Can Rangers fans embrace being a selling club?

[trublusince1982 243]

Gave up at the comparison with what Celtic do. Complete nonsense. We are signing free agents from mainly one market. They search the whole european market for players with a sell on value when introduced to European cup football experience.

 

Signing the majority of players on freebies ain't even close to doing that.

 

If as stated king has money to put in why wait till after the window is shut .Please don't go for st money is to pay for recruitment since it won't be available either until the window is shut.

 

Stop listening to words and judge actions and circumstances. If we had money we would be spending it.Nothing sinister in that it's the obvious explanation for our actions.

 

The part about quality having nothing to do with spend is wrong to. Correct if taking a single transaction into account. But not when buying several players in one window the chance of quality at that price range reduce dramatically with each purchase. The chances of finding 7 players good enough to play in front of 50000 for under 200k each would be close to winning the lottery.

[gisabeer 409]

I dont think warburton would have came with no budget. But i an very miffed at the level were at when it comes to signing players.

[Calgacus 8]

I don't think we're going to get the type of players we'd like, while we are in the Scottish Championship.

[der Berliner 3,742]

IMHO, only the utterly inflated prices in the English market have made the Yahoos' transfer activities a success. They sure have spotted the odd talented chap out there (or the latter used Scum FC as a stepping stone to the EPL) and have him play in a non-competitive league, but with a winning team, may indeed improve chances to be spotted. Add the odd good European game and off you go. Yet, rest assured that if the English weren't awash with money, the figures would be far less "glorious" or impressive.

 

As for us, when you look around Europe, many of the better clubs have first teamers aged 22 to 25, hungry folk out to prove their worth ... and probably move on to a bigger club. Thus, I am not sure whether the tag "selling club" is really appropriate, as it would cover some 75% - if not more - of all teams out there. Generally, hardly any club is going to revolve its squad due to incoming and outgoing players to merit that tag though.

 

In any case, we should make sure that all outgoing players leave with a sell-on-clause in their deal, even as low a 5%. For one never knows what will happen in the future.

Edited July 9, 2015 by der Berliner

[Ser Barristan Selmy 222]

A selling club? Since Advocaat left the vast majority of our players have been paid off or left on contract expiration. A selling club would be a huge improvement from where we were before. That said, we have publicly said on numerous occasions we are a selling club, for years we were doing everything we could to sell our players. I remember when there was some interest in Daniel Cousin we told the press his minimum fee release clause!

 

I would hope if anything we are going to radically change our approach to transfers, signing decent foreign players that we can develop and sell for a decent profit. We certainly aren't going to get an awful lot of value for money focusing on English football, hopefully that changes next season.

 

Pretty much every team in the world is ultimately a selling club, bar the odd few. There's varying degrees to be had though, with certain clubs being more reluctant than others to part their cash. 'Every player has their price', but with us that price was often the first offer another team made.

Edited July 9, 2015 by Ser Barristan Selmy

[Ser Barristan Selmy 222]

Another argument is “where is the money we should be spending on players?” This is nonsensical. The quality of player has nothing to do with the transfer spend. So far, we have made 3 signings at a transfer cost of £200k but these additions have probably added between £1.5 and £2 million to the playing squad’s value.

Firstly, I don't see why it is nonsensical. We clearly are not awash with cash. We do not want to go down the route of splashing cash we don't have, but we clearly do need significant investment pretty much everywhere.

 

As for the part in bold, while you can obviously get bargains, what you are saying is illogical.

Edited July 9, 2015 by Ser Barristan Selmy

[Gribz 850]

I think we were a selling club even if when we were in the CL 10 years ago. Unfortunately it comes down to players wanting to play for bigger bucks when claiming its for winning bigger trophies. Even 75% of the English Premier League are selling clubs.

 

We made good sales profit out of Boumsong and Alan Hutton. I cant remember if we got anything for Charlie Adam.

[Rangersitis 0]

A selling club? Since Advocaat left the vast majority of our players have been paid off or left on contract expiration. A selling club would be a huge improvement from where we were before. That said, we have publicly said on numerous occasions we are a selling club, for years we were doing everything we could to sell our players. I remember when there was some interest in Daniel Cousin we told the press his minimum fee release clause!

 

I would hope if anything we are going to radically change our approach to transfers, signing decent foreign players that we can develop and sell for a decent profit. We certainly aren't going to get an awful lot of value for money focusing on English football, hopefully that changes next season.

 

Pretty much every team in the world is ultimately a selling club, bar the odd few. There's varying degrees to be had though, with certain clubs being more reluctant than others to part their cash. 'Every player has their price', but with us that price was often the first offer another team made.

 

 

Spot on! There have been a grand total of ten transfers of over £1m since Advocaat stepped down in 2001 totalling about £40m.

 

Flo, Amoruso, McCann, Ferguson, Boumsong, Hutton, Arteta, Thomson, Wilson, Jelavic.

 

A transfer surplus of £10m per annum from a declining nation is rather optimistic.

Edited July 9, 2015 by Rangersitis

[Darthter 542]

I think it is essential that we become a selling club - as long as it's done right.

 

For too long we have done things the wrong way - we have brought in players with inflated transfer fees & OTT wages. We then try to keep them as long as possible, then they move on for less than we paid - either as free agents or poor negotiations.

 

We need to bring players in, develop them, play them....then they will start to attract increased bids. All to often we have brought in players, done nothing with them training-wise then not played them. If a player isn't playing, he ain't gonna attract a decent transfer.

[Rangersitis 0]

I think we were a selling club even if when we were in the CL 10 years ago. Unfortunately it comes down to players wanting to play for bigger bucks when claiming its for winning bigger trophies. Even 75% of the English Premier League are selling clubs.

 

We made good sales profit out of Boumsong and Alan Hutton. I cant remember if we got anything for Charlie Adam.

 

 

Adam was sold to Blackpool for £500k.