Richard Wilson - 'Miles to go' but McCoist confident of moving on

[craig 5,199]

Thankfully the players he is looking to move on are exactly the ones we as fans would also wish he moves on - so we are seeing similar failings in those players.

 

Also to remember is that last year we had a scatter-gun approach for very obvious reasons. And the results were seen, and remain to be seen given some of the dead-wood is still here. Not much he could do when he had 6 players show up to pre-season training. It was an exercise in "needs must".

 

However.... this pre-season, look at the signings. There are none that I have seen where you would be saying "Oh No, please dont play him".

 

Bell - very decent keeper who will to a fine job for us. Not too many doubting - hasnt played enough to be proven

Law - I think his performances have spoken for themselves. Proving very handy already and providing goals from midfield

Daly - Proving an excellent signing already. More mobile than expected, holding the ball up very well and bringing others into the game well. Off the amrk with a couple of goals which could open the floodgates. Signs very encouraging.

Mohsni - Probably THE shining light in pre-season. Obviously havent seen him recently but undoubtedly will be one of the two CB's in most games, injuries and suspension willing. Looks a real find.

Clark - has looked very decent in pre-season and may get a couple of starts with Daly ineligible now till Sept 1st. I suspect more one for the future but a decent signing who will more than likely score goals for us.

Peralta - Looks like the ball-winning midfielder many of us wanted to see at the club. Can take an excellent free kick as we have seen. Looks like he has the box-to-box engine we have wanted to see too.

Smith - Back up to Wallace for the most part probably. Someone we know, decent enough and more than sufficient for the climb back up the leagues. Wages probably not too high either, so more plusses than minuses with this signing for me.

Foster - Read as per Smith, save for the "back up to Wallace" comment. I would like to think he will end up being back up to McAusland (who has played well at RB) or even Mitchell. But again, a decent squad filler and we dont have any true RB's (with Argyriou surplus to requirements) with McAusland, Hegarty and Mitchell all preferring positions other than RB but happy to play wherever they get game time.

 

All in all, from what we have seen of the new signings, I think that Ally has carried out some very astute business in the transfer market and, at this point, should be commended for the players he has sourced on free transfers. Personally, it looks like night and day when he is given the chance to have proper preparation to make signings vs a scatter-gun "we need bodies" approach.

 

Also, we are seeing the benefits of Henry's strength and conditioning regime too - and he could very well prove to be one of, if not THE, best signings this summer.

 

But we ARE playing better stuff, we DO look fitter and we do look more like a cohesive unit. And Ally should get much of the credit for that, especially with the abuse he suffered last year for the failings.

[craig 5,199]

The squad size of 30+ is artificially inflated, as calscot says, by the inclusion of ALL of our youth players who MAY be called upon to play.

 

Right now we are using MacLeod, McAusland, Hegarty, Mitchell, Aird, McKay etc - but even in times gone by when we used youngsters were they truly considered 1st teamers ? Of the ones mentioned only MacLeod right now would truly be considered a 1st teamer - with McAusland being one on the cusp of the 1st team - in comparison to how we would consider youths of bygone years.

 

I am not saying that they shouldnt be considered as 1st teamers... but would you really want to have to rely on all of those youngsters at the same time ? Or would you prefer a 1st team squad of, say, 20 plus the youngsters being called upon when needed or when their efforts merit it ?

 

I dont think we have a "true" 1st team squad of 30+ players - it is just that everyone seems to be listed as such because we might NEED to use them all !

[BrahimHemdani 1]

• he is within the smallest budget to turnover in living memory.

• 
  

• You already seem to be prejudging the situation by using words like "bloated" in a factual sense.

• 
  

• I agree we need to make less mistakes and less payouts

• 
  

• Players are not robots and so come with no guarantee.

• 
  

• I think he should be given a realistic budget that is in keeping with good practice for its proportion to the turnover.

 

Some excellent points.

[BrahimHemdani 1]

Ally should get much of the credit for that (signings), especially with the abuse he suffered last year for the failings.

 

I agree with that especially after having met him one day in June when he had a clutch of players detail sheets in his hand and told me that he needed: 2 CB's, a RB, a "wide player", and 1 "no two" strikers. Seems to me he has got most of that wish list and perhaps more (in the shape of Peralta) though personally I would question the point of Smith who is not a serious challenger to Wallace and may only get an occasional game in LMF to the exclusion of the likes of Aird.

 

However, McCoist's biggest failing in the eyes of most fans I speak to is his total lack of tactical awareness; now if he could address that somehow........

 

Edit: I should add that McCoist also said "but no one wants to come" (and perhaps we had to pay over the odds wages wise to get them); but it does add to the achievement that on the whole the signings look like a good bunch.

Edited August 27, 2013 by BrahimHemdani

[calscot 0]

I think McLeod is our Barry Ferguson of today.

 

I don't think Ally can really be blamed for the payoffs of Goian and Boca.

 

Of the players he signed last season - with a about week to do it, he still has some half decent ones: Black is now playing at his best (despite his work-life problems), Templeton is one that most think will come good when fit again, Shiels still could be a decent player when fit and in a better team, and Faure has fired the optimism in some.

 

Cribari and Argi aren't the biggest flops we've ever had and looked good on paper for the position we were in when looking for experienced players at a reasonable wage.

 

We've moved the rest on but it didn't seem all that difficult with the first two I mentioned being the biggest cheques.

[craig 5,199]

I was going to use the BF/MacLeod comparison but didnt want to go there. I agree though.

[craig 5,199]

I agree with that especially after having met him one day in June when he had a clutch of players detail sheets in his hand and told me that he needed: 2 CB's, a RB, a "wide player", and 1 "no two" strikers. Seems to me he has got most of that wish list and perhaps more (in the shape of Peralta) though personally I would question the point of Smith who is not a serious challenger to Wallace and may only get an occasional game in LMF to the exclusion of the likes of Aird.

 

However, McCoist's biggest failing in the eyes of most fans I speak to is his total lack of tactical awareness; now if he could address that somehow........

 

 

Wouldnt disagree with much of that aside from the Smith signing. I agree he wont be a serious challenger to Wallace but two things spring to mind there.... 1) who would be, given the ability Wallace has and 2) we have no natural under-study to Wallace, we are having to shoe-horn someone into LB who is uncomfortable there when Wallace is (infrequently) unavailable. So I can see why Smith was brought in. Occasional LM player and understudy to the LB to give us 2 natural LB's in the squad.

Edited August 27, 2013 by craig
disagree/agree...

[BrahimHemdani 1]

Wouldnt agree with much of that aside from the Smith signing. I agree he wont be a serious challenger to Wallace but two things spring to mind there.... 1) who would be, given the ability Wallace has and 2) we have no natural under-study to Wallace, we are having to shoe-horn someone into LB who is uncomfortable there when Wallace is (infrequently) unavailable. So I can see why Smith was brought in. Occasional LM player and understudy to the LB to give us 2 natural LB's in the squad.

 

Did you mean wouldn't disagree with much of that , by any chance?

[craig 5,199]

Did you mean wouldn't disagree with much of that , by any chance?

 

aye, sorry BH !!

[calscot 0]

I was going to use the BF/MacLeod comparison but didnt want to go there. I agree though.

 

Yeah, only in the sense that he's our best teenager by miles and deserves a regular starting slot at the tender age of 18. No other comparison meant...

 

The good thing is that we have 16 academy players, all of whom have played and 8 of which have played more than 25 times. A bit unprecedented for us. However, they do make up 50% of the "squad".