New signings, contracts.

[Guest birdog]

WTF?

Four new players in the squad, four six months deals. Even if we manage to wriggle out of relegation where the feck will we be at the start of next season?

We have already lost Black to a PCA and Cowie looks to be going the same way.

I can only think of a couple of reasons behind this, our DoF has no negotiating skills, we are totally skint or Brewster has been given until the end of the season and the DoF does not want a big bill when the new man takes over and has a clearout.

Whatever the reason we are going to have to spend a lot of money to get a squad together next season.

Edited January 14, 2009 by birdog

[Yngwie]

I would imagine that none of the new players would be keen on playing in Div 1, so didn't want to commit beyong the end of the season. Likewise, we shouldn't be committing to pay SPL wages for any longer than we are in the SPL.

Also, all 4 players were fairly risky signings with little proven SPL quality track record. Despite a promising start they could still turn out to be duds.

Edited January 14, 2009 by Yngwie

[RednBlackComeback]

Just posted something similar on another thread:

Correct me if I'm wrong but aren't all these signings just being given contracts till the end of the season?

Why is that? ....So the players can showcase themselves at ICT and then leave for another club in the summer?..... So the club doesn't have to renew their contracts for next season when ICT is in the 1st division? ....So that they can do a job for 6 months and keep ICT in the SPL, then leave for nothing thereby putting ICT back to square one, squad wise, for the beginning of the following season?......So they have 6 months to prove themselves worthy of an extended contract?....

hmmm

[Guest birdog]

I would imagine that none of the new players would be keen on playing in Div 1, so didn't want to commit beyong the end of the season. Likewise, we shouldn't be committing to pay SPL wages for any longer than we are in the SPL.

Also, all 4 players were fairly risky signings with little proven SPL quality track record. Despite a promising start they could still turn out to be duds.

Granted, but is it not a lot more risky to potentially leave us with a decimated squad next season?

EDIT to save over posting.

It would be nice to know if we have options to extend written into these guy's six month contracts.

Edited January 14, 2009 by birdog

[CaleyD]

Sure I saw something somewhere (certainly in reference to the boys that came from Hibs) that if they performed over the coming weeks then deals would be extended.

I don't necessarily agree with the path we've chosen, but as it's the one we're heading down then the short term deals do offer us the best "protection" if/when it comes to damage limitation further down the line. I also think that it shows signs that the Board aren't necessarily as confident in Brewster's ability to turn things around and avoid relegation as they might have been saying.

[Yngwie]

is it not a lot more risky to potentially leave us with a decimated squad next season?

At this moment in time, avoiding relegation and then having to rebuild in the summer seems a perfectly acceptable scenario to me!

[KingBeastie]

If we were relegated and had all of these players on long terms SPL contracts we'd be even more up sheet creek.

It was a wise move by the board when you weigh up all the pros and cons IMO.

[Alex MacLeod]

According to one newspaper and a website the Latvian is on loan. Byrne is a short term fix who could break down anytime. The two Hibee's are being given time to prove their worth. Sounds like very good business to me. Try before you buy.

[Guest birdog]

is it not a lot more risky to potentially leave us with a decimated squad next season?

At this moment in time, avoiding relegation and then having to rebuild in the summer seems a perfectly acceptable scenario to me!

According to one newspaper and a website the Latvian is on loan. Byrne is a short term fix who could break down anytime. The two Hibee's are being given time to prove their worth. Sounds like very good business to me. Try before you buy.

Very good points. I guess the pessimist inside me can see us getting into a cycle of short term deals and renewing the team every six months but as said if it keeps us in the SPL then it will be worth the frustration.

[Guest Murdock]

Try before you buy is all well and good but then you could have the scenario that these guys have a fantastic few weeks, we decide to extend but they have now come to the attention of other, richer, clubs who sign them on a pre-contract agreement before we get pen to paper.

I can see the arguments for saving money if we go down, however, looking at the quality of the first division do you believe we could shed that many players and still compete? If we go down (as much as I would like to deny it could happen it looks like a possibility, especially with Brew at the helm) we need as good a squad as we would in the SPL or we have nae chance of getting back up.

[Alex MacLeod]

Try before you buy is all well and good but then you could have the scenario that these guys have a fantastic few weeks, we decide to extend but they have now come to the attention of other, richer, clubs who sign them on a pre-contract agreement before we get pen to paper.

I can see the arguments for saving money if we go down, however, looking at the quality of the first division do you believe we could shed that many players and still compete? If we go down (as much as I would like to deny it could happen it looks like a possibility, especially with Brew at the helm) we need as good a squad as we would in the SPL or we have nae chance of getting back up.

Lets put it another way. We chase a player and sign him for three years. He turns out not to be what was expected. We're stuck with him unless he agree's by 'mutual consent'.

[ICTJackson]

Edited January 14, 2009 by ICTJackson

[AJS]

I don't rate Bennett very highly at all when it comes to negotiating deals for our own players. He is just not at a standard for this in the SPL.

But i disagree with those saying the new signings are bad buisness. I heard the same as CaleyD hearing that if Morais and Gathuessi impress they would have their deals extended which to me is fair enough. Byrnes a hit and a miss with his track record so if he impresses and stays fit im sure he will be staying and with Mihadjuks let's just watch with intrest there....

I really think that this is great buisness in the market with still another few weeks to go.

[Kingsmills]

.All four signings have something to prove. In the circumstances I don't think that we should be too critical of the club adopting a safe approach.

Edited January 14, 2009 by Kingsmills

[Guest Muir-Jaggie]

[/qutoe]

Lets put it another way. We chase a player and sign him for three years. He turns out not to be what was expected. We're stuck with him unless he agree's by 'mutual consent'.

[stevico1]

I think that in this instance the club have got it spot on, all the signings are a major gamble and with the likes of Byrne and the Hibs duo they didnt exactly set the heather on fire at their last club, thats not to say they cant be a big success at ICT but lets have a good look at them before tying them down to long contracts, and even if a month or so down the line and they are looking the part the club could then go back to them then with longer term deals.

[Guest birdog]

What is the story? Morias and Gathuessi are reported as having signed non-loan contracts with ICT yet there are still conflicting stories over the interweb here

Is this a misunderstanding or the club misinforming the fans? Have I read things wrong? Did we only sign Morias and Byrne on short term deals and Gathuessi and Pavels on loans? Where the feck is the substantial investment?

AAARRRGGGHHHH my head hurts and where we might just do enough to survive this season next season is going to be more of the same, twitchy erseholes hating the management and watching dross.

[Alex MacLeod]

As, it appears, we are only allowed to sign one loan player over 21, and all those are over 21 then only one can be on loan. I read that the Latvian was.

birdog, your head hurts from the effects of too much shelter in Lerwick.

[CaleyD]

Even with all these guys coming in on short term deals our wage bill looks like it's going to be through the roof for the next few months.

[Kingsmills]

Even with all these guys coming in on short term deals our wage bill looks like it's going to be through the roof for the next few months.

That's what I was thinking but I suppose the resultant loss will be nothing compared to that caused by relegation.

[Guest birdog]

As, it appears, we are only allowed to sign one loan player over 21, and all those are over 21 then only one can be on loan. I read that the Latvian was.

birdog, your head hurts from the effects of too much shelter liquor in Lerwick.

Fixed it for you Alex. We were not at shelter though, I have left the supply boat game and am working for Northlink ferries atm, no sailings through the festive period and a free bar from the company for the three days. You may well be correct.