The St. Mirren FC 2023/24 thread

[Coventry Saint]

I have to say, the lack of experience thing doesn't worry me too much. We typically go for up and coming managers and they rarely have more than a couple years under their belt anyway. And even then, it's been a hit and miss approach.

Hendrie, Lennon, Murray, MacPherson, Rae, Ross, Goodwin, Teale were all on only their first or second jobs, with wildly mixed results. Stubbs and Craig had more experience, and they were both absolutely honking.

Dundee have gone for experience - and we've seen how people feel about that.

IMO, what makes him a good candidate (or not) is entirely down to attitude and potential connection with the fans. Is he going to give a shit about us as a club (or at least pretend he does?) or is he going to treat us with disdain from day one like Stubbs did?

Hendrie, Ross, Goodwin and Kearney all had a great connection with the fans and really energised the club. Say what you want about their departures, but in each case they left us better off than they found us. (Arguably not Hendrie, but he did at least give us a title season and a year in the top flight).

On the flip side, Craig, Stubbs and Rae in particular were absolutely tragic appointments and there was zero bond between us and them. And you can't say it was entirely down to a lack of success because Rae's rescue act in that first season was far from terrible.

Gus is obviously the outlier because he delivered (relative) success without achieving that bond, so I do accept there are exceptions. But he rarely made watching St Mirren a fun experience.

 

I'm not saying we need every manager to be a "pure St Mirren man", but I do want them to give a shit about the club and to represent us properly, and to be someone who the players will enjoy training with and be prepared to bust a gut for.

I'm not saying that has to be Brown, but I'm not saying it can't be.

Edit: LOL @ me and @GAD sitting typing out similar shite at 7am on. Saturday morning.

Edited February 19, 2022 by Coventry Saint

[Thenorthernlight]

7 hours ago, RandomGuy. said:

Because the transfer window is shut. Surely thats really, really, obvious?

You’re not listening. 
If his contract is cancelled, he’s effectively deemed a free agent.

Surely that’s really, really, REALLY obvious? 

[Saint Shug]

5 minutes ago, Thenorthernlight said:

You’re not listening. 
If his contract is cancelled, he’s effectively deemed a free agent.

Surely that’s really, really, REALLY obvious? 

He would have to have been a free agent before the end of the transfer window to allow him to sign elsewhere after it had closed. 

[FTOF]

6 hours ago, prov said:

what exactly is not on & unacceptable?

Getting leathered and making howling at the moon type posts?

[djchapsticks]

49 minutes ago, Coventry Saint said:

I have to say, the lack of experience thing doesn't worry me too much. We typically go for up and coming managers and they rarely have more than a couple years under their belt anyway. And even then, it's been a hit and miss approach.

Hendrie, Lennon, Murray, MacPherson, Rae, Ross, Goodwin, Teale were all on only their first or second jobs, with wildly mixed results. Stubbs and Craig had more experience, and they were both absolutely honking.

Dundee have gone for experience - and we've seen how people feel about that.

IMO, what makes him a good candidate (or not) is entirely down to attitude and potential connection with the fans. Is he going to give a shit about us as a club (or at least pretend he does?) or is he going to treat us with disdain from day one like Stubbs did?

Hendrie, Ross, Goodwin and Kearney all had a great connection with the fans and really energised the club. Say what you want about their departures, but in each case they left us better off than they found us. (Arguably not Hendrie, but he did at least give us a title season and a year in the top flight).

On the flip side, Craig, Stubbs and Rae in particular were absolutely tragic appointments and there was zero bond between us and them. And you can't say it was entirely down to a lack of success because Rae's rescue act in that first season was far from terrible.

Gus is obviously the outlier because he delivered (relative) success without achieving that bond, so I do accept there are exceptions. But he rarely made watching St Mirren a fun experience.

 

I'm not saying we need every manager to be a "pure St Mirren man", but I do want them to give a shit about the club and to represent us properly, and to be someone who the players will enjoy training with and be prepared to bust a gut for.

I'm not saying that has to be Brown, but I'm not saying it can't be.

Edit: LOL @ me and @GAD sitting typing out similar shite at 7am on. Saturday morning.

This. This all the way.

I'm not THAT worried about it being someone's first job. I remember thinking when Stubbs came in that it was refreshing that for once, we hadn't gone for a rank rookie or someone who had only managed with success at a part time team. 

The only managers in my memory that don't fit that description are Bone, Hay, Rae and Stubbs. The latter three were unmitigated disasters, none of the three looking or feeling like they actually gave a shit or got the club they worked for.

The others, Fitzpatrick x2, Hendrie, Coughlin, McPherson, Lennon, Craig, Teale, Murray, Ross and Goodwin were all either first timers, internal appointments, part timers or a mixture. 

Attitude trumps experience for me in some instances. If someone - not just necessarily Brown - comes in as their first gig and throws themselves at the job, gives a shit and looks like he's buying into it rather than just there for a payday with a billy big baws attitude that alienates the dressing room and supporters, then I'll be OK with it. 

[buddie06smfc]

6 hours ago, ZingaliMan said:

Will it make a difference.  For me it's about experience  nothing else. Huge gamble. 

That would be understandable as a worry but not a reason to protest. Only yesterday you were tipping Allan McManus as your choice. Inexperience didn’t worry you then, what’s changed? 

Edited February 19, 2022 by buddie06smfc

[Yorky]

Does anyone at St Mirren really want to replace a handsome poster boy like Goodwin with Brown, the female support will dwindle.

[Saint Shug]

That’s it confirmed then. 
 

We move on. 
 

 

[btb]

My initial reaction regarding Scott Brown last night was

Having thought about if he'd be a first time manager and these are usualy paired with an experienced No. 2 (not cheap), then there's the issue of compensation - Aberdeen pay more than us (hence JGs departure) so we'd probably be handing most of said compo back.

My considered reaction is

 

Edited February 19, 2022 by btb

[djchapsticks]

Ah well. One more step along the world we go.

Good luck to Jim and thanks for the job done. I hope you fall flat on your arse against us.

[AW saint]

End of the Goodwin era. Onwards and upwards. 

[Dunning1874]

You can flip the argument about gambling on an inexperienced manager either way.

If there's ever a time to do it mid-season, then when you're basically already safe from relegation minimises the risk. The new manager could be a shambles who fails to win for the rest of the season and you'd probably still draw your way to safety from the position you're in. On the other hand, when you're chasing the top six and there's even the possibility of European qualification with a strong end to the season, you could argue that makes the job more attractive, you could get something of a coup of an appointment and that's not a position to throw away cheaply on a first time manager.

[RandomGuy.]

50 minutes ago, Thenorthernlight said:

You’re not listening. 
If his contract is cancelled, he’s effectively deemed a free agent.

Surely that’s really, really, REALLY obvious? 

He could sign for St Mirren but he couldn't play. There's no debate to be had here, that's how it works.

[Ric]

It's the Record reporting it, that's as reliable as the gossip who talks about something "three towns over", so let's not get all worked up about it. Even if there is a shred of evidence (and this is the Record, and they don't require such things to publish a story because they are a low-rent shit rag with journos who struggle to grasp event the most basic things).

Either way, it would be utmost folly for the board to appoint Brown. He may or may not end up a decent manager in the future but he has no experience at present, and I don't think he even has the badges necessary. It would be madness to throw away the progress Goodwin and others have made to gamble on someone who will be asked more about Celtic than he will about St Mirren.

As I posted before, it's all 'top bantz' though.

No idea who it will be, there are clearly better candidates than not, and it's not like I have agreed with some previous managerial decisions.

Edited February 19, 2022 by Ric

[RandomGuy.]

I tend to think with managers you're sometimes better gambling on a potential failure than a proven one, if ever St Mirren were going to roll the dice on a rookie it would be now when they have a strong squad safe from relegation, I guess.

[djchapsticks]

1 minute ago, Dunning1874 said:

You can flip the argument about gambling on an inexperienced manager either way.

If there's ever a time to do it mid-season, then when you're basically already safe from relegation minimises the risk. The new manager could be a shambles who fails to win for the rest of the season and you'd probably still draw your way to safety from the position you're in. On the other hand, when you're chasing the top six and there's even the possibility of European qualification with a strong end to the season, you could argue that makes the job more attractive, you could get something of a coup of an appointment and that's not a position to throw away cheaply on a first time manager.

Agreed and I see both sides of such an argument.

I do think Brown is too big a risk to take just now when, honestly and realistically, not only top six but the often laughed at notion of top four is within our reach but I can't get on board with those who don't want him just because of who he is.

I want us to actually push the boat out and not go cheap. And Brown wouldn't be cheap, so I'd rather we spent that money on a lower risk.

[FTOF]

1 minute ago, djchapsticks said:

Agreed and I see both sides of such an argument.

I do think Brown is too big a risk to take just now when, honestly and realistically, not only top six but the often laughed at notion of top four is within our reach but I can't get on board with those who don't want him just because of who he is.

I want us to actually push the boat out and not go cheap. And Brown wouldn't be cheap, so I'd rather we spent that money on a lower risk.

Indeed.

We've just received well in excess of £250K for both Goodwin and Sharp and I'd rather we didn't spunk it all on a complete rookie.

[Ric]

5 minutes ago, Dunning1874 said:

You can flip the argument about gambling on an inexperienced manager either way.

If there's ever a time to do it mid-season, then when you're basically already safe from relegation minimises the risk. The new manager could be a shambles who fails to win for the rest of the season and you'd probably still draw your way to safety from the position you're in. On the other hand, when you're chasing the top six and there's even the possibility of European qualification with a strong end to the season, you could argue that makes the job more attractive, you could get something of a coup of an appointment and that's not a position to throw away cheaply on a first time manager.

That point has been made, regarding Goodwin's departure/replacement and the time, already by several people, myself included.

However, what needs to be factored in is not just how much experience someone has, but equally who that person is. If this is led by the board, then more fool them, if it's led by the media, well no surprises there as they love to suck up to the OF.

[Ric]

6 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said:

I tend to think with managers you're sometimes better gambling on a potential failure than a proven one, if ever St Mirren were going to roll the dice on a rookie it would be now when they have a strong squad safe from relegation, I guess.

Here's the thing, we absolutely do not need to gamble, for all the reasons you mention.

Gambling simply because you can, is stupid

 

[RandomGuy.]

5 minutes ago, Ric said:

Here's the thing, we absolutely do not need to gamble, for all the reasons you mention.

Gambling simply because you can, is stupid

 

Every managerial appointment is a gamble.