The Falkirk FC Thread

[HoBNob]

2 minutes ago, LatapyBairn. said:

It’s actually less money than I’d presumed

It doesn't include the money you got from gate receipts I presume. 

[LatapyBairn.]

9 minutes ago, Duncan Freemason said:

Of course they will be his decisions to make.

Well we have people on here suggesting it should be otherwise and the BOD should have some kind of veto on re-signing or signing players. I could go with that if it’s outwith wage structure  or a three/four year contract but the extending of a Nisbet type player isn’t that and seems pretty run of the mill to me. 

Edited June 4, 2023 by LatapyBairn.

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, Amarillo Bairn said:

I'm 50/50 with Nesbit tbh, he's not as bad as some are saying but not the superstar either that will be key player to win us the league 

His agent played a blinder getting a 2 year deal, should have been 1 year with option of 2nd if we promoted, played X many games etc 

Maybe his agent screwed up if he was being chased by Championship sides….

[LatapyBairn.]

Just now, Duncan Freemason said:

Maybe his agent screwed up if he was being chased by Championship sides….

Depends who it was, our wage structure is probably more competitive than at least 4 or maybe 5 of the clubs in that division. 

[Guest Brockvillenomore]

[Guest]

1 minute ago, LatapyBairn. said:

Well we have people on here the BOD should have some kind of veto on re-signing or signing players. I could go with that if it’s outwith wage structure  or a three/four year contract but the extending of a Nisbet type player isn’t that and seems pretty run of the mill to me. 

I think that’s a misinterpretation of what has been said. The manager picks the players…………..end of.

However, the Board simply have to be involved in both the financials and the duration of the contracts. The manager would be discussing that on a weekly basis with the Board. The Board simply must have assurance that the manager stays on planet Earth, and isn’t doing anything that comes across as an unacceptable risk (something like blowing 80% of the budget on 3 players, and then seeking to spend the other 20% on a dozen kids). That’s not “new” or “interference” or “picking the players”. That’s pretty much been the formula for 100 years, and is entirely consistent with a Board doing it’s job.

[PedroMoutinho]

14 minutes ago, LatapyBairn. said:

At the time he actually rejected Morton’s offer of an extension to come to us, it was McGuffie they jettisoned. To be honest I agree with BPM in that I’m not his biggest fan either but I can see what he brings to the table and understand the thinking in keeping him, a one year deal might have been more appropriate but I’m not the manager. Mcglynn will live or die by his decisions but they need to be his decisions to make. 

From what I understand Holt offered him substantially more than he was on at Morton and he had no offers from other clubs (I don’t know whether Morton offered him a deal).

I’d be astonished if any other clubs were offering him a 2 year deal this summer and if there were, they’d have been welcome to him for me.

[Guest]

17 minutes ago, LatapyBairn. said:

It’s actually less money than I’d presumed

Remember that is prize money not gate receipts

 

[Guest Ecosse83]

Mcglynn obviously rates Nesbitt if he was offered the 2 years before we knew what league we were going to be playing in next season. 
 

Personally I don’t think he would be good enough for the Championship but don’t mind him in League 1, for me he brings a wee bit more energy to the midfield and it’s quite noticeable when he doesn’t play the tempo is a fair bit slower. 

 

[HopeStreetWalker]

12 minutes ago, Duncan Freemason said:

I think that’s a misinterpretation of what has been said. The manager picks the players…………..end of.

However, the Board simply have to be involved in both the financials and the duration of the contracts. The manager would be discussing that on a weekly basis with the Board. The Board simply must have assurance that the manager stays on planet Earth, and isn’t doing anything that comes across as an unacceptable risk (something like blowing 80% of the budget on 3 players, and then seeking to spend the other 20% on a dozen kids). That’s not “new” or “interference” or “picking the players”. That’s pretty much been the formula for 100 years, and is entirely consistent with a Board doing it’s job.

Any manager worth his salt whether in football or business selects his employees to fulfill their job description and targets under the perimeters set namely wages and length contract, they stand or fall on their judgment.

If the board have crossed that boundary now or in the past then hell mend them. 

[Rocco]

I love how posters on here are slagging off Morrison and Nesbitt saying they only play a handful of good games a season and contribute very little, however, the same ones were being fan boys of Burrell who contributed the same, if not less. 

Edited June 4, 2023 by Rocco

[PedroMoutinho]

3 minutes ago, Rocco said:

I love how posters on here are slagging off Morrison and Nesbitt saying they only play a handful of good games a season and contribute very little, however, the same ones were being fan boys of Burrell who contributed the same, if not less. 

Morrison and Burrell both contribute(d) a lot more than Nesbitt imo. Nesbitt’s assist stats are often pulled out (many of which were from corners) but look at his goal figure. 5 goals in 49 appearances, which is nowhere near enough for a number 10 in a single striker formation.

McGuffie got 7 goals and spent most of the season on the bench.

[Tea and Busquets]

What does it matter how Nesbitt assisted? The main point is his cross or pass led to a goal. 

[PedroMoutinho]

2 minutes ago, Tea and Busquets said:

What does it matter how Nesbitt assisted? The main point is his cross or pass led to a goal. 

Because he contributes very little from open play. 

[Harry Kinnear]

1 hour ago, Back Post Misses said:

https://twitter.com/spflwatch/status/1665129997625880576?s=46&t=LTFT_DCFlJCXiaikA3250g
 

apparently pretty accurate.

 

Looking at what the ugly sisters pocket in comparison to the rest it’s no wonder we don’t have a competitive top flight. 

[grumpyoldman]

45 minutes ago, Ecosse83 said:

Mcglynn obviously rates Nesbitt if he was offered the 2 years before we knew what league we were going to be playing in next season. 
 

Personally I don’t think he would be good enough for the Championship but don’t mind him in League 1, for me he brings a wee bit more energy to the midfield and it’s quite noticeable when he doesn’t play the tempo is a fair bit slower. 

 

As well as McGlynn his peers rate him as well, tbh I’m not sure what they see in him, I would have got shot of him, but then again I’m a grumpyoldman by profession who thinks he knows one or two things  about football and not a football manager.

[Rocco]

29 minutes ago, PedroMoutinho said:

Morrison and Burrell both contribute(d) a lot more than Nesbitt imo. Nesbitt’s assist stats are often pulled out (many of which were from corners) but look at his goal figure. 5 goals in 49 appearances, which is nowhere near enough for a number 10 in a single striker formation.

McGuffie got 7 goals and spent most of the season on the bench.

I don’t think it really matters how he’s assists to be fair. If someone was scoring goals I doubt anyone would bother how he scores them. 
 

Whilst I agree he needs to add more goals, I’d also argue that the reason he’s playing league 1 football with us is because of that. I’m sure if he was getting 10+ assists and 10+ goals a season he would be off to the league above 

[Guest]

36 minutes ago, Tea and Busquets said:

What does it matter how Nesbitt assisted? The main point is his cross or pass led to a goal. 

It matters when it is the single defining aspect of any players contribution simply because “assist” can mean many things.

The guy getting the assist can beat three players, and set up a simple side foot for the striker.

The guy getting the assist can make a sideways pass on the half way line to midfielder who then beats a couple of opponents before firing a screamer into the top corner. All assists are nowhere near being equal.

[LatapyBairn.]

1 hour ago, Duncan Freemason said:

I think that’s a misinterpretation of what has been said. The manager picks the players…………..end of.

However, the Board simply have to be involved in both the financials and the duration of the contracts. The manager would be discussing that on a weekly basis with the Board. The Board simply must have assurance that the manager stays on planet Earth, and isn’t doing anything that comes across as an unacceptable risk (something like blowing 80% of the budget on 3 players, and then seeking to spend the other 20% on a dozen kids). That’s not “new” or “interference” or “picking the players”. That’s pretty much been the formula for 100 years, and is entirely consistent with a Board doing it’s job.

Of course, that’s why I said within budget and wage structure. Obviously if the manager for one reason or another wanted to break that for a single player (I.e. griffiths ) or decide to offer a 3,4,5 year contract ect it should probably need proper scrutiny from the BOD. That is not what has happened with Nisbet however, it’s a very run of the mill signing/re-signing which is the managers prerogative. 

Edited June 4, 2023 by LatapyBairn.

[ShaggerG]

Given our current situation I've no problem with Nesbitt being a squad player. We are in L1 after all.