Leaderboard

Interview in the RR (apologies if it's behind a paywall) with Koppen and his remit as well as his plan going forward with recruitment. https://www.rangersreview.co.uk/interviews/24650431.nils-koppen-exclusive-fixing-rangers-player-trading-model/ He says good things and he's acted on his words thus far with the young players and different markets we're signing from. Some points I think are pertinent: "The club have hired two data engineers to build a custom scouting platform in-house and are working to establish an emerging talent wing in their scouting system. That in-house data investment is viewed as a significant step, not least because the platform provides scouting data detailing players’ technical qualities (xG, passes played, etc) alongside physical data to offer a holistic picture concerning a league where duels matter. The wage bill and average age of the squad have dropped significantly. There’s been a move to reestablish a wage structure and increase the money being spent on the attacking areas, due to the weight of wages attributed to the defensive areas instead in recent years" - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This for me is much needed and long overdue. Slightly embarrassing that we didn't have a bespoke model already. On fixing the trading model: So, how do Rangers fix their player-trading problem? How can they consistently sell in order to consistently reinvest? “There are multiple layers. It's firstly about lowering the age because if you look at clubs that are willing to buy, they're not going to buy a 28-year-old. They're going to buy a 19, 21 or 23-year-old. It’s about bringing the age and salary down,” Koppen continues. “Take Sam Lammers, if he had been younger and on a lower wage, we would have been able to get a higher transfer fee. That's just logic. Bringing salaries down and the average age down, both of these things will allow you to sell more easily. “This summer it was impossible with how the squad was built, the profiles and salary profiles, to get decent transfer fees in. It’s also about selling in the right moments. “If we have a player like Jefte who is doing well and the right offer comes in, we should sell him and be brave enough to say that we can find the next one.” - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - We've said it was a mess and he's echoing our thoughts - what I do like is that he's acted on it and we now have younger assets in the team, it's just a matter of getting them to develop and win whilst doing so. Then the club can't be afraid of offloading them, he mentions in the piece that the club should've sold post 55. Last one: Overlooking the best talent outside of the Old Firm has also vexed supporters in recent years. Signing the likes of Connor Barron only makes sense if you throw them in, however. “It’s about getting the right mindset, that we should be able to play young players. Young, for me, is not 21, it’s 18,” adds Koppen. “Getting that mindset right is key. Maybe he will drown a bit while he tries to swim and that will be the next step. Protecting our academy players for too long and keeping them in a safe environment, they're not going to be the players who manage regular minutes. That's a step we have to take. “We have to be aggressive in the youth market to try to get the best young players in the country and keep investing in that. Because the strong core of Scottish players should come from your own academy. And sporadically, you buy somebody from other clubs, like with Connor Barron. “It’s one of our objectives, to try and sign one player a season from another Scottish club if they’re there and the deal makes sense and it fits the plan. “There are so many circumstances with every transfer call you make. Does the money make sense, is the player arriving in a position you’re looking for, are you killing the value of another player in that position? You need to always consider the overall picture." - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This is encouraging and I like that he says young is 18 and not 21. Although this will be the toughest part of the model to get right, Rangers haven't regularly produced their own for as long as I've been alive and possibly as long as some of the older heads in our support. He has signed Barron and we've played him so that is a plus and signing a young Scot a season is a policy I can get behind! That's that, sorry for the long read but i wanted to say something on his recent video and now this interview - we wanted senior figures to tell us what the plan is and he's fronted up. At least we have an idea of what's going to happen going forward. What do you reckon? Happy with these takeaways? There's others but these stood out and are at least being acted on. If any of the admin want to put the quotes in bold because idk how to on my phone - just to make it an easier read. Cheers.

These are the parts I've been hoping we would implement for years now: I've always maintained that if we receive a favourable offer, we should sell and opt for a more cost-effective replacement. And then this, my biggest gripe regarding Gerrard and the post 55 decline: The days of the late '80s and '90s are gone; we can't purchase players like Mark Hateley, Richard Gough, Trevor Steven, Gary Stevens, Stuart McCall, Chris Woods, etc. and retain them until they decline. We must sell them at the appropriate time. It's reassuring to hear similar sentiments from someone within the club who has the authority to effect such changes.

Roll on Sunday and we can get back to the old ham and egg fitbaw this international stuff is just boring .

mm Mixed feelings myself but in total I'm for it. Reason, it's highlighted the cheating and done the job Rangers FC should be doing by looking back. Trouble is looking back they've just added rationale for the mistakes.. there was an electrical outage was a new one.. It's now on Rangers to harass them for 'clarification'. Also, they need to refer to Celtic games.. and the mistakes they gain points from and the ones we lose (or could've lost) from these 'mistakes'. Let's be absolutely clear, and the number of goals in Rangers games that go to VAR, relates to the abuse that the Rangers hating media and Scottish Clubs throw the way to officials bears this out. The officials are TERRIFIED to give us decisions and their default now is to refuse anything that benefits us, or hinders any opposition (or Celtic). So.. all about the club HIGHLIGHTING the inconsistency and applying pressure. I'd also like to see Rangers put forward a kinda badge of honour re ex players, as the number of these players that basically bash Rangers for a few bucks is so f*cking annoying. It doesn't happen with that lot over at Parkhead, any sign of not toeing the party line then they become persona non grata.

The next update on all will be Monday 11th November 2024 and I'll post the links then. It's completely sorted now, but 1) I wanna make sure the formula entered works out and 2) I'll have a better idea re these European formats and how they work out after this 8 GAMES part.. so after 4 games (by then) I'll know how it finishes off. Reason for the delay this season is the amount of players coming and going... there was a few errors but in hindsight (being a pedantic bassa) that is one of the tasks that appeals to me - get the feeling that subconsciously I deliberately make them. So.. Monday 11th November 2024 at around dinner time (ish).

More importantly, what happened to @Rousseau's regular thread title fixes. "Heros"?

Harry Potter?

Yup my old seat was located very west of the Club Deck - you couldnt see the corner flag at the East enclosure end unless you were in early before K/O. Fully agree about Celtic allocation at Ibrox in the corner - prime view seats compared to restricted area at their ground - this is something that baffled me for a long time as to why we accepted that section. Im a more traditionist and prefer a heavy away support in these matches but fair is fair and then there is taking the mick.

Difficult to criticise the board for this. Almost all supporters think that the solution to any problem is a little tantrum or bleating about it online. Quite often this is to demand something that is either unrealistic or completely pointless.

We do have a problem with many areas of the Main Stand and the Enclosures (far east and west) I just hope that when we eventually (with Parks in charge it will be a long time) increase capacity that passes Parkhead we take those seats out of commission or sell them at a pittance. Thing that angers me most is we give that corner away to away fans.. absolutely brilliant seats, no obstruction and in return our fans are hidden in partial sited areas of away grounds. Rangers FC must change this IF we the fans in any way matter to them. Giving the ****s 5% of our capacity in that area compared to 5% seats that're partially sighted is criminal and Rangers should be deeply ashamed of themselves at how they allow Rangers fans to be treated. Some will say it's on the advice of the Police.. but then again for Rangers fans to be sighted where they are at Parkhead is more dangerous.. the other corner (where the scum of the GB sit is more ideal for our fans entering and exiting their ground - have we questioned the Police on this? We pump tens of millions each decade into Rangers and our Board don't give a rats ass for we the fans.

Well erm...I didnt want to say 😃

It obstructs the view. Also, when fans stand up (en masse) in front of them they can't see (from what I can see - I'll nip up there at the next home league match to confirm) they can't see because standing up means the cantilever obstructs the view especially at the Broomloan end goal.