Motherwell FC - A Thread For All Seasons

[rowsdower]

Maybe he will be better if he's only given three things to do. 

[YassinMoutaouakil]

Probably worth bearing in mind that Ross County lost 5-0 to this Motherwell team and are already starting to look a bit adrift. There's  always a fear about them because they have a history of these mad post-January surges but objectively they're probably increasingly favourites to go down. 

[Ron Aldo]

Woolery not being Connor Shields automatically makes him a better option than Connor Shields. 

In saying that, I wouldn't say that a winger is a priority. Another striker (none of this "can play across the front 3 pish), a defensive midfielder and a centre half are all more important. If we can get them in and still have a bit left in the budget then I'd be happy to resign Woolery to give us some depth if nothing else. 

[rowsdower]

I'd only be happy with bringing back Woolery and Scott because it could be a funny bit that we sign more ex Motherwell players than st mirren. 

I'm hoping we can sign a few complete unknowns, so that the people who are whining about us bringing back folk we know can pivot to "who?"

As for priorities: people who aren't slow, an actual striker that refuses to play wide, a midfielder that's not a shitebag.

 

[capt_oats]

If we're talking priorities then a #9 and a centre half please.

A holding midfielder and a winger fall into the "also extremely desirable" category for me.

KVV's on 12 goals in 23 games. Yes it should be more given some of the chances he's had but still...good for him. He's absolutely doing us a turn this season but asking him to do it week in, week out for an entire season without any sort of (fit) alternative option to take some of the slack is fucking wild.

His 9 league goals account for 39% of our league total at the moment but the drop off in terms of our team goals scored is telling when you look at the other teams with scorers in the Top 10. We're 10 off Aberdeen who are next highest.

It's interesting to see we've popped our heads back into the Top 5 of WhoScored.com's 'Ratings' section and we've the 4th highest shots per game.

Edited January 4, 2023 by capt_oats

['WellDel]

With Hammell hopeful of at least one in before the weekend, can we not get that crackpot who sits on Fir Park Street on deadline day and posts hazy photo's with captions like "Someone coming out the Chapman building with a bag over his shoulder" followed shortly after by "oh, wait, it's just a cleaner putting the bins out" put to work early with his super-sleuthing skills.?

[Desp]

There's definitely a list of wants for this month (defender, couple of wide men, a striker) but we absolutely need someone in to help out our midfield.  A proper b*****d, if you will. 

We've certainly not got Nesta & Cannavaro at the back, but I think Sol & Lamie are passable enough at our level. Penney is excellent (if we can keep hold of him) and McGinn is an experienced head who knows how to get by.  I think our defence can be awright, but if they've got f**k all protection in front of them then they're going to struggle.

Slattery, Goss and Spittal are neat and tidy enough as individuals, but I don't see any level of partnership in there and certainly none of them can hold a midfield together.  If you can go out and find me an Alex Gorrin type figure, I'd bite your hand off for him.

A huge few weeks coming up for us.  If we don't get what we need, I'd say a bottom two spot is a stick-on.

 

[Busta Nut]

I think Woolery had maybe 3 good games.

It's a no for me.

[Londonwell]

Woolery was mostly pish. However, mostly pish would still be better than Shields. If we’re flapping about come the end of the window with no one in then, in you come Woolery lad. No before that though. 

[Kapowzer]

I think it's imperative we sign 2 unknowns this window so they can be touted for returns when we're in the shit in 2026-27 season ..... We're not backfilling our unknowns effectively which may result in players being needed for a third iteration .... I always have the fear the cigar smoking hobbit may darken our door again.

Said before Gogic would have helped us immensely if signed in August. I'd take Shaughnessy and wouldn't have any qualms about getting reverse abuse from buddies fans. I mean a few of them go on about a cup tie 45 years ago based on gut rather than facts.

Wee Robbo bought better than us last summer and where we are in the financial world, that is the edge. Finding players is one thing, making them wanted and securing their signature is another. I don't know how much of the latter is down to Nick Daws or it rests on Flao/Hammy. He didn't deliver anything 6 months ago but our issues at that time are well documented on here. To also give the benefit of the doubt, he could have put players forward who were unfancied and turned out OK, we didn't act fast enough or didn't do enough to secure them. He better be earning his dough in the next 4 weeks.

[capt_oats]

The thing with recruitment is that presumably the department are working on the instruction of the manager in terms of what they actually want.

Here are the players that have signed for the club on Daws' watch (it's up for debate whether Shields would have been his work given the timeline but I've included him anyway):

21/22 - Connor Shields (PCA), Justin Amaluzor, Kaiyne Woolery, Kevin Van Veen, Liam Kelly, Darragh O'Connor, Mich'el Parker, Callum Slattery, Juhani Ojala, Sean Goss, Sondre Johansen, Ross Tierney, Jordan Roberts, Victor Nirennold, Joseph Efford, Robbie Mahon, Liam Shaw (loan) = (18)

22/23 - Blair Spittal, Paul McGinn, Josh Morris, Aston Oxborough, Shane Blaney, Stuart McKinstry (loan), Matt Penney (loan), Rolando Aarons (loan), Louis Moult (loan) = (9)

To me, the likes of Amaluzor, O'Connor and Parker were squad filler at a point at which we were trying to get other business done while big Vic Nirennold was clearly signed cover and nothing else. Those signings were very much a case of; it is what it is.

Their role was simply to fill a jersey and I'd say it's pretty disingenuous to judge them as if they were brought in to be long term additions to the first team.

It's your Woolery, Van Veen, Kelly, Slattery et al that you're judging the recruitment team on (IMO).

I mean, KVV has a better goal scoring record for us (23 in 62) than ANY striker Robinson signed:

• Fisher (0 in 19) 
• Newell (0 in 10)
• Main (14 in 58)
• Ciftci (3 in 15)
• Johnson (8 in 28)
• Sammon (3 in 21)
• McCormack (0 in 4)
• Long (17 in 66)
• Manzinga (1 in 7)
• MacIver (1 in 9)
• Watt (19 in 70)
• Devante Cole (16 in 52)
• Jordan White (0 in 20).

I'd say that unlike Robinson/Foyle whose transfer business was hit or miss, the bulk of the 27 signings we've made have been fine and in a way that's kind of the problem.

Where Robinson managed to pick up the likes of Kipré, Carson, Gillespie etc who obviously had a high upside and also inherited our 'golden generation' courtesy of Craigan's work with the dev squad and led to a generational player like Turnbull in our team alongside someone like Campbell our recruitment over the past 2 seasons has really been picking up a collection of players who have ranged from alright to quite good with a couple who haven't really worked out.

A number of those players Alexander seemed to simply choose not to play (*waves at Liam Shaw*) while others clearly had/have the sort of potential to justify their signing and are probably viewed as projects (Tierney).

In that respect it's not really the fault of the HoR if the manager loses his fucking mind? Or if the club decide they want to pivot their strategy to allow for more of a pathway and not bother replacing the established Premiership players they've let go?

Equally, it doesn't seem like a massive leap to suggest that McKinstry, Aarons and Moult came straight from Hammell's phone book so putting the blame for the 2 busts that everyone saw coming at Daws' door seems unfair - not to mention the fact that the Cult of Louis have been lobbying for him to come back since he said his farewell when we were scudded by Accies.

Don't get me wrong, I'm heavy sceptical as to whether we're equipped to bring in what we need or whether Hammell even knows what we need or even if Nick Daws is particularly suited to being a HoR but it's definitely a more nuanced conversation than just getting raging about "recruitment" as some sort of nebulous entity such is the way of social media 

Edited January 5, 2023 by capt_oats

[rowsdower]

I get that the manager can scupper the HoRs plans by not playing his signings, and the further away we get from Alexander's reign the more I absolutely hate him,  but he should surely be the one that throws the big NOPE at signing two crocks. I don't think you need an xKnee stat to figure out those were huge risks, especially when we had a glaring hole in the forward areas as well as a b*****dless midfield.

The recruitment department should be the ones ensuring continuity and that we aren't completely fucked in one area of the pitch. Getting to the last day of the window with no striker signed, leaving us with a massive gamble on moult, then admitting we didn't even expect him to start games, was a massive failure. 

Penney was a good signing, and the ability to identify useful loan players is critical in our league, so hopefully that's a sign of things to come.

The rumours on SO was two Irish guys. Other than that, all I've seen is VL Twitter pish.

[Marinello]

SH tells us that many a long night is spent mulling over signing targets.

Can only hope that this will yield a Devante Cole type signing rather than a Justin Amaluzer hunch.

[capt_oats]

1 hour ago, rowsdower said:

I get that the manager can scupper the HoRs plans by not playing his signings, and the further away we get from Alexander's reign the more I absolutely hate him,  but he should surely be the one that throws the big NOPE at signing two crocks. I don't think you need an xKnee stat to figure out those were huge risks, especially when we had a glaring hole in the forward areas as well as a b*****dless midfield.

The recruitment department should be the ones ensuring continuity and that we aren't completely fucked in one area of the pitch. Getting to the last day of the window with no striker signed, leaving us with a massive gamble on moult, then admitting we didn't even expect him to start games, was a massive failure. 

Penney was a good signing, and the ability to identify useful loan players is critical in our league, so hopefully that's a sign of things to come.

The rumours on SO was two Irish guys. Other than that, all I've seen is VL Twitter pish.

Aye, I don’t disagree and to be clear I’m not sat here looking to absolve anyone.

On the point about us being left b*****dless at the end of the window - we know we were interested in Robert Snodgrass because Hammell literally told the press “we’re interested in Robert Snodgrass”, by the end of window we didn’t sign anyone that plays the same position as him.

Was that just an opportunity thing where it was Hammell looking at Transfermarkt and deciding we should pitch to him in which case it was Snodgrass or no one or was it the case that it was a position and profile we needed filled (it is) and we didn’t have an alternative (or was he the alternative to Steven Davis).

@Swello made a good point earlier in the thread in terms of the squad having deteriorated- it has. Possibly through choice in that we’ve not replaced a lot of what went out the door but also in terms of the intangible stuff.

Say what you like about Tony Watt, his badge kissing and his exit but he dragged us through games last season. The 1-0 against United at FP being a case in point.

The irony there is that Alexander indicated publicly that he didn’t feel we needed to directly replace Watt and we haven’t - on several levels.

I get the impression that having Moult around the place was an attempt to address the “culture” thing but ultimately if he can’t get on the park then his influence is clearly going to be limited.

[one m in Motherwell]

It’s a bit of a poisoned chalice really.  Previous injury issues aside I don’t think many of us would have grumbled with Aarons or Moult returning.  Whether we would have been in a drastically different situation is a valid question but had both of them stayed fit it would have at least addressed some of the deficiencies we’ve seen ie having to rely on Connor Shields…

The problem with a club at our level is that every signing is going to be a gamble to some extent.  Having a HoR might help to implement a particular strategy but the required output of that can change drastically over a season for various reasons, so what we are looking for now is likely different to what we would have been after if the summer signings worked out.

There are obviously gaps we need filled now, but I wonder if we ever *can* take a particularly long term view?

[Swello]

3 hours ago, one m in Motherwell said:

The problem with a club at our level is that every signing is going to be a gamble to some extent.  Having a HoR might help to implement a particular strategy but the required output of that can change drastically over a season for various reasons, so what we are looking for now is likely different to what we would have been after if the summer signings worked out.

This is true - but it seems pretty clear that any of the "strategic" stuff that was going on when we brought in a bunch of players on longer term deals at the start of last season pretty much disintegrated along with Alexander's Motherwell career.  This summer window felt half-arsed and short-term (likely as the Board weren't letting Alexander spend our full budget) and has put us in the spot we're in now. The decision to start the season with GA still in charge is looking increasingly like a very bad one.

 

[welldaft]

1 hour ago, Swello said:

This is true - but it seems pretty clear that any of the "strategic" stuff that was going on when we brought in a bunch of players on longer term deals at the start of last season pretty much disintegrated along with Alexander's Motherwell career.  This summer window felt half-arsed and short-term (likely as the Board weren't letting Alexander spend our full budget) and has put us in the spot we're in now. The decision to start the season with GA still in charge is looking increasingly like a very bad one.

 

True. 

Alexander was close to losing his job had we not made top 6. Alexander was close to losing his job had we lost all games whilst in the top 6. But the Board rightly felt that you cannot sack a Manager who (regardless of circumstances and how it came about) got us into Europe. And to be fair I cannot criticise that decision or perhaps more pertinently I understand the thinking. 

The above I know. What I don’t know was whether Alexander coming to us to “mutually” walk away saved the club a lot of money. There have been suggestions this is the case. So based on all the above again it is hard to criticise the Board. 

In effect I am agreeing with you. All this has led to the situation we find ourselves in. But I am prepared to give the Board leeway on how it all came about. Let’s wait and see how this transfer window works out and how we perform 2nd half of season. 

I am still 50/50 in my thoughts as to whether we have a good enough squad and with a few (hopefully) quality additions we can kick on. I was chatting to a mate today who felt we were the better side v Livi. 2nd half more so. We were the better side v Killie for most of the game. Same goes for home games v Hearts and DDee Utd. So there is evidence to suggest we are not far away.

I do however accept that if we keep performing well but not picking up enough points it won’t much matter come May. 

 

[Desp]

54 minutes ago, welldaft said:

The above I know. What I don’t know was whether Alexander coming to us to “mutually” walk away saved the club a lot of money. There have been suggestions this is the case. So based on all the above again it is hard to criticise the Board. 

 

Interesting point this.  As far as I'm aware, Alexander hasn't taken another job since leaving us and we haven't really replaced Hammell as Academy Director, have we?

So are we still paying Alexander?  Effectively having him on gardening leave and our staff wage bill would be exactly the same now, give or take, as it was in June.  Would give substance to the "cheapest option" patter surrounding appointing Hammell over splashing out to get Valakari out of his contract.

[welldaft]

10 minutes ago, Desp said:

Interesting point this.  As far as I'm aware, Alexander hasn't taken another job since leaving us and we haven't really replaced Hammell as Academy Director, have we?

So are we still paying Alexander?  Effectively having him on gardening leave and our staff wage bill would be exactly the same now, give or take, as it was in June.  Would give substance to the "cheapest option" patter surrounding appointing Hammell over splashing out to get Valakari out of his contract.

Like most employment contracts I suspect that there were termination clauses based on various scenarios and with various compensation amounts. Likely as it was mutual there would have been a fixed term payment such as 6 months as a guess. Whereas if we sacked him we may well have had to pay up the full contract term. Cannot recall how long was left but it would have been much more than we probably ended up paying out. All supposition on my part of course. 

[Kapowzer]

Wait for Flao’s memoirs folks.