Motherwell FC - A Thread For All Seasons

['WellDel]

Can see the sense in pushing the boat our a bit for the services of a keeper of Kelly's calibre. Having seen in recent years the difference it makes having a commanding figure like Randolph, Ruddy, Carson or Gillespie behind the defence, as opposed to a Twardzik, Hollis, Samson, or the godforsaken Chapman, it's a no-brainer to go for Kelly if is at all possible (and it appears the ink is already dry on the deal). 

It does go against the previous setup of a wage cap type structure, but in certain circumstances it makes sense to have a level of flexibility in that regard, the specialised position of keeper being one.

Burrows and the board are very pragmatic, and if (when) this is announced, I see it more as a sign of intent to push on and the clubs firm financial footing, rather than an exuberant expenditure and deviation from the restrictions Robinson always used as an excuse for limitations within his ranks.

The assembly of the new squad is definitely taking time, but I'm quietly confident that the management are recruiting wisely and have a decent season ahead.

[well fan for life]

Let me preface this whole thing with a I am literally completely uninformed label.

If we're bringing in Kelly we won't be paying a big transfer fee because we don't have that money. I would guess there will be some money but maybe a substantial sell on or something. Wouldn't be surprised if he's the highest paid at the club.

From the outside I think Liam Kelly wants to play every week. Bigger picture, the Scotland goalkeeper position is...problematic. Gordon, McLaughlin & Marshall aren't getting any younger and there isn't anyone seems a stick on to take over. We know from SOD that playing for Motherwell isn't going to hold him back while Clarke is in charge. I don't think he's a million miles away from a call up if he's playing every week.

[YassinMoutaouakil]

10 minutes ago, well fan for life said:

Let me preface this whole thing with a I am literally completely uninformed label.

If we're bringing in Kelly we won't be paying a big transfer fee because we don't have that money. I would guess there will be some money but maybe a substantial sell on or something. Wouldn't be surprised if he's the highest paid at the club.

From the outside I think Liam Kelly wants to play every week. Bigger picture, the Scotland goalkeeper position is...problematic. Gordon, McLaughlin & Marshall aren't getting any younger and there isn't anyone seems a stick on to take over. We know from SOD that playing for Motherwell isn't going to hold him back while Clarke is in charge. I don't think he's a million miles away from a call up if he's playing every week.

Aye looking at the competition (or lack of) I'd say he's got a very good chance of being Scotlands #1 in a few years unless someone appears out of nowhere.

[Blink182]

12 hours ago, capt_oats said:

The rumour at the time was £5k p/w but...yes, pretty much. And he has another 2 years of his Rangers contract to run.

Pretty sure it's much higher than 5k per week and there's no way anyone could turn it down especially someone who had a good run of games over a short period of time.

 

Signing Kelly would be some statement of intent for next season. We seem to either have outstanding goalies or unbelievably poor and nothing in-between so I'm hopeful we are sticking to the outstanding type!

[capt_oats]

Aye, to be clear I'm not saying we shouldn't it just feels weird that we are (subject to confirmation, terms and conditions etc). Especially when you think about all the chat that's surrounded how we'd be hamstrung in this sort of area as a fan owned club (and a fair amount of that has come from our own fan-base).

The logic itself is something I'd been wondering about, my take in general is the idea that we're looking at it from the POV that there's probably less risk in paying extra (within reason etc) for someone we know is good vs paying less for someone who might be good and turn out like Gillespie but could equally turn out like a Samson or Chapman (lest we forget he was winner of the League 2 Golden Glove 17/18).

It kind of speaks to a point Alan Burrows was making on the MFC Pod the other week about the difference in approach between Robinson and Alexander:

Quote

"Graham's slightly different in that his view would be rather than take the first pick that we're going to get, let's make sure that the pick that we're going to bring in, in his eyes, is the strongest pick and that might mean waiting a wee bit longer or battling harder to get one or trying to aim for whatever we might want to aim for." 

Holding out and targeting good players rather than gettable players. What a concept.

From Kelly's POV it makes total sense, he's coming back to a club he knows, that's relatively local for him and one that will platform him.

Edited July 4, 2021 by capt_oats

[ropy]

If we are paying money it would have to be a 3 year deal minimum.

[Yorky]

7 minutes ago, capt_oats said:

Aye, to be clear I'm not saying we shouldn't it just feels weird that we are (subject to confirmation, terms and conditions etc). Especially when you think about all the chat that's surrounded how we'd be hamstrung in this sort of area as a fan owned club (and a fair amount of that has come from our own fan-base).

The logic itself is something I'd been wondering about, my take in general is the idea that we're looking at it from to POV that there's probably less risk in paying extra (within reason etc) for someone we know is good vs paying less for someone who might be good and turn out like Gillespie but could equally turn out like a Samson or Chapman (lest we forget he was winner of the League 2 Golden Glove 17/18).

It kind of speaks to a point Alan Burrows was making on the MFC Pod the other week about the difference in approach between Robinson and Alexander:

Holding out and targeting good players rather than gettable players. What a concept.

From Kelly's POV it makes total sense, he's coming back to a club he knows, that's relatively local for him and one that will platform him.

That’s my take, we know his qualities and he’s not even in his prime as a goalkeeper. Unless he’s unlucky with injuries paying say 100k for someone on a 3 year deal and selling for 1 million plus is good business. Ok I’m just picking figures here and you obviously can’t do that on a regular basis, issues with the wage cap and keeping other players happy but in this case I think it absolutely makes sense. Smaller, better quality squad.

[welldaft]

I remember wondering what Hibs were playing at spending £250k+ plus wages for Nisbet. Especially during Covid on the back of making redundancies.  It very much looks like that bear fruit and make a very decent ROI. 

It is not something we have done often if at all lately, but as covered above I suspect the Board and Manager view paying a premium to get Liam Kelly back as an investment down the line. That said we had Randolph and Gillespie and somehow did not get a penny for either .

Also it may be we are not looking at going vastly over the 1st team squad budget if at all.  As Yorky mentions GA made it clear he prefers to run with a smaller squad. So as opposed to signing 10 new players on £1.5k per week we sign 4 or 5 at that level and 2 or 3 on a larger wage. 

Anyways it would be a good signing and hopefully confirmed next couple of days. 

[YassinMoutaouakil]

I guess if we're going to be chucking money about this is pretty much the safest investment we can make. We know he's good and not an arsehole, he's still at a sellable age and plays a position where he's fairly unlikely to suffer a massive drop in quality or bad injury.

[thisGRAEME]

12 minutes ago, YassinMoutaouakil said:

I guess if we're going to be chucking money about this is pretty much the safest investment we can make. We know he's good and not an arsehole, he's still at a sellable age and plays a position where he's fairly unlikely to suffer a massive drop in quality or bad injury.

Why would you 

[well fan for life]

16 minutes ago, YassinMoutaouakil said:

I guess if we're going to be chucking money about this is pretty much the safest investment we can make. We know he's good and not an arsehole, he's still at a sellable age and plays a position where he's fairly unlikely to suffer a massive drop in quality or bad injury.

[capt_oats]

15 minutes ago, YassinMoutaouakil said:

I guess if we're going to be chucking money about this is pretty much the safest investment we can make. We know he's good and not an arsehole, he's still at a sellable age and plays a position where he's fairly unlikely to suffer a massive drop in quality or bad injury.

 

[Mr. Brightside]

Delete that post and the ones quoting it right fucking now.

[YassinMoutaouakil]

I mean, I'd much rather we patched whatever we're giving Kelly+ QPR and funnelled it into Nadir's signing on fee like...

[crazylegsjoe_mfc]

 I can't believe people question Alexander's policy on youth...

 

[crazylegsjoe_mfc]

I'm astonished that not only it looks like we've won the race to sign Kelly, but also that it's permanent. I assumed that he had been so good with us last season that he had almost played himself out of a return to Fir Park. Be that a route back into contention at QPR, a permanent transfer to a club with better finances than us or a loan to a club willing to pay a bigger % of his wage. Great news and I think last season illustrated the benefits of a good goalkeeper.

I wonder how many players off a full set we are now.

I would say I would probably like five, but reckon three might be more realistic. I'd like two centre backs, but part of me thinks that we'll sign a right-sided centre back and then have McGinley as the cover for both LB and LCB.

In midfield, I'd like a like-for-like replacement for Campbell and one for Polworth on a good day. I reckon we might try and shoehorn O'Hara in to the Campbell role right enough.

I also say we lack a right-footed wide player. From what I can tell, it seems Woolery, Lawless and Amaluzor are all lefties. Could use a bit of balance there.

 

[capt_oats]

1 hour ago, crazylegsjoe_mfc said:

I'm astonished that not only it looks like we've won the race to sign Kelly, but also that it's permanent. I assumed that he had been so good with us last season that he had almost played himself out of a return to Fir Park. Be that a route back into contention at QPR, a permanent transfer to a club with better finances than us or a loan to a club willing to pay a bigger % of his wage. Great news and I think last season illustrated the benefits of a good goalkeeper.

I wonder how many players off a full set we are now.

I would say I would probably like five, but reckon three might be more realistic. I'd like two centre backs, but part of me thinks that we'll sign a right-sided centre back and then have McGinley as the cover for both LB and LCB.

In midfield, I'd like a like-for-like replacement for Campbell and one for Polworth on a good day. I reckon we might try and shoehorn O'Hara in to the Campbell role right enough.

I also say we lack a right-footed wide player. From what I can tell, it seems Woolery, Lawless and Amaluzor are all lefties. Could use a bit of balance there.

I'm still in a kind of 'believe it when I see it' mode re: Kelly. If it was Scott Burns reporting it then fine but I noticed that while Nixon had the info re: Archer to QPR and Kelly to us it was a different Sun journo who had the "permanent deal" story.

If you remember last summer Nixon had us looking at Lang on a permanent and he eventually ended up here on loan. The circumstances/finances around Kelly on a permanent still feel slightly ambitious to me. Even allowing for Carson leaving.

In terms of the full set I'd say there are a few ways you can look at it:

On a basic level Alexander's said he wants to run with a smaller squad than we had last season (no fucking shit!) to me that'd be roughly 23 or 24 players - two for each position and a couple spare for contingency. We're currently on 22 (including Morrison, Devine, Johnston and Cornelius).

Alternatively you had Alexander saying at the start of the close season that he was expecting between 7-10 players in. We've currently signed 4, Kelly would obviously make 5. In that respect I still kind of wonder whether we might see a couple of players move out either on loan or permanently (Carson is obviously gone, Morrison seems likely on loan given the way he was talking about needing games and would it be a massive surprise to see Lawleff end up back at Thistle on loan or suchlike?).

The third way is to look at who we've lost from our *cough* best XI last season and ask whether we've replaced them: IMO we've clearly not replaced Gallagher, Campbell and Polworth so those (along with Kelly) would be the minimum I'd say we'd be looking to add. After that there's an argument for a couple of squad options (and it'd squarely land us in Alexander's projected 7-10 range).

That's a really fucking long-winded way of me saying we probably need another 4 or 5.

Edited July 5, 2021 by capt_oats

[Neil86]

50 minutes ago, capt_oats said:

I'm still in a kind of 'believe it when I see it' mode re: Kelly. If it was Scott Burns reporting it then fine but I noticed that while Nixon had the info re: Archer to QPR and Kelly to us it was a different Sun journo who had the "permanent deal" story.

If you remember last summer Nixon had us looking at Lang on a permanent and he eventually ended up here on loan. The circumstances/finances around Kelly on a permanent still feel slightly ambitious to me. Even allowing for Carson leaving.

In terms of the full set I'd say there are a few ways you can look at it:

On a basic level Alexander's said he wants to run with a smaller squad than we had last season (no fucking shit!) to me that'd be roughly 23 or 24 players - two for each position and a couple spare for contingency. We're currently on 22 (including Morrison, Devine, Johnston and Cornelius).

Alternatively you had Alexander saying at the start of the close season that he was expecting between 7-10 players in. We've currently signed 4, Kelly would obviously make 5. In that respect I still kind of wonder whether we might see a couple of players move out either on loan or permanently (Carson is obviously gone, Morrison seems likely on loan given the way he was talking about needing games and would it be a massive surprise to see Lawleff end up back at Thistle on loan or suchlike?).

The third way is to look at who we've lost from our *cough* best XI last season and ask whether we've replaced them: IMO we've clearly not replaced Gallagher, Campbell and Polworth so those (along with Kelly) would be the minimum I'd say we'd be looking to add. After that there's an argument for a couple of squad options (and it'd squarely land us in Alexander's projected 7-10 range).

That's a really fucking long-winded way of me saying we probably need another 4 or 5.

In agreement with all of this. You mentioned Morrison, Johnston, Devine and Cornelius, it wouldn't be a massive surprise to see all four go out on loan. Given the total lack of any football last season, you have to think that they really do need to be playing every week this season. 

Johnston is probably still you enough that he would benefit from just being around the first team squad, Cornelius and Devine have had that for a few years now and probably need the game time. Would be interesting to see them get a decent gig in the championship and see how they do.

Ideally I would like to replace Allan Campbell as well but a creative type should be far higher up the list when it comes to midfielders. 

[Lobby Dossar]

31 minutes ago, Neil86 said:

In agreement with all of this. You mentioned Morrison, Johnston, Devine and Cornelius, it wouldn't be a massive surprise to see all four go out on loan. Given the total lack of any football last season, you have to think that they really do need to be playing every week this season. 

Johnston is probably still you enough that he would benefit from just being around the first team squad, Cornelius and Devine have had that for a few years now and probably need the game time. Would be interesting to see them get a decent gig in the championship and see how they do.

Ideally I would like to replace Allan Campbell as well but a creative type should be far higher up the list when it comes to midfielders. 

Jackson Irvine is the ready made replacement for Alan Campbell ……… think he’s a free agent but doubt we could afford his wage demands

[Jim McLean's Ghost]

1 hour ago, capt_oats said:

I'm still in a kind of 'believe it when I see it' mode re: Kelly. If it was Scott Burns reporting it then fine but I noticed that while Nixon had the info re: Archer to QPR and Kelly to us it was a different Sun journo who had the "permanent deal" story.

Same.

I completely missed this Kelly "deal" because Scott Burns didn't tweet about it, or even like the story that was in the Sun which means that whatever is happening the info hasn't come out of Motherwell.