Footballs all about opinions.

I watched newcastle jets twice last season, against Auckland FC, both times I thought Rose was the standout. He scored one in the first game and two in the second game.

It’s a fair question. I am convinced we have not properly watched some of our recent signings. Kuch would be a good example. He was just never going to work in Scottish football.

Key phrase for me: Again, is it just that he's fast and can press?

That is what I think Goodwin looks for first and foremost in attacking players. Not attacking ability or goal scoring prowess. Defend from the front and try to sneak a goal is his idea on football.

Morphman wrote:

Macho Man wrote:

I feel too much onus is being put on the 'player trading' model and not enough attention is being paid to the must have element of the team, if we want to have a go at winning a cup or getting European football.

Agree with this. I'm not a total dinosaur that is against a bit of data and analytic driven recruitment but I do think when you use that approach you lose a lot of other things. Mentality just isn't something that you can quantify, the quintessential scottish football questions such as: will they go in to a 50/50 against Gogic on a freezing Wednesday night when it's pishing doon in Paisley? Will their bottle go in big matches? Do they have a winning mentality (how many points did we throw away from winning positions last year)?

Many of these sorts of questions you can at least have a decent idea of when you sign a 29 year old who's played 300 games, less so signing a West Ham youth player and a boy with 40 appearances for Dunfermline. Like you've said, the difference is the 29 year old probably can't be sold on for a few quid.

Going to copy and paste this comment I made yesterday on the Summer transfer thread as it sums up most of my thoughts on our recruitment.

Tangy, I'm not so sure that I can believe that we do as much checking as United would have us believe. The whole "we're bringing in pace at the back so we can play a higher line" last summer, then subsequently signing Esselink to be the main man of that back line is probably the best example. Esselink is slower than a weekend in Bell Street and, whatever his data may have shown (you have to assume it was positive), it took about two games for the average fan to notice this, so surely the Goodwins and the whoever else scouts for us would've saw this if we really did to our diligence.

I've defended the recruitment last year due to the unexpected, but very welcome, entry in to Europe. No doubt it was tough to bring in a higher level of player for Europe with about 6/7 week turnaround but the fact remains that some of the players, TEKs example of Naamo probably being a good one, has me convinced that we weren't quite as thorough as the club would have us believe.

Last edited by Morphman (16/6/2026 11:22 am)

Tangy wrote:

Take on board some of your points.

I think data is a crucial part of scouting now. Would we have got fatah, agyei etc if it wasn't for that? I cant see united having a budget to be near most of the leagues we are recruiting from.

How much effort goes on in the background, I dont know - I'd assume  they are getting plenty game video of targets and speaking to people in the know.

Side note, bert was slow for sure hut not helped by being put up against maeda- every united player would be getting burned for pace and he didnt get much help from strain on that

 
Strain was standing around the half way line on at least 2 occasions Bert had to go out and face Maeda.
I'm still convinced Bert would have been ok in a flat 4 where he wasn't expected to be a combination of Beckenbauer and Baresi. Goodwin ruined him.

Macho Man wrote:

TEK, I wouldn't base an opinion on a highlights reel.  We all know how some of our recent signings have looked great in their YouTube clips but have turned out to be total horse shit.

We all know of games where United have looked decent, but the highlights reel has made them look atrocious (or vice versa).  Highlights are like stats, they can be very misleading.

Lets give him a chance to show what he can do when watched over 90 minutes over a few games and give him a chance to settle in a new country first before we form an opinion on him.

I'd also say that if he predominantly plays shit but bags us 15-20 goals a season, then I won't be complaining too much.

He'll get a chance mate, of course he will. I only judge players once I've seen them kick a ball for United.

But this wasn't just a highlights reel. We watched their entire season. As I said, other attackers consistently stood out.

Which prompted my original question. 


 

Just was playing alongside a class act in Chris Wood who layed on at least one if not both goals for Just.

Macho Man wrote:

TEK, I wouldn't base an opinion on a highlights reel. 

I meant to say Macho Man, this is kinda my point.

For instance, in the past. A scout was sent to watch a player of interest. Let's say Dario Naamo.

Had they watched him and his team two or three times, they might come back with their report to our Management and say 'Well, hey done 'ok', but tbh there is another lad that stood out in another position who we should instead/or also focus on'.

I think the whole modern 'Head of Recruitment' thing is bullshit.

In as much as i think we're signing players far too much on data and not enough on scouting. 

P.s. if Ross Goodwin has actually watched Nammo and St.Polten more than once i'd say it's still a fair question to ask him how Elijah Just never piqued his interest (considering we were also in the market for a winger).

The club supposedly have quarterly meetings about recruitment etc. I'd say things like this should be scrutinised with laser focus.

And Jim Goodwin should be the first to ask that question btw.

Recruitment is everything for a football club. Particularly a provincial club.