Leaderboard

We have a veterans side. They play at Victoria Park.

disapointing! at 2-1 after johnys goal i thought we had a chance to get back in it but some poor clearences and giving the ball away to easily cost us in the end

Let's hope so he's p**h

I'm thinking back to our first game of the 1st division against the Pars, as as long as the team are as vocally supported as they were on that day I dont mind who it is or where.

The arguments against long term contracts can be summarised in one word: Barrowman.

Diadvantages :- Nothing set in stone---could lead to restless players as the season comes closer to an end. Aad instability. Performance may fall off--e.g. Adam Rooney's towards the end of our last season. Clearly he must have been thinking more of his future (club?) rather than concentrating on assisting ICT to do well towards the end. Planning for the future very difficult indeed for the Manager. Formerly , i.e. up to now, we have had local players who were settled, confident of their place, understood their options and salary expectations and loved to be at home in Inverness. All leading to a more settled existence and allowed them to do some planning for their future. Now, however, under our new scheme of things nothing is settled, instability is, and always will be for the foreseeable future, in the wind and we cannot rely on the attraction of being "at home" to have the slightest impact on the desire of younger, ambitious players to stay in Inverness--unless they REALLY like the City and environs of course. I agree that there are many unknown and different factors that could affect all of this but, personally, I feel that the strength of a new team will depend entirely on the way it gels and its related success(es) as the matches unfold under their feet. If injuries reduce the the team's effectiveness severely for any length of time then such a team comprised of newbies could falter and maybe flounder and founder. I short we could start with a very vulnerable team for the SPL. Just a thought!

Advantages of 1 Year Deals that immediately spring to mind..... - No long term financial commitment. - New players may not be as good as expected and can be offloaded easily. - Players with potential to play at higher level don't feel "tied in" and willing to give us a year. - Prevents complacency, players always playing for new contract...either with us or elsewhere. - Keeping the team "fresh" with new faces makes it tougher for teams to get a read on us as seasons go by. Had it been a manager like Brewster who was adopting this kind of policy then I would be really worried, but Butcher seems to have ample contacts for finding (free) players year on year and if he's happy and confident that he can whip a squad with a higher than usual turnover rate into shape every summer then it's a policy that could work....it's risky, but you learn/achieve nothing by standing still and doing the same thing time after time. I notice some of these contracts also seem to be offered with an "option" included, so it's just as conceivable that Butcher does want to give some longer deals but they don't want to commit to that. With the financial state of the game in Scotland as it is right now a prudent approach to spending and future spending commitment does make some sense. (I'd still be happier seeing more longer term contracts though)

I had hoped Charlie Bannerman would have pointed that out within the constraints of any embargo! What chance ICT at Dunfermline and Barrowman scoring the winner?

I'm delighted Gillet is staying (he's probably my favourite player!) but ANOTHER one year deal. At this rate we'll go through the same limbo every year.

I believe that side would see us relegated. We really need to strengthen up a few areas of that team as you say.

Due to the content of some of the offerings on here, I went to the Rumour Mill to check out the content of the Rossco thread thereon and HEY!! Maybe IHE could arrange to get Happy Pills to some of the 'fans' as it would appear that we have a lot of 'trouble at mill'! The source for all statements is probably as well founded as their Rossco offerings... their belief in our leader is so weak poor Terry is tried, found guilty and sentenced AND HE HAS NOT EVEN ISSUED ANY DETAILS OF HIS TARGETS YET!! To again quote Mr IHE ... Muppets!

This should be the nonsense threads now, I'm ******* sick of going to read an update to be met with this trype

This is where the manager comes in to his own. I would expect with those on 1 year deals that are showing promise, then we'd be talking to them sooner rather than later with a view to extending their stay. I would say, for the most part, players looking for new clubs/contracts would be more inclined to up their game. I also don't agree with the argument that Rooney somehow dipped in form towards the end of the season. It's the manager who's offering the shorter contracts, so I imagine he's ok with the challenge. Our own young players are all being offered 2 year contracts as far as I can see, so the 1 year thing doesn't really effect them. Sorry, but as much as I am a fan of ICT, I would expect any young player with ambition to be looking at ICT as nothing more than a stepping stone to bigger and better things, especially at the moment. Again, this is for the manager to "manage" and as he seems to be doing things his way...unlike in the past when there's always been a hint of interference from above...then you have to assume he's comfortable with it. Injuries etc can impact heavily on any team whether it's made up of long serving players or not, in fact we had a bit of that issue last season. What's more, it was the new/young guys who stepped into the breach and performed to ensure we didn't flounder and a couple of them performed so well they became mainstays in the matchday squad. It's not as if we are starting the season with a squad of 20+ strangers, nor are we likely to be doing so in the future. Our turnover of players will very likely increase and time will tell whether or not that's for the better or not. It feels like unfamiliar territory, but we've had closed seasons like this before where a number of new faces have come in. The difference this time is that it seems to be happening through choice instead of circumstance...and we have afar more experienced manager at the helm who is conducting proceedings. Some of the new players will move on to bigger and better things, some will need more development before moving on, some will find their level here and some won't make the grade. We seem to be cutting out the risk of being stuck with those that don't make the grade whilst remaining attractive to players with potential looking for a step up who don't want to be tied in anywhere. What we lose with 1 year deals is the chance to cash in on those who move on and up, but football is hardly a sellers market these days and big pay days for young players are few and far between so you have to manage the risk v reward. We seem to be betting on our own young guys in that regard (which makes sense as those are the players we know best) and giving them the 2 year deals, and that's a good thing. One dud on the books for a year longer than we want them there could easily wipe out any fee we might get for selling on one other player and given the ratio of players released to players sold and the fees being commanded just now, then those are not good odds. I'd love for us to be giving players 2 or 3 year deals, but right now, I don't think we can afford to do that and Butcher looks to be thinking outside the normal parameters expected from ICT to overcome that. It could be argued that he's simply being more realistic by not chasing the elusive "big sale" that this club has been chasing for 17 years without success.