The Hibernian Thread

[VincentGuerin]

1 minute ago, Tommy Tappin said:

Decline in status from what exactly?

From your historical and cultural position in the game.

Hibs have a long history, have played in a European Cup semi-final, are a well-known club.

Now you're a feeder club for Bournemouth. And the best you'll likely get from it is finishing third a bit more often. I honestly don't see how anyone could not view that as just a bit sad.

[Tommy Tappin]

1 minute ago, VincentGuerin said:

From your historical and cultural position in the game.

Hibs have a long history, have played in a European Cup semi-final, are a well-known club.

Now you're a feeder club for Bournemouth. And the best you'll likely get from it is finishing third a bit more often. I honestly don't see how anyone could not view that as just a bit sad.

Most of my life Hibs and Hearts have been feeder clubs for Rangers and Celtic. Bournemouth are less vile than those two. Win.

Our status, like yours, is of a club that doesn't qualify for Europe or win a trophy very often. We last played in the European Cup before most of our support was alive. This gives us a better shot of Europe and of domestic trophies every year. Win.

Where's the decline?

[Leith Green]

 

Just now, VincentGuerin said:

From your historical and cultural position in the game.

Hibs have a long history, have played in a European Cup semi-final, are a well-known club.

Now you're a feeder club for Bournemouth. And the best you'll likely get from it is finishing third a bit more often. I honestly don't see how anyone could not view that as just a bit sad.

Do you think this is just about Bill Foley?

Its not.

As I mentioned a few posts ago, wait and see before making all these assumptions.

 

[VincentGuerin]

Just now, Tommy Tappin said:

Most of my life Hibs and Hearts have been feeder clubs for Rangers and Celtic. Bournemouth are less vile than those two. Win.

Our status, like yours, is of a club that doesn't qualify for Europe or win a trophy very often. We last played in the European Cup before most of our support was alive. This gives us a better shot of Europe and of domestic trophies every year. Win.

Where's the decline?

That's an obvious false equivelance.

As it stands, Hibs can refuse to sell to Celtic or Rangers. Fletcher and McGinn, for example.

You'll not get that from Bournemouth. As I said, you are not your own priority any more. You serve a higher purpose. And forget getting big transfer fees for anyone Bournemouth take. At least the Old Firm have to pay for your players. Why would Bournemouth pay you? They've got FFP to worry about, and they're the priority.

[Tommy Tappin]

8 minutes ago, VincentGuerin said:

Is that it? That's depressing reading.

Here's my take on why it's bad.

1) Hibernian's identity: Up until now, for better or worse, Hibernian's priority has been Hibernian. You can be good, you can be mediocre, you can be shite, but it's all on your terms. This will fundamentally change this. Hibernian's priority from here on will be its role in The Group; ultimately, its role in making Bournemouth successful. That's a status not befitting of Hibs, to be honest.

Keep in mind Bournemouth's financial fair play obligations in the Premier League. Consider the case of Man City's banking of the transfer money for Aaron Mooy despite him never playing for them. You'd need to be exceptionally optimistic to not forsee such a future for Hibs. If not immediately, then down the line. You're not the main thing anymore, you exist to serve the big club.

Imagine Hibs having a player provided by the goup who has 20 goals in December and Bournemouth have an injury crisis up-front. Keep in mind that the Premier League recently voted against barring loans from connected clubs. There's your top scorer off on a long-term loan to Bournemouth with Hibs receiving the square root of f**k all to replace him. You get a gamble from further down the chain. Does this all sound good? That's the conclusion of this, however light-touch they have to pretend to be to convince you to let the wolf in the door.

Forget about the quality of player, think of the change in status. You're not even your own priority any more. Get that in the fucking bin.

2) Our league's status: Imagine a Hibs side up challenging at the top of the league having its best player taken off it for f**k all to serve the needs of fucking Bournemouth? Forget about the finances, think of the humiliation. Title race over, ambitions thwarted, firmly put in your fucking place. Nobody cares about our league. Nobody is making big money from a club in our league. You exist to serve. It's utterly humiliating, and, all joking aside, beneath Hibs. I'd feel the same about Hearts or Aberdeen getting involved.

3) The shape of the game ahead: This is part of the move towards competing Brands rather than football clubs. Each country will have its City Football Group franchise, and its PIF francshise, etc. It will concentrate the focus fully on the clubs at the top of these groups. Everything else is subservient. Our game officially second-class. Your club officially second-class. What if the Bournemouth owners (as some of these groups already do) decide that branding requires all the clubs wear red and black? Happened at Cardiff, and they went along with it. And their fans are much harder than yours.

I don't really care if people think this is a partisan issue. I don't see it that way. Hearts wouldn't be getting another penny of my money or another minute of my time if they got involved in one of these groups. Hopefully being fan-owned can keep us from this, but, long-term, who knows? It's not beyond the imagination we end up going the same way. If we do, I imagine many of our fans will lap it up. But I wouldn't. I'd chuck it, and I'd consider it very sad what has happened to the club.

All joking aside, Hibs should be better than this. It's a dreadful decline in status. You're Melbourne City.

1. Our identity, like yours, is of clubs that people outside Scotland struggle to name and that don't win much. I'd like to improve on that.

2. Our league status is that we exist like the Washington Generals to make sure that the Harlem Globetrotters always win. I'd like to improve on that.

3. We moved to brands with the inception of the EPL in 1992. Some kids now follow player brands rather than clubs. Keep up.   

[VincentGuerin]

1 minute ago, Leith Green said:

 

Do you think this is just about Bill Foley?

Its not.

As I mentioned a few posts ago, wait and see before making all these assumptions.

 

I understand that Hibs fans can only really be optimistic about this. But the motivations are very obvious, and the end result of this is very obvious.Like I said, negotiation and tact requires a light-touch introduction and promises that it'll all be good. Ten years down the line all that's forgotten and you're stuck with it.

[Leith Green]

Just now, VincentGuerin said:

I understand that Hibs fans can only really be optimistic about this. But the motivations are very obvious, and the end result of this is very obvious.Like I said, negotiation and tact requires a light-touch introduction and promises that it'll all be good. Ten years down the line all that's forgotten and you're stuck with it.

Stuck with what?

A club that - having had gazzillions spent on infrastructure and upgraded far beyond where we are now -  might be offloaded for a couple million if the holding company goes breasts skyward?

Nightmare...........

[Tommy Tappin]

1 minute ago, VincentGuerin said:

That's an obvious false equivelance.

As it stands, Hibs can refuse to sell to Celtic or Rangers. Fletcher and McGinn, for example.

You'll not get that from Bournemouth. As I said, you are not your own priority any more. You serve a higher purpose. And forget getting big transfer fees for anyone Bournemouth take. At least the Old Firm have to pay for your players. Why would Bournemouth pay you? They've got FFP to worry about, and they're the priority.

We didn't refuse to sell McGinn to Celtic, Celtic refused to meet the asking price. He'd have gone there otherwise. 

Your assumption that we'll not only exist only to serve Bournemouth but that in doing so, it's somehow worse than 6th/7th/8th placed finishes in a clown league where any good player we have leaves anyway, is interesting. Every club outside of the top 20, are feeder clubs. 

[VincentGuerin]

Just now, Leith Green said:

Stuck with what?

A club that - having had gazzillions spent on infrastructure and upgraded far beyond where we are now -  might be offloaded for a couple million if the holding company goes breasts skyward?

Nightmare...........

Aye, because that's definitely the only way this will go.

As I said, I get that you need to be optimistic. You're in the position lots of football fans have been in before of having to argue for something that you know deep down isn't right. Flip it round and imagine what you'd be thinking if this were Hearts.

Hibs are about to lose their autonomy. If you can't see the obvious dangers in that, then I'd argue that's due to wishful thinking.

And, in terms of the benefits, it's hard to see how Hibs gain much more than a few more trips to Europe. You may feel that's worth it. That's your call.

I doubt you'd argue for this positively if it were another club doing it, though.

[VincentGuerin]

4 minutes ago, Tommy Tappin said:

We didn't refuse to sell McGinn to Celtic, Celtic refused to meet the asking price. He'd have gone there otherwise. 

 

Bournemouth have no asking price to meet. You just give them the player.

Starting to see the difference?

You give them John McGinn for zero pounds and zero pence.

It's in no way comparable to the relationship between Hibs and the OF. Look how much the OF spent on your players in the 2000s. Bournemouth will, down the line, take your players of that standard for absolutely no money at all.

Edited December 12, 2023 by VincentGuerin

[Tommy Tappin]

2 minutes ago, VincentGuerin said:

Bournemouth have no asking price to meet. You just give them the player.

Starting to see the difference?

You give them John McGinn for zero pounds and zero pence.

It's in no way comparable to the relationship between Hibs and the OF. Look how much the OF spent on your players in the 2000s. Bournemouth will, down the line, take your players of that standard for absolutely no money at all.

How do you know?

[VincentGuerin]

1 minute ago, Tommy Tappin said:

How do you know?

Because Bournemouth are the priority and they have FFP to satisfy.

Can you give me a single good reason they would pay Hibs for a player? If they're going to pay Hibs market value (or any money) for players, this is a complete waste of their time.

Edited December 12, 2023 by VincentGuerin

[Leith Green]

2 minutes ago, VincentGuerin said:

Bournemouth have no asking price to meet. You just give them the player.

Starting to see the difference?

You give them John McGinn for zero pounds and zero pence.

It's in no way comparable to the relationship between Hibs and the OF. Look how much the OF spent on your players in the 2000s. Bournemouth will, down the line, take your players of that standard for absolutely no money at all.

Its an interesting bit of mental gymnastics that jumps to "you need to send a player to a club the owners dictate" without the earlier part which could equally be "players bought for you by holding company are excellent, win you trophies and euro qualification".

[madhibby]

8 minutes ago, VincentGuerin said:

Aye, because that's definitely the only way this will go.

As I said, I get that you need to be optimistic. You're in the position lots of football fans have been in before of having to argue for something that you know deep down isn't right. Flip it round and imagine what you'd be thinking if this were Hearts.

Hibs are about to lose their autonomy. If you can't see the obvious dangers in that, then I'd argue that's due to wishful thinking.

And, in terms of the benefits, it's hard to see how Hibs gain much more than a few more trips to Europe. You may feel that's worth it. That's your call.

I doubt you'd argue for this positively if it were another club doing it, though.

Hibs are not about to lose their autonomy - the stake Foley will be taking is under 30%.

[Tommy Tappin]

2 minutes ago, VincentGuerin said:

Because Bournemouth are the priority and they have FFP to satisfy.

Can you give me a single good reason they would pay Hibs for a player? If they're going to pay Hibs market value (or any money) for players, this is a complete waste of their time.

Not a concern. We produce very few premier league quality players. If that happens then we nick an SPL quality player from Lorient. What we lose in transfer fees, we'll gain in new annual investment. Next.

[VincentGuerin]

7 minutes ago, Leith Green said:

Its an interesting bit of mental gymnastics that jumps to "you need to send a player to a club the owners dictate" without the earlier part which could equally be "players bought for you by holding company are excellent, win you trophies and euro qualification".

They might be. But why would they be? That's an exceptionally optimistic reading of the situation.

Are they really going to fund the club at a level that would disrupt the Old Firm? Why on earth would they do that? Hibs' long-term success is not their priority. It's a place to pass players through, or to park players who aren't cutting it at Bournemouth. Look forward to season-long loans for guys returning from long-term injury who must play when fit etc. Or young players needing experience. Doesn't matter if they're shite, the priority is Bournemouth, not Hibs' results.

And what do you think happens if Hibs develop a player worth £10m who is interesting Bayer Leverkusen? I'll tell you what happens. He signs for Bournemouth for free and they sell him to Leverkusen for £10m. That's how this works. Or a player who Celtic may have paid you £4m for. He either goes to Bournemouth for free to play for them, or goes to Bournemouth for free to be sold to Celtic. And it ain't Hibs banking that cash.

As I said, your decline in status here is stark. And I'm struggling to see how the benefits will be anything spectacular. You'll maybe finish third more often. But it's not worth the spending required to do more than that. You have to stop and consider the motivations and the possible benefits. Making Hibs champions of Scotland is a waste of time, and so unlikely to happen that it's not worth the resources.

You'll lose your autonomy and the gains will be nothing you couldn't have managed by yourselves.

Edited December 12, 2023 by VincentGuerin

[VincentGuerin]

3 minutes ago, madhibby said:

Hibs are not about to lose their autonomy - the stake Foley will be taking is under 30%.

For now.

[VincentGuerin]

3 minutes ago, Tommy Tappin said:

Not a concern. We produce very few premier league quality players. If that happens then we nick an SPL quality player from Lorient. What we lose in transfer fees, we'll gain in new annual investment. Next.

Oh dear.

[Leith Green]

Fucking hell @VincentGuerin you are a bawhair away from nomination for the Peppino Impastato thread !

Chillax my man..........

[VincentGuerin]

Just now, Leith Green said:

Fucking hell @VincentGuerin you are a bawhair away from nomination for the Peppino Impastato thread !

Chillax my man..........

It's poor form to nominate for that thread simply when someone disagrees with you.

I'm simply presenting the reality of this news. I get that you need to be optimisti about it. Most fans at most clubs would.

But I think this happening to Hibs is both sad and quite dangerous for Hibs. It's very easy to see dissatisfaction down the line when you no longer control your transfer policy, you are a car park for players as suits Bournemouth, and you've not got a lot to show for it.

Like I said, all the early promises about this will be rainbows and light. But remember, this is cold, hard business. Hibs are not important here.