Is There Any Point In New Signings Under MW

[Cdoug29 0]

I've seen a lot of people, including me, question last summers signings and lack of signings in January. Did Dave King not give MW a transfer budget etc... However when you look at the team since Jan last year. I.e. MOH, is there any point in MW making signings? He does not play them in favour of his favourites. Has DK said why give you funds for players when they sit on the bench! I was reading David Bates interview, seems a good promising young defender. Unlikely to be any worse than what we've seen, I just worry he will never feature and end up away!

[Davie P 4]

It's interesting, isn't it. In my more rational moments, it has to be said that Warburton's record at Brentford with identifying young talented players, bringing them through and selling them on at decent profits was excellent. He has attempted to replicate this at Rangers, but the weight of expectation on players at our club versus Brentford is worlds apart. Perhaps unreasonably, we expect Rangers to be challenging for the title, whereas for Brentford avoiding relegation is job done.

I can only imagine that the players he signed in year 1 (i.e. the Championship winning team) were expected to be replaced by better players as we progressed up the ladder. At face value, certainly Rossiter, Barton and Kranjcar would be expected to be an improvement on Halliday, Holt, Shiels, Law etc. but it just hasn't happened. I mentioned elsewhere that certain players cannot play in the style that MW favours (MoH, Garner) so it seems that he has reverted to those players that can i.e. the Championship team. Only problem is that the teams that they beat last season had inferior players and were intimidated by playing against Rangers.

[Frankie 8,562]

If you read the stuff in the papers then it could be argued the board have already made that decision and the minimal contribution of MOH, Barton and Garner in particular would make me nervous giving the manager any substantial cash.

 

The problem is that arguably the lower the fee, the less likely it is a player will work out. As such, expecting diamonds for the fees we pay is perhaps unrealistic. However, there's no denying we should be doing better and the MOH signing in particular was never going to work as his style of play just doesn't fit. Perhaps that's bad scouting more than anything else but to answer your question our mediocre transfer record doesn't strengthen the manager's hand when it comes to asking for more money.

 

But, more money, is what we undoubtedly need.

[lenny3k 660]

This could be one of the reasons why MW has been forced into loan signings.. The board doesn't 100% trust his ability to unearth 'value for money' and so he needs to loan players to prove he can find players that can cut it at Rangers.

[Frankie 8,562]

This could be one of the reasons why MW has been forced into loan signings.. The board doesn't 100% trust his ability to unearth 'value for money' and so he needs to loan players to prove he can find players that can cut it at Rangers.

 

Possibly but the manager himself has said he'll only sign players if he thinks they can improve the squad and that the January window isn't always the best place to do that.

[Cdoug29 0]

It is clear that the players he has brought in have ability, or show promise. Injury to Rossiter & Krancjar cannot be foreseen. There are managers getting more out of less in this league and MW inability to change or adapt will cost him his job. We need a manager who can get the best out of this under performing squad. When a player is bought you would think it is to improve the team. Ours signings just seem to be part of the background squad. i am at a loss to think what MW it actually trying to do, developing players is one thing, but if they are not put in the shop window then they will not be sold!

[lenny3k 660]

Possibly but the manager himself has said he'll only sign players if he thinks they can improve the squad and that the January window isn't always the best place to do that.

 

I agree.

 

I think another reason could be that with the possible lure of European football next season, why pay over inflated prices in January when in the summer, if we make it into Europe, we'll have a bigger choice of possible signings which represent better value...

Edited February 8, 2017 by lenny3k

[Frankie 8,562]

I agree.

 

I think another reason could be that with the possible lure of European football next season, why pay over inflated prices in January when in the summer, if we make it into Europe, we'll have a bigger choice of possible signings which represent better value...

 

Exactly...

[les186 271]

Wasn't the reason we got Rossiter was that he was injury prone and Liverpool decided to get rid? Also European qualification begins in June so we are unlikely to have brought anyone in by then so are likely to be beaten by some mediocre outfit who will know our weaknesses

[Gribz 850]

We've been very unlucky with Kranjcar and Rossiter. Had Kranjcar still been in the side he would probably be running every game. If they had stayed fit then Hyndman and Toral wouldnt have come and with Hyndman it might be we get him again in the summer which would be a boost.

 

Crooks has been a concerning one, there must have been something not picked up in his medical. We knew Windass came with an injury and he has been in and out. Id say one policy we must put in place now is not to sign anyone carrying so called short term injuries.

 

If we go on a winning streak again of about 5 games and play some good stuff then the opinions about MW will probably change. I just dont see who could possibly replace him at the moment.