Jackie Myles
-
Posts
232 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Jackie Myles
-
-
Playing very well so far. Knocking the ball about really well and the effort is different level altogether from last season. Mackie looks far better at centre half . A decent striker and we've got the basis of a side here. So much more solid in midfield and defence.
1 -
1 hour ago, Blame Me said:
Forgive me but it does seem like there is confusion as to the purpose of the FSS.
The contributions are to have more say in how the club is run and gain more involvement in the decision making - and future direction of the club - by buying shares.
It's not to sustain the clubs cashflow as supporters are already doing that with season tickets, match tickets and retail alongside the wider sponsorship deals the club has.
I thought that was the case. Thanks for clearing that up.
0 -
34 minutes ago, Kircer bairn said:
Anyone know why Ryan Williamson was absent on Saturday
Probably injured again.
0 -
50 minutes ago, FalkirkBairn2021 said:
Not sure that's going to work though if we are going to have any kind of serviceable squad. It's a noble idea but I don't think we generate enough income.
Unless we want to be part time of course.
I think under our current ownership there realistically has to be income from the FSS to balance the books.
You can't rely on a definitive amount from it though to balance the books. The fss money is to buy shares that will hopefully end up giving them more than 51 percent of the club. You rely on it and it falls how do you balance the books then if you've already based your budgets on an amount that you don't get?
0 -
2 hours ago, FalkirkBairn2021 said:
I'm pretty sure I remember that St Mirren worked out that the club needed 1000 monthly subscribers at £12 a pop to run. Presumably making some basic guesses on the number of STs you will have, commercial income etc.
Would be interesting to see what Falkirk's model, laid out simply, is. That could help too if fans knew that we needed say 900 FSS monthly subscribers to be completely self sustaining. Gives a target.
We need to set out something saying for each division (and I get a lot of this will be extractable from the accounts somewhere)
1) Cost of running the club Inc salaries, upkeep etc
2) Commercial income ST sales, prize money etc
3) Shortfall
Apologies if this has already been done but do we know how many monthly subscriptions are required to be completely break even?
Are we not going to self sustaining anyway? I'd be a bit wary about basing your future on having a certain number of subscribers . Fans can be very fickle and things like the current cost of living crisis could adversely affect the clubs ability to survive. At the moment the club doesn't have anyone putting in a pile of cash every year to cover losses so we have to base our budgets on guaranteed income I'd have thought. The fss money should be seen as bonus money . I'm all for the fss owning the club by providing enough money eventually to get to the magic 51 percent of shares but I'm not so keen on us wholly relying on a certain amount of subscribers cash every month to actually exist.
1 -
3 minutes ago, LatapyBairn. said:
Are both the FSS representative positions being voted on or just the one Nigel Serafini holds with it being the temporary appointment after Gordon white stepped down?
Just the one as Nigel wasn't voted in by the members.
1 -
9 minutes ago, Back Post Misses said:
FSS have c450 members. Morton double that but the cash coming on from both is approximately the same I understand.
The FSS is minimum £10 so I guess Morton have a lower entry threshold. I wonder if that would help?Big difference with Morton was that they were basically going to go tits up without fans buy in to this. I'm sure if we were on the brink you'd have folk signing up left right and centre. It's just the way fans are unfortunately.
1 -
Monthly draw first prize being replacing Jaime Wilson in the match day squad.
0 -
I thought it was all going towards a new pitch for Davie?
0 -
21 minutes ago, roman_bairn said:
I don’t like the OF but you can hardly give a bye to teams finishing below the champions and still ask the champions to qualify.
Talk sense……The whole reason they get byes is to allow them to concentrate on their European games.It's got nothing to do with league positions as A championship side could win the Scottish cup and that would get them a bye despite them being a whole league below other premiership sides. If it's not clashing with any euro fixtures then why should they get a bye?
0 -
2 hours ago, Russ said:
Nah there’s 1 less second place team qualifying due to the extra team in Europe so 8 points isn’t going to be enough. There will be teams not qualifying on 9 so we won’t have a chance with 8 if we got there.Really no reason why Celtic have been given a bye this season. The group stages of the champ league don't start to mid September so it's not as if this competition is going to get in the way. Them playing in the group's would've meant they could keep the same format as before in regard to qualifying.
-2 -
Whilst you could get reps who are in fss but not patrons you'll struggle to get patrons reps who aren't members of fss I would think so one way or another your going to have a group with members on the bod over and above the group's reps. Wouldn't like to think that being a member of fss would stop a patron from being a rep surely.
0 -
26 minutes ago, AGPar said:
Quote one post - just one - where someone has expressly stated that they "expect us to win the league". The sole objective - note objective, not expectation - is promotion, by whatever way that comes. A bang-average QP finished fourth last season, 28 points behind CR, 21 behind Airdrieonians. They are now in the Championship. Our principal rivals for the upcoming season are managed by James McPake, Willie Gibson and a rookie player-manager. I highly doubt McGlynn dropped down from a top-half championship team with the intention of drudging about in League One for any longer than a season. If the rest of whatever recruitment can be done is successful - players to go straight into the first eleven as opposed to yet more padding of the squad - and perhaps even managing to jettison some of last seasons dreck at the same time, I see no reason why we should not expect to be challenging at the top of the table. Again, that does not mean I "expect to win the league" If that is unrealistic, so be it and God Help Us.
It's not impossible but we have to be realistic and say that chances are we won't . People saying well it'll be a 5th season in league one if we don't sign another 4 players at least . It may well be and it may be a fifth season in league one even if we sign 4 players given our starting point. Going to be a lot of ups and downs this season I'd expect but that's better than the constant downs of last season.
0 -
Some people on here seem to actually be expecting us to win the league this season. We were how many points behind cove and Airdrie last season so it's a bit of a push to think we might come top given the budget situation. We need to see definite improvement and playoffs should be achievable but winning the league would be a massive bonus given where we were last season. Now given that that's the case surely we need to realise that 23/24 is a far more realistic season where winning the league would be the minimum target . We need to build towards that and signing these promising young players instead of letting them go is a step towards that.
-1 -
3 minutes ago, FalkirkBairn2021 said:
Because for example we spunked 1K a week on Leith Griffiths under that useless clowns tenure
That's money which could have been given to McGlynn.
There were other spends also on the failed gamble to reach the playoffs.
It's not difficult.
No it couldn't have been given to mcglynn. That money was provided by bfl to sign a striker in that window so would've been spent by now anyway. Could've been spent better yes but was never going to be not spent.
2 -
It's the managers budget at the end of the day so it's up to him how he spends it. If he'd rather keep these players at the club than let them go elsewhere then they must have something about them. He won't be doing it just for the sake of it that's for sure and it obviously isn't preventing him from signing other players that will start of he wouldn't be doing it.
0 -
7 minutes ago, GeordieBairn said:
Why? Bizarre signing
At the moment you either sign them for the first team squad or free them . Mcglynn must think he has a good future ahead of him to do that. The development side will be about next season for these players to join in future but at the moment they need to train with the first team as there is no other avenue. These guys will be on utter peanuts .
0 -
2 minutes ago, Proudtobeabairn said:
Of the 7 McGlynn has brought in, not many have been significant upgrades. Mackie, Donaldson and McGinn make us better while Morrison, Henderson and Yeats are most likely marginal improvements (not getting carried away by Yeats after 2 ok friendlies and comparing Morrison to Mutch and Henderson to Watson). Oliver looks like a waste of a wage on evidence so far.
Hopefully I'll be proved wrong but with the current squad I can't see us finishing above Dunfermline, Airdrie or QOS.
Next 2-3 signings are crucial and we need guys like Nesbitt and C. Morrison to really step it up if we don't get the quality we need.Like to see Oliver playing up front alongside someone half decent before I make my mind up on him. Watson was poor last season so hopefully Henderson will be an upgrade on him.
0 -
4 minutes ago, grumpyoldman said:
The biggest issue from the past as far as a fan is concerned,is the completed lack of quality of the players. That can’t be sorted overnight due to the contracts that these guys are on or unless we suddenly find thousands of £’s to pay them off.
Suck it up and move on, this old board/ new board pish is boring.I still feel that the right manager can get more out of some of these guys but yes if these guys are on 2 or 3 year deals I'm.not sure how we are expected to get them off our books if they don't want to go. The managers happy with the budget which is more than he had at Raith so it's not as if it's been cut or the bod are skimping on giving the manager money. We are dependant on what the manager can do with the free part of the budget and how much more he can get out of the players he has inherited.
1 -
20 minutes ago, Russ said:
Henderson can cover left back but I’d be surprised if he’s ever played right back in his life. Our right back options at the moment are Williamson who we all know is horrendous, Brad McKay
and Yeats who apparently played a couple of highland league games there but from what we’ve seen of him looks a cracking prospect in midfield.
After getting the strikers in getting another right back should be our next priority imo.People talk as if playing right and left back is some sort of impossible task. Christ you get guys in your local pub team that can do it quite comfortably. We've had numerous players in the past that could do it no bother. As I said though we do need a better right back than Williamson . As for wide players one more would be useful but probably not seen as a priority at the moment.
1 -
33 minutes ago, Russ said:
I think we’re about 5 short at the moment. Another right back, another player in the middle of the park, some cover out wide and 2 strikers.Can't see us signing any more for the middle of the park. We have mcginn , yeats, Ross, Henderson, hetherington and nesbitt that can play there so I would think that areas done. Another right back. Maybe. Although years and Henderson can both play there. It's probably a starter we really need unless Williamson improves.
0 -
10 minutes ago, NUMBER 7 said:
Sorry to hear of your issues with guy. Them running Falkirk at the time must have known things weren’t right and payments weren’t coming in by the time we had to rush out the 3rd White Strip, and we still plastered his company name on that too. Crazy to have allowed this to happen, surely the agreement/ contract would have had terms and conditions regards failing to meet payment terms. The more you hear the previous board sound like dumb and dumber.
Certainly the current bod couldn't take his name off anything until the court ruling or it would've opened them up to legal action on his part so I presume there was none of those terms you mention in place.
0 -
Are we really miles short? Couple of strikers definitely. A few options elsewhere maybe but at the end of the day we've got players covering most areas now and we look far more solid at the back. Now up to mcglynn to weave a bit of magic and get us playing as a side. All these boys have played at a decent level so hopefully getting a boot up the arse off the manager instead of them being molly coddled will make all the difference. Not exactly seeing any of our rivals bring in superstars. Michael Ruth levels up front aren't going to cut it.
-1 -
9 minutes ago, Massimo said:
Daily record today and more to follow this is just the tip of the ice berg !
Boy that owns the rocks says he appeared from nowhere and the next thing he's sponsoring all these big clubs. The appeared from nowhere surely should've had alarm bells ringing .
0
2022/23 SLC Group D
in Domestic Cup Football
Posted
Kyle mclelland just as pish as he was the last time he played at TFS.