weeyin

Blackman was never our player, so nobody has stolen him.

I wasn't too bothered about the Porter deal as that was always going to end in pure profit for the club. Picked up him for free with the intention of selling him on for some decent cash, so the salary was a pretty shrewd investment. In general, though, I agree that it's not a good situation to rely on the chairman's deep pockets.

Because some businessmen are ploughing in cash. In the FA Cup earlier in the week, Crawley brought on a sub they had just bought for 275,000 quid. They have a five year plan to get into League 1, and there are a few other non-league teams with similar ambitions.

It's not sinking low, it's a board policy not to pay transfer fees and has been for a quite few years (with the odd exception when, for example, Gannon required a significant rebuilding job).

Indeed he did. Which always made it strange how he used to struggle with the ball at his feet when the passback law was changed.

That is modern for auld farts like myself

Guys like Lambert and McAllister achieved similarly impressive feats. And, of course, McLair.

I remember playing Stenny in the Cup. We drew with them at Ochilview and then put 6 (I think) past them in the replay.

Ally Maxwell used to play Centre Forward for his BB team while he was the youth team goalie at Motherwell.

Steve McLelland - signed as a striker, and was pretty useless up front, but turned out to be a great defender.

Again - 7 years under many managers and the guy is still here. Either he offers the team something or every manager he has played under knows nothing about the game.

+1 for Porter. One of the most natural finishers I have seen at Fir Park.

I don't think you understood what I wrote. The managers that he has worked with (and there have been many) obviously believe he offers something to the team. So they don't share your opinion that he 'gets to do nothing' - otherwise they would have punted him. What 'we say' is irrelevant.

There's your answer. You don't stay with a club for 7 years if the management don't rate you.

I have been using that site for years and not seen any viruses.

The fact that Broon is trying to get Gow and Blackman shows what a limited imagination he has. Another reason I'm glad to the see the back of him when it comes to supplementing a squad. I'm hoping McCall's stint as a scout in the lower leagues will have alerted him to a few interesting possibilities.

So Walter Smith is in good company with you pair. I'd love to see the 18 team league too. I hate the split, but would even take a 14 team league with a 7/7 split over a 10-team effort any day.

That's why we should have brought Gannon back.

They did - just in slightly less direct language.

In McCall's early interview he seemed to think that he could replace outgoing players with the cash that was freed up.

You're lucky. My local team is the New York Red Bulls.

Alternatively: 14 team league. Pre-split all 14 play home and away = 26 games. Post split, play home and away = 12 games (including, most likely another 2 OF). It would mean a week off for each team after the split, but it solves a few problems in regard to playing an odd number of games after the split.

We do have play-offs for the drop and Europe. It's called the SPL.

People don't need to accept it - that's the point. The game relies on the paying customer. If it doesn't deliver to an acceptable standard, then no more customers.

See, you're falling into the same, short-term thinking. Right now, the level across the board is short on quality. Increasing the number of teams might not improve the quality overnight, but stands a chance of allowing teams to develop better players without every game being a relegation dogfight. But relegating 20% of the league every season will increase quality exactly how?