Motherwell FC - A Thread For All Seasons

[YassinMoutaouakil]

2 minutes ago, Ron Aldo said:

I once saw a picture of Hastie on Twitter and he was wearing white jeans.

For that reason he can get to f**k.

Who's got the Craig Reid photo?

[thisGRAEME]

5 minutes ago, Ron Aldo said:

I once saw a picture of Hastie on Twitter and he was wearing white jeans.

For that reason he can get to f**k.

The old Wes Fletcher rule.

Nice.

[Desp]

4 minutes ago, thisGRAEME said:

The old Wes Fletcher rule.

Nice.

He had lovely hair though.  Different kettle of fish was oor Wes.

[Luke92]

22 minutes ago, Desp said:

Re the bit in bold, we've got Turnbull, Campbell, Scott and Maguire all down in longer-term deals.  We've got Livingstone signed up for next year as well.

Nobody could have predicted how Hastie would have fared into the team.  Looked ok at Airdrie, done well at Alloa but that's about it.  He was never billed as the "next big thing". 

With regards to "protecting our investment" we're in line for circa £750k for two players (Hastie & McKinstry) who've played less than 20 games for Motherwell between them.  I think that's a decent return.  Plus, we've got the potential for another half a million from Cadden.  All came through our Academy.

For every Jake Hastie leaving too soon, there'll be a Ross Forbes, Luke Watt or Dom Thomas stinking the place out for a couple of years.  We can't get them all right, but I think we've shown we do better than most. 

Turnbull could have left at the end of the season, we were very fortunate with him.  Maiguire/Scott were also in their last 6 months so could have gone elsewhere.

What I am proposing is to have more than a few months left on the contracts of players we have as the main prospects from our youth academy. As I have said I don't think it would have required much more money to get these guys tied down last summer.  Having someone out on loan normally suggests you are trying to develop them I would have thought.

I agree with you, 750k is a decent return (if we actually get that) but I believe we could have got more for Hastie. This is our main revenue stream so we need to ensure we are making as much dollar as possible. Despite what Burrows said in the media I would like to think the board are looking at this.

Edited April 26, 2019 by Luke92

[Desp]

13 minutes ago, YassinMoutaouakil said:

Who's got the Craig Reid photo?

 

[AndyRoss]

Remember the Calum Elliot dance video? 

[Desp]

8 minutes ago, Luke92 said:

What I am proposing is to have more than a few months left on the contracts of players we have as the main prospects from our youth academy. As I have said I don't think it would have required much more money to get these guys tied down last summer.  

All well and good, in theory, but we can't force these players to sign contracts if they (or their agents) are looking to play a waiting game and see what's best for them.

The youngsters now, would they really sign three or four year deals on youth player wages when it's shown that if they wait until they break through, even 15 games in the first team can either get you a first team contract at Motherwell or a move to Rangers or England like Hastie, Hall or McKinstry?

It's almost like going back to the "why didn't we sell Randolph for £1m?" when nobody actually made a bid for him. 

Edited April 26, 2019 by Desp

[Busta Nut]

"If Hastie (& Turnbull) hadn't come into the team and done so well we could have signed them up in Feb for another 3 years on £500 a week."

"If we'd offered them new contracts in the summer they would have been signed up too."

I am not comfortable with these arguments. Nostradamus type shit. 

 

[Desp]

12 minutes ago, Busta Nut said:

"If Hastie (& Turnbull) hadn't come into the team and done so well we could have signed them up in Feb for another 3 years on £500 a week."

I am not comfortable with these arguments. Nostradamus type shit. 

Yeah, never understood this argument.  Also completely ignores the question of why should we offer these types of players long-term deals if they haven't broken into the first team by the age of 19?

As I've said, I believe we've shown we'll win a lot more than we'll lose with these kind of players.

Edited April 26, 2019 by Desp

[Luke92]

Just now, Desp said:

The youngsters now, would they really sign three or four year deals on youth player wages when it's shown that if they wait until they break through, even 15 games in the first team can either get you a first team contract at Motherwell or a move to Rangers or England like Hastie, Hall or McKinstry?

It's almost like going back to the "why didn't we sell Randolph for £1m?" which nobody actually made a bid for him. 

Aye clearly these are all hypotheticals but IMO Hastie and Turnbull would have signed a year contract extension last summer. I think suggesting otherwise is pretty unrealistic. They were nowhere near first team players at that point, a similar or slightly improved wage would likely have been accepted.

I don't think anyone is suggesting giving a 4 year deal for a youth player. What I am suggesting is if a guy is one of our top youth prospects we should have then on more than a six month contract and not rely on compensation thus maxmising our profits in the situation they come good.  To me, this would a basic approach to our top 3/4 youth prospects.

[Desp]

2 minutes ago, Luke92 said:

Aye clearly these are all hypotheticals but IMO Hastie and Turnbull would have signed a year contract extension last summer. I think suggesting otherwise is pretty unrealistic. They were nowhere near first team players at that point, a similar or slightly improved wage would likely have been accepted.

I don't think anyone is suggesting giving a 4 year deal for a youth player. What I am suggesting is if a guy is one of our top youth prospects we should have then on more than a six month contract and not rely on compensation thus maxmising our profits in the situation they come good.  To me, this would a basic approach to our top 3/4 youth prospects.

David Turnbull's agent would probably disagree with you. 

Like I've said, in an ideal world what you've suggested would be great.  I've never really watched the U20s, but did any of the Motherwell fans, or even coaching staff, have Hastie down as one of our top prospects this time last year, which he was doing ok(ish) at Airdrie in League One? 

The power is with the players these days, even when the players are 16, 17, 18 years old.  So I think the days of 'these young lads will sign whatever we put down to them' are long gone.  It's a very fine balancing act, we can't sign up four of five in the hope that one comes good as we don't have the cash for it.  Let's be honest, if we released Jake Hastie at the end of the 2017/18, would there have been a huge outcry from the fans?  I doubt it. 

Yes, it's disappointing to lose a player so soon for less money than some would like, but we have benefitted from it.  So that's a positive.  We may benefit down the line if Hastie does well at Ibrox, both financially and also for future kids who'll have another example of a player breaking through at Motherwell and doing well for himself. 

[Swello]

17 minutes ago, Luke92 said:

What I am proposing is to have more than a few months left on the contracts of players we have as the main prospects from our youth academy. As I have said I don't think it would have required much more money to get these guys tied down last summer.  

I've seen this point of view a lot during this endless Hastie saga - and I honestly find it odd that people act like Bosman (which will have been in place for the lifetime of a lot of the people saying it) never happened. The purpose (and real world effect) of it was that it took all the power around contracting, registrations and transfers that used to reside with the clubs and transferred the vast majority of that power to players and their agents. The fact is that clubs (and especially clubs with low budgets) are in a pretty weak negotiating position when a "main prospect" player is involved as their agent will be watching the countdown on the contract well before it gets into the last year and will already have their strategy in place. 

There seems to be an impression that Pro-youth players are just daft boys that will sign anything that's put in front of them for an extra couple of hundred quid a week because they aren't in the first team yet but surely the length of Turnbull's negotiation alone should have put that idea to bed - never mind McKinstry who hasn't been near the first team yet. Their agents know better than the club what kind of offer is on the table elsewhere and so they simply wouldn't make their client "easy to deal with" when they have that leverage. 

The bottom line is that the directors of the club have a duty to protect our investments in youth order to keep us afloat -  and a big part of that is making sure that we aren't left with the derisory fees we got under Dempster and previously. The upshot of that is probably that most of our good youth players will leave at 20 or 21 and mostly for training compensation rather than huge transfer fees - but if it means that the club is able to run sustainably/profitably - then that's ok IMO.

[Neil86]

 

24 minutes ago, Luke92 said:

Aye clearly these are all hypotheticals but IMO Hastie and Turnbull would have signed a year contract extension last summer. I think suggesting otherwise is pretty unrealistic. They were nowhere near first team players at that point, a similar or slightly improved wage would likely have been accepted.

I don't think anyone is suggesting giving a 4 year deal for a youth player. What I am suggesting is if a guy is one of our top youth prospects we should have then on more than a six month contract and not rely on compensation thus maxmising our profits in the situation they come good.  To me, this would a basic approach to our top 3/4 youth prospects.

Maybe we do have our top prospects signed though in Turnbull, Scott and Maguire? someone mentioned having Scott been offered a better contract than Hastie as, even after his purple patch, Scott was the better prospect.

[ONeils4Oyarder]

2 hours ago, Desp said:

A four-year deal on at least £5k a week?  Nice work if you can get it, Jake. 

 

I've heard its nowhere near 5k a week

[capt_oats]

1 hour ago, Desp said:

David Turnbull's agent would probably disagree with you. 

Like I've said, in an ideal world what you've suggested would be great.  I've never really watched the U20s, but did any of the Motherwell fans, or even coaching staff, have Hastie down as one of our top prospects this time last year, which he was doing ok(ish) at Airdrie in League One? 

The power is with the players these days, even when the players are 16, 17, 18 years old.  So I think the days of 'these young lads will sign whatever we put down to them' are long gone.  It's a very fine balancing act, we can't sign up four of five in the hope that one comes good as we don't have the cash for it.  Let's be honest, if we released Jake Hastie at the end of the 2017/18, would there have been a huge outcry from the fans?  I doubt it. 

Yes, it's disappointing to lose a player so soon for less money than some would like, but we have benefitted from it.  So that's a positive.  We may benefit down the line if Hastie does well at Ibrox, both financially and also for future kids who'll have another example of a player breaking through at Motherwell and doing well for himself. 

I watched a fair bit of the u20s with Hastie in the team when they were still playing their games at Airdrie and I'd absolutely have said he was one of the obvious prospects to break into the first team and he's someone I'd have thought we'd definitely be offering an extended contract to (which we did).

Would I have envisaged a scenario where Rangers would be taking a punt on him for actual cash money? Absolutely-fucking-not.

In fact, watching Rangers in the Youth Cup Final last night I still find it quite surprising they're taking a punt on him given some of the players they have coming through.

It's difficult to add too much to what @Desp and @Swello have said above. So far we've got Turnbull, Scott, Maguire, Livingstone and Semple signed up. The only one who's rejected the offer is Hastie. That's 5 from 6.

Granted it's been perpetuated by Burrows himself but there's also this idea that we don't hand out long term extensions. We gave Allan Campbell a 4 year deal when he was 19 and James Scott got a 3.5 year deal at 18 a couple of months ago. As has already been explained it's up to the player and his rep what they're prepared to sign and when they're prepared to sign it.

Would Hastie have signed a 3 year deal last summer for a couple of hundred quid more? Maybe he would but given he hadn't played a minute of first team football since he signed  his last extension and was getting loaned out again for the first half of this season (which he admitted himself he needed) it would hardly have been a surprise if he, his rep and the club were happy to see how things went at Alloa (where he scored 3 goals in 23 games).

Edited April 26, 2019 by capt_oats

[nsr]

Hastie still isn't anywhere close to being a finished article. I don't think he'll get much game time at Sevco. In a couple of years I dare say we'll have forgotten about him.

[Casagolda]

Anyway, enough about Hastie. 

My Link

Good news, seems like Trevor is on the mend and might even be back before the seasons out.

Also;

Quote

Robinson is continuing to make progress in building his squad for next season, with another new signing on the cards following pre-contract deals for Liam Polworth and Declan Gallagher.

And the Motherwell boss is optimistic about re-signing players who are nearing the end of their contracts, a group which contains the likes of Elliott Frear, Alex Gorrin and Chris Cadden.

"We are getting closer to a few," he said. "We have signed another player which we will announce next week when their season finishes.

"So we are making progress. We have offered six contracts. Contrary to what some people say, only one player has been offered less money than he has been on this season, based on appearances. Everyone else has been offered the same or more."

Surely must be either Frear or McHugh that’s been offered a reduced deal?

[Desp]

Quote

The SPFL have revealed the Premiership prize money for this season;

7th - £1,437,500

8th - £1,375,000

9th - £1,312,500

£62,500 per place up for grabs.  That's a decent salary for a player per place.  7th is very much worth going for.

[Neil86]

any idea on who the new signing is? English leagues don't finish until next saturday and the statement obviously rules out ousmane fane.....for now.

[Desp]

Just now, Neil86 said:

any idea on who the new signing is? English leagues don't finish until next saturday and the statement obviously rules out ousmane fane.....for now.

Depends on what he means by next week. 

If it's early next week then it'll be someone from the National League in England.  I believe they finish up this weekend.   If he was referring to next Sunday then the Scottish & English lower leagues finish up, with the exception of the play-offs.