Thought I'd start a transfer thread in its own right for the up coming season. 

Any new players coming in can be listed here along with our thoughts on how they will fit in

 

2 minutes ago, bdu98196 said:

I think for around 2000 of us winning the SC was an anti-climax the real stand out was the results and drama of being at the semi. In many ways we were expected to win the final and made hard work of it in a relatively forgettable game

Whilst the standard of football wasn't the best, that game was definitely not forgettable. I will remember that game and the whole day for as long as I live.

15 minutes ago, Kingsmills said:

Whilst the standard of football wasn't the best, that game was definitely not forgettable. I will remember that game and the whole day for as long as I live.

Absolutely agree.

The banter pre match was superb. I believe the following photo should be captioned #SquadGoals

2 hours ago, RiG said:

I don't see how Cameron is to blame for Hughes and Foran spunking the clubs cash on utter jobbers. Per the list ICTChris posted the other day we've barely made a good signing in something like two years. The quality in the squad dropped dramatically under our last two managers.

That said I do (partly) blame Cameron for our relegation for not binning Foran earlier but overall I think he did a good job.

Sorry RIG but he had the power to say NO and if he had any football knowledge he would have done so. I honestly get the feeling that Foran took advantage of him. I think Hughes saw through him.

32 minutes ago, caleyboy said:

Sorry RIG but he had the power to say NO and if he had any football knowledge he would have done so. I honestly get the feeling that Foran took advantage of him. I think Hughes saw through him.

The power to say no to what exactly? The managers signing targets? I think we'd all be a little concerned if the chairman of the club was involving himself in our transfer dealings and making decisions above the manager as to who was coming in or going out.

I've got to agree with RIG there. The final decision on signing players has to lie with the manager. Especially considering that he'd be the one to assess what he needs and if those being looked at are suitable. If the chairman doesn't trust the managers judgement then you'd have to wonder how the manager got the job. If the manager asks for a player to be signed and the club can afford it they have to go with it. If not its a relationship that won't work.

However If I remember correctly that when Hughes was signing utter nonsense like Lopez and complaining that he didn't have the resources to sign an adequate goalscorer, it was in fact Cameron who located Miles Storey. Not Hughes. In hindsight it's worrying that one of the most successful signings during his tenure was done by the chairman.

3 hours ago, ictchris said:

I don't recall many people criticising the contracts offered to Draper, Raven etc.  If anything fans clamoured for it.

Interestingly, we've signed Trafford on a three year deal and paid a transfer fee for him, although considering the length of contract it's probably minimal.  

I'm baffled how we're able to offer 3 year deals in the championship. Most teams generally stick to 2 years, as a) it presents less risk, you don't want to be stuck with a dud for 2 years or pay a contract up to release them. No budget room. and b) it motivates the player to earn a new deal. Contract extension clauses can always be added if they prove successful.

When Butcher was signing players most were brought in on 1 year deals initially. We didn't actually lose many of them at this instance. It was usually at the end of their 2nd deal.

The longer term deal that Draper got has earned us 100k. So that's a positive. As for Raven, if his wages are an issue, and he's still capable of delivering on the pitch why not offer to swap his remaining 6 month contract with a 12 month deal on lower wages and appearance money? As someone settled in the area having a years contract, despite earning less, might be favourable.

Surely the manager and Board work in tandem over contracts.  Whilst the Board should not interfere over choice of player, they will set the budget which the manager has to work within.  There is a grey area in between regarding the roles of different people in the actual contract negotiations.  Bottom line in this is that the person leading the negotiations needs to be clear about the strategy regarding length of contract and the implications of paying a high price for a player the manager particularly wants to (re-)sign.  For instance, if the Board say that there is enough budget for £4k a week in wages, there has to be clarity on whether the manager thinks the one player is so crucial to plans that all the money goes on him ,or do we, say,  limit it to £2k with £1k each for 2 other players? Responsibility for unaffordable contracts is therefore a joint one.

My take on our current situation is that after the cup win and gaining a European spot, the Board in general and Cameron in particular were conned into thinking that Hughes was a decent manager and that he would further consolidate our top flight status thereby boosting revenues.  As a result, they gave into his demands for additional funding which was then spent either on poor players or on inappropriately generous new contracts for existing players.  Meanwhile, gate revenues slumped as fans stayed away in response to the mind numbingly boring dross Hughes was delivering on the pitch.  Cameron also had too much faith in Foran and gave him a decent budget too in an attempt to keep us in the top flight.  Nice guy that he is, sadly Foran was not up to dealing with the mess that Hughes had left.  If only Cameron had let Hughes talk to Dundee Utd when they came knocking things might be very different now.

A 3 year deal for Trafford might sound, on the face of it, that the club still has not learned from past mistakes.  But it very much depends on the size of the deal.  If we are paying him a relatively modest, affordable wage, then if the lad develops we either get the opportunity to make something on the transfer market or we have 3 years of a player playing above the level he is being paid.  Bottom line here is that for a club with resources as tight as ours  and as uncertain as ours (we could be relegated again) long term contracts should only be given if they are at a wage level which the club will be able to afford if revenue takes a further significant dip.  If we can get promising players in on that basis, then great.

The deal for Trafford is a 2 year deal with a year option. 

3 hours ago, RiG said:

The power to say no to what exactly? The managers signing targets? I think we'd all be a little concerned if the chairman of the club was involving himself in our transfer dealings and making decisions above the manager as to who was coming in or going out.

So are you saying the manager agrees the contract terms with the player i.e. wages etc.? That being the case we would have been bust years ago. The manager MUST get agreement from whoever's role that is on the Board - and that was Cameron. Believe me, very few if any managers would have the business knowledge to run a football club.If that concerns you then so be it.  

Edited August 17, 20177 yr by caleyboy

6 minutes ago, caleyboy said:

So are you saying the manager agrees the contract terms with the player i.e. wages etc.? That being the case we would have been bust years ago. The manager MUST get agreement from whoever's role that is on the Board - and that was Cameron. Believe me, very few if any managers would have the business knowledge to run a football club.If that concerns you then so be it.  

Maybe a good point and the reason why people such as Charlie Christie shouldn't be allowed anywhere near running the club.

Although it could be argued that he didn't really hack it as a manager, then again the dwindling lotto hints that that's maybe beyond him as well!

23 minutes ago, caleyboy said:

So are you saying the manager agrees the contract terms with the player i.e. wages etc.? That being the case we would have been bust years ago. The manager MUST get agreement from whoever's role that is on the Board - and that was Cameron. Believe me, very few if any managers would have the business knowledge to run a football club.If that concerns you then so be it.  

Obviously that's not what I'm saying. The manager will be set a budget by the Chairman and then he is largely free to do with that what he wishes. Hughes, Foran etc. will have been given £X for signings/wages etc and then it's up to them to use that money as they saw fit. Why would Cameron get involved and say no to signing whoever it was Hughes or Foran wanted in. That would surely indicate he didn't trust them and I can't imagine either would have liked that.

In the case of those two managers it is hard to argue, with hindsight, that the vast majority of signings that made was money spent wisely. I'm obviously not saying that our managers had free reign to offer whatever they wanted to players. If some utterly ludicrous offer is put forward by the manager then someone like Cameron might say hold on a minute and query whether signing player X on daft cash per week is a good move but by and large the managers at ICT have generally worked with little interference from the Chairman.

Again, what exactly is it you are wanting Cameron to be saying no to? If you are saying that he should have stepped in to veto some of the signings that were made then that would led to outcry amongst supporters that the Chairman is dictating who should or shouldn't be signed and essentially undermine the manager which is not something I think should happen and I don't think that would sit well with fans of ICT.

9 minutes ago, RiG said:

Obviously that's not what I'm saying. The manager will be set a budget by the Chairman and then he is largely free to do with that what he wishes. Hughes, Foran etc. will have been given £X for signings/wages etc and then it's up to them to use that money as they saw fit. Why would Cameron get involved and say no to signing whoever it was Hughes or Foran wanted in. That would surely indicate he didn't trust them and I can't imagine either would have liked that.

In the case of those two managers it is hard to argue, with hindsight, that the vast majority of signings that made was money spent wisely. I'm obviously not saying that our managers had free reign to offer whatever they wanted to players. If some utterly ludicrous offer is put forward by the manager then someone like Cameron might say hold on a minute and query whether signing player X on daft cash per week is a good move but by and large the managers at ICT have generally worked with little interference from the Chairman.

Again, what exactly is it you are wanting Cameron to be saying no to? If you are saying that he should have stepped in to veto some of the signings that were made then that would led to outcry amongst supporters that the Chairman is dictating who should or shouldn't be signed and essentially undermine the manager which is not something I think should happen and I don't think that would sit well with fans of ICT.

I'm not going to get drawn into an argument with you so let's just agree to disagree.

33 minutes ago, Shorty said:

Maybe a good point and the reason why people such as Charlie Christie shouldn't be allowed anywhere near running the club.

Although it could be argued that he didn't really hack it as a manager, then again the dwindling lotto hints that that's maybe beyond him as well!

I think you would find CC to be quite articulate. I don't know if he could do a DoF or a COO job because he hasn't been in either of those positions. Danny Macdonald has been given the chance to show if he can perform the COO task so we will see how he gets on.

1 hour ago, caleyboy said:

So are you saying the manager agrees the contract terms with the player i.e. wages etc.? That being the case we would have been bust years ago. The manager MUST get agreement from whoever's role that is on the Board - and that was Cameron. Believe me, very few if any managers would have the business knowledge to run a football club.If that concerns you then so be it.  

Obviously the chairman/board sets the budgets but it's the manager that identifies the players who they can get for that budget. And whilst the chairman might block a signing because of financial reasons "sorry we can't afford him" it's clearly undermining a manager if they are having a say on signing the player due to quality. "NAH sorry boss he's guff."

Generally the money men will trust the managers/coaches/head of recruitments judgement regarding the player and then try to ensure the contract falls into the budget. They might go back and say he wants "x" to which they all might come to agreement he's not worth that percentage of the player budget.

2 hours ago, Council Juice said:

Obviously the chairman/board sets the budgets but it's the manager that identifies the players who they can get for that budget. And whilst the chairman might block a signing because of financial reasons "sorry we can't afford him" it's clearly undermining a manager if they are having a say on signing the player due to quality. "NAH sorry boss he's guff."

Generally the money men will trust the managers/coaches/head of recruitments judgement regarding the player and then try to ensure the contract falls into the budget. They might go back and say he wants "x" to which they all might come to agreement he's not worth that percentage of the player budget.

I understand where you are coming from. From what is being said 're our finances, somebody has overspent somewhere cos we needed massive soft loans to pay wages! Does nobody see why? OBTW  the chief exec and chairman was Mr Kenny Cameron.

Edited August 17, 20177 yr by caleyboy

4 minutes ago, caleyboy said:

I understand where you are coming from. From what is being said 're our finances, somebody has overspent somewhere cos we needed massive soft loans to pay wages! Does nobody see why? OBTW  the chief exec and chairman was Mr Kenny Cameron.

Theyve overspent because we didnt budget for relegation! 

2 minutes ago, old caley girl said:

Theyve overspent because we didnt budget for relegation! 

Budgeting for relegation should always be part of the calculation. I don't  believe Mr Cameron was on top of our spending as can be evidenced by him giving Foran a 4 year deal on, what is believed to be at least the same money as his playing contract.

Just now, caleyboy said:

Budgeting for relegation should always be part of the calculation. I don't  believe Mr Cameron was on top of our spending as can be evidenced by him giving Foran a 4 year deal on, what is believed to be at least the same money as his playing contract.

I doubt many clubs actually budget for relegation. Dont think club can win here as had purse strings been tightened we the fans would have accused them of no ambition. 

I dont know details of Forans wages but if I had been promoted at work Id not take less money. It also appears to have been a rolling contract as we got rid of him before 4 years? 

You seem remarkably well informed on the subject??? 

We've apparently signed Coll Donaldson.

not promising tbh. Maybe a new start is what he needs, let's hope so,

6 minutes ago, ictchris said:

We've apparently signed Coll Donaldson.

not promising tbh. Maybe a new start is what he needs, let's hope so,

Can't be any worse than Elsdon. 

12 hours ago, old caley girl said:

I doubt many clubs actually budget for relegation. Dont think club can win here as had purse strings been tightened we the fans would have accused them of no ambition. 

I dont know details of Forans wages but if I had been promoted at work Id not take less money. It also appears to have been a rolling contract as we got rid of him before 4 years? 

You seem remarkably well informed on the subject??? 

Surely any competent business prepare  budgets on best(top 6) and worst (relegation) case scenarios. This was obviously not done. If it was and Cameron kept to the set budgets we would not be in this positnion. He cannot be defended for his role in this situation.

 

Edited August 18, 20177 yr by caleyboy

Caleyboy, you claim to be party to very specific information. Did the club tell you officially that they might struggle to honour your wages or is it just unsubstantiated gossip?

11 hours ago, ictchris said:

We've apparently signed Coll Donaldson.

not promising tbh. Maybe a new start is what he needs, let's hope so,

Still no sign of any of our young homegrown players making the breakthrough any time soon then. 

12 hours ago, Caman said:

Can't be any worse than Elsdon. 

But probably a lot worse than jason brown .....

And as fer the yoof - who is ready ?

59 minutes ago, Shorty said:

Caleyboy, you claim to be party to very specific information. Did the club tell you officially that they might struggle to honour your wages or is it just unsubstantiated gossip?

I am not making any claims, just stating information which is readily available