The New Raith Rovers Thread

[vikingTON]

48 minutes ago, CALDERON said:

I get how passionate Mcglynn is about bringing young players through and seeing them developing, but we are a football club in our own right first and foremost.  Rolling over because we don't want to offend a player really does not sit well with me.  If players come and go like that then we won't get the benefit from them longer term.  Great for a youth development centre, but for a club with Premiership ambitions?

Do you seriously take that 'Premiership ambitions' as anything other than a throwaway line? There's been nothing to demonstrate that in terms of the way your club is developing off the park or putting together a squad. 

From an outside perspective I don't think there is anything wrong with accepting the reality that a play-off challenge while moving players on for a decent enough sum is your operating model. It's more functional than quite a few other club's efforts in the same division right now. 

[Rovers_Lad]

1 hour ago, Are we there yet? said:

Reality check time for a bunch of folks on here. The advantage of progressing the careers of great young players is that more are likely to see the Rovers as a stepping step to the Premiership and beyond. And they will be advised by agents and parents to join us because we benefit from them playing, they benefit from showing what they can do and we get money for young guys that are not yet the finished product. And we will celebrate the fact that they can go onto great careers with bigger teams. We are not yet a premiership club and we have to continue to generate income to fund our progress.  Guys choose us over Dunfermline from the Fife Elite team because they see that they get the opportunities here.

Look at Peterborough and Brentford, two clubs who bring in players of potential to sell on and generate the income to supplement the squad and pay for the continued development of the squad and other young guys coming in. And Brentford are in the Premier now.  If our business model is bring in great  young players with potential for £100,000+ every year to supplement our budgets then this is excellent way to fund the club and keep us moving forward.  We need to be picking up the young guys with potential who are at clubs where they dont get a chance and bring them here...tie them up on 3-4 year contracts and expect to be able to sell them after a year or two. Shorter contracts and they walk for free. 

Sure I want a team of stars who fulfil their potential here at the Rovers but I would rather have a steady stream of young guys who make us money and allow us to bring in more experienced players who will hang around. We all remember young guys with potential who ran out of stream here over a couple of seasons and were released.  

We will always be a selling club and this should be something to be applauded. If we are seen as a selling club because we can develop great young players and still continue to progress then thats a great outcome. Money plus a sell on fee from someone who's been here a couple of years is a good bit of business IMO.

In answer to one of the above posts...the point of attracting players here to unltimately benefit other clubs is that for a couple of years effort we get £100,000+ and sell on fees. That helps keep our club solvent and alive! Whats the point of not bringing them in and being prepared to sell them on if another club can do the same? 

And no I'm not a Director and no, I'm not connected with the club, I'm just a long time supporter who many years ago had my heart broken when Brewster choose Dundee United over us for his next move! For no money. That was harder to take than it is to celebrate seeing someone like Dylan move on because we gave him his chance to shine. And I'm so happy about that I'm increasing my monthly amount to the development fund because my investment has helped the club make over £100,000 from his transfer.  

COYR

Unconvincing

[raith1974]

1 hour ago, Raith Against The Machine said:

Maybe I'm going over the score here, but that interview has really wound me up. We seem to have progressed beyond "can't stand in his way" to "come and get him". 

I understand that John McGlynn prides himself on developing young players but I support a football team, not a youth academy. 

Next time we've got a decent youth prospect, I'll tell you one thing - we won't be commanding a big fee for them. A big club just needs to pick up the phone and offer "an opportunity" and we'll wave the boy off. That couldn't be further from trying to drive up the price of our young players. 

I know the cost of a transfer isn't McGlynn's department, but he's saying there that he wouldn't even want to take the chance on Tait being unsettled. It sounds like as far as the manager was concerned, he'd have accepted the first offer that came in whatever it was. 

The second half of the interview is just a weirdly defensive run-through of players who can play in midfield, for some reason. 

I trust John McGlynn. I think he's an excellent manager. But that's a dreadful message for our support to hear. All they had to do was send out someone, anyone, to say "Hibs initially made contact with us and we felt duty bound to let Dylan know. He made it very clear to us that he wanted to move, and we all recognise that at this stage of his career that makes sense. With that in mind we went back to Hibs and secured an up front cost that we were satisfied with, along with substantial add-ons that could be very lucrative for this club if Dylan goes on to become the player we all believe he can be."

It's not difficult. In fact, it's really straightforward. I was complaining about Scottish football's attitudes to its customers on the thread for the Ayr game, and to take that theme in a slightly different direction, there aren't many businesses whose customer base is actively willing them to succeed, and will forgive them almost any sin. Football supporters are - to generalise, and to include myself - really thick. You can pander to them, you can tell half-truths, you can make daft gestures, and they'll lap it all up. But the other side of that coin is that they're very easy to piss off. The easiest way is to denigrate the club they support. Try not to do that when you are that club and you'll get on much better. 

I completely agree that interview really would me up. Firstly we don't need the money then I might not be able to strengthen come January as the board might not give me any of the money. Then we can't stand in a young players way if any offer comes in. We might end up with a disgruntled player. He was on a contract until 2024 if he continues to develop then we have a player that would have been subject not to just one club bidding but perhaps several. The manager and board have badly let us long suffering, money donating fans down and if they are not careful fans that will give up on donating over 5k every month to the development fund if this is what happens when a bid is received. 

[ohnononowheredidRossgo]

I think McGlynn feels that we've had as strong an offer as we'll receive for Tait. We've got him until January and gives him time to find replacements.

As I've said previously Tait wasn't an immediate starter last season and only is this season as we lack depth. Purely my opinion now but Tait won't ever be a regular in a top 6 side in Scotland let alone make waves down south. Again, I don't think £100k-£110k + add-ons with a loan back until Jan is a particularly bad deal. Especially when you see so few and far between transfer fees in Scotland. Bowie whether you think he's more talented or not was a different animal as he has the physical capability to play down south, I think if we'd held onto him for another year we'd have got more money.

I'd also advocate Arnott coming in and playing a role sooner rather than later.

[Rovers_Lad]

Off topic but

 

 

Tickets – Scanning – Photographic ID 

We want to ensure that every supporter attending Saturday’s match v Forfar Athletic is able to access the stadium with ease. Our new scanning system sometimes highlights tickets that require to be double-checked.

If you are coming to the cup match on Saturday, please bring photographic ID in case tickets need verified.

Access arrangements – COVID protocols

We’d like to remind all supporters of the Access arrangements this weekend v Forfar Athletic, as detailed earlier this week here.

Really!

 

[Raith_Raver]

When we develop young players the idea is to get them to a standard that will imrove OUR team, not get them to a point where they've just graduated to first team standard for someone else to snap them up for a cheap steal. Naturally players do want to move up the ladder but when they do move on the their time at Rovers has to be seen as an investment for the club, it's not all about the player and the buying club.

[Been going too long]

2 hours ago, Are we there yet? said:

Reality check time for a bunch of folks on here. The advantage of progressing the careers of great young players is that more are likely to see the Rovers as a stepping step to the Premiership and beyond. And they will be advised by agents and parents to join us because we benefit from them playing, they benefit from showing what they can do and we get money for young guys that are not yet the finished product. And we will celebrate the fact that they can go onto great careers with bigger teams. We are not yet a premiership club and we have to continue to generate income to fund our progress.  Guys choose us over Dunfermline from the Fife Elite team because they see that they get the opportunities here.

Look at Peterborough and Brentford, two clubs who bring in players of potential to sell on and generate the income to supplement the squad and pay for the continued development of the squad and other young guys coming in. And Brentford are in the Premier now.  If our business model is bring in great  young players with potential for £100,000+ every year to supplement our budgets then this is excellent way to fund the club and keep us moving forward.  We need to be picking up the young guys with potential who are at clubs where they dont get a chance and bring them here...tie them up on 3-4 year contracts and expect to be able to sell them after a year or two. Shorter contracts and they walk for free. 

Sure I want a team of stars who fulfil their potential here at the Rovers but I would rather have a steady stream of young guys who make us money and allow us to bring in more experienced players who will hang around. We all remember young guys with potential who ran out of stream here over a couple of seasons and were released.  

We will always be a selling club and this should be something to be applauded. If we are seen as a selling club because we can develop great young players and still continue to progress then thats a great outcome. Money plus a sell on fee from someone who's been here a couple of years is a good bit of business IMO.

In answer to one of the above posts...the point of attracting players here to unltimately benefit other clubs is that for a couple of years effort we get £100,000+ and sell on fees. That helps keep our club solvent and alive! Whats the point of not bringing them in and being prepared to sell them on if another club can do the same? 

And no I'm not a Director and no, I'm not connected with the club, I'm just a long time supporter who many years ago had my heart broken when Brewster choose Dundee United over us for his next move! For no money. That was harder to take than it is to celebrate seeing someone like Dylan move on because we gave him his chance to shine. And I'm so happy about that I'm increasing my monthly amount to the development fund because my investment has helped the club make over £100,000 from his transfer.  

COYR

Hi John hi pal

[ohnononowheredidRossgo]

48 minutes ago, Raith_Raver said:

When we develop young players the idea is to get them to a standard that will imrove OUR team, not get them to a point where they've just graduated to first team standard for someone else to snap them up for a cheap steal. Naturally players do want to move up the ladder but when they do move on the their time at Rovers has to be seen as an investment for the club, it's not all about the player and the buying club.

I think if you can generate a few and manage to piece together other experienced guys with a point to prove you end up with a squad anomaly like last season where we had quality in our squad wage budget. Ultimately you want to create a conveyor belt of your own youths and others that haven't made the grade elsewhere. Get a few right at the same time and we have a season like last.

[Been going too long]

1 hour ago, TxRover said:

Reading more of the Hibs coverage, it looks like Dylan is a signing for development next year and beyond, with no easy slot for him to fill for now. Several references to him being loaned back until “at least” January…so we may see Tait the whole season if Hibs are happy with his development at Raith. and still don’t have a spot for him as a starter.

Your probably right Tx and after cooling down the biggest reasons I’m annoyed about this is 1) timing of the deal 2) imo the average signings we have made 3) the communication from the club last few months. Glad I’m going to the Scotland game on Saturday instead of Forfar I think will be there on the 11th thou 

[Michael W]

McGlynn clearly doesn't make the call on who gets sold or for what price, but that's pretty disappointing. I get he can hardly turn round and say that Sim is an idiot for sanctioning this, but he's basically saying that we'll sell players without a fight. Poor stuff but it really ought to be the CEO or Sim taking these questions and not McGlynn. 

I fully get the point that our better players will move on and it's daft to pretend that won't happen, annoying as it is. But if players want more flexibility, then they shouldn't be signing three or four year contracts. When a player has three years to run, we are in a very strong position and shouldn't be taking the first bid that comes in. Yet, that's exactly what we did. 

The central point here, which some are continuing to miss whilst defending the club, is that we were under no pressure to sell Tait and should've held out. Inevitably he would leave us in January instead, but if other clubs tracking him knew there was serious interest, they would also be in a position to counter offer and we'd probably have gotten a better fee. In addition, we'd have had time for succession planning as well. Whilst he's a very good player, Frankie Musonda did not join the club as a midfielder. 

£110k is also below what I'd have taken for Tait. @Ro Sham Bo suggested £150k (i.e. the Bowie fee) as a baseline and I fully agree. 

[foreverarover]

Rovers are not rolling in cash. Last season, they sold less season tickets & had no Pay at the Gate customers. Some of the away supports would have been considerable. However, we have spent funds on floodlights & a half baked ticketing system -set up with wrong details, non-existing  seats , while we appear to still have electrical problems & a still broken turnstile. 
It appears that Hibs made a late switch to Tait as another target deal fell through. They made a late cheeky offer which should have been rejected. The details will come out at the next AGM as it did with Ross Callachan . A whole £40K for him & probably cost us promotion. 
If the club have an actual plan for our future then I think that it is time that it is made public. Everything appears to be short term & clueless.
 

I'm sorry but we finished second in the league which equates to £400k, £500k from the government. £100k from fans. £5K PM from more fans. 1000+ season tickets. I'm sorry but we must be one of the clubs to have made a profit from the virus. The money for the electric system would have been part of the government scheme for covid. The floodlights should NOT be factored into this as we are renting the ground from a landlord who should have fit the bill for an acceptable level of staduim for rent.

[Frank conner]

Funnily enough the club who bought Tait certainly didn't take the first offer that comes in Nisbet was put in his place when he tried to force a move to Birmingham. 

[steakngravy]

John Sim if I recall correctly two or maybe three seasons ago wanted the team to be based around a youth policy to build a team to progress into the premier league. Now for some reason that has changed two youth/young players who given time could have been part of the backbone that a team could have been built around what happened sell them quick and kiss their hand, it happened before with a certain Mr Drysdale I have a sneaky suspicious feeling Bill Clark is his nemisis. Because sinse he's reappeared thhe su[[orters have been trated very badly.  Another thing when we pated at the gate you didn't have to prove who you were. This nonsense about having to be scanned in , where is this information going ? 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[basher brash]

Only guessing but what’s stopping me from sending my e-ticket to someone then they can use it 

[Zen Archer (Raconteur)]

1 hour ago, Rovers_Lad said:

Off topic but

 

 

Tickets – Scanning – Photographic ID 

We want to ensure that every supporter attending Saturday’s match v Forfar Athletic is able to access the stadium with ease. Our new scanning system sometimes highlights tickets that require to be double-checked.

If you are coming to the cup match on Saturday, please bring photographic ID in case tickets need verified.

Access arrangements – COVID protocols

We’d like to remind all supporters of the Access arrangements this weekend v Forfar Athletic, as detailed earlier this week here.

Really!

 

Some one must think that season tickets are being loaned out.

[basher brash]

Is that  why the club  are wanting prove of ID 

[pub car king]

Unless there's an attempt to get someone into the ground who is banned what is the need to prove who you are?

Are we going to demand ID when it's back to pay at the gate if that ever returns. 

Club are making a rip roaring c**t of themselves in the last few weeks. 

[steakngravy]

Bring back pay at the gate let's be sensible it worked for years.

[foreverarover]

I imagine you're in the some spot as us, in that while the initial fee looks low, it becomes mega due to the sell on clause.
Widely rumoured we get 25% of McCanns next fee, which in English money could double or treble the initial amount.
I'd assume you've accepted a lower initial fee to get a larger sell on clause, something clubs don't like making public, ad Hibs history of developing/selling young players is great. If you've got 25% and they sell him for £5m, which is roughly what they're wanting for Porteous/Doig/Nisbet, then his fee, plus clauses etc., could top £1.5m

Nobody in thier right mind would buy those 3 anything near £5m. [emoji23][emoji23]

[CALDERON]

35 minutes ago, Zen Archer (Raconteur) said:

Some one must think that season tickets are being loaned out.

Only til January though.