Jump to content

2025/26 Ins & Outs Discussion


David
 Share

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, MJC said:

Does anyone seriously think that we would be in a position to turn down an offer of anywhere near £4.5m if we got one?

It's all about demand.

If 3, 4 or 5 clubs are seriously interested in him then we can turn down £4.5m.

If only 1 club actually steps up then you bite their hand off for £4.5m.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Ya Bezzer! said:

For me Cetic's midfield isn't that great.

You have McGregor, who's getting older, and Hatate but other than that I think Miller is better than Bernardo or Engels.

So it's not outwith the realms of possibility than Miller can go there and get first team football and he does look like the long term replacement for McGregor.

Celtic paid £11 million for Engels.  Now he was brought in from a bigger club and a higher level of football so I don't think we'd get that but surely if you are using Engels as a yard stick we should be looking for 6 - 7 million for Miller.

 

 

 

I know we will never turn down that kind of money if its the only deal on the table, but for me selling your best players to a rival team in your league is never a good plan.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MJC said:

Does anyone seriously think that we would be in a position to turn down an offer of anywhere near £4.5m if we got one?

And does anyone seriously believe that if offered the chance Miller wouldn’t go to Celtic for what would be life changing money and the opportunity to win silverware and play in the Champions League?? 
 

Because if there is anyone who thinks either of the above then it’s time to wake up and smell the coffee. 

I honestly don't think he would go to the goldfish bowl that is the Old Firm.

Its been made clear that his preferred option is abroad and im almost certain that is where he will end up.

I also think that given some of the numbers quoted and the fact that he is now a capped Scotland player, 4.5mil is pretty low for him....................the question of "would Motherwell turn that sort of money down for him" is another matter.

I would be extremely surprised if he were to be wearing a Celtic top next year.  Miller would get the sort of money Celtic would be offering at any of the clubs that have been mentioned and regardless of the European football aspect, he would be playing at a far better level week in week out if he were to choose outside of Scotland.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MJC said:

Because if there is anyone who thinks either of the above then it’s time to wake up and smell the coffee. 

A large latte please. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact that a bang average player like James forrest is the most decorated player is celtics history says it all,if miller really wants to reach his potential and get the very most out the talent he's got then he shouldn't even entertain for a second going there.turnbull took the lazy option and is paying for it now,no good can come of playing against the same crap teams 4 times a season.miller is good enough to go abroad and succeed and be the a mainstay at international level for over the next decade,celtic or rangers shouldn't even be on his radar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, MJC said:

Does anyone seriously think that we would be in a position to turn down an offer of anywhere near £4.5m if we got one?

And does anyone seriously believe that if offered the chance Miller wouldn’t go to Celtic for what would be life changing money and the opportunity to win silverware and play in the Champions League?? 
 

Because if there is anyone who thinks either of the above then it’s time to wake up and smell the coffee. 

I think I have been sleeping for 3 months cos woke up this morning and it feels like middle of October outside!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, robsterwood said:

Possible signing Eseosa Sule. Ex Celtic and current west brom striker on loan. Looks decent although mostly played reserve games.

A bit of an unkown quantity at this level. We certainly need striking reinforcements before next Saturday. Got to be the right ones of course. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Kmcalpin said:

A bit of an unkown quantity at this level. We certainly need striking reinforcements before next Saturday. Got to be the right ones of course. 

Yes more of a gamble than Biereth as he had already been on loan. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These are the loans we have to take a chance on when they come around . Talented youngster with something to prove.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, robsterwood said:

Yes more of a gamble than Biereth as he had already been on loan. 

Motherwell don't sign sure things. If they're a "sure thing" for SPL level, they go to Aberdeen, Hearts, Hibs or Dundee United. Gambles are where we live. Scott McDonald was rejected elsewhere. Moult had dropped down divisions. These ones paid off. Others don't. Just need to get more right than wrong. Fact we've not been relegated in nearly forty years suggests we tend to...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, MelvinBragg said:

Motherwell don't sign sure things. If they're a "sure thing" for SPL level, they go to Aberdeen, Hearts, Hibs or Dundee United. Gambles are where we live. Scott McDonald was rejected elsewhere. Moult had dropped down divisions. These ones paid off. Others don't. Just need to get more right than wrong. Fact we've not been relegated in nearly forty years suggests we tend to...

 

Yes agree we have to gamble but they are calculated risk that they have potential to inform. Biereth was more of a sure bet he would adapt to our league. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MelvinBragg said:

Motherwell don't sign sure things. If they're a "sure thing" for SPL level, they go to Aberdeen, Hearts, Hibs or Dundee United. Gambles are where we live. Scott McDonald was rejected elsewhere. Moult had dropped down divisions. These ones paid off. Others don't. Just need to get more right than wrong. Fact we've not been relegated in nearly forty years suggests we tend to...

 

Teams you mentioned take gambles too. Many have not paid off. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, robsterwood said:

Yes agree we have to gamble but they are calculated risk that they have potential to inform. Biereth was more of a sure bet he would adapt to our league. 

Let's not rewrite history, Biereth had scored two first team goals before signing for us. He was in no way a sure bet...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, MelvinBragg said:

Let's not rewrite history, Biereth had scored two first team goals before signing for us. He was in no way a sure bet...

He has been loaned out to RKC Waalwijk and played 12 games in Dutch league. Also had played at youth level for Denmark so had slightly more pedigree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, MelvinBragg said:

Let's not rewrite history, Biereth had scored two first team goals before signing for us. He was in no way a sure bet...

There's more to it than first team goals, though. You only needed to watch him play for 45 minutes to see how good he was.

Unlike, say, Theo Bair, who was very much a "project".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, weeyin said:

There's more to it than first team goals, though. You only needed to watch him play for 45 minutes to see how good he was.

Unlike, say, Theo Bair, who was very much a "project".

Aye, but before we actually clapped eyes on him, there was no way to tell. We've had good and bad loans (and signings) from big clubs. For every Biereth, Jutkiewicz or Ruddy, there's a Cosgrove, Bellic (?) or Plange...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MelvinBragg said:

Let's not rewrite history, Biereth had scored two first team goals before signing for us. He was in no way a sure bet...

Talking of history, did you look at his goals per match record in the U18 Premier League? 23 in 33 games......and 15 assists... in case you missed it. He was loaned out because he was far too good for that age level and his route into the first team was blocked by players who cost millions. If that is taking a risk then can we please find more risks of that kind.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, dennyc said:

Talking of history, did you look at his goals per match record in the U18 Premier League? 23 in 33 games......and 15 assists... in case you missed it. He was loaned out because he was far too good for that age level and his route into the first team was blocked by players who cost millions. If that is taking a risk then can we please find more risks of that kind.

Aye, but the world is full of guys who are outstanding at youth level and never make the grade at senior level (going back, was John Hendry's goal record not great for Spurs reserves). Don't get me wrong, as soon as he started playing for us it was prety clear he was too good to be loan turned to permanent. But I don't think any of us saw the kind of rise he's had coming.  I even saw him mentioned as a potential Man United target...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MelvinBragg said:

Aye, but the world is full of guys who are outstanding at youth level and never make the grade at senior level (going back, was John Hendry's goal record not great for Spurs reserves). Don't get me wrong, as soon as he started playing for us it was prety clear he was too good to be loan turned to permanent. But I don't think any of us saw the kind of rise he's had coming.  I even saw him mentioned as a potential Man United target...

So you contradicting your earlier point that every Motherwell signing is a gamble then? If Henry was so good 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, robsterwood said:

So you contradicting your earlier point that every Motherwell signing is a gamble then? If Henry was so good 

Nope. Every signing is a gamble. Hendry was one that very much didn't work out.. 

I'm struggling to remember the last striker we signed where even before they kicked a ball, you felt certain they'd get goals and it actually came to pass. John Sutton? Tommy Coyne? People with a track record at our level, we don't often sign...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MelvinBragg said:

Nope. Every signing is a gamble. Hendry was one that very much didn't work out.. 

I'm struggling to remember the last striker we signed where even before they kicked a ball, you felt certain they'd get goals and it actually came to pass. John Sutton? Tommy Coyne? People with a track record at our level, we don't often sign...

I agree every signing is a gamble. So all any Club can do is minimise the chances of failure. But I think in this case it was as close as you are going to get to guaranteeing success. I think there is no similarity in any way to the Hendry signing or the risk attached.

With Biereth we signed a player who not only scored goals but was physically suited to the Scottish game.....as demonstrated in his first appearance (I think) when as a sub he bullied us into a home win over Hibs. I think that lack of physicality and determination is what Hendry was lacking, We did not discover those negatives until the deal was done. .So score one for lessening the risk factor re Biereth. He was suited to our game and had the correct mentality..

Arsenal were adamant Biereth was not for sale as he was viewed as one for their future. Just not right then. Spurs wanted shot of Hendry.  Another plus point on the Biereth risk assessment. For once the hype of 'Even short term, we are fortunate to get a player of this calibre' was pretty accurate. Clearly when he did well for us and in Austria, the offer of a few million up front was something Arsenal saw as too good to miss given he still had no route into their first team. A big mistake by them as it turned out. 

No injury record of note or a rehabilitation/career rebuild  in mind. Not a player looking to top up his pension. Like so many we have taken a much greater risk with. Now referred to as 'The Kettlewell Signing Policy'. 

Biereth was a Loan deal (sadly). Risk minimised. We had an out if it was a disaster. Unlike Henry who we signed on a permanent deal.......for £200k?

So, in respect of signing a youngster whether permanently or on Loan, I think the Biereth deal was as guaranteed as any Club could hope for. We were fortunate to get him but it was not luck that it worked out as well as it did. Just all too brief a stay sadly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, dennyc said:

I agree every signing is a gamble. So all any Club can do is minimise the chances of failure. But I think in this case it was as close as you are going to get to guaranteeing success. I think there is no similarity in any way to the Hendry signing or the risk attached.

With Biereth we signed a player who not only scored goals but was physically suited to the Scottish game.....as demonstrated in his first appearance (I think) when as a sub he bullied us into a home win over Hibs. I think that lack of physicality and determination is what Hendry was lacking, We did not discover those negatives until the deal was done. .So score one for lessening the risk factor re Biereth. He was suited to our game and had the correct mentality..

Arsenal were adamant Biereth was not for sale as he was viewed as one for their future. Just not right then. Spurs wanted shot of Hendry.  Another plus point on the Biereth risk assessment. For once the hype of 'Even short term, we are fortunate to get a player of this calibre' was pretty accurate. Clearly when he did well for us and in Austria, the offer of a few million up front was something Arsenal saw as too good to miss given he still had no route into their first team. A big mistake by them as it turned out. 

No injury record of note or a rehabilitation/career rebuild  in mind. Not a player looking to top up his pension. Like so many we have taken a much greater risk with. Now referred to as 'The Kettlewell Signing Policy'. 

Biereth was a Loan deal (sadly). Risk minimised. We had an out if it was a disaster. Unlike Henry who we signed on a permanent deal.......for £200k?

So, in respect of signing a youngster whether permanently or on Loan, I think the Biereth deal was as guaranteed as any Club could hope for. We were fortunate to get him but it was not luck that it worked out as well as it did. Just all too brief a stay sadly.

Good post and yip Hendry was £200k, still not near the £350k mcleish paid for Shaun mcskimming 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, grizzlyg said:

Good post and yip Hendry was £200k, still not near the £350k mcleish paid for Shaun mcskimming 

Shaun was probably worth the money, my Killie mate loved him and was gutted he left to us, signing him and keeping him on the bench was folly too

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...