before they're picked up by our rivals. It would then be up to Motherwell to convince the parent clubs this is the right place to develop their youngsters. It's still a risky strategy and, even it it works, the manager would be required to rebuild the squad on a regular basis, same as now - though not because of failure. You'd obviously need experienced pros to help them. Getting guys of a decent standard in the door will always be difficult, as they're already in the game and will be known to every other club on the lookout.

You've been critical of the guys in charge here for not getting a lot/a few of our youth players on longer contracts and allowing other sides to pinch them. Again, which players you're talking about?

[David]

1 hour ago, bobbybingo said:

There may well be lessons to be learned from other clubs, but the example you gave, Brighton, have spent vast amounts of money to get to the position they're in, so I'm extremely dubious about how well you could adapt their approach on a shoestring budget. 

I primarily mentioned Brighton because they are in a similar position to us, relatively speaking. They are competing with clubs who have far and away more money to spend than they do. While they've spent vast amounts of money in comparison to us, they haven't when compared to clubs they're competing with regularly. That they are punching above their weight (I hate that term, but still) cannot be argued against.

What we need to do is look at modernising the club from the top down. As much as I appreciate the work that the people we have running the club have done, it's pretty plain to see that we're not getting anywhere under the current leadership. I had hoped when Burrows moved on that we'd see a younger guy come in with some fresh ideas. That's not happened. In fact, we've seen no one appointed from the outside.

It's not just Brighton who are implementing a modern approach to football and seeing the benefits. There are clubs all over Europe who are doing it. 

Bodø/Glimt are another good example. A club that has invested in data analytics and a sizable rebuild behind the scenes in personnel and approach, and are now reaping the rewards after their return to the Norwegian top flight in 2018. 

And I'm sure you'll be able to find some areas they haven't done well in and use that as a reason why we can't do it, but the truth is, there are clubs all over Europe who are at least trying to change the way they go about their business.

Why can't we be one of them?

1 hour ago, bobbybingo said:

The best of our summer singings has undoubtedly been Biereth. Is that the future for us, young, hungry players brought in on loan from teams at a higher level? Probably.

He has been good for sure, but I think his abilities have shone even brighter because he's being compared to absolute dogshit like Theo Bair. That we're basically relying on a 20-year-old kid who'd played less than 20 first-team games when he arrived here isn't ideal. 

1 hour ago, bobbybingo said:

That's where someone can earn their corn, identifying targets before they're picked up by our rivals. It would then be up to Motherwell to convince the parent clubs this is the right place to develop their youngsters. It's still a risky strategy and, even it it works, the manager would be required to rebuild the squad on a regular basis, same as now - though not because of failure. You'd obviously need experienced pros to help them. Getting guys of a decent standard in the door will always be difficult, as they're already in the game and will be known to every other club on the lookout.

While loan signings are definitely important, they should not be the spine of our side. We need to be using the technical resources I mentioned previously to bring in players from markets that aren't quite as high up the priority list for clubs with more money.

The more money a club has to spend, the more they're interested in the finished article. We need to be a club where a player can become that finished article, or close to it, before moving on. 

What we should not be doing is making signings like we have of late. Seriously, I'd love to know the reasoning behind handing a two-year contract to Theo Bair. What data backed up this move? I'd be interested in seeing that because everything I've looked at told me that we should expect nothing different to what he'd done at every other club he's played at. 

Again, I said it months ago. The data suggests we can expect around 4 goals for the season if he gets regular starts. 

Obika. What was the thinking there? The data suggests we could expect a player who may look good in flashes but who is too injury-prone to do much of value. 

I could go on, but you get the picture. This all suggests to me that we're absolutely not looking at the data and the information available to us when making signings. We're panic buying because there is no strategy, there is no plan, there is no long-term vision in place.

It wouldn't take millions of pounds to change the way we're approaching transfers at the moment.

1 hour ago, bobbybingo said:

You've been critical of the guys in charge here for not getting a lot/a few of our youth players on longer contracts and allowing other sides to pinch them. Again, which players you're talking about?

There are players dotted throughout the past 5 years or so that are good examples. You know who they are, as we've all discussed them at length here. 

And I know, the general consensus is that when a bigger club comes in we just have to shrug our shoulders and say "Ah well, they can offer more money. That's how it goes." 

But, there are things we can do to make the club more attractive to young players. 

Clear Development Pathway:

• Outline a clear and well-defined pathway for player development within the club.
• Highlight opportunities for youth players to train with the first team or participate in competitive matches.

First-Team Opportunities:

• Demonstrate a commitment to providing genuine opportunities for youth players to break into the first team.
• Illustrate instances where young players have successfully transitioned to regular first-team football.

We don't do this well enough in my opinion. We're too quick to fire players out on loan to clubs lower down the pecking order in Scotland, only to play absolute dross in their place. If I was a young player like Mark Ferrie or Robbie Mahon looking at the club just now, seeing that they deem me not good enough at the moment while playing who we have? I'd be looking for ways to exit the club as quickly as possible for new opportunities.

Robbie Mahon in particular is looking very good at Edinburgh City, winning some MOTM awards, scoring three goals and providing two assists. But, we have brought in a manager who's decided we don't use wingers, so he's got about as much chance of playing for Motherwell as I have.

So yeah, I think we're failing big-time here. Not only have we been reportedly slow when it comes to offering a contract to youth players, but we're not really giving them much reason to want to sign those deals either. We're signing absolute dross that will get game time ahead of the youth players, for the most part, changing managers consistently which is bringing with it a total change in approach and philosophy, which adds to little to no consistency. 

I like Kettlewell as a pundit, but why we brought someone in who had a completely different approach to that of the previous manager right after we made a bunch of signings to suit the former's style of play is beyond me. It all makes zero sense. 

There's no long-term vision and approach, and when you can't sell that to a young player or his family/agent, you're always going to have a hard time convincing them to stay. If their future will consist of being shunted out on loan to Stenhousemuir or Cowdenbeath I'm not sure you'll have them buying into the plan.

Even worse, this season we've seen the likes of Robbie Garcia and Ewan Wilson hardly feature for Cowdenbeath and Stirling. I have to ask then. What's the point? We always hear about clubs wanting to send their young players out on loan to destinations that will benefit them and give them game time. Why aren't we doing that? What possible benefit will either of those lads get from sitting on the bench at those clubs? They'd be as well staying at Motherwell where the training facilities are better.

It's already a difficult job convincing young players and their families to stick it out at Motherwell when they're being offered more money elsewhere, but when you throw all of the above into the mix? That makes it even harder.

It all reeks of amateurism, sadly. 

[bobbybingo]

10 minutes ago, David said:

There are players dotted throughout the past 5 years or so that are good examples. You know who they are, as we've all discussed them at length here. 

Max Johnston is one of them, I suppose.

Sorry, but can you tell me who the others are, youngsters we allowed to leave through carelessness and didn't make a profit from, because I can't think of a list.

[dennyc]

34 minutes ago, David said:

I primarily mentioned Brighton because they are in a similar position to us, relatively speaking. They are competing with clubs who have far and away more money to spend than they do. While they've spent vast amounts of money in comparison to us, they haven't when compared to clubs they're competing with regularly. That they are punching above their weight (I hate that term, but still) cannot be argued against.

 

I think there are certainly areas where we could be smarter. That is the case no matter which Club you look at. And, yes, there are comparisons that can be made to Brighton but only in respect of their "weight" in the Division they are in.

Purely on a financial basis, the level at which they can enter the recruitment market (players and staff) is way above the level at which we can. So although they cannot compete with the Chelsea's and Man City's of this world, they are still operating in a different world to us. And the level they operate at makes the possibility of recruitment success more likely and the impact of failure less ruinous.

In short, in the market we operate in, the chance of failure is much more likely and the financial impact of any failure is greatly magnified. We are scraping the bottom of the barrel when we take a punt on Bair. Brighton are scraping the bottom of their barrel when they take a £5m punt on some unknown South American youngster.

Regarding youngsters being allowed to leave, if giants such as Chelsea, Man City, Rangers, Celtic cannot retain star prospects due to riches/attractions on offer elsewhere, then it is a bit naive to expect Motherwell to be the exception. There comes a time when it would be madness for a youngster to sit tight. These players might be Motherwell fans, but first and foremost they are professionals with a career to manage. And would any of us refuse a tenfold wage increase (minimum)?

I actually think we do pretty well regards income from youth development. I would prefer the kids to stay but that is just not realistic The Board were also very open. As a fan owned Club we must complete at least one decent player sale a season to compete at our current level. With top ups from youth sales as required. If either does not happen, then Budgets will be cut and as a result squad quality will reduce. Every one of the Managers who has left in recent years hit that exact barrier, with the most scary thing being that each time the timescale reduced. Not saying those Managers did not have faults, but the quality reduction did for them.

Everything comes down to finance at the end of the day. Unlike Brighton, we cannot afford to make mistakes.

[Spiderpig]

18 minutes ago, dennyc said:

I think there are certainly areas where we could be smarter. That is the case no matter which Club you look at. And, yes, there are comparisons that can be made to Brighton but only in respect of their "weight" in the Division they are in.

Purely on a financial basis, the level at which they can enter the recruitment market (players and staff) is way above the level at which we can. So although they cannot compete with the Chelsea's and Man City's of this world, they are still operating in a different world to us. And the level they operate at makes the possibility of recruitment success more likely and the impact of failure less ruinous.

In short, in the market we operate in, the chance of failure is much more likely and the financial impact of any failure is greatly magnified. We are scraping the bottom of the barrel when we take a punt on Bair. Brighton are scraping the bottom of their barrel when they take a £5m punt on some unknown South American youngster.

Regarding youngsters being allowed to leave, if giants such as Chelsea, Man City, Rangers, Celtic cannot retain star prospects due to riches/attractions on offer elsewhere, then it is a bit naive to expect Motherwell to be the exception. There comes a time when it would be madness for a youngster to sit tight. These players might be Motherwell fans, but first and foremost they are professionals with a career to manage. And would any of us refuse a tenfold wage increase (minimum)?

I actually think we do pretty well regards income from youth development. I would prefer the kids to stay but that is just not realistic The Board were also very open. As a fan owned Club we must complete at least one decent player sale a season to compete at our current level. With top ups from youth sales as required. If either does not happen, then Budgets will be cut and as a result squad quality will reduce. Every one of the Managers who has left in recent years hit that exact barrier, with the most scary thing being that each time the timescale reduced. Not saying those Managers did not have faults, but the quality reduction did for them.

Everything comes down to finance at the end of the day. Unlike Brighton, we cannot afford to make mistakes.

This, some reality to the debate at last a great post.

[Mad Dog]

4 hours ago, bobbybingo said:

Max Johnston is one of them, I suppose.

Sorry, but can you tell me who the others are, youngsters we allowed to leave through carelessness and didn't make a profit from, because I can't think of a list.

Bailey Rice? Reece McAlear? Stuart McKinstry? Allan Campbell and Chris Cadden both established themselves, playing a good number of games before leaving us for nothing. Paul Slane if you want to go back a bit further.

[David]

3 hours ago, bobbybingo said:

Max Johnston is one of them, I suppose.

Sorry, but can you tell me who the others are, youngsters we allowed to leave through carelessness and didn't make a profit from, because I can't think of a list.

Well, there's also Bailey Rice. And Stuart McKinstry. Again, maybe They would have left regardless. At the end of the day, money does talk, but, we certainly do ourselves no favours at the moment with how we're using our youth system. Like I said, we're punting players out on loan to sit on the bench in the lower leagues. That's not good business. Or a good look.

I wouldn't be surprised if youngsters are coming up who would maybe have entertained the idea of coming to Motherwell who are now looking elsewhere for the reasons I mentioned.

2 hours ago, dennyc said:

I think there are certainly areas where we could be smarter. That is the case no matter which Club you look at. And, yes, there are comparisons that can be made to Brighton but only in respect of their "weight" in the Division they are in.

Which is the point I've made about three times, and yet....

2 hours ago, dennyc said:

Purely on a financial basis, the level at which they can enter the recruitment market (players and staff) is way above the level at which we can. So although they cannot compete with the Chelsea's and Man City's of this world, they are still operating in a different world to us. And the level they operate at makes the possibility of recruitment success more likely and the impact of failure less ruinous.

You then go on to mention their finances as if we don't already know the gulf in the clubs. Weird. At absolutely no point have I mentioned us having anywhere near the money they do to buy players. 

2 hours ago, dennyc said:

In short, in the market we operate in, the chance of failure is much more likely and the financial impact of any failure is greatly magnified. We are scraping the bottom of the barrel when we take a punt on Bair. Brighton are scraping the bottom of their barrel when they take a £5m punt on some unknown South American youngster.

Yes, the chances of failure are higher, but again, I would absolutely love to know which analytics or data supported a move for Theo Bair. Seriously. When a guy sitting in his living room with his laptop can access information that suggests that Bair is more than likely to provide 4 or so goals at Motherwell if he starts regularly, and that the Scottish Premier League is above his ability level, you'd like to think that the club can afford to access that same information?

I hate to toot my own horn, but I said before he kicked a ball that absolutely every data set pointed to him being a waste of whatever money we are paying him. For two years.

The problem I also have is that when we say "take a punt" we're basically going on the kind of approach that clubs used back in the day when a decision was made based on some part-time scout who drives a Cortina heading to a game to watch someone and take some notes with a biro and a pad out of Woolworths. 

Times have changed. I guarantee you that Brighton aren't "taking a punt" on someone based on nothing. £5 million or not, they'll be doing their due diligence and utilising the analytics to make sure the player is at least a fit and has some chance of success. 

3 hours ago, dennyc said:

Regarding youngsters being allowed to leave, if giants such as Chelsea, Man City, Rangers, Celtic cannot retain star prospects due to riches/attractions on offer elsewhere, then it is a bit naive to expect Motherwell to be the exception. There comes a time when it would be madness for a youngster to sit tight. These players might be Motherwell fans, but first and foremost they are professionals with a career to manage. And would any of us refuse a tenfold wage increase (minimum)?

Again, as I said, there will be instances when money talks, and there's not much we can do about that. But...we can also do a lot to clean up our act as to how we're treating the youngsters at our club. Because when a kid is coming through, or when we're one of a few clubs pitching him, his parents and his representative, what we don't want is for their agent to say "Well, Motherwell of late have punted their youngsters to the depths of the Scottish leagues to sit on the bench for part-time clubs, and they also sign absolute dross and play them rather than give youth a shot. Oh, and they don't really have any kind of playing philosophy or plan or pathway for youth to get into the first team. Let's see what the other clubs have to offer."

Throw the above into the mix and it makes it quite difficult for the club to use the argument of "we don't have as much money to give you, but there's a clear and present pathway for you at our club, which includes a continuity at the club from youth to senior level, and any loans we sanction will be done with you getting playing time firmly in mind."

3 hours ago, dennyc said:

The Board were also very open. As a fan owned Club we must complete at least one decent player sale a season to compete at our current level. With top ups from youth sales as required. If either does not happen, then Budgets will be cut and as a result squad quality will reduce. Every one of the Managers who has left in recent years hit that exact barrier, with the most scary thing being that each time the timescale reduced. Not saying those Managers did not have faults, but the quality reduction did for them.

Then maybe they should look to change their approach from "taking a punt" on the likes of Theo Bair to a more measured, analytical approach? It's not 100% guaranteed success, but by fuck it would stand more chance of succeeding than what we've done of late.

At this point we're carrying out the footballing equivalent of throwing shite against a wall and seeing what might stick.

[bobbybingo]

9 minutes ago, Mad Dog said:

Bailey Rice? Reece McAlear? Stuart McKinstry? Allan Campbell and Chris Cadden both established themselves, playing a good number of games before leaving us for nothing. Paul Slane if you want to go back a bit further.

Rice and Slane rejected contracts with us to sign with the Old Firm. I'm not sure how much more the club can do when that happens. 

McAlear to Norwich, McKinstry to Leeds - again, money talks and there's no way of tying down a player who wants away.

Cadden (or his agent) knew exactly what he was doing. Campbell didn't leave for nothing.

[dennyc]

1 hour ago, Mad Dog said:

Bailey Rice? Reece McAlear? Stuart McKinstry? Allan Campbell and Chris Cadden both established themselves, playing a good number of games before leaving us for nothing. Paul Slane if you want to go back a bit further.

Rice, McAlear and McKinstrey were youth players who brought in a total in excess of £1m between them in agreed fees and add ons in lieu of Development Fees. So to say they left us for nothing is just not correct. 

Campbell and Cadden were established first team players who gave Motherwell a good number of years, served us well and then left under freedom of contract. In the same way that we recruited out of contract players from other teams. Some of whom went on to earn us a pretty penny. Some you win, some you lose.

1 hour ago, David said:

 

 

You then go on to mention their finances as if we don't already know the gulf in the clubs. Weird. At absolutely no point have I mentioned us having anywhere near the money they do to buy players. 

 

 

Nowhere did I say that you ever suggested we had similar funds to spend as Brighton.

What is weird is that you continue to ignore the fact that the level of each clubs finances means the probability of success in the transfer market for Brighton is greater than it is at Motherwell. Also Brighton can afford to get it wrong. You get what you can afford to pay for and sadly what we can afford is Bair, Shaw etc. So the risk of failure is increased. Brighton at least can buy players with a decent track record. How we have arrived at that financial situation is a whole different conversation.

Our risk of failure in the transfer market will always be far greater than any club that can afford to pay millions. I agree that means we need to be smarter in our selections but yet again that lack of finances affects the quality of resource we can allocate to analytical research.

So comparing us to Brighton ( or any established EPL Club) is nonsense. Much of what you suggest makes sense in a perfect world. But please tell me how Motherwell would fund the changes and expansion which might certainly be of benefit long term.

[Spit_It_Out]

Tbh you can compare this and that if you get the right infrastructure at the club you can compete with the Aberdeen's and Hearts,Hibs of this league and a top 4 or top 6 is more than a achievable.

And on the transfer front I am hoping Alexander comes back and takes our head of recruitment off off our hands I think he has been terrible that's been a big part of our downfall this season.

I think he is still here cause the club can't afford to pay him off or he would be gone by now.

 

[David]

16 hours ago, dennyc said:

What is weird is that you continue to ignore the fact that the level of each clubs finances means the probability of success in the transfer market for Brighton is greater than it is at Motherwell.

And yet I said...

17 hours ago, David said:

Yes, the chances of failure are higher, but again, I would absolutely love to know which analytics or data supported a move for Theo Bair. Seriously.

Surely to God you can see the point I'm making here? That if we smarten up and start utilising (or utilising correctly) some of the data and analytics available to us we wouldn't have to keep taking "a punt" on players as much. 

There is no 100% success rate in the football transfer market. None. But... if we at least try to improve in that regard we could see a higher success rate than we do now.

I'm sorry, but the recent transfer business we've done can be described as lazy at best, and absolutely criminal at worst. 

16 hours ago, dennyc said:

Also Brighton can afford to get it wrong.

Yes, and we can't. Which is all the more reason to rely on more than "hanging our hat" on someone, or "taking a punt" on others. If anything we should be more careful than Brighton are. And yet, it doesn't seem that way.

16 hours ago, dennyc said:

You get what you can afford to pay for and sadly what we can afford is Bair, Shaw etc.

I absolutely 100% guarantee that if the club did its due diligence it would have found another option better than Bair for the money we're paying him. Like I said, he's pretty much set to provide us with an average of four goals in a season where he gets more starts than he doesn't. He comes to us with virtually zero sell-on potential as well. 

The very fact that our recruitment team and manager looked at his record, and the accompanying data sets and concluded that he was worth a two-year deal is mind-boggling and makes me question their judgement.

16 hours ago, dennyc said:

I agree that means we need to be smarter in our selections but yet again that lack of finances affects the quality of resource we can allocate to analytical research.

That's true, we won't be attracting the very best analytical minds to the club, but let's not get crazy and think we'd need to outlay millions to incorporate that kind of department. 

A junior analytics team member will be able to pull the same information as his or her counterpart at Manchester City. The actual raw data isn't tiered based on finance. The information is there at a basic level. Sure, a bit more spending would allow for some extra facilities to really deep dive into the numbers, but in all honesty, we can get by without that. It's a nice to have, but not a need to have at our level.

Where the real talent comes into play is in how the data is interpreted. We could have the best data analyst in the world, but if he provides the information on someone like Theo Bair but our footballing department decides to go on a gut feeling of "hanging their hat" on him, or they fancy a project to turn someone who isn't a footballer into a footballer, then it won't matter a jot. 

I honestly believe that our problem lies not really with the players, because they're just doing what is asked of them to the ability they have. It's the recruitment department and to a lesser degree the manager. And also whoever is responsible for both hiring them and their continued employment at the club. 

16 hours ago, dennyc said:

So comparing us to Brighton ( or any established EPL Club) is nonsense.

Okay, would you rather I compared us to Bodø/Glimt instead? Average attendance of around 5,000, a stadium that holds just over 8,000. 

They're a club who have implemented an analytics-first approach and since 2018 they haven't looked back. In fact, they've managed to gradually increase their playing budget based on player sales down to the recruitment tactics they use.

they brought in Aasmund Bjørkan initially as manager, but he then moved upstairs as Chief Analyst and Sporting Director, with Kjetil Knutsen taking over as manager. 

They're now selling players for anywhere between €2 million to €8 million. And are using the exact same recruitment systems and parameters to basically "rinse and repeat" the process. Is it 100% successful? No. No system is. Is it providing a higher rate of success than "taking a punt?" Absolutely.

16 hours ago, dennyc said:

But please tell me how Motherwell would fund the changes and expansion which might certainly be of benefit long term.

You'd be surprised how little relatively speaking it would actually cost. 

You'd probably be looking at the following:

Director/Head of Analytics:

• Oversees the entire analytics department.
• Develop the overall analytics strategy aligned with the club's objectives.
• Collaborates with coaching staff and other departments to integrate analytics into decision-making processes.

Data Analysts:

• Collect and analyse data related to player performance, team tactics, and opposition analysis.
• Use statistical models and machine learning techniques to derive insights.
• Provide reports and visualisations to help coaches and management make informed decisions.

Performance Analysts:

• Focus on analysing in-game performance data.
• Provide real-time insights during matches to support coaches in making tactical adjustments.
• Work closely with the coaching staff to evaluate player performance and identify areas for improvement.

So, between 3-5 people. Again, a club like Motherwell could be looking at entry-level data analysts and performance analysts. We wouldn't be competing with clubs higher up the food chain for experienced candidates with a track record. 

What I can pretty much guarantee you is that the entire department mentioned above would cost less per year than what we'll be shelling out on panic buys in January. 

However, you need buy-in from the people who run the club and the management team. If there's resistance to this kind of approach from "football people" who prefer to go on their gut, or what their favoured agent is selling them each summer, then it won't work. 

Just like I mentioned with Bodø/Glimt, you need people in positions of power who are relatively young (at least mentally), up to speed on technology and data implementation, and who are progressive thinkers. Maybe even people who aren't from a traditional football background. 

If we're happy to remain a "wee rollercoaster" of a club, which hires managers who want players who "run their socks off" and are "honest professionals" and all that tired, cliche bullshit then we'll pretty much just continue doing what we've always done. 

Anyway, I think we all know the club most likely isn't going to go down this route. They have a hard enough time communicating via email with Well Society members, so the chances of those in power wrapping their heads around any of the above is slim to none.

It's been an interesting discussion though, so thanks to those who took part! 

[wellfan]

As I wrote previously, I, unfortunately, believe that Kettlewell signed his death warrant when he signed a striker known for their inability to score goals and sought to justify that bit of business by saying that he's hanging his hat on this project. We needed a goalscorer, not a 2-year project. I actually feel a bit of empathy for the player because he tries bloody hard for us and I want him to succeed, but it's not happening and all evidence before he was signed indicated that reality. 
 

It's ridiculous and naive of him to have signed that player and even more so to have said what he said in that interview. It also begs the question of his rationale for other signings, suggesting to me that analytics and common sense are probably double Dutch to Kettlewell, Daws and the Board.
 

Fans are fickle and won’t forget this type of bold stupidity of playing fast and loose with our tight budget. 

[bobbybingo]

13 minutes ago, wellfan said:

As I wrote previously, I, unfortunately, believe that Kettlewell signed his death warrant when he signed a striker known for their inability to score goals and sought to justify that bit of business by saying that he's hanging his hat on this project. We needed a goalscorer, not a 2-year project. I actually feel a bit of empathy for the player because he tries bloody hard for us and I want him to succeed, but it's not happening and all evidence before he was signed indicated that reality. 
 

It's ridiculous and naive of him to have signed that player and even more so to have said what he said in that interview. It also begs the question of his rationale for other signings, suggesting to me that analytics and common sense are probably double Dutch to Kettlewell, Daws and the Board.
 

Fans are fickle and won’t forget this type of bold stupidity of playing fast and loose with our tight budget. 

Fair enough. But can you name one Motherwell manager who hasn't signed at least one useless dud?