Jump to content

John Mcginn


davidg
 Share

Recommended Posts


NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!

I suppose we shouldn't be surprised that clubs will be swooping in, but I had hoped we could hang onto him for another year.

Fingers crossed there isn't any substance to this, but if so, we should be holding out for daft money.

Edited by Drew
Link to comment
Share on other sites

At the end of the day, like it or not, we are a selling club.

If a Championship club in England came in for McGinn with a sensible offer then the club would be crazy not to consider it. John could leave for very little under freedom of contract next summer just as McLean will probably do this summer.

Yes we will get compensation if that happens, but it wouldn't be anywhere close to what we could get in a competitive market.

For the wee man a move to the Championship would be fantastic financially, Brighton seem like a decent club.

Caveat to all of this of course is that the management should get the vast majority of any outbound transfer fees to help rebuild the squad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Caveat to all of this of course is that the management should get the vast majority of any outbound transfer fees to help rebuild the squad.

And therein lies the rub....

Of course we need to be realistic, but given the stupid money in circulation in the English game, I would suggest that the club should be looking at very close to seven figures for a player of McGinn's ability, and, crucially, potential. Sell-on fees are also a must.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And therein lies the rub....

Of course we need to be realistic, but given the stupid money in circulation in the English game, I would suggest that the club should be looking at very close to seven figures for a player of McGinn's ability, and, crucially, potential. Sell-on fees are also a must.

Definitely, didn't Hamilton get an extra £1million when Everton bought Mcarthy from Wigan on top of the initial £1.2M from Wigan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We should only let him go if they are offering somewhere near £1 million. That's pocket change to a club in the championship so they would probably gladly pay it if they rate him enough.

Can't see £1m being paid out.

Craig Bryson was £350K, James McArthur was £500K, Johnny Russell £750K.

You have to put in clauses such as games played, sell-on, international caps to make up the rest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can't see £1m being paid out.

Craig Bryson was £350K, James McArthur was £500K, Johnny Russell £750K.

You have to put in clauses such as games played, sell-on, international caps to make up the rest.

James McCarthy was £1.2M though and McGinn is just as good as he was at Hamilton (better in my opinion). Plus we have the leverage as we don’t need to sell him, we can get another year out of him and we are guaranteed at least the compensation which is about £250K is it not?

Edited by irvine_buddie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, what alternative do we have? Watch him wind his contract down? Where is the 'transfer fee threshold' at which it makes more sense to let him go than to keep him?

£400k? £350k? It's a very tough call for a club like ours, when that money could go on wages for a few other/extra players.

Sadly, with finances being as they are, what if someone said right, here's £200k, take it or leave it. Would our board really leave it, given that he'll walk in a year's time?

Makes me a bit sick just thinking about it, TBH. thumbdown.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

James McCarthy was £1.2M though and McGinn is just as good as he was at Hamilton (better in my opinion). Plus we have the leverage as we don’t need to sell him, we can get another year out of him and we are guaranteed at least the compensation which is about £250K is it not?

Jam

To be honest McCarthy had folk clamouring for his signature for years and was playing first team at 14. He went for a lot of cash and they got a big whack when he moved to Everton too. As much as I'd love to think we'll get millions for McGinn there was more hype about McCarthy and looking at McArthur (another good player) Wigan paid a lot less for him.

Edited by flyingscot
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, what alternative do we have? Watch him wind his contract down? Where is the 'transfer fee threshold' at which it makes more sense to let him go than to keep him?

£400k? £350k? It's a very tough call for a club like ours, when that money could go on wages for a few other/extra players.

Sadly, with finances being as they are, what if someone said right, here's £200k, take it or leave it. Would our board really leave it, given that he'll walk in a year's time?

Makes me a bit sick just thinking about it, TBH. thumbdown.gif

He won't simply 'walk' in a year's time, though. We would be entitled to a healthy compensation payment as has already been mentioned. Perhaps as much as £300K, and we would get another year of service from arguably our best player.

An interesting angle, of course, pertains to the fact that the current BoD might well be offski by then. Would the fact that they might not benefit from a future compensation payment as opposed to selling him just now have a bearing?

Just saying....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He won't simply 'walk' in a year's time, though. We would be entitled to a healthy compensation payment as has already been mentioned. Perhaps as much as £300K, and we would get another year of service from arguably our best player.

An interesting angle, of course, pertains to the fact that the current BoD might well be offski by then. Would the fact that they might not benefit from a future compensation payment as opposed to selling him just now have a bearing?

Just saying....

Good point, the fact that they got rid of DL and replaced him with 3 people already on the wage bill suggests that they aren’t willing to spend any money or invest in any long term investments. They might be happy to take 400K or whatever now rather than get another year of The Mighty Meatball and £250K compensation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He won't simply 'walk' in a year's time, though. We would be entitled to a healthy compensation payment as has already been mentioned. Perhaps as much as £300K, and we would get another year of service from arguably our best player.

Aye, fair enough - it's just that I have a degree of scepticism of the compo payments, and exactly what constitutes 'healthy'. This isn't based on anything specific, just my own discomfort with the idea that the matter is arbitrated by a third party.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He won't simply 'walk' in a year's time, though. We would be entitled to a healthy compensation payment as has already been mentioned. Perhaps as much as £300K, and we would get another year of service from arguably our best player.

An interesting angle, of course, pertains to the fact that the current BoD might well be offski by then. Would the fact that they might not benefit from a future compensation payment as opposed to selling him just now have a bearing?

Just saying....

mmmm

Not that long ago since you were saying that freeing the lad Slater and him going to Killie was no issue as we already had McGinn, McLean & McGowan.

whistling.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Caveat to all of this of course is that the management should get the vast majority of any outbound transfer fees to help rebuild the squad.

And how would that work?

We surely wouldn’t want to start shelling out big transfer fees surely? Going down that route under Fitzpatrick & Hay led to disaster. And in this day and age, any player who commands a big transfer fee wouldn’t be within our wage bracket anyway – nor would he be wanting to come to St. Mirren!

Use the cash to artificially increase the wage budget for a couple of seasons until it runs out?

Save the cash and use to it to generate a smaller increase to the wage budget over the long term?

Use the cash to fit out the void in the main stand to hopefully generate an income which again would lead to a more long term but smaller increase to the wage budget?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And how would that work?

We surely wouldn’t want to start shelling out big transfer fees surely? Going down that route under Fitzpatrick & Hay led to disaster. And in this day and age, any player who commands a big transfer fee wouldn’t be within our wage bracket anyway – nor would he be wanting to come to St. Mirren!

Use the cash to artificially increase the wage budget for a couple of seasons until it runs out?

Save the cash and use to it to generate a smaller increase to the wage budget over the long term?

Use the cash to fit out the void in the main stand to hopefully generate an income which again would lead to a more long term but smaller increase to the wage budget?

I think it's only fair that the management team would get some of any cash raised from player sales to help them replace with good players.

There has to be a balance of short term and longer term thinking. It can't ALL be longer term.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...