The Queen of the South thread

[HighlandQueen]

42 minutes ago, Ye Olde Hamiltonian said:

Accies tried twice to sign Tommy Goss this season and were told he was staying as Annan needed him this season.

If Peter Murphy becomes Annan Manager,I would expect you guys to come in for him,although we may come back in a third time.

Dear good no. Utter donkey and failed with us before. If that’s the level of our ambition we may be in this league for a very long time…..

[HighlandQueen]

5 hours ago, 19QOS19 said:

Like yesterday's result, that Bartley interview is a very fitting end to his time with us. Absolutely no personal responsibility. He's unable to use the "I inherited this team" excuse as he's built the squad but instead of blaming himself he goes on to blame their professionalism. Any chance you ballsed up the recruitment, Marv?

The budget being blamed as well. Unable to compete with the other FT clubs - even though we had a squad of almost 30. Any chance you ballsed up the recruitment, Marv? 

How many of those "100 fines" were given to his pal, Efe? Efe who he's known and played alongside him so will have known exactly what he was like before signing him. Any chance you ballsed up the recruitment, Marv? 

I did enjoy his passive aggression. Very much a "Don't think it'll get better when I'm gone, Queens fans". I assume he means ECFC players were on more with their work wage and PT wage. If he's genuinely claiming our FT wages are the same as EC PT wages then we'd be mental to stay FT next season. 

Anyway. Thanks for the worst season I've had being a QoS fan, Marv. If your head can fit through the frame, don't let the door hit your arse on the way out. 

It’s a shame it didn’t work out. I thought it was an exciting appointment when announced. Even though the football was eye bleeding I have to believe Bartley tried his best to organise the club professionally. It’s a shame his signings and tactics weren’t up to it. Sadly he has to come to terms with the fact that he failed. Saying that I have got to believe as professionals that some didn’t cover themselves in glory. In corporate life I gave it 110 percent irrespective of who my boss was out of personal pride. If we had a fully fit Mimnaugh and Brydon it would have helped. I don’t have any rancour for Bartley but he had to go as the season. Was a disaster. 
 

Personally I think it would be a massive retrograde step to go part time and I have the fear that we just end up settling for Murphy. Whilst the club has no massive debt I personally would like to have had new owners ( not necessarily local) to inject cash and ambition into our club. I don’t know Jim McLinden but we need a strong board and an able chairman who are prepared to use their skills and probably input cash to get us out of the hole we are in. 
 

After 2 false starts we need an experienced manager ( see what McGlynn did for Falkirk albeit with a decent budget) and I would go for McCall who has been round this track before. We do need to act swiftly on board and manager recruitment to be able to assembled and get game ready a decent squad. 
 

What a mess . Still. We have got one new board member in and cleared  the managerial decks ( please god Murray is away as he was useless). Much to be done. 

[Mon_The_South]

Everything and I mean everything depends on the club getting the board situation sorted out.... 

Over maybe the last 5 years you will see a steady decline in the gate numbers, not obviously counting the pandemic season. A lot (granted not all) of the decline in numbers seem to have been in dispute with the transparency of the board and that divide between board and terrace, therefore it is IMPERATIVE that Mr McLinden (who is obviously going to be the new chairman) gets his board absolutely spot on and ensures the fans feel welcome.  If the fans are welcomed and feel involved then they will turn up at the gate..... If the fans turn up at the gate... then the finances are there.  If we even get back to an average gate of 15/1600 this will add circa £130k back into the coffers which is a huge difference in wages.  Lets forget any other business plan.... focus on how do we get the fans back Mr Chairman...

• Local Businessmen involved
• Fans listened to and involved
• Palmerston Upgrade Strategy (and I am not just talking new stand)
  • Remedial Action to stop Main Stand being condemned (which is close I believe)
  • Toilets sorted before being condemned
  • Terrace Kitchen sorted as the mould and damp in there now would not pass an HSE assessment for food storage. Spores are dangerous...
  • Cleanliness of stadium in General
  • Lick of paint and general spruce up
• Stop refusing to speak to Solway Sharks and embrace the potential partnership for what it can deliver

Get the board wrong (of which sadly I am on that trajectory line), fans will not return and will only mean a guaranteed return to PT, more losses and (the very worst case) us going quickly into the red, with Save our South buckets being hunted out again. 

I don't know where I stand with my thoughts on PT.  Is the club staying FT actually hampering us? If we are paying so bad a wage that we can't even compete with the PT wages, then we are on a hiding to nothing.  If we kept the budget where it is and continued to train in Glasgow we surely then should go from terrible fulltime payers to a decent part time payer.  My biggest wish is always for more training at Palmerston however if we went PT I don't expect this would be achievable.... Tues/Thurs Training wouldn't finish until 9ish and for those players not local, it would take them a couple of hours to get home at least be it Central Belt of NE/NW England.... 

Some HUGE decisions by those in power, but hopefully these next 2 weeks we will see some news and direction

[Baghdad_QoS]

4 minutes ago, Mon_The_South said:

Everything and I mean everything depends on the club getting the board situation sorted out.... 

Over maybe the last 5 years you will see a steady decline in the gate numbers, not obviously counting the pandemic season. A lot (granted not all) of the decline in numbers seem to have been in dispute with the transparency of the board and that divide between board and terrace, therefore it is IMPERATIVE that Mr McLinden (who is obviously going to be the new chairman) gets his board absolutely spot on and ensures the fans feel welcome.  If the fans are welcomed and feel involved then they will turn up at the gate..... If the fans turn up at the gate... then the finances are there.  If we even get back to an average gate of 15/1600 this will add circa £130k back into the coffers which is a huge difference in wages.  Lets forget any other business plan.... focus on how do we get the fans back Mr Chairman...

• Local Businessmen involved
• Fans listened to and involved
• Palmerston Upgrade Strategy (and I am not just talking new stand)
  • Remedial Action to stop Main Stand being condemned (which is close I believe)
  • Toilets sorted before being condemned
  • Terrace Kitchen sorted as the mould and damp in there now would not pass an HSE assessment for food storage. Spores are dangerous...
  • Cleanliness of stadium in General
  • Lick of paint and general spruce up
• Stop refusing to speak to Solway Sharks and embrace the potential partnership for what it can deliver

Get the board wrong (of which sadly I am on that trajectory line), fans will not return and will only mean a guaranteed return to PT, more losses and (the very worst case) us going quickly into the red, with Save our South buckets being hunted out again. 

I don't know where I stand with my thoughts on PT.  Is the club staying FT actually hampering us? If we are paying so bad a wage that we can't even compete with the PT wages, then we are on a hiding to nothing.  If we kept the budget where it is and continued to train in Glasgow we surely then should go from terrible fulltime payers to a decent part time payer.  My biggest wish is always for more training at Palmerston however if we went PT I don't expect this would be achievable.... Tues/Thurs Training wouldn't finish until 9ish and for those players not local, it would take them a couple of hours to get home at least be it Central Belt of NE/NW England.... 

Some HUGE decisions by those in power, but hopefully these next 2 weeks we will see some news and direction

 - 100% agree with this... Would obviously love to see the club remain Fulltime, however it very well may be hampering us if the budget is so low... however as stated elsewhere, if the budget is so bad, don't sign 30 players, and surely that will increase quality over quantity.... surely my maths isn't that bad.  Big decisions coming up this next week or two you would think...

[Monkey Tennis]

6 hours ago, Kunter said:

In theory yes but in reality I wouldn't be surprised if two average Queens player wages wouldn't even make up one half decent one. I certainly remember reading mutterings about one local players wages being particularly bad and I know for a fact Johnson was shocked how low they were in his second stint here. 

Got to remember as well it's hard to attract quality at this level unless there's a decent incentive, facilities or/and prospects. 

 

None of which challenges the point about the relationship between squad size and the wages that can be offered to individuals.

I'm not clear on what you're saying here.  If it's simply that we pay low wages then fair enough.  That certainly wouldn't come as a shock.  Carrying a big squad would exacerbate that problem though, which is all that's being said.

[Monkey Tennis]

1 hour ago, Mon_The_South said:

Over maybe the last 5 years you will see a steady decline in the gate numbers, not obviously counting the pandemic season. A lot (granted not all) of the decline in numbers seem to have been in dispute with the transparency of the board and that divide between board and terrace, 

I think you're overstating this.

By far the biggest factor in the declining gates over the period, is directly related to the performances of the team, especially at home.

[bod]

Don't understand some people's dislike for the thought of Murphy as a manager. There's no denying he's worked wonders on what will have been a limited, to say the least budget and has certainly got the best out of the resources at his disposal. That is exactly the type of manager we'll need.I

As for the new board working with and involving supporters and local businesses, I fear that ship has already sailed!

 

[bridge of allan bairn]

14 minutes ago, bod said:

Don't understand some people's dislike for the thought of Murphy as a manager. There's no denying he's worked wonders on what will have been a limited, to say the least budget and has certainly got the best out of the resources at his disposal. That is exactly the type of manager we'll need.I

As for the new board working with and involving supporters and local businesses, I fear that ship has already sailed!

 

Re Murphy, just looking at the form over the past 10 games, I knew Annans was good but didn't realise just how good.

3rd in the table having lost only 1 game in 10 (Queens lost 4 in the same 10). Some recovery to catch Stirling.

Edited May 6 by bridge of allan bairn

[QOS5Ayr4]

11 hours ago, 19QOS19 said:

Like yesterday's result, that Bartley interview is a very fitting end to his time with us. Absolutely no personal responsibility. He's unable to use the "I inherited this team" excuse as he's built the squad but instead of blaming himself he goes on to blame their professionalism. Any chance you ballsed up the recruitment, Marv?

The budget being blamed as well. Unable to compete with the other FT clubs - even though we had a squad of almost 30. Any chance you ballsed up the recruitment, Marv? 

How many of those "100 fines" were given to his pal, Efe? Efe who he's known and played alongside him so will have known exactly what he was like before signing him. Any chance you ballsed up the recruitment, Marv? 

I did enjoy his passive aggression. Very much a "Don't think it'll get better when I'm gone, Queens fans". I assume he means ECFC players were on more with their work wage and PT wage. If he's genuinely claiming our FT wages are the same as EC PT wages then we'd be mental to stay FT next season. 

Anyway. Thanks for the worst season I've had being a QoS fan, Marv. If your head can fit through the frame, don't let the door hit your arse on the way out. 

Spot on . Marv would do well as a politician.

And I did actually laugh out loud at your last sentence - brilliant!

[QOS5Ayr4]

11 hours ago, Slipmat said:

The insecure rookie teacher comparison is an interesting one.  I sometimes got the feeling he forgot that he was employed principally to train and put a football team on the park that would win games and instead sees himself as a kind of educational guru / life coach hence his preference for signing so many young players who he thought he could easily influence and instruct.

I think that's absolutely spot-on.  At the end of the day it's a failed experiment at our expense, although I do think he believed in it and worked hard to try make a success of it.  He'll hopefully have learned massively from this, and I hope to hell that the board (old and new) have too.

[Diamonds are Forever]

13 hours ago, Greenacres said:

We must get back to part time football.

Marv gave a good example we were interested in Edinburgh City players in the New Year but they were on much the same money part time as our full time players.

Even right now another example is  Tommy Goss he will make more money working and playing  at Annan 

If we are part time then  we can pay top end wages attract the better player rather than sign boys in the hope they suddenly become men overnight 

 

I think in most cases this is a huge backward step for clubs and doesn't bring the benefits that people expect.

The simplest argument is to look at the league tables, Arbroath were an outlier for a few seasons but are now back down, next season there won't be a part-time team above League 1 (unless Montrose or Alloa win play-offs obviously). Apart from Arbroath, very few part-time teams have escaped League 1 in recent years and those that did soon dropped back down. There's not much evidence to suggest it's an effective strategy, Arbroath did well by it but they had a well established core of experienced players and manager built up over a few years. Queens would be starting from scratch.

There is an assumption that by going part-time you then get pick of the bunch, but that's also not the case. Infact you can end up moving into a market where clubs can still out-compete you financially but now you don't even have the lure of full-time football to tempt them. There's plenty money in the lower leagues now and whoever the next Darvel, Cove, Edinburgh City, Kelty, East Kilbride etc is could pay more. So you still don't necessarily get the best part-timers and now you don't have any of the benefits that full-time should bring either. An extreme example of that is us signing Dylan Easton from Kelty in the Lowland League. He will have been on the same or probably more at Kelty, but it was the chance to play full-time that meant he signed, and then won POTY that season. We'd never have got him if we were part-time.

I see loads of parallels between Queens and Airdrie a decade ago. Like Queens, we were hanging on to full-time football for dear life with crowds that could barely sustain it and had the decision to make. Went part-time for a few seasons which just resulted in us getting worse, being a relegation threatened side for a couple of years and crowds falling further. When we went hybrid things started to turn as the offer of effectively going full-time for players attracted better players.

I think the market for clubs like us and Queens at that level is guys who were full-time, have had to drop to part-time and want one last shot at full-time. They are usually in their early twenties and have already played 100+ games so aren't young lads with no experience, they are highly motivated as they know it's their last shot, and obviously have ability or they wouldn't have been at a higher level previously. Our promotion winning team was built on these types of players, most of which are still playing with us now - Frizzell from Dumbarton, Gallagher from Dumbarton, Watson from East Fife, Ballantyne from Montrose, plus Easton from Kelty. Add in a few younger players and couple of experienced heads and that's a good mix. Of course the problem is that requires good knowledge of the lower leagues and good recruitment.

Everything comes down to what you can afford ultimately, but for any club with aspirations to get into the Championship going part-time seems a backward move.

 

[Homer Thompson]

11 minutes ago, Diamonds are Forever said:

 

I think in most cases this is a huge backward step for clubs and doesn't bring the benefits that people expect.

The simplest argument is to look at the league tables, Arbroath were an outlier for a few seasons but are now back down, next season there won't be a part-time team above League 1 (unless Montrose or Alloa win play-offs obviously). Apart from Arbroath, very few part-time teams have escaped League 1 in recent years and those that did soon dropped back down. There's not much evidence to suggest it's an effective strategy, Arbroath did well by it but they had a well established core of experienced players and manager built up over a few years. Queens would be starting from scratch.

There is an assumption that by going part-time you then get pick of the bunch, but that's also not the case. Infact you can end up moving into a market where clubs can still out-compete you financially but now you don't even have the lure of full-time football to tempt them. There's plenty money in the lower leagues now and whoever the next Darvel, Cove, Edinburgh City, Kelty, East Kilbride etc is could pay more. So you still don't necessarily get the best part-timers and now you don't have any of the benefits that full-time should bring either. An extreme example of that is us signing Dylan Easton from Kelty in the Lowland League. He will have been on the same or probably more at Kelty, but it was the chance to play full-time that meant he signed, and then won POTY that season. We'd never have got him if we were part-time.

I see loads of parallels between Queens and Airdrie a decade ago. Like Queens, we were hanging on to full-time football for dear life with crowds that could barely sustain it and had the decision to make. Went part-time for a few seasons which just resulted in us getting worse, being a relegation threatened side for a couple of years and crowds falling further. When we went hybrid things started to turn as the offer of effectively going full-time for players attracted better players.

I think the market for clubs like us and Queens at that level is guys who were full-time, have had to drop to part-time and want one last shot at full-time. They are usually in their early twenties and have already played 100+ games so aren't young lads with no experience, they are highly motivated as they know it's their last shot, and obviously have ability or they wouldn't have been at a higher level previously. Our promotion winning team was built on these types of players, most of which are still playing with us now - Frizzell from Dumbarton, Gallagher from Dumbarton, Watson from East Fife, Ballantyne from Montrose, plus Easton from Kelty. Add in a few younger players and couple of experienced heads and that's a good mix. Of course the problem is that requires good knowledge of the lower leagues and good recruitment.

Everything comes down to what you can afford ultimately, but for any club with aspirations to get into the Championship going part-time seems a backward move.

 

I'm afraid your fact-based, common sense posts have no place here 

[Homer Thompson]

2 hours ago, Monkey Tennis said:

I think you're overstating this.

By far the biggest factor in the declining gates over the period, is directly related to the performances of the team, especially at home.

Absolutely this. 

The new board need to communicate with the fans, no doubt about it, but I'm not sure it will make much difference to attendance. Those that are genuinely interested will be attending anyway and the "floating" fans who we need to encourage back won't care. They will be enticed back by a winning team. I'm sure there will be the odd individual who will see a new board as a reason to come back, but it won't be many. 

I would say the SLO appointment is much more important. They can be far more visible and engaged with fans on match days than the board. They also have a much easier "one of us" relationship to build. 

[Greenacres]

43 minutes ago, Diamonds are Forever said:

 

I think in most cases this is a huge backward step for clubs and doesn't bring the benefits that people expect.

The simplest argument is to look at the league tables, Arbroath were an outlier for a few seasons but are now back down, next season there won't be a part-time team above League 1 (unless Montrose or Alloa win play-offs obviously). Apart from Arbroath, very few part-time teams have escaped League 1 in recent years and those that did soon dropped back down. There's not much evidence to suggest it's an effective strategy, Arbroath did well by it but they had a well established core of experienced players and manager built up over a few years. Queens would be starting from scratch.

There is an assumption that by going part-time you then get pick of the bunch, but that's also not the case. Infact you can end up moving into a market where clubs can still out-compete you financially but now you don't even have the lure of full-time football to tempt them. There's plenty money in the lower leagues now and whoever the next Darvel, Cove, Edinburgh City, Kelty, East Kilbride etc is could pay more. So you still don't necessarily get the best part-timers and now you don't have any of the benefits that full-time should bring either. An extreme example of that is us signing Dylan Easton from Kelty in the Lowland League. He will have been on the same or probably more at Kelty, but it was the chance to play full-time that meant he signed, and then won POTY that season. We'd never have got him if we were part-time.

I see loads of parallels between Queens and Airdrie a decade ago. Like Queens, we were hanging on to full-time football for dear life with crowds that could barely sustain it and had the decision to make. Went part-time for a few seasons which just resulted in us getting worse, being a relegation threatened side for a couple of years and crowds falling further. When we went hybrid things started to turn as the offer of effectively going full-time for players attracted better players.

I think the market for clubs like us and Queens at that level is guys who were full-time, have had to drop to part-time and want one last shot at full-time. They are usually in their early twenties and have already played 100+ games so aren't young lads with no experience, they are highly motivated as they know it's their last shot, and obviously have ability or they wouldn't have been at a higher level previously. Our promotion winning team was built on these types of players, most of which are still playing with us now - Frizzell from Dumbarton, Gallagher from Dumbarton, Watson from East Fife, Ballantyne from Montrose, plus Easton from Kelty. Add in a few younger players and couple of experienced heads and that's a good mix. Of course the problem is that requires good knowledge of the lower leagues and good recruitment.

Everything comes down to what you can afford ultimately, but for any club with aspirations to get into the Championship going part-time seems a backward move.

 

With our budget being full time is actually holding us back. 

We need experienced decent players only way we can get that is going part time pay what we do now to our full time players think you will find the better part time players will sign for us .

At our level is a full time player any better than part time certainly fitness wise nowadays no difference.

This we must be full time is like a advantage to us well the last 2 seasons have shown no difference from any part time team we have played 

[Mon_The_South]

38 minutes ago, Homer Thompson said:

I would say the SLO appointment is much more important. They can be far more visible and engaged with fans on match days than the board. They also have a much easier "one of us" relationship to build. 

Agreed - This was going to be a great place for the Tanner Fund to occupy as agreed with the Club CEO.  The club were hoping for them to be the financier of youth prospects, SLO's and also the work party coordinators for the pre season cleaning.... a real fan powerhouse.... however with its Chairman standing down, sadly the rest of the committee followed suit knowing that the continued reluctance of the club to take the money was becoming more and more frustrating.

If ever there was a time for the fans to become part of the fund and help the playing budget it would certainly be now, however those plans were not supported.

[HighlandQueen]

6 hours ago, Mon_The_South said:

Everything and I mean everything depends on the club getting the board situation sorted out.... 

Over maybe the last 5 years you will see a steady decline in the gate numbers, not obviously counting the pandemic season. A lot (granted not all) of the decline in numbers seem to have been in dispute with the transparency of the board and that divide between board and terrace, therefore it is IMPERATIVE that Mr McLinden (who is obviously going to be the new chairman) gets his board absolutely spot on and ensures the fans feel welcome.  If the fans are welcomed and feel involved then they will turn up at the gate..... If the fans turn up at the gate... then the finances are there.  If we even get back to an average gate of 15/1600 this will add circa £130k back into the coffers which is a huge difference in wages.  Lets forget any other business plan.... focus on how do we get the fans back Mr Chairman...

• Local Businessmen involved
• Fans listened to and involved
• Palmerston Upgrade Strategy (and I am not just talking new stand)
  • Remedial Action to stop Main Stand being condemned (which is close I believe)
  • Toilets sorted before being condemned
  • Terrace Kitchen sorted as the mould and damp in there now would not pass an HSE assessment for food storage. Spores are dangerous...
  • Cleanliness of stadium in General
  • Lick of paint and general spruce up
• Stop refusing to speak to Solway Sharks and embrace the potential partnership for what it can deliver

Get the board wrong (of which sadly I am on that trajectory line), fans will not return and will only mean a guaranteed return to PT, more losses and (the very worst case) us going quickly into the red, with Save our South buckets being hunted out again. 

I don't know where I stand with my thoughts on PT.  Is the club staying FT actually hampering us? If we are paying so bad a wage that we can't even compete with the PT wages, then we are on a hiding to nothing.  If we kept the budget where it is and continued to train in Glasgow we surely then should go from terrible fulltime payers to a decent part time payer.  My biggest wish is always for more training at Palmerston however if we went PT I don't expect this would be achievable.... Tues/Thurs Training wouldn't finish until 9ish and for those players not local, it would take them a couple of hours to get home at least be it Central Belt of NE/NW England.... 

Some HUGE decisions by those in power, but hopefully these next 2 weeks we will see some news and direction

Very sensible post given where we are. Crucial to get the right Board in with the right vision, strategy and funding in place. Time is of the essence. 
 

As much as anything our communication with the fans is just awful. Partial or no info prior to games or about what’s happening at the club, no excitement generated, almost as if we just get in the way. Mark Blount tried hard with his infrequent fan updates but our PR and comms is a disaster. I appreciate it’s done on a volunteer basis but we don’t even have highlights that clubs like Annan and Montrose post. 
 

The stadium does look terrible, with rotting wood, peeling paint etc. The arena has holes in the roof with water damage and broken doors, sanitary fittings etc. perhaps excusable if the focus had been investing in the pitch with the club on the up and up but there is a stench of decay. This from a club with a Chairman in the buildins trade.!!!

Rather than being excited, given the lack of Board activity I’m more in the nervous and worried camp at the moment. 
 

I hope I’m proven wrong. 

[HighlandQueen]

6 hours ago, Baghdad_QoS said:

 - 100% agree with this... Would obviously love to see the club remain Fulltime, however it very well may be hampering us if the budget is so low... however as stated elsewhere, if the budget is so bad, don't sign 30 players, and surely that will increase quality over quantity.... surely my maths isn't that bad.  Big decisions coming up this next week or two you would think...

Agree

[Homer Thompson]

49 minutes ago, Mon_The_South said:

Agreed - This was going to be a great place for the Tanner Fund to occupy as agreed with the Club CEO.  The club were hoping for them to be the financier of youth prospects, SLO's and also the work party coordinators for the pre season cleaning.... a real fan powerhouse.... however with its Chairman standing down, sadly the rest of the committee followed suit knowing that the continued reluctance of the club to take the money was becoming more and more frustrating.

If ever there was a time for the fans to become part of the fund and help the playing budget it would certainly be now, however those plans were not supported.

Seems like odd timing to wind up the Tanner Fund. I get the perceived perception of difficulties dealing with the outgoing board but with a new board coming, surely the Fund could have kept going and worked out a relationship with the new board?

What you appear to be saying is the club wanted the Fund money and their help at the club but the Fund decided to fold. Seems like there must be more to it. 

Also, the things you've listed aren't really linked. We've had SLOs and fan cleanups without any funding before, so why is it required now? 

[Monkey Tennis]

1 hour ago, Diamonds are Forever said:

 

I think in most cases this is a huge backward step for clubs and doesn't bring the benefits that people expect.

The simplest argument is to look at the league tables, Arbroath were an outlier for a few seasons but are now back down, next season there won't be a part-time team above League 1 (unless Montrose or Alloa win play-offs obviously). Apart from Arbroath, very few part-time teams have escaped League 1 in recent years and those that did soon dropped back down. There's not much evidence to suggest it's an effective strategy, Arbroath did well by it but they had a well established core of experienced players and manager built up over a few years. Queens would be starting from scratch.

There is an assumption that by going part-time you then get pick of the bunch, but that's also not the case. Infact you can end up moving into a market where clubs can still out-compete you financially but now you don't even have the lure of full-time football to tempt them. There's plenty money in the lower leagues now and whoever the next Darvel, Cove, Edinburgh City, Kelty, East Kilbride etc is could pay more. So you still don't necessarily get the best part-timers and now you don't have any of the benefits that full-time should bring either. An extreme example of that is us signing Dylan Easton from Kelty in the Lowland League. He will have been on the same or probably more at Kelty, but it was the chance to play full-time that meant he signed, and then won POTY that season. We'd never have got him if we were part-time.

I see loads of parallels between Queens and Airdrie a decade ago. Like Queens, we were hanging on to full-time football for dear life with crowds that could barely sustain it and had the decision to make. Went part-time for a few seasons which just resulted in us getting worse, being a relegation threatened side for a couple of years and crowds falling further. When we went hybrid things started to turn as the offer of effectively going full-time for players attracted better players.

I think the market for clubs like us and Queens at that level is guys who were full-time, have had to drop to part-time and want one last shot at full-time. They are usually in their early twenties and have already played 100+ games so aren't young lads with no experience, they are highly motivated as they know it's their last shot, and obviously have ability or they wouldn't have been at a higher level previously. Our promotion winning team was built on these types of players, most of which are still playing with us now - Frizzell from Dumbarton, Gallagher from Dumbarton, Watson from East Fife, Ballantyne from Montrose, plus Easton from Kelty. Add in a few younger players and couple of experienced heads and that's a good mix. Of course the problem is that requires good knowledge of the lower leagues and good recruitment.

Everything comes down to what you can afford ultimately, but for any club with aspirations to get into the Championship going part-time seems a backward move.

 

That's a really interesting post.

My own instinct says that being full-time is not serving us well and that a re-think is due.  However, you've pointed out why full-time status is worth hanging onto if the right parts of the market are harvested for players.

Maybe some kind of hybrid is required.

I hate it when someone challenges what I already think with good sense, logic and evidence.  Don't let it happen again.

[Kunter]

4 hours ago, Monkey Tennis said:

None of which challenges the point about the relationship between squad size and the wages that can be offered to individuals.

I'm not clear on what you're saying here.  If it's simply that we pay low wages then fair enough.  That certainly wouldn't come as a shock.  Carrying a big squad would exacerbate that problem though, which is all that's being said.

My point is folk see we have a big squad and assume that this means he's had a decent budget.