Walking Down The Halbeath Road

[Chubbychops]

45 minutes ago, Rob1885 said:

How did the goalie look?

A total bombscare.

[HoBNob]

29 minutes ago, starshot131 said:

Not so sure about tiny fees, qp have had two 6 figure sum transfers in the last year from our academy

Not to mention what we could've got for Robertson, shankland, Douglas etc

There must be at least one good prospect in Fife that can't be arsed driving to Edinburgh for training every time that yous can hook

Those are tiny fees in relation to making money from the academy though. How much do you reckon it costs to run an academy? A conservative figure would have you at £200,000 to have one on a decent scale. 

The best academy I can remember at this level was Falkirk in the 2010s, they were selling players every summer for decent enough fees, and even then they dropped the academy in the end with the reasoning being that the player sales were barely covering the costs of the academy, they're expensive. 

I'd also argue that they're best player from that era didn't come through the academy, I'm not sure how much money Vaulks went for but he's went on to have a very good career. Likewise our two most sellable assets at the moment are Otoo and KRH, it's absolutely plausible to have the aim of selling young talent without sinking thousands into an academy. 

[Springfield]

37 minutes ago, HoBNob said:

Those are tiny fees in relation to making money from the academy though. How much do you reckon it costs to run an academy? A conservative figure would have you at £200,000 to have one on a decent scale. 

 

The best academy I can remember at this level was Falkirk in the 2010s, they were selling players every summer for decent enough fees, and even then they dropped the academy in the end with the reasoning being that the player sales were barely covering the costs of the academy, they're expensive. 

I'd also argue that they're best player from that era didn't come through the academy, I'm not sure how much money Vaulks went for but he's went on to have a very good career. Likewise our two most sellable assets at the moment are Otoo and KRH, it's absolutely plausible to have the aim of selling young talent without sinking thousands into an academy. 

We had an academy that many provincial clubs couldn’t get near, produced some great youngsters and made some decent pounds with sales.
Virtually closed it overnight dumped a vast array of coaches/players of the future on the shiter.

Statement that followed was brutal, and told we couldn’t afford the costs associated with running an academy, by imposters brought in to run our club. Figures of up to 400K/yr were being widely bandied about, and I’ve absolutely no idea what the true costs were. Don't think 200K+ is too far off. 

Not blaming the Academy for the last five years, but certainly didn’t help. We  are slowly putting in little blocks with the youth again, but unless we find an investor with millions to burn, like yous guys a full time academy is pipe dream at present. 

Look forward to the fixture again.

[Stellaboz]

That's what I'm afraid will end up with ours. One day, costs too high, P45s all round. 

[dave_binos]

15 hours ago, Cosmic Joe said:

Josh Cooper

How did he do?

[SRB]

47 minutes ago, dave_binos said:

How did he do?

Game passed him by 

[Chubbychops]

58 minutes ago, dave_binos said:

How did he do?

What his situation? Has he been released from you guys?

[Rob1885]

We are woke.

[DA Baracus]

We've been trying the same thing since 2013 (that being the same thing that hasn't worked for most other teams, i.e. high turnover of players and managers and basically churning through most of the same players and managers our league rivals do). It hasn't worked for the majority of them and hasn't worked for us.

Surely worth giving something else a try now? Might not work but worth a shot I think. Worst that happens is that we still aren't successful and go back to the old model that also hasn't been successful and hope that it will somehow be so again.

Aye, I get the argument that the worst is actually getting relegated, but that happened under the old model when Grant and Hughes got to sign about 1038484939 players (although it could be argued, fairly, that those two are pretty much the worst managerial appointments the club has ever made).

 

[Chubbychops]

6 minutes ago, DA Baracus said:

We've been trying the same thing since 2013 (that being the same thing that hasn't worked for most other teams, i.e. high turnover of players and managers and basically churning through most of the same players and managers our league rivals do). It hasn't worked for the majority of them and hasn't worked for us.

Surely worth giving something else a try now? Might not work but worth a shot I think. Worst that happens is that we still aren't successful and go back to the old model that also hasn't been successful and hope that it will somehow be so again.

Aye, I get the argument that the worst is actually getting relegated, but that happened under the old model when Grant and Hughes got to sign about 1038484939 players (although it could be argued, fairly, that those two are pretty much the worst managerial appointments the club has ever made).

 

Fair point. I do think our recruitment has been worse that most over that time though.

Crawford did pretty well in the lower league market and we did well with Geggan, Falkingham and Ryan Wallace in that market in JJs time. I think we should be looking around there for players. Partick have the guy McBeth in their first team that came from the lowland league.

[parsforlife]

3 minutes ago, DA Baracus said:

We've been trying the same thing since 2013 (that being the same thing that hasn't worked for most other teams, i.e. high turnover of players and managers and basically churning through most of the same players and managers our league rivals do). It hasn't worked for the majority of them and hasn't worked for us.

Surely worth giving something else a try now? 

 

 

I've seen this argument quite a lot but I'm not convinced by it , there's a reason that the majority pick a certain model,  its the one most likely to deliver success.  yes it doesn't work for a lot, but that's the nature of football at best 20% of the teams in the league can succeed at any one time.

[Rob1885]

The team we assembled in the Summer of 2018 should have challenged County, we were just mismanaged horrendously. The team assembled in 2020 should have done much better and the team assembled in 2021 should have challenged Killie. Constant f**k ups at board level with managerial appointments. We'd have faired way better had we appointed Petrie, McCall or DC at various stages.

 

The direction and results over the last season has really put a lot of people off.

Edited Saturday at 14:56 by Rob1885

[The Toun Clock]

Club just confirmed on the socials that the season ticket renewal has been extended to a week on Wednesday (10th) due to high demand in last couple days. Now up to the 2400 mark.

[da_no_1]

Anyone heard from thon boy @Enigma? Aw they signings yet drew a blank against an East Fife select.  Send help

[DA Baracus]

I think you all make fair points.

Obviously it isn't straightforward as then everyone would be going up and not just the same few teams we've seen for a while.

The managerial appointments are definitely a huge factor (my prediction; McPake gone in November if we start poorly) and maybe even the main one; you can have the crowds, budgets etc but if you're being set up shite then what does it matter? Again, see Grant and Hughes, who were both backed massively by the club but got us relegated.

McPake has been backed really well by the club (pretty sure we ended last season with the most players of any club in the league) but struggled to do much last season. The argument there is the mental injuries, so if the squad can stay fit then he'll have no excuse this coming season.

 

If the first team isn't doing it then fans are going to question everything, and I don't just mean at our club. It happens at all clubs. This is where the dilemma, of sorts, lies. Do fans give the club time to allow things to play out if we aren't challenging at the top each season, to get to a theoretical season where we are after the 'model' pays off? Or will fans demand more funds are chucked at the first team to try and get up?

Neither method is a guarantee of success. We have however tried the one of pumping cash to managers and signings for over a decade now with no luck, so why not give the youth academy model a chance? I know why of course, and ultimately I think it will probably be abandoned after fan pressure stemming from displeasure at the first team performance. Not saying anyone is right or wrong with their thoughts here, and definitely agree with the concerns about long term funding.

[dave_binos]

1 hour ago, Chubbychops said:

What his situation? Has he been released from you guys?

Out of contract. With a change of manager he has obviously decided to try and get a full-time deal. A player I’d love to have kept. 

[parsboi]

16 minutes ago, DA Baracus said:

I think you all make fair points.

Obviously it isn't straightforward as then everyone would be going up and not just the same few teams we've seen for a while.

The managerial appointments are definitely a huge factor (my prediction; McPake gone in November if we start poorly) and maybe even the main one; you can have the crowds, budgets etc but if you're being set up shite then what does it matter? Again, see Grant and Hughes, who were both backed massively by the club but got us relegated.

McPake has been backed really well by the club (pretty sure we ended last season with the most players of any club in the league) but struggled to do much last season. The argument there is the mental injuries, so if the squad can stay fit then he'll have no excuse this coming season.

 

If the first team isn't doing it then fans are going to question everything, and I don't just mean at our club. It happens at all clubs. This is where the dilemma, of sorts, lies. Do fans give the club time to allow things to play out if we aren't challenging at the top each season, to get to a theoretical season where we are after the 'model' pays off? Or will fans demand more funds are chucked at the first team to try and get up?

Neither method is a guarantee of success. We have however tried the one of pumping cash to managers and signings for over a decade now with no luck, so why not give the youth academy model a chance? I know why of course, and ultimately I think it will probably be abandoned after fan pressure stemming from displeasure at the first team performance. Not saying anyone is right or wrong with their thoughts here, and definitely agree with the concerns about long term funding.

Good post.
 

I agree with most of that other than the bit about McPake being backed fully last season.  I think he was dealt a pretty poor hand by the board, not helped by the injury situation.  We started the season very low on numbers - even before taking into account injuries, and this carried on right through to February when the board finally saw sense and brought in a couple more to see us safe.  I would have hated to be mcpake last season because in reality, for many games he was picking a team based purely on what 11 were fit and available, with a couple on the bench plus a couple of kids he was never going to play.  In that sense I don’t think he was backed adequately.   At the same time though I understand and agree that he doesn’t get let off fully for the underperformance in the run in, and some of the turgid football.

 

I think there is a balance to be had between pursuing the strategy the board has set out, and the first team product.  For me it’s slightly skewed the wrong way.   I also think and will carry on saying this until it’s sorted, all of this isn’t helped by the regular silence and lack of updates or communication directly to the wider fan base from the owners and CEO. Little meetings of select groups just won’t cut through on their own.   The recent update given by the CEO was welcome, but clearly felt like a “oh I better get this out because we’re seeing impact of an information vacuum being filled by negativity” situation.   This feedback I know has been passed up the way, so it’s up to them to act on it or not.  
 

Ultimately BAs point about other clubs doing the same stuff and us trying something different is a good one.  I suppose I’m of the mind to agree.  I think it’s a good thing to do.  I hope that those in charge do a better job of demonstrating it - and for that it’s up to the CEO and board.

[Enigma]

26 minutes ago, da_no_1 said:

Anyone heard from thon boy @Enigma? Aw they signings yet drew a blank against an East Fife select.  Send help

Don’t tag me in your posts again, creep.

[Well over Par]

We’d be much better picking up guys not good enough for the big team academies. You only need to look at Hosler otoo and fisher to see how well that can work 

can’t see too many more signings this season. Suspect a goalie and and a left sided defender for cover. 
 

we will pick up a couple of loans near the end of the window 

That’s it I think 

Edited Saturday at 15:49 by Well over Par

[DA Baracus]

21 minutes ago, parsboi said:

I agree with most of that other than the bit about McPake being backed fully last season.  I think he was dealt a pretty poor hand by the board, not helped by the injury situation

Suppose we'll never really know but McPake himself said that he tried to sign lots of players who said no. Wotherspoon and Brophy were two guys he apparently offered deals to who turned him down. The board also paid fees for KRH, Otoo and Fisher. Pretty sure we ended up being one of the teams with the most signings across last season, not including the ones who didn't sign.

It seems to me that a lot of seem to believe that McPake has had certain signings foisted upon him, but I don't think that's true, unless you think the board made him sign O'Halloran, Holmes, Benjamin, Summers, MFW, Sharpe, Kane etc.

Basically it seems that the theory among some is that McPake made the better signings (MFW and Kane) and the board made the shite ones (Sharpe, Benjamin, Holmes).