Jump to content

Stuwell2

Legends
  • Posts

    818
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

Posts posted by Stuwell2

  1. 3 hours ago, weeyin said:

    Prudence should be the name of the game even if we get millions for Miller.

    The last thing we need to be doing is following the John Boyle Model of Recruitment & Financial Management.

    100% agree with you on that, as I’ve said previously I think the majority of the money will go towards a new training ground but I’d also expect some to be reinvested into the playing squad with the hope of getting someone who we can sell on at a profit to what he costs in wages etc 

  2. To my way of thinking we won’t see many, if any, further signings in the next few weeks until the club knows what cash it’s going to receive from the sale of Miller. The club - or the society don’t have a few million stashed away that they can afford to lose if a big money move for Miller doesn’t materialise and although it’s unlikely to happen, prudence is the name of the game.
    I’ve no doubt that they’ll have spoken with players and possibly agreed verbal terms on the condition of Miller being sold but those players may still sign for another team meanwhile. 

  3. 5 hours ago, Onthefringes said:

    The two posts above help dispel the theory.

    Club will realise a market value like never seen soon enough.

    Interesting statement mate hopefully it’s true. 
    Rumour I heard is he’s looking to go to Germany, Austria or Italy in that order of preference but no bids from those countries as yet. 

  4. 2 hours ago, dennyc said:

    As I said earlier. If you really want to distinguish between the two groups, simply remove from those that stop contributing some of the frills that attach to those that do contribute. Like training opportunities and hospitality draws. It really does come across like the Board are looking to punish those that stop contributing, even if for perfectly genuine financial reasons. Not a good look. 

     

    Not aimed at you but here my thoughts.

    I fully agree that something needs to be done to encourage people to invest regularly if they can afford it but I do have some issues with the proposals.
    Firstly rightly or wrongly the if you stop paying you lose the right to vote could be seen as a reprisal act on those who stopped paying last year after the (thankfully) rejected “investment” vote, which I hope it isn’t.
    Secondly as previously said some of the people losing their vote will have paid in more over the years than many of the initial one off payment people like myself who have since paid for season tickets (in my case for me and my daughter - £751 this year- and once she’s earning and can pay her own I will give to the society again as I do passionately believe in it).
    So as said above maybe a tapering of benefits is more appropriate ie loss of benefits over years 1&2 then loss of right to vote on board members in year 3 or 4 but leaving the right to vote on any major issues that effect the club if the total payments are in excess of £750 or membership has been 6 years or more.

    One potential way of getting people to pay regularly is by saying new members can get the benefits straight away but can only vote for board members after 1 full year’s membership and on major decisions effecting the club after a further 2 or 3 years. 
    This final part would also hinder any potential future attempt to flood the society with new members to unduly influence a vote in some unforeseen circumstances. 

  5. 5 hours ago, wellgirl said:

    You're raging because he threw supporters under the bus. I get that but it was months ago and what's the point in keeping digging at him? 

     

    Months ago? I’ve a wife who can go back decades when the notion takes her - or I’m winning an argument :)

    • Haha 1
  6. 4 minutes ago, fizoxy said:

     

    My assumption is that we'd look to develop something at the location we currently use.

    I don’t think we own where we train but lease it - or we did a few years ago.
    I’m sure there was talk before Covid of building on the fields across from where we train now but I sceptical about that as in bad weather it’s always flooded. 

  7. 9 hours ago, wellgirl said:

    I would very much doubt that. If the club have been happy where we are training and have been for the last few years I don't see them changing that. 

    Wrong, even going back to when Alan Burrows was CEO there has been talk of getting our own training facilities rather than having to change at FP, bus the players up to Dalziel park for training then bus them back to change/do technical analysis etc. 

  8. 2 hours ago, texanwellfan said:

    ….. I’m hoping we don’t squander any money on transfers but rather use it to be a bit more competitive on the salary front and enable us to better compete for some higher quality players. 
      To be honest if we can replace Miller with two or three better quality players than we currently have in our squad we won’t miss him that much. With the team and tactics we’ve had the last few years we have not got the best out of him. We basically restricted his ability to play to his full potential by the way we played and the “support” we provided around him.
            So my comment about not missing him that much is a reflection on Motherwell FC and not on Miller. His talent and ability is there for everyone to to see but we were just never able to take full advantage of it. 

    I suspect that a lot of the money will go on a new training facility as previous managers have said that what we use at the moment is inadequate and has made it difficult for us to sign some players 

  9. 2 hours ago, Jonesy said:

    It's nowhere near the most important appointment post admin. The Wimmer appointment itself was much more important. The Kettlewell and Alexander appointments also. You could also add Craig Brown and Mark McGhee 1.0 to that list off the top of my head. Baraclough as well, probably.

     

    Livi and Falkirk being in the league should give us a fair bit of breathing space to the bottom of the league. Dundee deciding to become a basket case again after a couple of relatively quiet seasons, Killie replacing McInnes with SK and St Mirren potentially losing Robbo should make the season even more comfortable. We'd have to genuinely have one of our worst seasons ever (not one of the kid on ones everyone has claimed we've had for the last 15 years) to finish below 2 of that lot.

    Correct, in my defence I wrote that last night while slightly drunk 🥴 

    • Haha 4
  10. This management appointment is possibly the most important one post administration and I don’t envy the boards task. Ignoring the arse cheeks at least Aberdeen, Hearts, Hibs, Dundee and Dundee Utd will all out spend us this season on player purchase and wages leaving us - potentially (if money equates to a better position, which we all know doesn’t always happen but could) - fighting it out with St.Mirren, Killie, Falkirk and Livingston to avoid the bottom 2 spots. 
    Although we will have money from LM’s transfer I don’t think we will see much of that being reinvested in players as long term projects like a training ground will eat into that. 
    So that leaves us with two options, a hopefully safe option with someone who knows the Scottish game and can grind out another season in the top flight or another Wimmer type more risky option which hopefully lifts us to a higher level. 
    Neither option is a stick on to succeed and could etch the boards names in Motherwell’s history as the board that got us relegated/took us to the Great Leap Forward - no pressure at all then. 

     

  11. 4 hours ago, coldonmac said:

     

    The only thing is if you were doing a Hammell/Kettlewell 'who was the better' comparison, based on his service to the club I think Stevie Nicks it ...

    Great, just waiting for the Scum exclusive saying Stevie Nicks is going to be the new manager 

    • Haha 1
×
×
  • Create New...