Double Winning St Johnstone FC Thread

[tree house tam]

If you still want to go to the football while bail conditions say otherwise it's pretty simple to do. Just go in a different stand from normal, without your mates, with a hat on and don't be as much of a dick as before. It's a proven strategy. 

[mizfit]

If you still want to go to the football while bail conditions say otherwise it's pretty simple to do. Just go in a different stand from normal, without your mates, with a hat on and don't be as much of a dick as before. It's a proven strategy. 

/\ one of the bailed.

[tree house tam]

6 minutes ago, mizfit said:

 

/\ one of the bailed.

 

Not guilty your honour. 

That's a proven strategy as well.

[Radford]

Justice for the 22 26.

I wasn't saying that McCart and Rooney should have been given three years, I was saying that if Davidson can prove shrewder than Wright, we might be able to do that. 

For two reasons, although they are linked. You trust the players will actually be decent, and you haven't had to pay their replacements off or indeed sign them to replace the guys earning good money that the manager doesn't want any more.

The minute someone starts doing well with Saints (lowish payers) then you are up against it. We've seen it for as long as. That's why three years initially is better than two years then trying to negotiate and extension. 

[Kyle]

3 hours ago, PauloPerth said:

The club can’t really win here. You sign players on good contracts like Scougall and McMillan for 3 years and it doesn’t work out so you’re stuck with them on a good wage or have to pay them off and lose money.

So you learn your lesson and sign McCart and Rooney etc on 2 year deals and folk complain they should have been longer deals.

Every new signing is a gamble, so 2 years is probably about right in most cases.  The trick is to identify you’ve picked someone with sell-on potential early and get them extended.

Up until the Hibs 3-0 semi, who would have predicted Rooney being the success he has been?  Don’t want him to leave, but I’d be amazed if the club rejected an offer of £300k for him.

The one I’m struggling to get my head round is in what universe Ryan Porteous is worth more than Jason Kerr.

I agree with the general points made here, but both Scougall and McMillan were 2 and 2 and a half year deals respectively. Still expensive failures but if either had been a success in their first full season we’d have faced the same situation as we are with Kerr, Rooney and McCart now. Three year contracts have been reserved for our own talented youth players/products of late. Clark, Kerr, McCann, Ferguson and Kucheriavy. I can’t even think who the last signing we made on a 3 year deal would’ve been. McCart and MOH signed 2 and a half year contracts recently. 
 

I think Radford’s right. If Davidson wants a player and really rates him we probably need to back that and offer him a 3 year deal if it’s someone you think can be sold after being developed. Hendry aside, there’s not really any player that’s gone backwards under his management. 
 

[steviemay17]

53 minutes ago, Radford said:

Justice for the 22 26.

I wasn't saying that McCart and Rooney should have been given three years, I was saying that if Davidson can prove shrewder than Wright, we might be able to do that. 

For two reasons, although they are linked. You trust the players will actually be decent, and you haven't had to pay their replacements off or indeed sign them to replace the guys earning good money that the manager doesn't want any more.

The minute someone starts doing well with Saints (lowish payers) then you are up against it. We've seen it for as long as. That's why three years initially is better than two years then trying to negotiate and extension. 

I guess a lot will depend on how long we can keep CD for, but there's a solid argument for three year if he really believes in a player based on what he produced last season.

Tommy Wright was usually good at making us a hard team to beat with a fairly rigid system, but from memory it also feels like Scott Tanser was an exception when it came to coaching players up and improving them, so if a player wasn't good enough or didn't fit the system then they would be written off and he would look for the next signing.

Davidson is also rigid with some parts of his setup in terms of going with three at the back, but he's also shown he can and will adapt to put those with gamechanging ability in the position to succeed, while there were also signs of improvement from most of the squad too.

The board should see that he has an ability to get the best out of players when they don't start well rather than writing them off and demanding someone new, so longer deals should be seen as a safer investment for the club too

[RandomGuy.]

Anyone who wasn't happy with Scougall getting a long deal is a liar, IMO.

In saying that it never felt like a move that was particularly thought out well. He was never playing central in a TW side, yet he was never going to be any use out wide either, looking back its hard to understand what the plan was with him. Alston transfer was similar, like you could understand us signing a player with that pedigree/ability, but looking back it was never really obvious where they were meant to fit into the starting line up.

[Shaggy Jenkins]

The hibs thing is not so much the money. Although low of you take on what they 'could' earn us in prize money. It is the selling to effectively one of our main competitors domestically

[RandomGuy.]

Aye or Naw for this type of content?

Seems a fair divide amongst Saints fans on twitter.

[steviemay17]

3 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said:

Aye or Naw for this type of content?

Seems a fair divide amongst Saints fans on twitter.

Good for the Twitter analytics metrics, achieves very little

[PauloPerth]

2 hours ago, steviemay17 said:

I guess a lot will depend on how long we can keep CD for, but there's a solid argument for three year if he really believes in a player based on what he produced last season.

Tommy Wright was usually good at making us a hard team to beat with a fairly rigid system, but from memory it also feels like Scott Tanser was an exception when it came to coaching players up and improving them, so if a player wasn't good enough or didn't fit the system then they would be written off and he would look for the next signing.

Davidson is also rigid with some parts of his setup in terms of going with three at the back, but he's also shown he can and will adapt to put those with gamechanging ability in the position to succeed, while there were also signs of improvement from most of the squad too.

The board should see that he has an ability to get the best out of players when they don't start well rather than writing them off and demanding someone new, so longer deals should be seen as a safer investment for the club too

Agree with the positivity toward Davidson, but think there has to be balance if comparing their records. I'd argue Michael O'Halloran, Stevie May, Chris Millar, Scott Tanser as you mention, and probably Zander all improved and had the best spells of their careers under TW.  Matt Kennedy, Danny Swanson and Drey Wright were all excellent under Wright as well and have struggled for form elsewhere.  

He did write players off as you say, and probably had a lot more money to play with than Callum.  Still have hope Callum can get a tune out of Hendry, as his regression last season was a big disappointment as Kyle mentioned.

[RandomGuy.]

Hendry will be fine if his heads in the right place, he had to sacrifice last season to the xG Gods after his 19/20 season. They've been fed so he can make his own fate again.

Guy on WAP saying we're over 2100 season ticket holders, which doesn't include the family tickets in the Ormond stand or the posh seats.

[Saint Stevo]

Aye or Naw for this type of content?
Seems a fair divide amongst Saints fans on twitter.

Aye, good for a laugh but maybe we need to be a wee bit more professional [emoji23]

[Mr Positive, sometimes.]

2 hours ago, RandomGuy. said:

Aye or Naw for this type of content?

Seems a fair divide amongst Saints fans on twitter.

100% my cup of tea. 

It's in keeping with national views (and my complete polticy views).

Generally speaking if I'm not overly fussed by content if isn't within my views for arguement sake. I don't get offended by those either.

Edited July 3, 2021 by Mr Positive, sometimes.

[ATLIS]

11 hours ago, PauloPerth said:

The club can’t really win here. You sign players on good contracts like Scougall and McMillan for 3 years and it doesn’t work out so you’re stuck with them on a good wage or have to pay them off and lose money.

So you learn your lesson and sign McCart and Rooney etc on 2 year deals and folk complain they should have been longer deals.

Every new signing is a gamble, so 2 years is probably about right in most cases.  The trick is to identify you’ve picked someone with sell-on potential early and get them extended.

Up until the Hibs 3-0 semi, who would have predicted Rooney being the success he has been?  Don’t want him to leave, but I’d be amazed if the club rejected an offer of £300k for him.

The one I’m struggling to get my head round is in what universe Ryan Porteous is worth more than Jason Kerr.

Or you'd do it like we do and agree 2 year deals with an extra year optional to be activated by the club

[Mr Positive, sometimes.]

1 hour ago, ATLIS said:

Or you'd do it like we do and agree 2 year deals with an extra year optional to be activated by the club

It's like others have said though. Doesnt mean they'll accept that.

That'll be enough in deals to make them fall through if the player or his agent doesn't want that addition to be added. 

Saints more often than not are not negotiating from a position of strength 

[RandomGuy.]

Proper bidding war starting for McCart, apparently. 

Hibs, Barnsley, Sunderland, Nottingham Forest, Sheffield Wednesday, and Royale Union Saint-Gilloise all expected to make bids for him this window.

Wigan, Oxford, and Bournemouth, all still being linked with Kerr.

[Widge]

27 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said:

Proper bidding war starting for McCart, apparently. 

Hibs, Barnsley, Sunderland, Nottingham Forest, Sheffield Wednesday, and Royale Union Saint-Gilloise all expected to make bids for him this window.

Wigan, Oxford, and Bournemouth, all still being linked with Kerr.

This in a way is absolutely ideal. Whilst I think McCart is a fantastic player and one I really don’t want to lose, having multiple teams after him is what you want. Take the first offer, double it and add a 20% sell on and there’s your starting price! See who’ll deal at that (won’t be Hibs) and then send him on his way with our blessings. 

[RandomGuy.]

1 minute ago, Widge said:

This in a way is absolutely ideal. Whilst I think McCart is a fantastic player and one I really don’t want to lose, having multiple teams after him is what you want. Take the first offer, double it and add a 20% sell on and there’s your starting price! See who’ll deal at that (won’t be Hibs) and then send him on his way with our blessings. 

Aye, dunno exactly how it all works in terms of what Saints are telling each club, but you really just need one or two clubs to either panic, or go "f**k it", and the price starts heading upwards quickly.

[Radford]

It is interesting to ponder how such a situation works. Surely it benefits Saints though. If you have anything for sale and several interested parties, it drives the price up. The economists among us will know the specific word for it.

The fee will no doubt be undisclosed and this isn't a familiar situation for Saints to find themselves in but hopefully those in charge can get the best deal possible out of this.

The fee doesn't bother me too much but getting that future sell-on in there is key. I'm sure either one of Geoff or Steve Brown has acknowledged that though.

Edited July 4, 2021 by Radford