Jump to content
qos_75

The Queen of the South Thread

Recommended Posts

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?

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Share this post


Link to post
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

Share this post


Link to post
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.

 

Share this post


Link to post
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

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Share this post


Link to post
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?

Share this post


Link to post
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

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Share this post


Link to post
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?

Share this post


Link to post
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

Share this post


Link to post
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. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SUPERSOUTH said:

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. 

why doesn’t the guy wanting to put £2m into the Scottish game buy 10 of these testing machines, allocate 4 clubs to each machine and cover the cost of testing for 12 months.

That would be his money well spent in my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, SueSue said:

why doesn’t the guy wanting to put £2m into the Scottish game buy 10 of these testing machines, allocate 4 clubs to each machine and cover the cost of testing for 12 months.

That would be his money well spent in my opinion.

Only if that's the difference between clubs in the lower divisions playing and not playing. If, as seems likely, League One and League Two are not played next season, or at least not played until crowds are allowed which in turn presumably means the testing regime for players is likely to be less stringent, then giving a £35k machine to clubs down there will achieve absolutely nothing. The clubs would certainly rather have the cash to put towards their fixed costs. If playing behind closed doors isn't achievable anyway then testing players to allow it is pointless.

As a suggestion for the top two divisions though it makes some sense. I guess though if the bottom two divisions have the cash the other clubs would say they'd rather have the cash too and decide for themselves how best to spend it.

Edited by Skyline Drifter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Skyline Drifter said:

 

Hopefully all Championship clubs would have the finance to play 6 home games behind closed doors from October that would take them thru to 2021 and surely by then at the latest we could get 25% of fans in stadium allowance - example Palmerston 2150. Thus giving most clubs enough finance to see out the remainder of the season. 

Edited by SUPERSOUTH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you guys ever have a sell on with Dykes? We've basically came out and said he's leaving for no less than £2m so even a tiny sell on would net you a decent bit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, ATLIS said:

Did you guys ever have a sell on with Dykes? We've basically came out and said he's leaving for no less than £2m so even a tiny sell on would net you a decent bit

The only person that is likely to know this, also understandably won't answer.  I'd hope so, but I suspect not.  Pure speculation on my part, but I suspect getting Dykes back on loan from the January and then Jack Hamilton last season were the sweeteners in the deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Did you guys ever have a sell on with Dykes? We've basically came out and said he's leaving for no less than £2m so even a tiny sell on would net you a decent bit
I personally don't know. It's been said yes and no on here. Mental he's valued so high but hopefully he goes for such a price if we do have a sell-on.

Share this post


Link to post
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...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...