JohnMc

Kent makes a big difference to our side, if he's on his game and gets the ball in the last third he'll cause them problems. He's looked good in the last few matches, finding form at the right time. 

While someone like King might seem like an extravagance we don't need having someone experienced and used to playing at a high level like him keeps the competition for places in our midfield. Our midfield has been excellent this season, Davis, Kamara and particularly Jack have played consistently well. I'm sure that's partly because they're good professionals, partly because the training, tactics and coaching suit them but also I suspect because they're thriving in a competitive environment, where they know their place can't be taken for granted. If King provides that he's fulfilling a role. 

I didn't realise Defoe was out, that's a blow. I wouldn't expect him to start but having him on the bench should we need to change things is required. 

This will be a hard game tonight, looking forward to it though. 

For all King has done his most telling and lasting contribution might prove to be the appointment of Gerrard as manager. From the outside it looks like they have a good relationship and I understand it was King who identified and made initial contact with Gerrard about the Rangers job. We forget now that we weren't exactly an enticing prospect. Laden with debt following years of terrible publicity, struggling in the SPFL and miles behind Celtic on and off the pitch. Mr King must be quite persuasive for Gerrard to give up his job for life at Liverpool, while biding his time for Klop to leave in the hope that the 'boot room' promotion system that served Liverpool so well in the 70s and 80s would see him in line for the top job there. Gerrard has taken a huge gamble coming to us, if it doesn't work out here he has no chance of ever getting the Liverpool job. Dave King deserves huge credit for that if nothing else. 

My dad pointed out to me a long time ago that King attended Allan Glen's School in Townhead while living in Castlemilk. He must have had an inner-steel and an ability to either avoid or deal with trouble, because he must have attracted some dressed in their uniform while travelling across the city everyday. We shouldn't be surprised he doesn't back down from a fight and has no time for bullies. 

I'll be sorry to see him go, for all his faults I always felt he'd the club's best interests at heart, even if some of his actions left me a little nervous at times. 

27 minutes ago, alexscottislegend said:

Which begs the question? Whose fault is it? Look at the player Fleck has become; at the time we tried to turn him into some sort of Rooney but in fact he's turned out to be much more of a Billy Bremner type.

I don't think there's any one person to blame, rather it's a cultural thing around the club. The need to win every match makes it hard to introduce young players, who will inevitably make mistakes, and put pressure on the manager. The support, particularly the home support, are pretty unforgiving of mistakes, we're not good at making allowances for inexperience. I also think the support clamour for 'big signings'. they create a buzz, excite people and help sell season tickets and merchandise. Announcing your building the side around two 18 year olds from the reserves simply doesn't do that. 

I'm coming to the conclusion that young players are better off beginning their careers at smaller clubs. There is less pressure, more first team opportunities and the opportunity to move if you do well. There are always exceptions to this but I think the current system, where small clubs sign the players who don't make it at big clubs is the wrong way around. Yes, facilities are better at the bigger clubs, but nothing beats first team football. 

2 hours ago, alexscottislegend said:

My point is he could have been playing for us! And regularly. With the upcoming talent we have (McPake, King, Mebude, Kennedy et al) we could be close to something like the Man U class of '92. Don't tell me most Rangers supporters would not want to see that? Otherwise we just harvest youngsters for the wealthy few.

I can't remember a time when we've not had upcoming talent, the problem is it rarely makes that final step into our first team. We'd a spell in the early 2000s when Hutton, Stevie Smith, McGregor and Adam all followed Barry Ferguson to become first team players and made decent contributions. Previously players like Scott Wilson, Steven Pressley, Craig Moore, Charlie Miller, Maurice Ross, Chris Burke, John Fleck, Barrie McKay and Lewis McLeod have made some sort of impact on our first team but currently there's no one even in our first team squad we can point at and say to any promising young player 'that could be you'. Barjonas seems to be forcing his way back into some sort of contention but he's far from the first team. But would anyone be surprised if McPake, King, Mebude and Kennedy don't make it at Rangers? Frankly I'd be more surprised if they do. 

9 hours ago, duffman1872 said:

Listen to the pod every week, Colin a great host, always enjoy listening to him and Stewart Weir especially.  Keep up the good work ?

I couldn't agree more, Colin makes it sound easy, and it's not, but he's got a relaxed manner and natural style to what he does and it comes over really well. To be fair Ross does too.

Stewart Weir (or Steven as he's now known) is clearly a pro and sounds it. 

24 minutes ago, Briton said:

So If we are going to lose any player who looks the part  would we be better off not investing in a youth system and just acquire a squad as needs be?   A rhetorical question as it's not going to happen but it does make you wonder who we are going to bring through under those circumstances.

It's an interesting point and one I think there's a good argument for it. All I would say is that not every kid who shows massive potential at 15 realises it, and many a kid who didn't look like they'd make it at 15 goes on to have a stellar career. Elfideldo tells of seeing Michael Stewart play as a schoolboy, he turned down our offer and signed for Man Utd, a club with a fantastic record of nurturing talent, but failed to live up to the expectation. 

I don't know much about the lad King other than he seems to be highly prized, however it's hard to make a strong argument for him to stay with Rangers currently which is a real shame. 

It's only in recent times (last 40 years or so) that Cliftonville have been seen as a 'Catholic/Nationalist' club. That's partly to do with the changing demographics of that part of Belfast and partly to do with the demise of Belfast Celtic the traditional West Belfast 'Catholic/nationalist supported club. In the early 70s most of the Protestant families in that area were burnt out and Cliftonville cricket club, who played beside the football team, had to abandon their home of over 100 years due to sectarian attacks on players and supporters. The other main Belfast sides couldn't play at Solitude during the 70s and 80s for safety reasons, and Cliftonville lost many of their traditional supporters due to this too. In turn they attracted many 'nationalists' living locally and from other parts of Belfast.

Sport is a helpful way to understand Northern Ireland and Belfast in particular. Football isn't encouraged in the Republican communities, so Cliftonville weren't able to build a big support to rival Linfield and Glentoran. At the same time the rivalry between Glentoran and Linfield, two 'Protestant/unionist' supported clubs, is far more intense and far more visceral than between them and any of the 'Catholic' supported clubs. 

15 hours ago, 26th of foot said:

Rangers Colts at Solitude would be interesting?

It was the suggestion of future matches at the Brandywell that really raised my eyebrows!

I lived in Northern Ireland for a while and went to a match at Solitude once. I quite liked the ground, I like football grounds that are situated in residential areas, cheek to jowl with houses and people. I was little nervous visiting that part of Belfast though, one visit was enough for me. I went to matches at all the Belfast grounds plus Coleraine when I was there. I didn't ever go to Larne's which I regret as I like the look of it, you can see it when leaving the ferry and heading for Belfast. Although I became a Crusaders fan my favourite ground was The Oval, where Glentoran play. It was a really atmospheric old ground and both times I went there was a decent crowd. I went to Windsor Park a couple of times, once to see Linfield and once to see a Northern Ireland match. Again this was the old ground before the redevelopment. It was too big for the crowd that attended the Linfield match, so it had a poor atmosphere. 

There was a great thread on Rangersmedia many moons ago about the Rangers v Bohemians of Dublin match in the early 80s. I knew a couple of guys who attended the away leg and some of their stories were just astonishing. 

An interesting idea, thanks. I've no idea how feasible this is but it's an interesting discussion.

I could see a pan-Irish/Scottish league happening actually, both the Irish leagues want to increase revenues and interest. There's not a massive amount in it for Scottish sides though, but combined TV deals might be attractive to broadcasters. Getting the 'swifts' into the Irish League might be a precursor to that. 

23 hours ago, buster. said:

If they are able to hoover up the elite talent from most other clubs with fewer resources then it'll be more likely they'll have the younger players who are made of the right stuff to make the first team squad. 

 

An 18 year old Billy Gilmour is now making the Chelsea bench in EPL matches. 

 

- If he were still at Rangers, where do you think he would be in terms of breaking through to the first team ?

 

- Have his 2 years development at Chelsea been significantly more constructive than they would have been in Glasgow ?  If so, why ? 

 

 

Given the current expectations placed on the team and management relative to the challenge faced, is it realistic to expect a pathway to open up UNLESS we produce exceptional talent complete with the necessary strong mentality.

 

--------

 

My take is that we have to win the title and get that monkey off our backs in the short term. Then hope that the current crop coming through do produce and the likes of Kelly , McPake, Kennedy etc. continue to improve to the point of joining the first team squad.

 

IMO taking everything into consideration (including finances), the necessary timescale being we win the title this season (at a stretch the following season) and we start to get several youths into the first team squad for 20/21.

Chelsea play at a higher level than we do, they are in a more competitive league and in the Champion's League, so the standard a young player has to attain to reach their first team is higher than ours. I'm well aware that circumstances have forced Chelsea down this route and until relatively recently they were largely ignoring their youth prospects. However, currently, they look like a better career path than we do. 

Unfortunately I've seen nothing from the club recently to suggest we've figured out how to take highly talented, over-achieving youngsters and turn them into first team players. There's no way of knowing where Gilmour would be if he'd stayed at Rangers, but ask yourself would he be ahead of Davis, Kamara and Jack? Arfield or Kent? I'm not convinced, and nothing the club have done in the recent past has suggested to me he would be. 

I don't disagree with you in terms of the club's focus, but I'm not yet convinced there is a pathway to our first team even if we did win the league this season. It's not about whether that's the right thing or not, it's all about the context around the young lad King being courted by Chelsea and Liverpool. My point is that if I were him (or his parents) the harsh reality is that Liverpool and Chelsea can both point to successful 'graduates' of their youth system playing regular 1st team football at the highest level, plus offer him a life changing amount of money. We can't even point to successful youth system graduates. It makes it harder to convince an exceptionally talented young player their future lies with us. 

On 09/11/2019 at 19:23, craig said:

Disagree.  The biggest issue we will have in keeping him is money.

 

Billy Gilmour for a move at 16 and was rumored to be on £17k a week the moment he signed for Chelsea and rising to £22k a week on his 17th birthday.

 

I’ve personally seen Leon play since he was 8, though obviously fleetingly.  My son played against him 7 years ago and even then he looked a player.  Saw him the following year as a full back (prior to 11 a side) and his engine was terrific by also. Very good football player.

 

He played in a tournament a couple of gears ago down south and some of the scouts that were there questioned Rangers’ sanity in letting him play and be seen.

 

Some at HTC believe he has a brighter future than even Billy Gilmour.

 

Leon’s also a very well liked kid.

Craig, it's patently obvious we can't compete on money, that doesn't need stated, which is why our strongest card should always be the opportunity to get first team football earlier, play in cup finals, Old Firm matches, Europe and International football before moving south as an established first team player. Any aspiring young player should look at Rangers and see a clear path to first team football and then look at big English sides and see various loan spells before being released at 21 having made the bench in the League Cup a couple of times while their peers have 200 first team games under their belts. If money is what motivates them (and I'm not criticising them for that) then it won't matter what we say they'll go with who offers the most. If the family are looking at a bigger longer term picture we should be able to convince them to sign, however, currently it saddens me to say that Chelsea and Liverpool are better at training and promoting youth players to their first team than we are. 

On 09/11/2019 at 18:30, JFK-1 said:

The thing is the names you're mentioning currently out on loan patently aren't good enough to force a way into the first 11 anytime soon. If this boy is good enough there is a path for him. If he isn't good enough he's not going to make it at Liverpool/Chelsea either.
 

If he has some real quality all things being equal there has to be a better chance of regularly making the first team at Rangers than at Liverpool/Chelsea since we can't afford to match the depth of top quality they can. Alfie went straight into the first team at just 20 because he was good enough and is now turning EPL heads as he terrorises Europe. 

And talking of Alfie there's a chance he can hit 30 goals before the end of the year to match his total for all of last year. Last player to do anything like that Was Marco Negri who hit 33 by the end of the year in 1997. 

Yeah, but at 15 everyone involved thought those lads all had an excellent chance of making the Rangers first team, otherwise why bother offering them contracts and signing them? Some still might, but without a clear pathway to the first team and examples of players who've made that transition, it's much harder to convince young players their career is better served at Rangers. 

Alfie cost £1 Million to sign and we were his third senior club, I don't think the two are comparable. 

4 hours ago, JFK-1 said:

I'm hoping there's a chance we can start holding on to these boys given our success in Europe. They don't need to go anywhere else to get the chance to compete at a higher level in Europe at least. And what are the chances of getting into the first team at the likes of Liverpool anytime soon. 

I said the same thing about Billy Gilmour when he left us for Chelsea and he's on their bench today having featured in the Chelsea first team already this season. The biggest issue we'll have convincing this boy to stay is demonstrating the pathway into our first team. The unfortunate truth is there isn't one currently. McCrorie is struggling at Portsmouth, Rudden isn't even on the bench for Plymouth today, we've a couple of lads doing well at Ayr Utd but we've no clue if any of them will even make our first team squad next season far less the starting 11. 

Even if he's the biggest bluenose in the world the sad truth is the only other academy graduate who is in our first team currently is 37 year old Allan McGregor. So he might as well join Liverpool or Chelsea. Indeed he's probably got more chance of making the Rangers first team if he joins Liverpool.

Brilliant work and fascinating insight as ever. Well done. 

Good stuff Bluedell, many thanks. 

57 minutes ago, Gaffer said:

I read the accounts, but I didn't post anything because I didn't see anything particularly surprising or worrying about them.  Others may be the same.

 

I have an issue with your point about selling a player.  Of course selling a player will have a big impact on the team, which is why I hope King will be around for long enough to help us build a conveyor belt of talent to allow the club to fund itself.  However we can't have it both ways.  Either we don't want the club to require funding from King and in which case take much longer to return to winning ways, or we are happy with it for a period of time.  How can anyone be surprised in the slightest with these results, given the outlay we've had on players and upgrades?

 

I think it's all very well being concerned that the club suffers losses, but what would anyone here propose we do differently?  How can we build our revenue streams quickly without incurring significant losses?  I've never known any medium sized business (such as our club) being able to do that.  I'd be more concerned if these losses were debts but they're not.  These losses have been converted to equity at each opportunity.

 

Like everyone here, I'll continue to scrutinise the board's actions and the relevant accounts (and court judgements) because I don't want to leave that to other commentators again, but I will represent the information fairly.  There can be nothing in here that is a surprise to anyone surely?

I expected a loss but I expected a much reduced one. So I was surprised at the size of the loss and the need for more investment on top of it, I don't mind admitting. 

You make a very valid point about the need to grow and to do that there's a requirement for investment and I accept that, as far as we know, all the investors are happy to see that investment turned into shares. We're very lucky. 

As I said earlier in the thread I'd be interested in knowing what the mid-term plan is, how will the current Directors exit. I'm not panicking, but I'm a little nervous. 

49 minutes ago, Gaffer said:

I've read the accounts and there's nothing in there that worries me at all.  The debt is converted to equity so there's little to no debt funding required.  Even if King decided to pack up and leave, all we need to do is cover that loss with the sale of a player and we are break even.  Obviously, if King went we would need to either to continue to fund the gap with the sale of players or cut our cloth accordingly.  However the main difference now is that we would continue to survive.

 

I must admit that I am quite happy that the focus is on our board and our accounts because we need to maintain a healthy level of scrutiny.  What that lot across the city will find (if they bother to scrutinise their own accounts rather than ours) is if they fail to qualify for the group stages in Europe, they will see their bank balance wiped out very quickly.  Their spending is all balanced against an expectation of doing well in Europe.  To be fair, this was a sensible model while they were given a crack at the Champions League each year (without any domestic challenge), but one season of failure can quickly result in their house of cards collapsing.  That would be a shame!

My biggest concern Gaffer is there has in fact been very little focus on the board and accounts. This thread had around 4 replies until yesterday. We live in strange times, without making any political points there is a genuine chance that this country could look very different this time next year. Between Brexit and serious calls for another independence vote there is instability and uncertainty as well as financial volatility. Not the time you want to be depending on the largesse of individuals who, I assume, have their money tied up in investments, property and so on. 

Selling a player isn't without consequence. If we lose Morelos, undoubtedly our most sellable player, he needs replaced and that will cost money. Also, these figures remind all the buying clubs that we need the money, never the best place to be in negotiations. Morelos aside who is going to raise serious cash? Jack should walk into most English Championship sides and if he can maintain his form Barasic could prove valuable, Goldson, Katic, Helander, Tav and Kamara I suspect would too. But in reality are any of them going to leave for in excess of £10 million? I'm not convinced. Our squad players aren't going to raise much, no one is spending a lot to take Grezda, Murphy, Flanagan, Polster, McCrorie, Docherty, Foderingham or Halliday from us. 

I found the results a lot more troubling than you. Perhaps that's because of our recent history, perhaps I'm just naturally more pessimistic and cautious. 

8 hours ago, Bluedell said:

Do we really need a Celtic fan's view on here?  I'm sure we could go into the Celtic forums if we want to read how we're not going to make it to the end of the season but there's no need for it here. 

I'd never heard of that guy until yesterday and clearly he isn't someone to take seriously on matters Rangers. However nature abhors a vacuum and, 4 Lads aside, I didn't see much written about our results by our supporters. If we've learned anything in the last few years it's that Tims enjoy nothing more than writing about Rangers.

JFK-1up the thread has possibly summed up how too many of our support feel and that apathy has the potential to ruin us, again. That's probably my biggest concern. 

Agreed BD. Can you imagine the nightmare we'd face if UEFA decided to impose a transfer ban on us. That said this type of thing has always gone on, 'tapping up' and gentleman's agreements are as old as the professional game. Sam English told how Bill Struth made payments to him through a foreman at John Brown shipyard when he was still a Yoker player so he wouldn't sign for anyone else. This feels like a modern version of that. 

Have to say I expected there to be more chat about this thread. While I accept the board have the club's best interests at heart and are very different from past boards an £11 million pound loss is somewhat worrying. Without wishing to sound morbid what happens to Rangers if something happens to Dave King? King is in his mid 60s, that's not 'old' by today's standards, but it's not young either. 

I'm grateful for the money the directors have put in and continue to invest, but that's surely not sustainable for much longer. I'd like to know what the plan is for the short to medium term though. I assume it's 'sell players', which is fair enough but has proved harder than it sounds so far. I'd be very concerned if our plan for profitability is based on qualifying for the Champion's League. 

I'd also be interested to hear the current board's exit plan. What's the long term plan for the club? An open share issue? Private sale of shares to other high-wealth individuals? New investors? 

While we're all enjoying having a high profile manager again and playing some decent football while challenging properly for honours I'm nervous about what's next. What happens if we don't win the league this season, do we twist and gamble again next year or sell our best player(s) and balance the books? We all want to stop Celtic winning 10 in a row, but we also want a club for the long term.