David

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

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? 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. 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. 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.

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.

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.

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? 😂

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.

Which he is, and which means he's more than good enough for Motherwell. If he was better than "bang average" he'd be earning more money elsewhere.

Well, we see the likes of Brighton down south, and of course, they're a bigger club than Motherwell, but I think context is king there. Brighton, in comparison to the clubs they compete with, are similar to Motherwell in the Scottish Premier League. The competition they have for talent, both in regard to personnel and players, is similar to what we face in our league. Namely, that they have much bigger clubs with much bigger budgets on their doorstep. There are other examples further down the leagues down south as well. Sure, we don't have their finances, but we can certainly look at the systems and approaches they use and adapt them to suit our financial capabilities. Or at least try. I mean, if you or anyone else is trying to tell me that the best we can do is the dross we're signing just now, then I think we'd need to agree to disagree. I know there's always going to be an element of gambling on a signing at our level, and that's fine, but I highlighted the lack of quality in our signings at the start of the season, and I'm certainly no footballing expert. But if someone like me can look at the likes of Bair and Obika and ascertain that the odds are very much stacked against the latter maintaining fitness and the former even looking like a proper footballer, why can't the people being paid to do this at our club do the same? It's just my opinion, but the way we've gone about our business this summer has been absolutely shambolic. It may be entirely a coincidence, but since Burrows left we've seen a steep decline I think. The business in the window this summer was a farce. The fact that we're all putting our faith in a kid from Arsenal who had played 14 senior games when he arrived says it all. For this reason, I'm not sure sacking the manager is the answer. The problem, for me, goes much higher. But it certainly does include him.

For me, it's not actively signing absolute bollocks, for a start. Honestly man, anyone with half a brain could see that our signings this summer were going to fail. I know I got grief for not buying into "the human project," but I was astounded as to why we'd waste what little money we had on players like that, some on multi-year contracts. There's absolutely no reason why we can't look to improve things above management level. We see other smaller clubs who have implemented sound signing policies and departments without spending a fortune. It would actually likely end up saving us money, as we hopefully wouldn't need to rush out every January and splurge on a new cast of players to try and replace the turgid crap we bought in the summer. Which, funnily enough, we're likely going to have to do this season again. Then we'll get to the summer and whoever is in charge will have the unenviable task of convincing some poor sap at another club to take the likes of Bair and Obika.

I assume the OP was joking.

Doubt Rangers will go for him, and I don't see us being able to afford him. Could see him at Dundee United or Aberdeen.

There's other non-football related sections of the forum for this kind of chat. This is a thread for discussing the manager.

Yeah, it shouldn't be, but it is. He knows he's not getting an England call-up.

Being an international player who could potentially appear at a Euros or World Cup will do him no harm when it comes time to negotiate his next contract or secure his next move. That's the only reason he changed his mind.

Possibly. The MK Dons situation was a bit of a farce. He got something like 15 or 16 games there, which is mental. His time at Bradford and over the next few years will be a better indicator of if he can get back on track. Although in saying that, I don't really think how many times a manager has been sacked can be used as a barometer of his abilities, as mental as that sounds. What Alexander had that Kettlewell doesn't is a track record of some form of success. I think that's why I had more confidence in Alexander than I do Kettlewell.

Alexander? Ah, the days when we could appoint a manager whose track record down south included winning promotion, reaching playoffs and so forth? A manager who oversaw the signing of players like Van Veen and Woolery? It won't be long before we look back at such appointments as "the glory days." A far cry from appointing someone whose track record as a sole senior manager is six months in charge of Ross County and a 29% win percentage before getting bumped. If Alexander is "limited" what would we say our two coaches since him are?

And we employ a manager to have final say on who is signed. So he'll be rubber-stamping those deals, unless we think that the club are buying players and just telling Kettlewell to like it or lump it?

Personally, I think him moving on in January could seal our fate as far as relegation is concerned.

All it takes is a look at that list of keepers we've had over the past number of seasons to see that finding an able replacement isn't all that easy. Especially considering the recent recruitment we've seen by the club. I wouldn't trust them to recruit staff for the bar, much less the first team squad.

Not that I don't agree, but why should that be the case now when it never really has been in the past? When results turned against us it was Alexander, Hammell etc who got the blame. Kettlewell is no different.

So, I've seen a lot of discussion about the main man between the sticks as of late and thought it maybe deserved its own thread. Kelly is an interesting one, as he's the captain and has been a regular call-up for Scotland. I think if we were told a few years back that we'd have a keeper who was in that position we'd have been well happy. But it seems many fans aren't. Let's have it said right away, that Kelly isn't perfect. If he was, he wouldn't be at Motherwell. Or he wouldn't have been for long anyway. He's no Darren Randolph or John Ruddy, that's for sure. Although it should be said that it's probably a lot easier to look better when you have a defence in front of you that consisted of the likes of Stevie Hammell, Craigan, Mark Reynolds and Shaun Hutchinson as Randolph and Ruddy both did. I think we were relatively lucky to have both those keepers at the club, and it was very clear that they were destined for better things. What is interesting is looking at who else we've had since those guys were in our team: Lee Hollis Gunnar Nielsen George Long Dan Twardzik Craig Samson Brett Long Connor Ripley Russell Griffiths Dean Brill Trevor Carson Mark Gillespie Scott Fox Aaron Chapman How many of that list would anyone take over Liam Kelly? For me it would be one. Mark Gillespie. It's when you look at that list you realise that while Kelly isn't perfect, he's better than most of what we've had the past number of years. I'd happily keep him here for as long as he wanted to stay, because the chances are good that the likes of Oxborough and whoever else comes next will be another one of the unremarkable names on that list above.

I don't think that's the way to be looking at it though. Him sitting on a 15 wins from 22 record means nothing. What matters is how he's done this season. And as others have alluded to, this is him on his first full season with his own players. As I said already, our form for this season after the preliminary league cup games stands at 3 wins, 2 draws, and 7 losses. 12 goals scored, 18 conceded. So he has a 25% win rate. Last season he reaped the benefits of the players that Hammell brought in. He got the wages Van Veen was on though to offer to another player.

As I said about Bair in another thread, I want him to succeed. It would be mental for me, as a Motherwell fan, to not want him to become this incredible success story. Same with Kettlewell. I'm hoping with every fibre of my being that he can turn this around and make a success of it.

I was indeed. I am not one for wanting a manager moved on. I'm usually among the last to say that they should go, and I'm usually among the very last to be critical of any player. This season seems different to me though. On Alexander, I saw the sense in him getting the job because he had a track record. He'd accomplished stuff before coming here to suggest he at least knew what he was doing. Kettlewell hasn't. Once he got the Ross County job on his own it became clear that he was a man seemingly out of his depth. I think he's a really articulate speaker, and he's a great personality. But what he says and what he's managed to accomplish are two different things. I think that how he carries himself in the media gains him a lot of favour with fans. He's a confident guy who's comfortable in that settling. I think his signings have, for the most part, been terrible though. I can fully get behind the moving on of the likes of Shields and Efford, but can we honestly say that the players brought in have been, on the whole, an upgrade? I don't see us getting anywhere with this current crop of players. Even if we brought in an experienced manager tomorrow I think they'd find it really difficult to get anything from the squad as it is. The problem we have now is that we have Wilkinson on a two-year deal, Davor on a two-year deal, and Bair on a two-year deal. Thankfully Obika was a year-long deal with an option. The first three won't be easy to move on and trust me, if we bin Kettlewell for a new manager before January he'll be looking to do exactly that. And while those players might not be on much, it's still a decent chunk of change for a club that continually claims to have no money. We got got rid of Danzaki, Efford, Tierney, Maguire, Lamie and McGinley this summer. And got fees for Van Veen and Shields. We then used that freed up financial space to sign Obika, Wilkinson, Souare, Davor, and Bair on contracts, and got Mika, Spencer, Shaw, and Gent on loan. That's not good business in my opinion.

Our form for this season after the preliminary league cup games stands at 3 wins, 2 draws, and 7 losses. 12 goals scored, 18 conceded. So he has a 25% win rate. Kevin Van Veen was mentioned a lot. He scored 18 goals after the turn of the year, which played a huge part in where we finished. Casey and Butcher were just as vital. None of them were players that Kettlewell signed. And that's my biggest concern.