January window

[RicoS321]

Concentrate on developing our own young players rather than take them from any of or direct competitors.

 

It's a nonsense situation.

 

Well, aye, but what if the Tims loaned Morgan to Hibs and his goals and assists led directly to them gaining 9-12 points (not unrealistic) and finishing above us? I'd be happy enough that we've eplicitly rejected a model that relied on Tims ahead of our young players (Wright and McLennan in this case, who may be worse players than Morgan - I've only see him play once, and he was average) even if it meant us finishing lower in the league, because that's just the way I am. However, from the point of view of the manager who's job will be lost through poor league finishes, you could surely understand the dilemma? It has to be a club decision, and it has to be publicly articulated at club level (i.e. above McInnes) and built into expectations. Perhaps even with an agreement with yer Hertz, Hibss, Killies and Motherwells to alleviate the potential of the player just going elsewhere.

 

 

[TheDeeDon]

Well, aye, but what if the Tims loaned Morgan to Hibs and his goals and assists led directly to them gaining 9-12 points (not unrealistic) and finishing above us? I'd be happy enough that we've eplicitly rejected a model that relied on Tims ahead of our young players (Wright and McLennan in this case, who may be worse players than Morgan - I've only see him play once, and he was average) even if it meant us finishing lower in the league, because that's just the way I am. However, from the point of view of the manager who's job will be lost through poor league finishes, you could surely understand the dilemma? It has to be a club decision, and it has to be publicly articulated at club level (i.e. above McInnes) and built into expectations. Perhaps even with an agreement with yer Hertz, Hibss, Killies and Motherwells to alleviate the potential of the player just going elsewhere.

 

I hear you, but I still don't agree with it. I enjoyed having Christie here and thought he was a terrific player, but when you see him playing for Celtic knowing we have made him a better player, possibly just more experienced than better, it just sticks in the throat. I also realise it potentially could get you a player on a permanent basis if all things work out, but in a league where it is a struggle to keep up with Celtic and Rangers in spending power it feels like a backward step in helping their own younger players progress.

 

I can't ever envisage any other clubs agreeing to put a stop to it either.

[RicoS321]

I hear you, but I still don't agree with it. I enjoyed having Christie here and thought he was a terrific player, but when you see him playing for Celtic knowing we have made him a better player, possibly just more experienced than better, it just sticks in the throat. I also realise it potentially could get you a player on a permanent basis if all things work out, but in a league where it is a struggle to keep up with Celtic and Rangers in spending power it feels like a backward step in helping their own younger players progress.

 

I can't ever envisage any other clubs agreeing to put a stop to it either.

 

Aye, I don't agree with it either, I just mean that it's reality. It's short-termism at its worst.

 

That said, we were very close to getting Christie permanently, in which case would you have thought twice about Morgan coming?

[Jute]

Daily Ranger claiming this morning that McInnes has spoken to Lewis Morgan and it is now up to the player if he wants to move to Dons or down South on loan. Also reporting that McInnes interested in Hayes if GMS moves to New York.

[manc_don]

Daily Ranger claiming this morning that McInnes has spoken to Lewis Morgan and it is now up to the player if he wants to move to Dons or down South on loan. Also reporting that McInnes interested in Hayes if GMS moves to New York.

 

Whilst I accept that we're never going to make wholesale changes in Jan, it's been thoroughly underwhelming, again. Lowe, fantastic to get him on loan again, but I was hoping to get someone in permanently. Morgan (not doubting his ability) and Hayes, no thanks. Not keen on developing celtic players anymore, and Hayes, likely to be past his best. Here's hoping for something that isn't being reported in the last few days.

[RicoS321]

I'd actually rather have Hayes than Morgan. Hayes has a phenomenal workrate and is versatile. If given the choice, I'd rather have Hayes in centre mid than Gleeson (and Ball) for example even though that isn't his position (although, if he's lost a little of his pace, then it may not be a bad role for him). I think he's still got a couple of decent years left in him and would definitely improve our squad as a whole, if not our starting eleven.

[Ten Caat]

Not overly keen on Morgan and absolutely dead against Hayes. As said by others, developing players for a direct rival is probably counter-productive. I'd accept him on the basis that I honestly don't think he has a chance of ever making it at Celtic and by coming here it might put us to the head of the queue in summer when he could be available fairly cheaply on a permanent basis.

 

Hayes sorry but no. Now heading for 33, with a bad leg break since he left and hardly any first team football plus we would instantly have to make him our highest paid player to match his Celtic wage......just don't think he represents in any way good value for money. He obviously has no future at Park near but his level is now at a Motherwell or St Johnstone. Joining a club at that level, Celtic might subsidise his wages to an extent to get him out the door but if he joined ed us we would have to pay the full whack. There's better value for us in a younger hungrier player from the lower leagues in England or maybe Europe.

[RicoS321]

Hayes sorry but no. Now heading for 33, with a bad leg break since he left and hardly any first team football plus we would instantly have to make him our highest paid player to match his Celtic wage......just don't think he represents in any way good value for money. He obviously has no future at Park near but his level is now at a Motherwell or St Johnstone. Joining a club at that level, Celtic might subsidise his wages to an extent to get him out the door but if he joined ed us we would have to pay the full whack. There's better value for us in a younger hungrier player from the lower leagues in England or maybe Europe.

 

I don't think Hayes would cost us the amount you assume. I think he'd be on similar or less than what he was when he left. With his professionalism and work ethic, he'd walk into a Hertz or Hibs. There might be better value in a younger player from the lower leagues in England, but only if you completely ignore the 4 other players we'd have to sign too in the lottery that is our scouting process. If you were to accept that Cosgrove was a good signing, then you'd have to also accept that he's at least a 1 in 4 punt that came good. With Hayes you get a tried and tested player who you know will perform to a certain level. If we were considering re-signing Ball for example, I'd far rather that we spent the money on Hayes. I would still be looking for us to sign actual first team players in addition when it gets to the summer of course so that Hayes is just the reliable backup alongside our developing youngsters. Obviously if it was just a loan from the Tims, then fuck that. Only a free transfer would be acceptable. I'm talking out of pragmatism too, I don't see Hayes as an exciting signing, just a solid professional who's an improvement on the likes of Ball and Gleeson.

[Guest kiriakovisthenewstrachan]

Can't see why anyone would not want Hayes back at Pittodrie.  He is actually only 31 and not 32 until July so still has a good few years left, fitness permitting.

 

With Niall McGinn often looking like a shadow of what he was, Hayes would be a good signing, McLennan needs a bit more time until he can nail down a starting place on a regular basis.

 

Hayes looked sharp when he came on at Pittodrie a few weeks ago and on this one I don't think the Timmothys would be too difficult to deal with because they will be glad of him off their payroll and similarly Hayes will be thankful of going somewhere that he can get on the pitch.  He's a good pro who would be great down the left side along with Lowe.  He has been sorely missed since he left and getting him back at even 90% of the player he was could really transform the team.

[Reidzer 1314]

Sunderland now trying to beat us to the signing of Morgan apparently

[rocket_scientist]

No to Hayes. Retrograde step. It won't work. Like Stevie May who is much younger, the effect of that serious an injury can be devastating.

[RicoS321]

No to Hayes. Retrograde step. It won't work. Like Stevie May who is much younger, the effect of that serious an injury can be devastating.

 

It can be, but there are numerous examples of players who haven't been affected by similar injuries though. Considine as an example from our own ranks. To the extent that I don't think you can necessarily state that it'll have an effect. In fact, even in May it doesn't seem to effect his all round play. I see the player that St Johnstone had, but who is just not making the same runs as he was when he was scoring. I don't think he's lost any pace, any strength or any ability, just a timing of run that's poor and has been withered further through deep lack of confidence in his own ability in front of goal. I've always thought/said that his brief purple patch at St Johnstone was the result of a lot of very hard work that took him to the peak of his game. In other words, I don't think it was injury, it was just that he was never that good and - crucially - there didn't seem to be the avenues for improvements to his game that you can see in likes of McKenna or Fraser or even Wright; he was already the best he was going to be.

 

I haven't heard of any adverse affects from his injury on Hayes, just that the Tims have better players in his position and he was always going to struggle to break into that team.

 

Do you think he's better than Ball, Gleeson, McGinn? I do. We're not going to be signing 14 players in the summer, so this type of safe(ish) signing is more pragmatic than retrograde.

[rocket_scientist]

Yes he's better than those others McInnes has signed but that's the point. The manager isn't trying to win the league. He signs journeymen who aren't good enough. This all goes back to aspirations and signing a footballer at that age even without following a leg break isn't planning to build a title-winning squad. He's not Henrik Larsson, possibly the best example of coming back from a leg break (although that was a very clean break).

[RicoS321]

Yes he's better than those others McInnes has signed but that's the point. The manager isn't trying to win the league. He signs journeymen who aren't good enough. This all goes back to aspirations and signing a footballer at that age even without following a leg break isn't planning to build a title-winning squad. He's not Henrik Larsson, possibly the best example of coming back from a leg break (although that was a very clean break).

 

Aye, okay, but you must recognise the massive gap between our current squad and a title-winning squad? Even with a few million quid to spend, we're not getting a title-winning squad next season - even if Neil Lennon came in as manager. It's about incremental increases. If we can get Hayes in as squad player challenging the first eleven then that's an incremental increase. If Shinnie and GMS leave then we need two decent midfielders, a left back, a wide player (or two), another striker and a right back to challenge Logan in the summer. If McKenna leaves, then another centre half. If Devlin dies, then another centre half. That's a fair re-build by any stretch. We're going to get signings who are not up to it, as every team does, so having a tried and tested player would surely be a sensible solution to mitigate the inevitable transfer fuck ups? Finally, I don't think Hayes is a journeyman. He's been at the top end of the league's best players in every season he's played in the SPL, who just happens to be not quite good enough for the team that he's getting paid £15-20K per week to play for (but still played more than Morgan or Allan). He's a good professional who will undoubtedly raise the performances of the younger players in our squad if they try to emulate his fitness and approach to the game. Journeyman is definitely not the correct term for Hayes.

[rocket_scientist]

I didn't call Hayes a journeyman. I said the manager signs journeymen but the bigger point is what's the point? You say it's impossible to win the league. Why the fuck do we support them with our time and money then?

 

Incremental gains and margins? Not under this bearded midget clown and the rat chairman.

[RicoS321]

I didn't call Hayes a journeyman. I said the manager signs journeymen but the bigger point is what's the point? You say it's impossible to win the league. Why the fuck do we support them with our time and money then?

 

You didnt, my apologies. I think that's (yer second point) the existential point that surrounds Scottish fitba in an where only two teams have won the league in the last 34 years for both those clubs who have not won the league and those that have. I'm not sure why you think AFC are best placed to resolve this (assuming chairman and manager left)?

 

Incremental gains and margins? Not under this bearded midget clown and the rat chairman.

 

Maybe not, but that doesn't mean we can't discuss what may or may not be an incremental gain for AFC within the current parameters that are outwith our control. I believe that Hayes returning would be an incremental gain to our squad on the assumption that he was here to challenge the first 11 rather than assume a guaranteed spot. You seem to be arguing from a parallel universe where we have a different manager and chairman. Basically, I think you should just provide the sack the manager/chairman bit as part of a disclaimer to all your posts but still give your opinion on the raised point within the confines of the existing AFC setup!

[rocket_scientist]

You didnt, my apologies.

 

Accepted.

 

I think that's (yer second point) the existential point that surrounds Scottish fitba in an where only two teams have won the league in the last 34 years for both those clubs who have not won the league and those that have. I'm not sure why you think AFC are best placed to resolve this (assuming chairman and manager left)?

 

I didn't say that WE were best placed of anyone in Scotland to win the league but given the size of our club and it's dormant potential, I would very much hope that we were one of the best placed to do it. I actually think George Burley could have broken the duopoly if the mad Lithuanian crook hadn't sacked him after 12 games of the season when they were top.

 

Your line of rhetoric is concerning. You hold up the 34 years as if it's a ceiling? Have you given up? Don't you even strive to win? Obviously not, as you wrote in a previous post that it's not only this year that is another write-off but next year too, even if we throw "millions" at it.

 

So once again, I ask, what is the point? Why do you support Aberdeen and go to the majority of games? I go because I have NOT given up hope that we can win the league one day but I know that it won't be under this manager and chairman... who aren't going anywhere soon (so maybe I do need to ask myself some serious questions) but what exactly are your aspirations? Are you tugging off that we won the 2nd place trophy in recent seasons? What exactly are you looking for? Do you think winning is a fortuitous accident?

 

Maybe not, but that doesn't mean we can't discuss what may or may not be an incremental gain for AFC within the current parameters that are outwith our control. I believe that Hayes returning would be an incremental gain to our squad on the assumption that he was here to challenge the first 11 rather than assume a guaranteed spot. You seem to be arguing from a parallel universe where we have a different manager and chairman. Basically, I think you should just provide the sack the manager/chairman bit as part of a disclaimer to all your posts but still give your opinion on the raised point within the confines of the existing AFC setup!

 

Who said that we can't discuss anything? You and others think Hayes returning would be a good thing. I and others don't agree with you. He may well be a good influence and good to have around the place but winning mentality managers with a limited budget don't look to buy footballers to be squad fillers, they look to improve the team, always and IF THE GOAL IS TO WIN THE LEAGUE, we don't buy a 31 year old who recently suffered a broken leg.

 

Now you're holding up my conviction that McInnes and Milne are bad for AFC as an argument against me? Don't you understand that THEY ARE A BARRIER preventing us ever being the best we can be? You've written off the 2019/20 season so how many years are you prepared to tolerate McInnes? What exactly are you looking for from your time and money? A day out? So you have some material to come on here and write novellas?

 

[RicoS321]

I didn't say that WE were best placed of anyone in Scotland to win the league but given the size of our club and it's dormant potential, I would very much hope that we were one of the best placed to do it. I actually think George Burley could have broken the duopoly if the mad Lithuanian crook hadn't sacked him after 12 games of the season when they were top.

 

Yep, he did well and the signs were good. The mad Lithuanian sending the club into admin which, in turn, relegated them because they spent much more money than they took in despite being very well placed in the league.

 

Your line of rhetoric is concerning. You hold up the 34 years as if it's a ceiling? Have you given up? Don't you even strive to win? Obviously not, as you wrote in a previous post that it's not only this year that is another write-off but next year too, even if we throw "millions" at it.

 

If 34 years isn't a ceiling, then I'm not sure what it is. I don't expect to see many ceilings left in a 34 year old Stewarty new-build, that's for sure. It's systemic and circular. That you ignore the 34 years of evidence and put it down to Stewart Milne and McInnes is bewildering. I think Milne has done a poor job, and his idea for a new stadium will destroy the club, but I don't believe Anderson and Donald would have won us a league either (I do believe we'd have had a few more trophies and the like of Paterson and Miller would have been nowhere near the club and Westhill would be a ridiculous joke). The post-92 (ish) gulf in finances is unmatched anywhere in Europe. To win the league would require absolutely everything to go right: every signing, every decision, every last minute goal alongside a complete melt down from the Tims. It'd be significantly bigger than Leicester winning the EPL. My point about throwing millions at it, is that I don't think a short term spree would see us over the line. That's exactly what Romanov did and it failed at the first attempt and the Lithuanian imports got cheaper and cheaper. We're a good 7-8 players - at least - behind the tims.

 

So once again, I ask, what is the point? Why do you support Aberdeen and go to the majority of games? I go because I have NOT given up hope that we can win the league one day but I know that it won't be under this manager and chairman... who aren't going anywhere soon (so maybe I do need to ask myself some serious questions) but what exactly are your aspirations? Are you tugging off that we won the 2nd place trophy in recent seasons? What exactly are you looking for? Do you think winning is a fortuitous accident?

 

I watch Aberdeen because I've supported them since before my first memories and I enjoy watching fitba. I enjoy the ups and downs and the fact that you can watch a team develop or get shiter over time. I enjoy the moments that are great and the moments that are shite. I enjoy the fact that I can see the differences in performance from week to week because I see it with my own eyes. The formations, the tactics, the subs (or lack of, in McInnes' case), the timing of subs, the shite players and the good players. It's what fitba is about. I also tug off because we won the 2nd place trophy in recent seasons. Winning the league would absolutely be a fortituitous accident. Anyone who says otherwise is ignoring the last 34 years of evidence and the evidence throughout Europe where nobody else has achieved similar - it would take an absolutely monumental fuck-load of luck. This isn't just Aberdeen that are failing to do it, the evidence exists for every other team too, who also must be running and managing their club terribly by your standards. You fail to admit, nor acknowledge that there is not only a complete correlation between finance and league winning, but also a massive correlation between finance and being able to afford a manager who can overcome the correlation between finance and league winning. The perfect manager does exist, he just doesn't exist in a world where AFC can afford to pay him. I'm looking for AFC to do much, much more off the pitch to challenge the fact that 90% of our revenues go to one (occasionally two) club in this country and really hit the scum hard off the pitch. I'm looking for them to point out the fucking obvious again and again and again until something changes. Fitba in Scotland isn't sport, it's a bought and paid for sham. I want us to ditch the Milnes and become a club that lives and dies by its own turnover and support, not chasing the scum by trading insolvently or artificial investment from a few rich cunts. If we lose, we lose, if we win then we dinna have to credit some dick who we're beholden to because he happened to make money in some other industry once.

 

Who said that we can't discuss anything? You and others think Hayes returning would be a good thing. I and others don't agree with you. He may well be a good influence and good to have around the place but winning mentality managers with a limited budget don't look to buy footballers to be squad fillers, they look to improve the team, always and IF THE GOAL IS TO WIN THE LEAGUE, we don't buy a 31 year old who recently suffered a broken leg.

 

I didn't mean we couldn't discuss anything, it's just that you seem to be arguing in a different universe to the one that currently exists at AFC. The goal (I assume) is to finish as high up the league as possible whilst spending an amount of money roughly in line with our turnover. The only question is whether that, within our turnover, is Hayes an investment that will help us improve on this year's league performances? You seem to be advocating that we spend money to chase, and overtake, the Tims I think? I don't know actually, because all you keep saying is that we should have a goal of winning the league with no apparent mechanism for us doing so.

 

Now you're holding up my conviction that McInnes and Milne are bad for AFC as an argument against me? Don't you understand that THEY ARE A BARRIER preventing us ever being the best we can be? You've written off the 2019/20 season so how many years are you prepared to tolerate McInnes? What exactly are you looking for from your time and money? A day out? So you have some material to come on here and write novellas?

 

A day out, yes. Why wouldn't I? Would I prefer to be a Tim watching my financially doped squad win every week? Why should I see myself as any different to a Motherwell fan, or a Hearts or Hibs fan (given I have fuck all control over AFC)? I enjoy watching fitba, it's a good day out. I also enjoy the discussions about the games afterwards too. I don't know why you'd take issue with that. I do think that Milne is barrier for AFC, I disagree about McInnes. The difference is I know that the barrier he imposes is largely inconsequential in the scheme of things as there is a ceiling to our ability to make cash based on our support, and it would not make a dent in a single champions league game revenue for the Tim. My main complaint about him is that he makes a lot of mistakes, his vision for the club conflicts with my own and he has made no effort to change fitba in Scotland from the inside. In recent years he's done okay in his own terms and in McInnes he's got a manager who's in the top three in the country (Rogers, Clarke, McInnes), who has his obvious flaws but has a very solid points return despite those. I think he deserves to remain manager for a while longer and Milne should leave tomorrow and take his shitey plot in Westhill with him (aye, leave the training ground like).

[rocket_scientist]

If 34 years isn't a ceiling, then I'm not sure what it is. That you ignore the 34 years of evidence and put it down to Stewart Milne and McInnes is bewildering. I think Milne has done a poor job, and his idea for a new stadium will destroy the club, but I don't believe Anderson and Donald would have won us a league either

 

Stop writing too many words and stop imputing words and ideas to me that I didn't say and don't think. I have not ignored any "evidence" and if you say that 34 years is evidence that it can't happen, I say "awa and bile yer heid".

 

Anderson and Donald were directors. They don't win leagues, their job was to employ people who might and they certainly wouldn't have employed the shite that Milne has done for 20 years.

 

This started out as you taking issue with me saying that Hayes would be a retrograde step. I gave my reasons, the principal one being that we should not be looking at squad fillers - you said yourself he's not guaranteed to be good enough to get a start - if OUR GOAL WAS TO WIN THE LEAGUE, something that I have always hoped for every single season of my life. We have now established that this is the main difference between us. You have no hopes of winning the league and you give reasons for your void of optimism...

 

The post-92 (ish) gulf in finances is unmatched anywhere in Europe. To win the league would require absolutely everything to go right: every signing, every decision, every last minute goal alongside a complete melt down from the Tims. It'd be significantly bigger than Leicester winning the EPL.

 

Financial disparity is as pronounced in the EPL as it is in Scotland, as it has become throughout Europe thanks to UEFA mismanagement and "Financial Fair Play" hypocrisy. But money is NOT everything, only a significant advantage. You know why we see cup upsets every year without fail? Leicester's EPL win was seismic and beautiful for its poke in the eye to defeatist thinking.

 

My point about throwing millions at it, is that I don't think a short term spree would see us over the line. That's exactly what Romanov did and it failed at the first attempt and the Lithuanian imports got cheaper and cheaper. We're a good 7-8 players - at least - behind the tims.

 

I agree that throwing millions at it wouldn't work, nor have I ever advocated this. We don't have the right manager to invest in. His signings over a prolonged period prove that he's fucking incapable so we are not 7-8 players short, we are ONE manager short.

 

I watch Aberdeen because...

 

too many words but ultimately saying that we have no hope of winning the league

 

 

 

Winning the league would absolutely be a fortituitous accident. Anyone who says otherwise is ignoring the last 34 years of evidence and the evidence throughout Europe where nobody else has achieved similar - it would take an absolutely monumental fuck-load of luck.

 

You forgot about Leicester pretty quick but NOBODY EVER WINS BY ACCIDENT. My point is that the club isn't even TRYING to win the league and as we've just discovered, neither are you. Winners are DIFFERENT, that's why there are so few who succeed and McInnes is a perennial loser. There's your 34 years of "evidence" again, the glass ceiling self-imposed upon your ambition, the key fundamental difference between you and I.

 

This isn't just Aberdeen that are failing to do it, the evidence exists for every other team too, who also must be running and managing their club terribly by your standards.

 

There's you imputing "standards" to me now? I've not commented on Hibs and Hearts. Scottish football is shiit and the vast majority of managers employed in the SPL/SPFL going back 30 years have been incompetent.

 

You fail to admit, nor acknowledge that there is not only a complete correlation between finance and league winning, but also a massive correlation between finance and being able to afford a manager who can overcome the correlation between finance and league winning. The perfect manager does exist, he just doesn't exist in a world where AFC can afford to pay him.

 

I have NEVER denied the correlation between money and success. You are twisting my words to fit your supposed perception about our disagreement. I also totally refute that expensive managers are the key to success. The best managers weren't expensive when they did their best work - including our own history if you're old enough to remember - and the evidence of expensive and big name managers failing in recent years, recent days if we want to include Jose at Man U is a very long list indeed.

 

Next your argument, or your excuse for not having any optimism is that the game's rigged...

 

I'm looking for AFC to do much, much more off the pitch to challenge the fact that 90% of our revenues go to one (occasionally two) club in this country and really hit the scum hard off the pitch. Fitba in Scotland isn't sport, it's a bought and paid for sham.

 

...once again displaying that what winning looks like is invisible to you. Always excuses.

 

I didn't mean we couldn't discuss anything, it's just that you seem to be arguing in a different universe to the one that currently exists at AFC.

 

Your further insult is noted but rather than getting petty and childish, how about seeking to understand where we differ? Perhaps you don't even know despite my using plain English...

 

The goal (I assume) is to finish as high up the league as possible whilst spending an amount of money roughly in line with our turnover.

 

.. and perhaps you don't even know what your goal is, as you need to assume it?

 

THIS IS THE KEY. Milne has no interest in winning the league and McInnes has no goal to do so. Forget that McInnes isn't capable, he doesn't even try to win the league. As I said, the very few winners that there are ARE DIFFERENT. Understanding what separates the best from the rest is a good foundation for this particular key fundamental difference between us.

 

The only question is whether that, within our turnover, is Hayes an investment that will help us improve on this year's league performances? You seem to be advocating that we spend money to chase, and overtake, the Tims I think? I don't know actually, because all you keep saying is that we should have a goal of winning the league with no apparent mechanism for us doing so.

 

Not once have I said this. You are putting words into my mouth. You want a "mechanism"? There are no mechanisms or formulas for success, in anything. There are only truths, consistencies and non-negotiable fundamentals but every winner does it his or her own way. There are no parallel models to follow but here's the way that you might win the league, employ somebody who WANTS to win it and who BELIEVES that it is possible.

 

You then finish with a rant against Milne and a view of support for the manager...

 

 

I disagree about McInnes.

 

I think he deserves to remain manager for a while longer

 

THAT is where we disagree. McInnes will NEVER win the SPFL at AFC and as it's not your goal too, fine.

[RicoS321]

To save on the quoting, I do understand what you're saying, I just think it's massively flawed. Your opinion on McInnes aside, you're suggesting that we just need one manager that's a winner in order to win the league (one manager short); obviously with the associated luck etc. That suggests that in 34 years of Scottish fitba, there hasn't been one single manager at any club that is a winner? And Europe, where no league win - and I did include, and mention, Leicester in that - has come close to the disparity in wages from the Tims/Huns to their nearest competitor. Not one example. To avoid Leicester being argued about, let's say that there's one example, and it was Ranieri at Leicester. I'm pretty certain if I'd asked you about Chelsea's Ranieri "the tinkerman" back in 2002 you would have stated that he wasn't a winner (as would just about everyone). Anyway, that aside, that's one example of a significant gulf in wages being overturned this century. That suggests, to me, that a winner does cost money. Or certainly one that actually wins stuff and not just a person deemed to have a "winners mentality" like Lennon or Clarke (I like Clarke, but he wouldn't win the league with Aberdeen, so we're looking for someone better than him).

 

That said, I do believe that our goal is to win the league every year, or at least the dream is. The notion that belief and winner's mentality alone can do it is just ridiculous though. The notion that anyone doesn't believe/dream that they can win the league is also wierd, I'm pretty certain McInnes and even Milne, have dreamt about holding the trophy at the end of the season and probably every season. It would be pretty stupid to expect it or budget or spend for it though.

[rocket_scientist]

If you did understand what I'm saying, you wouldn't use confrontational language and throw in (mildly) insulting rhetoric. If you were capable of understanding my points, you wouldn't say that my posts are "massively flawed", which suggests you know more than me, you know best and anything I say is just plain wrong.

 

If you are capable of swallowing your pride, of communicating with greater efficiency and of agreeing to disagree, then I would ask you what specifically I've said is so flawed? And please use the quote function to show me my bad words.

 

[Stewart]

Scott Burns

?

@ScottBurns75

19m19 minutes ago

More

@CelticFC's Lewis Morgan looks set to disappoint @AberdeenFC by joining @SunderlandAFC on-loan.  @ScotExpress.

 

---

Scott Burns

?

@ScottBurns75

20m20 minutes ago

More

@officialdafc make approach to @AberdeenFC to try and loan Bruce Anderson and Scott Wright.  @ScotExpress

---

Scott Burns

@ScottBurns75

18m18 minutes ago

More

@AberdeenFC now keen to see if they can get Jonny Hayes back on-loan from @CelticFC.  @ScotExpress

[RicoS321]

If you did understand what I'm saying, you wouldn't use confrontational language and throw in (mildly) insulting rhetoric. If you were capable of understanding my points, you wouldn't say that my posts are "massively flawed", which suggests you know more than me, you know best and anything I say is just plain wrong.

 

If you are capable of swallowing your pride, of communicating with greater efficiency and of agreeing to disagree, then I would ask you what specifically I've said is so flawed? And please use the quote function to show me my bad words.

 

There was nothing intentionally confrontational about what I wrote, nor intentionally insulting. I am more than happy to agree on disagreeing, I was merely hoping that you'd put a bit more flesh on the bones of your argument, which is a constant (argument) in all your posts by providing examples of managers that aren't losers, or evidence that backs up your claim that our goal is not to win the league, or any evidence that having a goal of winning the league makes any difference whatsoever to realising that goal over and above just having a goal of finishing as high up the league as possible and signing the best players we can within our budget (which I don't think we are even close to doing, I'm just unsure how much blame to attribute to the manager for that). When I said that you are arguing from another universe, I meant that it seemed you were arguing - about Hayes in this case - from a point at which we've ditched Milne and McInnes and are talking about a different team entirely with a different budget. I'm happy to admit that was incorrect, you're point was that his injury would be a detriment to his performances making him a retrograde step.

[rocket_scientist]

I'm happy to spell out what I was saying, although I thought I already did.

 

What's quite frustrating is being misinterpreted when I'm using language as best I can.

 

What's very frustrating is being misquoted, which you continue to do. This means I have to waste time correcting you when you say I said something I didn't, something you've just done again, on more than one point.

[RicoS321]

I'm happy to spell out what I was saying, although I thought I already did.

 

What's quite frustrating is being misinterpreted when I'm using language as best I can.

 

What's very frustrating is being misquoted, which you continue to do. This means I have to waste time correcting you when you say I said something I didn't, something you've just done again, on more than one point.

 

It's not really wasting time if you're explaining something to me that I haven't understood or simply misinterpreted.

 

For example:

 

This(1):

No to Hayes. Retrograde step. It won't work. Like Stevie May who is much younger, the effect of that serious an injury can be devastating.

 

does not equal this(2):

you're point was that his injury would be a detriment to his performances making him a retrograde step.

 

and these(3):

if OUR GOAL WAS TO WIN THE LEAGUE

....McInnes is a perennial loser

 

do not equal this(4):

which is a constant (argument) in all your posts by providing examples of managers that aren't losers, or evidence that backs up your claim that our goal is not to win the league

 

 

Is what I infer from this:

What's very frustrating is being misquoted, which you continue to do.

 

As the above points were the only parts in my last reply that I took from your quotes (everything else was an explanation of my misunderstanding).

 

For what it's worth, I don't think your point (1) above is that clear, to the extent that my interpretation (2) is ridiculous. You seem to be conflating the injury and the fact that it is a retrograde step. I'm happy to accept that you're saying that it's a retrograde step, and also that the effect of that serious an injury can be devastating. I don't think that point was very clear.

 

In points (3) versus (4) I'm think that I have probably focused in on your repeated statements rather than your point as a whole, but I still think you could have been clearer.