The Queen of the South thread

[Otis Blue]

1 hour ago, Fae_the_'briggs said:

... Going part-time may be a necessary and sensible idea financially but it just seems like another step back into the previous dark ages we suffered under Harkness. There just seems to be a complete lack of any ambition or forward planning at the top level to try and get the Club out of this rut we find ourselves currently in ...

Yep, it (going PT) would be a backward step.  Sadly, I'd say it will be dictated purely by the club's finances.  We'll no doubt eventually find a board of directors willing to operate the club, but it's probably unlikely that we'll also find anyone wealthy enough (and daft enough) to also inject a meaningful portion of their own hard-earned funds into the club to improve our position financially.

Unfortunately, I'd say we are an awkward size of club/town/area - we're just on the cusp of being big enough to support a FT club (and would be at the top end size wise of most PT clubs) but we need sufficiently decent quality of product on the pitch to maintain reasonable sized crowds or else the financial model doesn't work.  Certainly the outgoing board had the right idea in seeking additional income streams (such as the Arena) to supplement the purely football income and should be lauded for that (although that doesn't excuse their chaotic exit strategy).  Geographically, I think it's a real shame if the South of Scotland (and aye, I'm not including Ayr in this "area") can't have a club able to maintain a profile within the top two leagues - just as I was pleased to see the introduction of Highland clubs (though I'm no fan of the County/McGregor rich plaything project) to give the game some profile in the North of the country.

I think in the short term (next couple of seasons) we should use a hybrid PT/FT model where we spend the budget wisely on a smaller squad with "high end" PT players and use the FT signings sparingly and only where we know we are bringing in decent quality.

[Slipmat]

Talking of finances and how to address losses, I was re-reading my Scottish Cup Final programme the other day and it was interesting to read in Davie Rae's interview that in the first season under McCall we lost £330,000 and the second suffered another loss of £120,000 (including the £20k fine for playing Jamie Adams in a cup tie he wasn't eligible to play in).  Obviously we hovered around the relegation spots in both seasons which affected crowds.

Rae's solution was to go full-time to attract a better quality of player, but crucially he dictated to Chisholm that he ran with a squad of no more than 20 players rather than the 30+ that McCall ("I just need to add another 2 or 3 players to the squad and we'll be fine" - rinse and repeat) had on the books as he felt that the main cause of the losses was the size of the payroll, even one made up of part time wages.  The full time team then finished fourth and got to the said cup final and the crowds swelled.

Pity that Hewitson wasn't so strict with Bartley in terms of adding more and more players to an already bloated squad this season.

Edited April 22 by Slipmat

[bod]

7 hours ago, Slipmat said:

Talking of finances and how to address losses, I was re-reading my Scottish Cup Final programme the other day and it was interesting to read in Davie Rae's interview that in the first season under McCall we lost £330,000 and the second suffered another loss of £120,000 (including the £20k fine for playing Jamie Adams in a cup tie he wasn't eligible to play in).  Obviously we hovered around the relegation spots in both seasons which affected crowds.

Rae's solution was to go full-time to attract a better quality of player, but crucially he dictated to Chisholm that he ran with a squad of no more than 20 players rather than the 30+ that McCall ("I just need to add another 2 or 3 players to the squad and we'll be fine" - rinse and repeat) had on the books as he felt that the main cause of the losses was the size of the payroll, even one made up of part time wages.  The full time team then finished fourth and got to the said cup final and the crowds swelled.

Pity that Hewitson wasn't so strict with Bartley in terms of adding more and more players to an already bloated squad this season.

Yeah but Bartley need new players who would follow his instructions and game plan as the existing ones wouldn't. 

Hence all the youngsters he can bully!

Strange it's the experienced guys (3 come to mind) that he's all publicly fell out with who've pulled him through the last few weeks. 

[Otis Blue]

10 hours ago, Slipmat said:

Talking of finances and how to address losses, I was re-reading my Scottish Cup Final programme the other day and it was interesting to read in Davie Rae's interview that in the first season under McCall we lost £330,000 and the second suffered another loss of £120,000 (including the £20k fine for playing Jamie Adams in a cup tie he wasn't eligible to play in).  Obviously we hovered around the relegation spots in both seasons which affected crowds.

Rae's solution was to go full-time to attract a better quality of player, but crucially he dictated to Chisholm that he ran with a squad of no more than 20 players rather than the 30+ that McCall ("I just need to add another 2 or 3 players to the squad and we'll be fine" - rinse and repeat) had on the books as he felt that the main cause of the losses was the size of the payroll, even one made up of part time wages.  The full time team then finished fourth and got to the said cup final and the crowds swelled.

Pity that Hewitson wasn't so strict with Bartley in terms of adding more and more players to an already bloated squad this season.

I think there was also an element of good fortune in the assembling of the cup final squad - the Mileson project Gr£tna fell apart in 2007 and we were well positioned to pick up some quality players (eg Steve Tosh, Jamie McQuilken, Neil MacFarlane, Andy Aitken) on the back of that to supplement what was already a decent squad (including a certain Mr Dobbie) - so to a degree things kind of fell into place as much as being pre-planned.  Great times nevertheless.

I totally agree that the Chairman needs to control the manager.  As in any business there needs to be checks and balances, approvals for transactions etc.  I've personal experience of seeing businesses suffer when powerful individuals are given too much leash without enough control from on high in place and it should be the same for clubs.  The club should set the budget, agree the strategy for squad building with the manager and then monitor the assembly of the squad via approval of each signing to ensure that the strategy is being followed.

[HighlandQueen]

36 minutes ago, Otis Blue said:

I think there was also an element of good fortune in the assembling of the cup final squad - the Mileson project Gr£tna fell apart in 2007 and we were well positioned to pick up some quality players (eg Steve Tosh, Jamie McQuilken, Neil MacFarlane, Andy Aitken) on the back of that to supplement what was already a decent squad (including a certain Mr Dobbie) - so to a degree things kind of fell into place as much as being pre-planned.  Great times nevertheless.

I totally agree that the Chairman needs to control the manager.  As in any business there needs to be checks and balances, approvals for transactions etc.  I've personal experience of seeing businesses suffer when powerful individuals are given too much leash without enough control from on high in place and it should be the same for clubs.  The club should set the budget, agree the strategy for squad building with the manager and then monitor the assembly of the squad via approval of each signing to ensure that the strategy is being followed.

I agree with this. I’ve sat on/ am sitting on a number of Boards and the Chairman with Board approval picks  the ceo ( in our case also the manager), a strategy is agreed, then a business plan, with an appropriate budget and the executional plan is agreed then monitored ongoing with appropriate metrics. 
 

For what it’s worth ( only my view) it would be a retrograde step to go part time. I would pay off Bartley, approach McCall ( who I guess is only on a short term contract at Clyde) and then have a long term plan to start moving forward again. It may mean another loss but to a purpose. Much though I like Marv and his rhetoric, this year has been an abject failure with poor recruitment, hapless tactics and the football is awful to watch. Even if he hasn’t lost the dressing room he seems to have lost the fans. It would worry me to trust him once more with our summer recruitment. If we leave him in place it’s another lost season. 
 

I am deeply worried about the potential calibre of the new chairman and board ( I’m nervous about the info one can glean about Mr McLinden, on the one hand there is some evidence of success but also extensive PR about an ambitious business he was involved in being dissolved). Maybe I’m wrong as I don’t know him but I’m edgy. You all know my view. I still wouldn’t rule out opening the club up to investment and professional input from beyond just the local area. Only my opinion but seems that we are at a crucial inflection point for our future. I would hate us to become another L1/2 part time local club with no ambition.

just a view…..

[Kelheart]

Needing you guys to give Cove a hiding on Saturday please and Montrose the following week , that's all

[annan4eva]

2 hours ago, HighlandQueen said:

I agree with this. I’ve sat on/ am sitting on a number of Boards and the Chairman with Board approval picks  the ceo ( in our case also the manager), a strategy is agreed, then a business plan, with an appropriate budget and the executional plan is agreed then monitored ongoing with appropriate metrics. 
 

For what it’s worth ( only my view) it would be a retrograde step to go part time. I would pay off Bartley, approach McCall ( who I guess is only on a short term contract at Clyde) and then have a long term plan to start moving forward again. It may mean another loss but to a purpose. Much though I like Marv and his rhetoric, this year has been an abject failure with poor recruitment, hapless tactics and the football is awful to watch. Even if he hasn’t lost the dressing room he seems to have lost the fans. It would worry me to trust him once more with our summer recruitment. If we leave him in place it’s another lost season. 
 

I am deeply worried about the potential calibre of the new chairman and board ( I’m nervous about the info one can glean about Mr McLinden, on the one hand there is some evidence of success but also extensive PR about an ambitious business he was involved in being dissolved). Maybe I’m wrong as I don’t know him but I’m edgy. You all know my view. I still wouldn’t rule out opening the club up to investment and professional input from beyond just the local area. Only my opinion but seems that we are at a crucial inflection point for our future. I would hate us to become another L1/2 part time local club with no ambition.

just a view…..

It’s interesting that you personally wish to employ a manager who is potentially a couple of games away to leading Clyde into oblivion. 

[bod]

50 minutes ago, annan4eva said:

It’s interesting that you personally wish to employ a manager who is potentially a couple of games away to leading Clyde into oblivion. 

Murphy would be my main target.

[Otis Blue]

2 hours ago, annan4eva said:

It’s interesting that you personally wish to employ a manager who is potentially a couple of games away to leading Clyde into oblivion. 

Yep, not top of my list ...

[annan4eva]

2 hours ago, bod said:

Murphy would be my main target.

Careful what you wish for.

[19QOS19]

29 minutes ago, annan4eva said:

Careful what you wish for.

I'd say that applies to you as well. I'm really not sure what else you think a new manager could do. Annan are punching well above their weight just now. 

[Slipmat]

Our Board of Director may be keen on bringing Murphy in if they are best buddies.  I'd prefer Murphy too to McCall to be honest, but first things first, let's get the incumbent buffoon out of the door.  No point in contemplating who his successor may be while there's still a danger that he may still be here in May and beyond.

[19QOS19]

19 minutes ago, Slipmat said:

Our Board of Director may be keen on bringing Murphy in if they are best buddies.  I'd prefer Murphy too to McCall to be honest, but first things first, let's get the incumbent buffoon out of the door.  No point in contemplating who his successor may be while there's still a danger that he may still be here in May and beyond.

The longer we're 'Boardless' the more concerned I am he'll be here next season. It doesn't bear thinking about. I've stuck it out this season but I don't know if I could do it again tbh. Have every intention of getting a ST next season just to put the money in, but I won't be if he's still here. 

[HighlandQueen]

5 hours ago, annan4eva said:

It’s interesting that you personally wish to employ a manager who is potentially a couple of games away to leading Clyde into oblivion. 

Because of his proven track record and link to Dumfries. Happy to listen if you have a better idea.

[HighlandQueen]

5 hours ago, bod said:

Murphy would be my main target.

I see no long term track record that would put him on my list

[19QOS19]

24 minutes ago, HighlandQueen said:

I see no long term track record that would put him on my list

He's done a remarkable job at Annan tbh. McCall's stock is in decline IMO. I certainly wouldn't be against him coming but I'm now doubtful he'll be here given our finances. 

[HighlandQueen]

12 hours ago, 19QOS19 said:

He's done a remarkable job at Annan tbh. McCall's stock is in decline IMO. I certainly wouldn't be against him coming but I'm now doubtful he'll be here given our finances. 

Did well to get them out of L2 and back end of this season has been good but no progressive forward player development strategy as seems to be done with a nexus of ageing pros, mostly ex Queens players. He has got a lot out of them but not sure how he would handle a bigger budget and no evidence of ability to get a team out of L1 or play on a bigger stage. Not for me but I could be wrong. Difficult to be worse than our last 2 incumbents. Still the proven track record and connections of McCall for me. 

[The Moonster]

1 hour ago, HighlandQueen said:

Did well to get them out of L2 and back end of this season has been good but no progressive forward player development strategy as seems to be done with a nexus of ageing pros, mostly ex Queens players. He has got a lot out of them but not sure how he would handle a bigger budget and no evidence of ability to get a team out of L1 or play on a bigger stage. Not for me but I could be wrong. Difficult to be worse than our last 2 incumbents. Still the proven track record and connections of McCall for me. 

No evidence to get a team out of League 1! He's been at this level for 1 season with one of the smallest budgets in the league

 

[Slipmat]

1 hour ago, HighlandQueen said:

Did well to get them out of L2 and back end of this season has been good but no progressive forward player development strategy as seems to be done with a nexus of ageing pros, mostly ex Queens players. He has got a lot out of them but not sure how he would handle a bigger budget and no evidence of ability to get a team out of L1 or play on a bigger stage. Not for me but I could be wrong. Difficult to be worse than our last 2 incumbents. Still the proven track record and connections of McCall for me. 

Don't forget Murphy's work with Bauhaus in the late 70's/early 80's.  A charismatic frontman, and songs like "Bela Lugosi's Dead" and "Kick In The Eye" are now regarded as post-punk/goth classics which have stood the test of time.

[Otis Blue]

30 minutes ago, Slipmat said:

Don't forget Murphy's work with Bauhaus in the late 70's/early 80's.  A charismatic frontman, and songs like "Bela Lugosi's Dead" and "Kick In The Eye" are now regarded as post-punk/goth classics which have stood the test of time.

Aye, it's the details that are often overlooked ...