Jump to content

The Queen of the South thread


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Monkey Tennis said:

I get your logic, but I'm not actually convinced of the above.  

It certainly feels that it would reduce any chances of making the play-offs and getting promoted.  The evidence of the last two seasons tells us that's a million miles away now anyway, whereas our chances of being relegated scarcely look capable of being enhanced.

See whilst I accept both seasons fell apart after Xmas for different reasons, I dont think they particularly do show it. At the midway point in both seasons we were 5th and well in contention for promotion playoffs (I dont think we were seriously good enough to be promoted but the Dobbie / Dykes pairing was always capable of taking teams apart on the right day). Still not sure exactly what went wrong under Naysmith for it to fall apart so quickly. Last season is much easier to pinpoint (losing McCrorie, Brownlie and El Bakhtaoui). 

Its also a fact we have been playing at this level for 17 of the last 18 seasons. No part time team is anywhere near playing consistently in the 2nd tier. I think Dumbarton managed 5 seasons did they? They still went down eventually and havent remotely looked like coming back. They were also helped by the likes of Rangers, Dunfermline, Livingston and Morton imploding and playing well below their level for a while. Alloa have done well at bouncing up and down but they've still been relegated a couple of times. 

Whatever you think of the quality of the last two season's squads they did ultimately survive and the stats are pretty clear that chances of relegation will increase significantly. We have I think finished below a part time team twice in the last 20 years. Last season when Alloa did it by a point and this season when they repeated the trick in a shortened season and Arbroath were comfortably above us. The head to heads, especially against Alloa, make the relative positions look worse than it is. The worst full time side will always likely be there or thereabouts bottom end of this level or top end League One. The best part time side will be about the same but we've no divine right to be about the best part time side. Once you are in that pool its much easier to drop lower as Dumbarton and others have done.

Edited by Skyline Drifter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Skyline Drifter said:

See whilst I accept both seasons fell apart after Xmas for different reasons, I dont think they particularly do show it. At the midway point in both seasons we were 5th and well in contention for promotion playoffs (I dont think we were seriously good enough to be promoted but the Dobbie / Dykes pairing was always capable of taking teams apart on the right day). Still not sure exactly what went wrong under Naysmith for it to fall apart so quickly. Last season is much easier to pinpoint (losing McCrorie, Brownlie and El Bakhtaoui). 

Its also a fact we have been playing at this level for 17 of the last 18 seasons. No part time team is anywhere near playing consistently in the 2nd tier. I think Dumbarton managed 5 seasons did they? They still went down eventually and havent remotely looked like coming back. They were also helped by the likes of Rangers, Dunfermline, Livingston and Morton imploding and playing well below their level for a while. Alloa have done well at bouncing up and down but they've still been relegated a couple of times. 

Whatever you think of the quality of the last two season's squads they did ultimately survive and the stats are pretty clear that chances of relegation will increase significantly. We have I think finished below a part time team twice in the last 20 years. Last season when Alloa did it by a point and this season when they repeated the trick in a shortened season and Arbroath were comfortably above us. The head to heads, especially against Alloa, make the relative positions look worse than it is. The worst full time side will always likely be there or thereabouts bottom end of this level or top end League One. The best part time side will be about the same but we've no divine right to be about the best part time side. Once you are in that pool its much easier to drop lower as Dumbsrton and others have done.

You're obviously not wrong with any of that, but there are a couple of points worth making:

We could actually count among the sides who managed a part-time run at this level.  For the first five or so of our 17/18 seasons, we were part-time.  I know that the cut-off wasn't that clearly defined and that several players were effectively full-time footballers before that time, but the point stands that the best example of a side sustaining a lengthy part-time run at this level in modern times is provided by us.

There's also a tendency in your post to attribute playing status solidly to the pt/ft divide, when really it's more about size of club.  The two are clearly related, but I'd suggest that we've done - a little - better than Alloa over the period because we're a bit bigger and will generally spend more.  

Now there's something circular about this, because it's spending a bit more that's obviously allowed us to be full-time.  However, I'd suggest that being ft is every bit as much a product of us staying at this level, as a cause.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

See whilst I accept both seasons fell apart after Xmas for different reasons, I dont think they particularly do show it. At the midway point in both seasons we were 5th and well in contention for promotion playoffs (I dont think we were seriously good enough to be promoted but the Dobbie / Dykes pairing was always capable of taking teams apart on the right day). Still not sure exactly what went wrong under Naysmith for it to fall apart so quickly. Last season is much easier to pinpoint (losing McCrorie, Brownlie and El Bakhtaoui). 
Its also a fact we have been playing at this level for 17 of the last 18 seasons. No part time team is anywhere near playing consistently in the 2nd tier. I think Dumbarton managed 5 seasons did they? They still went down eventually and havent remotely looked like coming back. They were also helped by the likes of Rangers, Dunfermline, Livingston and Morton imploding and playing well below their level for a while. Alloa have done well at bouncing up and down but they've still been relegated a couple of times. 
Whatever you think of the quality of the last two season's squads they did ultimately survive and the stats are pretty clear that chances of relegation will increase significantly. We have I think finished below a part time team twice in the last 20 years. Last season when Alloa did it by a point and this season when they repeated the trick in a shortened season and Arbroath were comfortably above us. The head to heads, especially against Alloa, make the relative positions look worse than it is. The worst full time side will always likely be there or thereabouts bottom end of this level or top end League One. The best part time side will be about the same but we've no divine right to be about the best part time side. Once you are in that pool its much easier to drop lower as Dumbarton and others have done.
We had six seasons, not five, in the Championship.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, lionel wickson said:
1 hour ago, Skyline Drifter said:
See whilst I accept both seasons fell apart after Xmas for different reasons, I dont think they particularly do show it. At the midway point in both seasons we were 5th and well in contention for promotion playoffs (I dont think we were seriously good enough to be promoted but the Dobbie / Dykes pairing was always capable of taking teams apart on the right day). Still not sure exactly what went wrong under Naysmith for it to fall apart so quickly. Last season is much easier to pinpoint (losing McCrorie, Brownlie and El Bakhtaoui). 
Its also a fact we have been playing at this level for 17 of the last 18 seasons. No part time team is anywhere near playing consistently in the 2nd tier. I think Dumbarton managed 5 seasons did they? They still went down eventually and havent remotely looked like coming back. They were also helped by the likes of Rangers, Dunfermline, Livingston and Morton imploding and playing well below their level for a while. Alloa have done well at bouncing up and down but they've still been relegated a couple of times. 
Whatever you think of the quality of the last two season's squads they did ultimately survive and the stats are pretty clear that chances of relegation will increase significantly. We have I think finished below a part time team twice in the last 20 years. Last season when Alloa did it by a point and this season when they repeated the trick in a shortened season and Arbroath were comfortably above us. The head to heads, especially against Alloa, make the relative positions look worse than it is. The worst full time side will always likely be there or thereabouts bottom end of this level or top end League One. The best part time side will be about the same but we've no divine right to be about the best part time side. Once you are in that pool its much easier to drop lower as Dumbarton and others have done.

We had six seasons, not five, in the Championship.

Fair enough, I wasn't sure and not in a position to check at the time. It's why there's a question mark and not a statement of fact. Dumbarton did brilliantly and it was the best achievement of a part time side at this level in a long time, better than us probably. As MT states above we were part time when we arrived at this level in 2002 and were not fully full time until 2007 so we did 5 seasons ostensibly as a part time side and weren't relegated. Although certainly by the 2nd half of that last season most of the players were full time anyway and a couple of them were even in the season before that.

Never the less, one top half finish was the best you managed and Dumbarton are a perfect example that you can be the best part time club in the country when you get the right group together which needs limited tinkering for a few years but when it falls apart there's absolutely no right to assume you'll remain one of the best part time clubs. Whereas the poorest full time side will always be somewhere in the 20th to 25th place range in Scotland.

I'm by no means suggesting a good part time side can't compete with a poor full time side on a equal or better footing. They can. Nor that being part time means certain relegation. But it's a much harder battle and inevitably will lead there eventually. I may be wrong but I think apart from Dumbarton's 6 year stint and our 5 year one (which is a bit more grey as we gradually moved full time), no part time side this century has survived more than 3 season at this level without a relegation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

You're obviously not wrong with any of that, but there are a couple of points worth making:

We could actually count among the sides who managed a part-time run at this level.  For the first five or so of our 17/18 seasons, we were part-time.  I know that the cut-off wasn't that clearly defined and that several players were effectively full-time footballers before that time, but the point stands that the best example of a side sustaining a lengthy part-time run at this level in modern times is provided by us.

There's also a tendency in your post to attribute playing status solidly to the pt/ft divide, when really it's more about size of club.  The two are clearly related, but I'd suggest that we've done - a little - better than Alloa over the period because we're a bit bigger and will generally spend more.  

Now there's something circular about this, because it's spending a bit more that's obviously allowed us to be full-time.  However, I'd suggest that being ft is every bit as much a product of us staying at this level, as a cause.

As per above, Dumbarton's run was at least a season longer (though ended in relegation, ours ended because we gave up pretending not to be full time and didn't actually get relegated for another 5 years).

I accept the size of the club and its relative support is a factor too but it's not necessarily a defining one in the way the status of the players is. It is likelier we'd be among the best part time sides than it is that Annan for instance would be. But Airdrie are among the biggest part time sides (and indeed have flirted with full time in the last couple of seasons) , they've not made it up. Peterhead aren't particularly "big" but they are extremely well bankrolled and haven't got beyond midtable in the level below (playoffs at one point I think). Cove are even better bank rolled by all accounts. Will be interesting to see if they bomb through League One or not.

Geography has an impact too. It will be harder to get part time players to play out of Dumfries than it will be full time ones probably. I know they don't train here and presumably still wouldn't but part time players are more likely to want to be nearer their club I think. When it's not your main income convenience is probably a bigger factor relative to wage than it is where it is your main income. That may be why Peterhead haven't made the progress you'd expect them to have done financially.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Skyline Drifter said:

 

I'm by no means suggesting a good part time side can't compete with a poor full time side on a equal or better footing. They can. Nor that being part time means certain relegation. But it's a much harder battle and inevitably will lead there eventually. I may be wrong but I think apart from Dumbarton's 6 year stint and our 5 year one (which is a bit more grey as we gradually moved full time), no part time side this century has survived more than 3 season at this level without a relegation.

Could we switch "smaller" as defined by a specific cut-off in average gates, for "part-time" in the above, and still make equal sense?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Monkey Tennis said:

Could we switch "smaller" as defined by a specific cut-off in average gates, for "part-time" in the above, and still make equal sense?

Personally no, I don't think it would make "equal" sense. It would be similar of course but as I went on to suggest in my direct response to you, I think the status of the players is a bigger factor than the size of the club.

I'll give you it would make sense, just not quite "equal" sense in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Skyline Drifter said:

Personally no, I don't think it would make "equal" sense. It would be similar of course but as I went on to suggest in my direct response to you, I think the status of the players is a bigger factor than the size of the club.

I'll give you it would make sense, just not quite "equal" sense in my opinion.

Fair enough.

I'm not going to argue that it's better to be part-time or anything, because lots of evidence suggests it's not.  I think however that the inarguable correlation between being full-time and stronger, has more of the 'chicken or the egg?' about it than is often recognised.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

Fair enough.

I'm not going to argue that it's better to be part-time or anything, because lots of evidence suggests it's not.  I think however that the inarguable correlation between being full-time and stronger, has more of the 'chicken or the egg?' about it than is often recognised.

Likewise fair enough. I'm not disagreeing with you that we'd likely be one of the bigger part time sides usually but I think our average position as a part time side would inevitably be lower than our average position as a full time one over time. Is that fair? The notion that we'd be no worse as a part time side is what I disagreed with. I think we certainly would be and whilst we may at times be capable of competing at a similar level to that we are now, it's very unlikely we'd do so consistently.

I know we'd suffered decades of mismanagement at the time but it's not outwith either of our memories that this "bigger part time side" were finishing 37th in what was then a 38 team SFL.

Edited by Skyline Drifter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Skyline Drifter said:

Likewise fair enough. I'm not disagreeing with you that we'd likely be one of the bigger part time sides usually but I think our average position as a part time side would inevitably be lower than our average position as a full time one over time. Is that fair? The notion that we'd be no worse as a part time side is what I disagreed with. I think we certainly would be and whilst we may at times be capable of competing at a similar level to that we are now, it's very unlikely we'd do so consistently.

I know we'd suffered decades of mismanagement at the time but it's not outwith either of our memories that this "bigger part time side" were finishing 37th in what was then a 38 team SFL.

No argument there.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1st-7th June is volunteers week. We would like to say a very big THANK YOU to all the volunteers that have given their valuable time to the Queens Trust over the last 17 years. A shout out also to all volunteers that help at @OfficialQosFC #VolunteersWeek #VolunteersWeek2020

4C8D5BAA-4BD3-4511-91B4-AB6EF3186341.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Absolutely no issue with me if we have to go part time for financial reasons.

 

But if at all possible we should stay full time. Yes the complaints of the last couple of seasons are well justified but all it takes is one season getting your recruitment and tactics right and you could be in the top division. Livingston are perfect proof.

 

Also if we go down to League 1 there is every chance you could romp it like we did last time. And I think most supporters really enjoyed that season. I would never want us to be relegated but it was starting to feel like we could almost do with a relegation to have a bit of a reset.

 

If we were part time there is far more chance of being stuck down there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The above arguments about the pros and cons of being full time over part time seem to assume it’d only be us dropping down to part time. Isn’t it possible that a few more championship clubs could be forced into this move?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, steakpiegravy said:

The above arguments about the pros and cons of being full time over part time seem to assume it’d only be us dropping down to part time. Isn’t it possible that a few more championship clubs could be forced into this move?

That's a good point.

We're obviously one of the clubs on the cusp of that divide anyway, but you're right.  If current circumstances tip us from one side to the other, then everyone else will be getting scaled down too.  It might be that the ft/pt divide falls in a different place in future.  

Edited by Monkey Tennis
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem here is we are in a position where we are only attracting the poorest full time guys players who are on the last chance at full time contracts.
Dont get me wrong there is the odd player that does well but really they are poor full time players who a lot of the time can't get a contract anywhere else.
If we were part time or a mix we would be able to get the better part time players who a lot of the time would be better that the full time guys we are currently attracting.
The part time/full-time thing used to be a big thing but not anymore and when this covid thing is done there will be a lot more part time teams and players around.
They game is changing and may never return to what it was before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, gogs said:

The problem here is we are in a position where we are only attracting the poorest full time guys players who are on the last chance at full time contracts.
Dont get me wrong there is the odd player that does well but really they are poor full time players who a lot of the time can't get a contract anywhere else.
If we were part time or a mix we would be able to get the better part time players who a lot of the time would be better that the full time guys we are currently attracting.
The part time/full-time thing used to be a big thing but not anymore and when this covid thing is done there will be a lot more part time teams and players around.
They game is changing and may never return to what it was before.

Disagree, about the first part anyway.

Inevitably we're bottom end of the full time market which means a mix of players who aren't deemed good enough for the top sides and youngsters who still have something to prove. Sometimes some of them work out, most don't inevitably. But the notion that we'd automatically get the best of the part time players is the part I'd challenge. There's not really any great basis to assume we'd pick up the best part timers. As I already pointed out, "big" and better geographically placed part time clubs like Airdrie haven't managed that. There are several part time sides such as Queen's Park, Peterhead and Cove throwing piles of money about too so those willing to travel further to play are likely to be able to make more money elsewhere. It's easy to assume we'd go back to being the best part time side because we were for half a decade before we went full time. Fact is we'd not been among the better part time sides for about 35 years before that.

A mix of part time and full time may work but it's not always easy to work. Full timers don't want to train in the evenings so you end up with mixed groups, unhappy full timers, or having to specifically recruit part timers who have a flexibility to train during the day which to an extent we do already (there are several players for instance who are fitness instructors or such like in their own time).

However, it may well be that the longer terms effects of Covid does lead to clubs who were previously full time having to revert to part time. If that's the case so be it, we will need to deal with it and make the best of it. It may very well never return to what it was before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 04/06/2020 at 17:42, Fae_the_'briggs said:

Quite agree.  The only slight advantage,  not including wages,  is that preparation for  midweek  matches  might be better if you don't have to do a days work beforehand. I can't say we look that much fitter than when we were part time. 

Am I not right in saying Queens mid week match results are, in the main, abysmal?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, gogs said:

The problem here is we are in a position where we are only attracting the poorest full time guys players who are on the last chance at full time contracts.
Dont get me wrong there is the odd player that does well but really they are poor full time players who a lot of the time can't get a contract anywhere else.
If we were part time or a mix we would be able to get the better part time players who a lot of the time would be better that the full time guys we are currently attracting.
The part time/full-time thing used to be a big thing but not anymore and when this covid thing is done there will be a lot more part time teams and players around.
They game is changing and may never return to what it was before.

I think its harsh to say we only attract the poorest full time players. We've had enough good players in the last few years to make the play-offs and even in the last couple of years we've been fine for half a season. Thats before you take into account loan players like Kerr, McCrorie etc who we, arguably, would not have been able to sign had we been part time.

SD has already covered it but it seems quite a jump to think we could go PT and suddenly improve the playing squad. Surely, if the BOD and management teams thought that was the case we'd already done it.

Of course, if other clubs go PT and we are forced into it for financial reasons, the quality is unlikely to change overall. There will just be more PT players earning less money than they do now full time

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Listening to sportsound it cost Roy Mcgregor from Ross County £35,000 to buy a covid testing machine plus it'll cost them £50 a week per person to get tested. He thinks all spl clubs wil need to have their own to get the league up and running, but could possibly share usage.

I wonder with Queens training at Hamilton they might also get the use of their covid testing machine further down the line when the Championship clubs gets the go ahead to start training again.  Sure with QoS Director Mark Blount being on the medical & player welfare committee group to get scottish football started again Queens will be right up to speed with all the medical guidelines etc. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...