Double Winning St Johnstone FC Thread

[ATLIS]

This was something that was brought up on the Livi thread/Facebook group at some point I think. Context being Martindale talking about the possibility of needing outside investment to push on and target Europe etc. 

The conversation ended up with people debating the pros and cons of being a Wrexham feeder club (). As tinpot as that sounds, and I'm probably against it, it boiled down to having that level of investment from RR and RM pushing the club onwards. 

It ended up being, investment is put into the club to ensure European football year on year with the aim of finishing 3rd for guaranteed group stage (for as long as that's here). The downside being that you're basically prepping players to go down and play for Wrexham, leaving for f**k all. You'd probably attract players you couldn't have otherwise gotten, and Wrexham end up getting guys that have played European football.  I think it was also suggested about being a feeder club in that way Chelsea used to do, the way Man City do with the City Group too. Either that or becoming Red Bull Livingston/St Johnstone

All in all it's a bit stupid, and I'd rather be an independent club that stands on its own. I'd imagine a lot of you here are probably in the same boat but it's relevant to the conversation  

Edited May 1, 2023 by ATLIS

[RandomGuy.]

6 minutes ago, Gekko said:

Think of the benefits for potential signings. A free Tesla...

A way to test their intelligence, whether they accept or reject that offer.

[The Saintee]

The idea of Geoff and Elon in a meeting is pretty funny.

[tree house tam]

13 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said:

A way to test their intelligence, whether they accept or reject that offer.

We all know 90% of footballers are thick and impressionable.

[The Marly]

1 hour ago, ATLIS said:

This was something that was brought up on the Livi thread/Facebook group at some point I think. Context being Martindale talking about the possibility of needing outside investment to push on and target Europe etc. 

The conversation ended up with people debating the pros and cons of being a Wrexham feeder club (). As tinpot as that sounds, and I'm probably against it, it boiled down to having that level of investment from RR and RM pushing the club onwards. 

It ended up being, investment is put into the club to ensure European football year on year with the aim of finishing 3rd for guaranteed group stage (for as long as that's here). The downside being that you're basically prepping players to go down and play for Wrexham, leaving for f**k all. You'd probably attract players you couldn't have otherwise gotten, and Wrexham end up getting guys that have played European football.  I think it was also suggested about being a feeder club in that way Chelsea used to do, the way Man City do with the City Group too. Either that or becoming Red Bull Livingston/St Johnstone

All in all it's a bit stupid, and I'd rather be an independent club that stands on its own. I'd imagine a lot of you here are probably in the same boat but it's relevant to the conversation  

f**k that.  I don't want Saints involved in any of that kind of shite. 

[PauloPerth]

1 hour ago, The Marly said:

f**k that.  I don't want Saints involved in any of that kind of shite. 

Me neither, but I must be honest there’s a part of me which would love it, absolutely love it if some huge mega rich owners sunk billions into us and bought us the title and champions league group stage football.

Purely for the seethe from OF fans, and the mainstream media about how it wasn’t fair, we were buying success, its not football etc etc. Then buying Celtic and rangers’ best players and loaning them out to Forfar for the season.

I could just about suffer being the Tesla St Johnstone Rockets for that 3-4 year period of hilarity before going back to normal post-administration.

But if it’s just some wee bit rich mob who are going to have us changing our name just to be challenging for third then they can ram it.

 

[saint pogo]

Jody as manager would feel similar to Stevie May coming back….

The timing is impeccable you must admit 

[ATLIS]

4 minutes ago, PauloPerth said:

Me neither, but I must be honest there’s a part of me which would love it, absolutely love it if some huge mega rich owners sunk billions into us and bought us the title and champions league group stage football.

Purely for the seethe from OF fans, and the mainstream media about how it wasn’t fair, we were buying success, its not football etc etc. Then buying Celtic and rangers’ best players and loaning them out to Forfar for the season.

I could just about suffer being the Tesla St Johnstone Rockets for that 3-4 year period of hilarity before going back to normal post-administration.

But if it’s just some wee bit rich mob who are going to have us changing our name just to be challenging for third then they can ram it.

 

Can you imagine the City group buying into a club in Scotland and aiming to make them regular Champions League qualifiers? Something about it would be really funny, especially when it would inevitably ruffle the feathers of those two. 

They'd need to filter it through daft sponsorships too, something like The Royal Qatari Arena. The Tony Mac... ah f**k wait a minute  The Space X dome, something utterly daft for 300m over 5 seasons.

Part of me would find it really funny winding just about everyone up as Livingston City, despite Livingston being a town. Martindale being given a budget of 25m per season, spending 1.7m and claiming a points per pound league win. It'd probably be easier for someone to do to us, as there's a lack of a long storied history. We'd end up finally getting rid of the plastic though at least.

[DukDukGoose]

12 hours ago, ATLIS said:

Can you imagine the City group buying into a club in Scotland and aiming to make them regular Champions League qualifiers? Something about it would be really funny, especially when it would inevitably ruffle the feathers of those two. 

They'd need to filter it through daft sponsorships too, something like The Royal Qatari Arena. The Tony Mac... ah f**k wait a minute  The Space X dome, something utterly daft for 300m over 5 seasons.

Part of me would find it really funny winding just about everyone up as Livingston City, despite Livingston being a town. Martindale being given a budget of 25m per season, spending 1.7m and claiming a points per pound league win. It'd probably be easier for someone to do to us, as there's a lack of a long storied history. We'd end up finally getting rid of the plastic though at least.

That's not what they do though.

[GreenGray]

12 hours ago, ATLIS said:

Can you imagine the City group buying into a club in Scotland and aiming to make them regular Champions League qualifiers? Something about it would be really funny, especially when it would inevitably ruffle the feathers of those two. 

They'd need to filter it through daft sponsorships too, something like The Royal Qatari Arena. The Tony Mac... ah f**k wait a minute  The Space X dome, something utterly daft for 300m over 5 seasons.

Part of me would find it really funny winding just about everyone up as Livingston City, despite Livingston being a town. Martindale being given a budget of 25m per season, spending 1.7m and claiming a points per pound league win. It'd probably be easier for someone to do to us, as there's a lack of a long storied history. We'd end up finally getting rid of the plastic though at least.

 

7 minutes ago, DukDukGoose said:

That's not what they do though.

There have been rumours of the City Group becoming involved with Hibs in some capacity, visits to the training ground etc. likely just internet chat but there might be something to them.

[SJFCtheTeamForMe]

1 minute ago, GreenGray said:

 

There have been rumours of the City Group becoming involved with Hibs in some capacity, visits to the training ground etc. likely just internet chat but there might be something to them.

Brexit resulting these clubs being unable to sign European kids under 18 has resulted in them trying to find ways to get access to younger players. That could be part of it. 

Speculation of course. 

[RandomGuy.]

26 minutes ago, SJFCtheTeamForMe said:

Brexit resulting these clubs being unable to sign European kids under 18 has resulted in them trying to find ways to get access to younger players. That could be part of it. 

Speculation of course. 

Its seemingly nuts down South just now. Bidding wars from the biggest clubs for 14/15 year old kids.

[DukDukGoose]

39 minutes ago, GreenGray said:

 

There have been rumours of the City Group becoming involved with Hibs in some capacity, visits to the training ground etc. likely just internet chat but there might be something to them.

I'm not tryin to put a dampener on anything but I would want the City Group nowhere near my team.

Even the prospect of loan players. We've had three from City that I can remember since they got the oil money and all three have been worse than terrible.

[GreenGray]

1 hour ago, DukDukGoose said:

I'm not tryin to put a dampener on anything but I would want the City Group nowhere near my team.

Even the prospect of loan players. We've had three from City that I can remember since they got the oil money and all three have been worse than terrible.

Never said I wanted it, it isn't for me. Although you can't argue with their record with the other teams they own. Also, two of our better players this season have been loan's from the group.

The human rights issues and the fact you lose your identity to become part of a corporate machine is why I would be against it.

[RandomGuy.]

Like this from MacLean.

Quote

On Rudden, MacLean added: “Zak did well against Hearts as well.

“I toyed with putting him on against Hibs. It was still going through my mind after the game.

“But our best chances in the second half were coming from midfield runners.

“They weren’t getting picked up. Melker had our best opportunities.

Just a simple thing really, but admits he thought about the Rudden sub i thought everyone expected, and explains why he went a different route.

Its totally fair enough and might be worth now watching the second half again to see if we can see what he was seeing, which will probably end up really obvious when you look for it, and understand he was right.

[Valentino Bolognese]

3 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said:

Like this from MacLean.

Just a simple thing really, but admits he thought about the Rudden sub i thought everyone expected, and explains why he went a different route.

Its totally fair enough and might be worth now watching the second half again to see if we can see what he was seeing, which will probably end up really obvious when you look for it, and understand he was right.

Yeah I read this and my first thought was 'I can see what he means'. My second thought was 'what an improvement on the interview we'd have got from Davidson'.

Generally feeling that the press this week is positive from Saints.

[PSJ.84]

44 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said:

Like this from MacLean.

Just a simple thing really, but admits he thought about the Rudden sub i thought everyone expected, and explains why he went a different route.

Its totally fair enough and might be worth now watching the second half again to see if we can see what he was seeing, which will probably end up really obvious when you look for it, and understand he was right.

Suppose it makes sense when you think about the chances Hallberg had. Fairly basic stuff, I guess, but nice to see him thinking about how best to impact the game, as opposed to Davidson’s throw as many attackers on the pitch and hope something happens. 

Edited May 3, 2023 by PSJ.84

[tree house tam]

I'm a bit amiss that you lot couldn't see it watching the game. That's what Melker brings, he just needs a wee bit of luck. I'd have still brought on Rudden as well though as we were a man up.

[Widge]

3 minutes ago, tree house tam said:

I'm a bit amiss that you lot couldn't see it watching the game. That's what Melker brings, he just needs a wee bit of luck. I'd have still brought on Rudden as well though as we were a man up.

This is fair, I didn’t necessarily think Hallberg on was wrong, it wasn’t. It was the fact that we continued to play May up top on his own which we know doesn’t work. If we’d gone 4-3-1-2, that would have retained midfield control and got an extra man upfront. 

[PauloPerth]

2 hours ago, Widge said:

This is fair, I didn’t necessarily think Hallberg on was wrong, it wasn’t. It was the fact that we continued to play May up top on his own which we know doesn’t work. If we’d gone 4-3-1-2, that would have retained midfield control and got an extra man upfront. 

That’s where I’m at. Good on Macca for explaining his decisions and Hallberg certainly made an impact.

But we had a man advantage, so could have had an extra striker on as well to occupy their defence, get on rebounds and the crosses we were putting in etc.