Last Season V This Season

[Tweed]

Remarkably after seven games in the league we have exactly the same record as we did this time last season. We started with WLLLLWX then and have done the same now. If we keep the same idea we're losing the next five. And also slightly bizarrely, last year games 8, 9 and 10 were against Hamilton, Thistle and Dundee, our next three fixtures.

 

However take the stats out, last season I think we were a pretty poor team. This year I think we are ordinary and underachieving which in a way is worse. But I think there is a bit more hope of improvement. Next three league games up to the international break are important to buck the trends and also to build a bit of belief. But by hook or by crook we are now three unbeaten.

[BigWeegieDosser]

We would have lost that game last season. Probably two nil, losing a second late on when chasing the game. The bench gave us options, rather than just being full of seat- warmers.

An uninspired, disjointed effort though it was- we dug in and took something from it.

I think Grimshaw, Robinson and the pending return of Pearson will move us on

[capt_oats]

We would have lost that game last season. Probably two nil, losing a second late on when chasing the game. The bench gave us options, rather than just being full of seat- warmers.

An uninspired, disjointed effort though it was- we dug in and took something from it.

I think Grimshaw, Robinson and the pending return of Pearson will move us on

^^^ This.

 

There's little excuse for the performance yesterday and it should put to bed any notion that playing Lasley and Taylor together is a viable option (as part of a 3 is a different matter) but if we persist with a central midfield 2 then we'll continue to be dominated in that area and questions will need asked.

 

That said this season we've variously heard words to the effect of "we can't grind out a draw", "we don't look like we can get back into a game when we lose the first goal" etc etc. Well we just did and we just have (against a team that's not East Fife too).

 

I've no doubt that last season from the same position, against a team in the sort of form that Ross County have been, we'd have lost that game and having watched the goal back again last night it really was a well worked bit of football that got us the point. We played poorly for 90 mins and still took something from the game.

 

The frustration for me, long balls and the root causes of us playing them aside, is that we're making the same mistakes and conceding soft, preventable goals (as we have done for years). I've said before that the manager needs to show that he can actually manage and that still remains the case.

[delboy]

for me last season we were on a decline this season I think we are on a incline but I am under no illusion this season is going to be easy we are in for a long hard season but I can see the team gelling and results improving

 

onwards and upwards

[Frazzie]

Taylor and McDonald should both be dropped immediately. I'd go as far as to say Taylor should be sat in the stand with Leitch back to the bench.

[Haggischomper]

If Taylor isn't working out and he's gonna persist with Hammell, would Chalmers be an option in the midfield?

[MelvinBragg]

If Taylor isn't working out and he's gonna persist with Hammell, would Chalmers be an option in the midfield?

Possibly at left midfield. Leitch looks a better option than Taylor in centre midfield...

[DEWELL]

Im sure we'll improve this season and the players will gel better we're still without Pearson and Fletcher who both did well in our opening game in Inverness. Agree with dropping MacDonald and Taylor what does worry me is the manager's ability to get the best out of our players and they'll be more bad times ahead this season unless he starts getting more from them.

[Ya Bezzer!]

Problems are far greater than switching a few players around.

 

Yesterday was a rival for any of the mind numbingly bad football we were producing in the latter days of McCall.

 

How much money spent since then? How many players come and gone? How many staff brought in? All for what we saw yesterday?

 

It used to be in the old days the fans bayed for the managers head both from the terraces and on occasion in front of the main stand. Nowadays they just stop coming to the matches, so the attendance yesterday kinda neatly sums up where we are.

[Haggischomper]

I suppose in a way it is quite telling that fans are moaning about the performances even when we get results - last season you were moaning about the performances AND results.

[The African]

Could it be a case of the fans realising that, should the performances remain at the level currently being delivered, then the chances of the slightly improved results continuing are extremely limited?

[Tweed]

Possibly, my frustration is we have better players than the performances we have seen and if they actually performed at their potential we could easily make the top six. As I said elsewhere, the move we scored from on Saturday shows how good we can be if we focus and concentrate and either the manager is telling us to do something or the players aren't doing what is asked of them. Either way we need to play closer to the potential we have.

[Bigeeze]

Possibly, my frustration is we have better players than the performances we have seen and if they actually performed at their potential we could easily make the top six. I

Like last season. When the original manager couldn't give a rats ass?

[Ya Bezzer!]

I suppose in a way it is quite telling that fans are moaning about the performances even when we get results - last season you were moaning about the performances AND results.

 

McCall, to be fair to him, had to work in very limited circumstances.

 

Baraclough has been given everything he could possibly want and ultimately the costs of all that will be passed on to you and me.

 

This season is not last season and should not be compared. There has to be a different set of standards and right now those aren't being met.

[weeyin]

While there's no doubt the new gaffer has been given access to extra resources, I don't know it would fall under "everything he could possibly want" - especially as we were outbid on some midfield options that would have done a good job for us.

 

I think people underestimate the time it takes to rebuild a bad team, and am not surprised by the slow start to this season. As I posted in other threads, Tommy McLean's first season in the SPL was dire (saved from relegation by reorganization) and he had access to plenty of resources. His next few seasons were mostly a struggle too.

[Ya Bezzer!]

While there's no doubt the new gaffer has been given access to extra resources, I don't know it would fall under "everything he could possibly want" - especially as we were outbid on some midfield options that would have done a good job for us.

 

I think people underestimate the time it takes to rebuild a bad team, and am not surprised by the slow start to this season. As I posted in other threads, Tommy McLean's first season in the SPL was dire (saved from relegation by reorganization) and he had access to plenty of resources. His next few seasons were mostly a struggle too.

 

The Tommy McLean era was completely different from now. The city clubs dominated the league and provincial clubs hardly got a look in. It was an achievment to keep Motherwell in the Premier League at that time and remember we had been a yo-yo club up until then. Now we are an established Premier level club, playing in a larger league, where the many of the city clubs aren't even in the top league or have lost their dominance.

 

As for now Baraclough has signed or re-signed the vast majority of our squad. He's getting close to a year in the job, had a pre season and a couple of transfer windows and we should be seeing something more than he have been. I'm not even looking for a Top Six position I just want to see something on a Saturday that points to us going in the right direction. I'm not seeing it.

[superward]

 

McCall, to be fair to him, had to work in very limited circumstances.

 

Baraclough has been given everything he could possibly want and ultimately the costs of all that will be passed on to you and me.

 

This season is not last season and should not be compared. There has to be a different set of standards and right now those aren't being met.

They wont ultimately be passed on of if we make money on players, which is the plan nowadays. A bit of money Moult, Fletcher and Johnson. Kushti.

[Ya Bezzer!]

They wont ultimately be passed on of if we make money on players, which is the plan nowadays. A bit of money Moult, Fletcher and Johnson. Kushti.

 

I've said it before but this idea that we can take players from the lower English leagues and sell them back I just don't believe in. We couldn't sell Darren Randolph, what chance do we have of selling Marvin Johnson, who's not even worth a starting XI this season?

 

If we sell anyone in this squad it will be Dom Thomas. Clubs will buy potential but they aren't going to spend money on players that are in their early 20s, are so so bottom half of the English leagues quality and can be picked up at the end of a contract for nothing.

 

Experience shows that our best bet of selling players on is through our youth development, then it's from buying international players from smaller nations and then selling them on, bringing up players from England has been a total failure as a money making venture. Out of all the players we've brought up from England over the last 10 years or so is Chris Porter the only one we sold back?

[capt_oats]

 

I've said it before but this idea that we can take players from the lower English leagues and sell them back I just don't believe in. We couldn't sell Darren Randolph, what chance do we have of selling Marvin Johnson, who's not even worth a starting XI this season?

 

If we sell anyone in this squad it will be Dom Thomas. Clubs will buy potential but they aren't going to spend money on players that are in their early 20s, are so so bottom half of the English leagues quality and can be picked up at the end of a contract for nothing.

 

Experience shows that our best bet of selling players on is through our youth development, then it's from buying international players from smaller nations and then selling them on, bringing up players from England has been a total failure as a money making venture. Out of all the players we've brought up from England over the last 10 years or so is Chris Porter the only one we sold back?

I think this is entirely accurate. There's nothing to say that we won't be able to sell a couple of the players we've brought in on at a profit but at the same time by no means is it guaranteed. I have to say I've been quite perplexed by the club running around telling anyone that will listen that we're going to bring players in to sell them on at a profit. Just because we say it often enough, doesn't mean it'll happen.

 

Yes, we should be aiming to perform better in the transfer market but that should be fairly self evident. With regards Randolph, Humphrey et al I suppose the question is whether or not we were actively trying to sell those players or not but you're right Porter to Derby was the only deal along those lines that's brought us cash the rest are our own youth products and players who we've brought in from abroad (Ojamaa, Anier).

 

Broadcasting our new policy to all and sundry seems a wee bit overly keen, shall we say. We're not the first club to have realised that selling players for profit is a good thing. Maybe the club feel it's helpful to recruit players if we're publicly stating we view ourselves as a stepping stone club, I don't know. It just seemed a bit "come sign for us, we want to sell you on for £££s!".

 

Similarly what you're saying about Dom Thomas being the most likely candidate for selling on and clubs buying potential is spot on and it's not just limited to us. On a basic level Sporting Lisbon bought Ryan Gauld because he is a prodigious talent, Hull bought Robertson, Wigan bought McArthur and McCarthy and Southampton bought Wanyama and van Djik because they thought they represented value for what they were prepared to pay vs their alternative options.

 

Ultimately that's the thing, a player is only really worth what another team is willing to pay for them and the value they see in them. If a buying club look at our players and think "I can get a player of a similar level or better for free" then it doesn't really matter what our plan is, it's down to whether someone is willing to pay a fee for our player. As I say, it's entirely possible at the end of the season someone will look at Louis Moult and think, "that's the player we need" but equally, as you point out, if our transfer history is anything to go by it's by no means a given.

 

And with that, I'll just leave this here: http://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/sep/18/fifpro-transfer-fees-could-go-fifa-brussels

[Electric Blues]

And with that, I'll just leave this here: http://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/sep/18/fifpro-transfer-fees-could-go-fifa-brussels

 

Interesting. That would pull the rug out from under our supposed strategy, but if it means seeing less of that roaring fuckwit Jim White on Sky Sports then bring it on!

[Andy_P]

I think this is entirely accurate. There's nothing to say that we won't be able to sell a couple of the players we've brought in on at a profit but at the same time by no means is it guaranteed. I have to say I've been quite perplexed by the club running around telling anyone that will listen that we're going to bring players in to sell them on at a profit. Just because we say it often enough, doesn't mean it'll happen.

 

Yes, we should be aiming to perform better in the transfer market but that should be fairly self evident. With regards Randolph, Humphrey et al I suppose the question is whether or not we were actively trying to sell those players or not but you're right Porter to Derby was the only deal along those lines that's brought us cash the rest are our own youth products and players who we've brought in from abroad (Ojamaa, Anier).

 

Broadcasting our new policy to all and sundry seems a wee bit overly keen, shall we say. We're not the first club to have realised that selling players for profit is a good thing. Maybe the club feel it's helpful to recruit players if we're publicly stating we view ourselves as a stepping stone club, I don't know. It just seemed a bit "come sign for us, we want to sell you on for £££s!".

 

I felt the oft stated change of transfer policy after Les' arrival was all about laying down a marker in response to several years where everyone and their dug knew that we were, if not perhaps a soft touch, in little position to bargain given our precarious financial situation.

Backed up by the fact it was now a billionaire owner who was making it clear that we wouldn't be mucked around in that department any longer I thought it was a good thing to do.

 

But the whole policy of course is entirely reliant on having players that people want to buy!

 

We can only speculate as to how players view the policy but I suspect you are largely correct with incomers from the English league being sold on a move to Motherwell in part by being encouraged that a move here could lead to fast-track to the Championship, Old Firm or wherever; or at the very very least a chance to showcase themselves in a league that whilst many may belittle, does have a fair profile.

[capt_oats]

 

I felt the oft stated change of transfer policy after Les' arrival was all about laying down a marker in response to several years where everyone and their dug knew that we were, if not perhaps a soft touch, in little position to bargain given our precarious financial situation.

Backed up by the fact it was now a billionaire owner who was making it clear that we wouldn't be mucked around in that department any longer I thought it was a good thing to do.

 

But the whole policy of course is entirely reliant on having players that people want to buy!

 

We can only speculate as to how players view the policy but I suspect you are largely correct with incomers from the English league being sold on a move to Motherwell in part by being encouraged that a move here could lead to fast-track to the Championship, Old Firm or wherever; or at the very very least a chance to showcase themselves in a league that whilst many may belittle, does have a fair profile.

I was maybe being a bit harsh earlier, I wasn't long up. I completely agree that's how I took it when I heard what Les was saying about it, that it was a marker with regards our position.

 

It's the fact that it's been repeated as much as it has I'm a bit "yeah, I know. we *get* it!".

 

Edit: I should also say I wasn't criticising the transfer strategy as such either, I'm fully supportive of the idea in general. Certainly I'd prefer we brought I players of the like of Fletcher, Moult, Kennedy and Chalmers than journeymen at the end of their careers. More observing that it's by no means a guarantee that we'll turn profits or that just because we say that it's our strategy that it'll play out like that.

[Andy_P]

No captain I didn't perceive your comments on the policy to be critical if that's how my point has come across.

 

I see the constant repetition of the policy as intended for ears other than our own. Hoping that, in much the same way people genuinely seemed to believe that every player who came through at Tannadice was great because Jim Spence repeated it on the radio or on a tweet every other day, it becomes ingrained in the target audience.

 

Whether productive or counter productive, is up for debate I guess.

[capt_oats]

No captain I didn't perceive your comments on the policy to be critical if that's how my point has come across.

Nah, I just read my original post back and thought it maybe came across as a bit more critical of policy than I had intended.