Any Juicy Rumours? Who Are We Hoping To Bring In?

[Lambies Lost Doo]

Yay pre-contract. Great things!

 

Think this is the first time we've had a pre-contract in our favour.

[Lenziejag]

Does this make it more likely that Bannigan will be away this transfer window ?

[ClydebankJag]

 

 

I don't know. That is why I asked. It is maybe just my perception that he has had a few lengthy absences in the past two and a half years.

 

According to this link he had 2 lengthy spells out with unconnected injuries and his absences were over 2 years apart. In my opinion that doesn't equate to being injury prone, which was your original question. I tend to think that players who are missing a game every month with a 'knock' are injury prone, kinda like Dan Seabourne before his current run in the team.

 

http://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/chris-erskine/verletzungen/spieler/117966

[JAGSMAN1968]

According to Arabs Facebook - he's signed a pre contract with us!!!!!!!

Coming home in summer!!!

[Mr Bunny]

Contracts are not something the board and management can sort out unilaterally. It takes two to tango and when the other party does not want to sign (perhaps on advice whether good or bad) and prefers to run the deal down, there is not much the club can do.

 

I don't think Bannigan is a good example (or bad example) of problems developing young players. We have had several good years out of him and he has been an excellent player for us. It would have cost us money to have found as good a player. He has stuck with us since he was 16 and is now 23. He has now developed into a fully mature players and person and we can have no problem with him deciding to leave. We may get no money for him but no one can doubt he has made a big contribution to the team.

 

As for future youngsters. A lot will depend on agents. Many want to push kids out for a move quickly (so they can get their slice of the deal) but if young kids see Bannigan, Hendry and possibly soon Lindsay getting good transfers then they will be attracted to sign up for our youth teams. It will also hopefuly encourage kids to stick with us for a few years if they see that transfers to good clubs can arise out of staying with the club and not shooting off at the first opportunity.

[BowenBoys]

Good post Mr B

[allyo]

The alternative to players running out their contracts is selling players still under contract. We could have done that with Bannigan last summer (or today). Does anyone want that?

[Lindau]

Nobody, but nobody can begrudge Banzo a move. He has given us sterling service and always gives the impression that he has a real love for the club. I think we would all hope that he goes down South, but if he ends up at Pittodrie, I will learn to live with it. Wonder if Jack Hendry is regretting moving south so soon, especially seeing how well Liam is doing in the first team. Given his lack of experience it would probably have benefitted him staying at Firhill for a few years! He won't be regretting it money wise though!

[jlsarmy]

The alternative to players running out their contracts is selling players still under contract. We could have done that with Bannigan last summer (or today). Does anyone want that?

Unfortunately as a club , you've got to weigh that up for the benefit of the club overall. Nobody wants players like Banzo , Higgy etc to leave for nothing but big decisions have to be made to justify the coaching and development of players. It's no different at a higher level than Celtic letting Wanyama , Van dyjk , Forster leaving , they weren't allowed to run down their contracts and Celtic got good money back for them.

Two players from provincial clubs maybe on a par with ourselves St Johnstone and Hamilton Accies are asking 300/500k for O'hallorran and Ali Crawford. , not sure either of them have Bannigans ability.

IMO every club in Scotland has to be a selling club to justify the investment in the Academy / Coaching Staff , if we don't have that template all we're doing is developing players for other clubs with absolutely no recompense and then the Academy becomes unsustainable.

[ThickAsThieves]

I wonder if we should be cuter with when our contracts run out for youngsters. So, never having someone's final year being when they turn 23. If their contract expires when they're 22, we should offer a two-year contract. As far as I'm aware, we'd have all the power there. Because if someone else was to go for him at 22 we'd be entitled to a fee because we offered him a contract. And if he signs the contract then we have two years to either sell him, or get two years out of him when ordinarily we'd get just the one.

 

Not sure if that's morally the right thing to do but from a business point of view it's surely the best idea. If I've got the rules correct.

[lady-isobel-barnett]

Unfortunately as a club , you've got to weigh that up for the benefit of the club overall. Nobody wants players like Banzo , Higgy etc to leave for nothing but big decisions have to be made to justify the coaching and development of players. It's no different at a higher level than Celtic letting Wanyama , Van dyjk , Forster leaving , they weren't allowed to run down their contracts and Celtic got good money back for them.

Two players from provincial clubs maybe on a par with ourselves St Johnstone and Hamilton Accies are asking 300/500k for O'hallorran and Ali Crawford. , not sure either of them have Bannigans ability.

IMO every club in Scotland has to be a selling club to justify the investment in the Academy / Coaching Staff , if we don't have that template all we're doing is developing players for other clubs with absolutely no recompense and then the Academy becomes unsustainable.

 

I think you make valid points in above and previous post. Still think in practice it would've been very difficult for us to emulate the Accies/St Johnstone model. To finance that we'd have had to sell players within contract. Most likely the players in question would've had to have been wanted by more than one club to drive up the selling price.

I certainly believe it is the route we should be, and hopefully are, taking. It stands to reason the only way we can compete at the top over a sustained period is to home produce young players and when needs be, sell them on within contract. We don't have the crowds and revenue streams to do anything else.

Edited January 16, 2016 by lady-isobel-barnett

[Dick Dastardly]

I wonder if we should be cuter with when our contracts run out for youngsters. So, never having someone's final year being when they turn 23. If their contract expires when they're 22, we should offer a two-year contract. As far as I'm aware, we'd have all the power there. Because if someone else was to go for him at 22 we'd be entitled to a fee because we offered him a contract. And if he signs the contract then we have two years to either sell him, or get two years out of him when ordinarily we'd get just the one.

 

Not sure if that's morally the right thing to do but from a business point of view it's surely the best idea. If I've got the rules correct.

 

I think that they can still not sign the new contract and let it run down without a club to move to, then sign on to a new club as a free agent. Admittedly, that would be brave for a young player to do this and it would prevent another club signing a pre-contract, so it does have merit.

[ian_mac]

Can't believe you are using Celtic as an example of players "not being allowed to run down their contracts"

 

Ask any Celtic fan what they think of that policy and you will find very few favourable answers.

 

Their balance sheet may look good but their team certainly doesn't.

 

Our first priority should be the team on the park, not the balance at the bank. Celtic's problem is that they have prioritised the latter at the expense of the former. Look at how they've fared in Europe for the past 2 years.

 

As I said, very poor example to use to strengthen the argument. I would much rather have the services of a good player for an extra year and lose him for nothing, than panic sell him for a few grand a year earlier.

[oneteaminglasgow]

Unfortunately as a club , you've got to weigh that up for the benefit of the club overall. Nobody wants players like Banzo , Higgy etc to leave for nothing but big decisions have to be made to justify the coaching and development of players. It's no different at a higher level than Celtic letting Wanyama , Van dyjk , Forster leaving , they weren't allowed to run down their contracts and Celtic got good money back for them.

Two players from provincial clubs maybe on a par with ourselves St Johnstone and Hamilton Accies are asking 300/500k for O'hallorran and Ali Crawford. , not sure either of them have Bannigans ability.

IMO every club in Scotland has to be a selling club to justify the investment in the Academy / Coaching Staff , if we don't have that template all we're doing is developing players for other clubs with absolutely no recompense and then the Academy becomes unsustainable.

 

I'd argue that the fact that Bannigan has consistently been one of the most important players for Thistle over the last 5 years during which time we've gone from being a pretty crap 2nd tier side to winning that division, getting promoted and looking like we belong here and could be a mainstay in the top flight is recompense enough for his development.

 

As ian_mac says, I'd be wary of following the Celtic model too closely. Their team on the park has struggled and I doubt the money made from selling these players would cover the losses from not making the champions league group stage, which they would have found easier if they hadn't sold.

 

Oh and Crawford & O'Halloran are both excellent players, but also both attacking players. Attacking players, for whatever reason, are always able to command a bigger fee than more defensive players of similar ability. And they both have longer on their contracts (I think).

[Dick Dastardly]

I would also say that we have already had 2 more years out of Banzo than I expected. I was surprised (and delighted) that he signed on for a further 2 years when he almost certainly had other offers then. As said above, we have had good value from Banzo and he owes us nothing.

[ThickAsThieves]

I think that they can still not sign the new contract and let it run down without a club to move to, then sign on to a new club as a free agent. Admittedly, that would be brave for a young player to do this and it would prevent another club signing a pre-contract, so it does have merit.

My recollection, backed up by an admittedly old case involving Jonathan Tiffoney at Ayr United, is that if you offer someone under 23 a contract then even if they reject the contract, you're entitled to compensation up until they turn 23.

 

Tiffoney turned down a contract at 21 and left Ayr United at the end of his current deal. However, because they had offered him new terms, he couldn't sign with anyone until he turned 23 - unless they paid a development fee. He ended up signing with Alloa on amateur terms as a way around it, but it was far from ideal.

 

Again, it's probably the wrong thing to do morally...

 

The rules may have been tweaked since then too.

Edited January 18, 2016 by ThickAsThieves

[King Kenny]

Sun newspaper on twitter stating Doolan has signed a new deal until 2019.

[Woodstock Jag]

 

My recollection, backed up by an admittedly old case involving Jonathan Tiffoney at Ayr United, is that if you offer someone under 23 a contract then even if they reject the contract, you're entitled to compensation up until they turn 23.

 

Tiffoney turned down a contract at 21 and left Ayr United at the end of his current deal. However, because they had offered him new terms, he couldn't sign with anyone until he turned 23 - unless they paid a development fee. He ended up signing with Alloa on amateur terms as a way around it, but it was far from ideal.

 

Again, it's probably the wrong thing to do morally...

 

The rules may have been tweaked since then too.

 

You have to offer a contract on at least as good terms as their current one to be entitled to development compensation in the event they reject it and agree terms with another club instead.

[jlsarmy]

 

 

I'd argue that the fact that Bannigan has consistently been one of the most important players for Thistle over the last 5 years during which time we've gone from being a pretty crap 2nd tier side to winning that division, getting promoted and looking like we belong here and could be a mainstay in the top flight is recompense enough for his development.

 

As ian_mac says, I'd be wary of following the Celtic model too closely. Their team on the park has struggled and I doubt the money made from selling these players would cover the losses from not making the champions league group stage, which they would have found easier if they hadn't sold.

 

Oh and Crawford & O'Halloran are both excellent players, but also both attacking players. Attacking players, for whatever reason, are always able to command a bigger fee than more defensive players of similar ability. And they both have longer on their contracts (I think).

Not really wanting to get defensive , the only parallel I was trying to make was we should be trying to get recompensed for developing a player whether it was Banzo or any other player . You can certainly make a case for the service Banzo has given us but it was actually the club who gave Banzo , O'donnell etc a chance when they were released from Celtic and Aberdeen respectively.

It should be a two way street , in terms of the fees that you mentioned for attacking players I think Stephen Hendrie a right back went to West Ham for a million quid .

Unfortunately to run an academy with the costs , coaches etc , IMO the philosophy has to change , don't think we can rely on benefactors for ever .

 

[oneteaminglasgow]

Not really wanting to get defensive , the only parallel I was trying to make was we should be trying to get recompensed for developing a player whether it was Banzo or any other player . You can certainly make a case for the service Banzo has given us but it was actually the club who gave Banzo , O'donnell etc a chance when they were released from Celtic and Aberdeen respectively.

It should be a two way street , in terms of the fees that you mentioned for attacking players I think Stephen Hendrie a right back went to West Ham for a million quid .

Unfortunately to run an academy with the costs , coaches etc , IMO the philosophy has to change , don't think we can rely on benefactors for ever .

 

And as I've said, there's a good argument that their service on the pitch and helping to establish the club where they are is recompense enough. It takes time and a lot of careful planning to get to the position that Hamilton are in, and frankly we can't hope to be there in the couple of years that we've had a proper youth system in place. Our best chance of getting there is to continue to give young players a chance in the team, hoping that the best can make a big move, and over time young prospects will begin to see that Thistle is a place where you'll get a chance to shine and we'll begin to reap the benefits.

 

I personally feel that Hendrie was able to command such a price because he was younger than any of the other players mentioned, more highly rated than any of the other players mentioned (whether correctly or not) and coming from a youth academy with a proven track record of producing English Premiership quality players.

 

The Weir's generosity will help us in the initial stage of developing the youth academy, but you're right that it can't last forever. What it does do, however, is give us a chance to develop our youth system without having to cut back on other areas of the club. Once its up and running, I'm confident we'll be able to have a self sufficient youth system. At present, the philosophy is, and should be, producing players for the Partick Thistle first team. Anything over and above that is a bonus.

[jlsarmy]

 

 

And as I've said, there's a good argument that their service on the pitch and helping to establish the club where they are is recompense enough. It takes time and a lot of careful planning to get to the position that Hamilton are in, and frankly we can't hope to be there in the couple of years that we've had a proper youth system in place. Our best chance of getting there is to continue to give young players a chance in the team, hoping that the best can make a big move, and over time young prospects will begin to see that Thistle is a place where you'll get a chance to shine and we'll begin to reap the benefits.

 

I personally feel that Hendrie was able to command such a price because he was younger than any of the other players mentioned, more highly rated than any of the other players mentioned (whether correctly or not) and coming from a youth academy with a proven track record of producing English Premiership quality players.

 

The Weir's generosity will help us in the initial stage of developing the youth academy, but you're right that it can't last forever. What it does do, however, is give us a chance to develop our youth system without having to cut back on other areas of the club. Once its up and running, I'm confident we'll be able to have a self sufficient youth system. At present, the philosophy is, and should be, producing players for the Partick Thistle first team. Anything over and above that is a bonus.

This thinking has been going on for years and years , there has been very few transfer fees paid to us over the years for good players , think I can think of about 3 ( Harkins , Twaddle and Jack Hendry ) before that it was Maurice Johnston in 1981.

You are right that the first thing you do is develop the young players and get them ready for the first team but the club has to get a return on the investment and coaching they've put in or it's not viable .

[oneteaminglasgow]

This thinking has been going on for years and years , there has been very few transfer fees paid to us over the years for good players , think I can think of about 3 ( Harkins , Twaddle and Jack Hendry ) before that it was Maurice Johnston in 1981.

You are right that the first thing you do is develop the young players and get them ready for the first team but the club has to get a return on the investment and coaching they've put in or it's not viable .

 

Aye, but we're about 2 years down the line of having a meaningful youth system. Give it time and I'm sure we'll see a decent monetary return on certain players. In any case, I'm not sure we've had a great deal of 'saleable assets' in recent years, hopefully that'll change with the youth system.

[lady-isobel-barnett]

but the club has to get a return on the investment and coaching they've put in or it's not viable .

 

...and as I read it at the time the initial Weir input was to cover set up costs and cash flow till we could get a return on the investment. Not wholly unlike founding a distillery and having to wait till the whisky matures before you could either drink it or sell it on. But you're right to the point that you can't wait forever to show a return on the investment/goodwill.

As for the years (decades even) of never being compensated for losing our better players I doubt anyone is proud of that fact. I was particularly miffed at the way our best players left after Lambie's last season. Archie, Toastie and Craigan should all have been on longer contracts. It was an insult to the likes of Archie and Craigan especially that the idea of short contracts would make them hungrier players thru insecurity. Folk always drum on about players not wanting to play under Collins, which was largely a red herring. If they didn't want to they could've asked for a transfer and at least we'd have got some dosh. Who knows we might never have seen Bonnes, Hinds and Eddie Forrest wearing a Jags top!

[ian_mac]

Stephen Craigan has stated many times that the only reason he didn't re-sign was because we only offered him a 1 year deal.

[lady-isobel-barnett]

Stephen Craigan has stated many times that the only reason he didn't re-sign was because we only offered him a 1 year deal.

 

A guy that went on to make nearly 300 top league appearances for ONE club. Arguably one of the biggest mistakes we made at a time when making big mistakes was routine. My point tho' was his contract like others should never have been allowed to run down in the first place.