Ongoing new manager discussion and speculation

[buster. 5,186]

I can't think of many, if any. I wish I could because I'd like to hope we were bringing in someone more exciting. However, I'm now resigned to the fact that it will be DM. I can't build any enthusiasm for this appointment, but I will support him as I would any Rangers manager. I'm now just hoping he can prove himself worthy of this post. However, until he's appointed I hope he loses every game in the meantime.

 

For the avoidance of doubt, I don't dislike DM as a person and he seems to get his teams winning (except against us). I just can't stomach the thought of that style of football.

 

There don't appear to be many and the obvious concern is if we were to approach Aberdeen/McInnes, that he said no.

[Gonzo79 15,293]

For all those who don't fancy McInnes,...... name a viable candidate with extensive knowledge of the British/Scottish game that you would prefer.

 

I'd prefer Tommy Wright. His teams do well against the bigger clubs. McInnes' teams don't.

[buster. 5,186]

I'd prefer Tommy Wright. His teams do well against the bigger clubs. McInnes' teams don't.

 

I think it's the consistency of results that have brought the sheep several consectutive second places that make McInnes a better fit.

That and the fact he already has hands-on experience of the demands that a Rangers player faces.

 

Wright has done a great job in Perth and I'd prefer him to some of the 'sexier names' that have been mentioned.

 

---------------

 

We have to realise where we are at present and how the manager market will perceive the Rangers job. Until we stabilize, re-build further and put ourselves in a position where we can actually challenge, rather than just expect to....then that will remain the case.

[Gonzo79 15,293]

There's not much in it for me (between Wright and McInnes).

 

The club is in a difficult situation, where the board have to get this appointment spot on or we could see Celtc dominant for over a decade and attendances/income fall if they cock it up. I think McInnes will bring some stability, which is a good start.

[boabie 230]

For all those who don't fancy McInnes,...... name a viable candidate with extensive knowledge of the British/Scottish game that you would prefer.

 

I think you've kind of mixed up 2 different arguments there buster.

" with extensive knowledge of the British/Scottish game " only applies if we are going with what King said.

I'm certain there are good managers out there without that quality who could do a great job at Ibrox. Who they are I don't know as I don't follow football outside Rangers.

McInnes if he arrived would imo get two years before the support had us back where we are right now.

Regular rogerings by the manks, which he seems to have got used to wouldn't be tolerated by our guys.

If he does arrive he'll certainly have my support. But to me it'll speak volumes about our board.

[buster. 5,186]

I think you've kind of mixed up 2 different arguments there buster.

" with extensive knowledge of the British/Scottish game " only applies if we are going with what King said.

I'm certain there are good managers out there without that quality who could do a great job at Ibrox. Who they are I don't know as I don't follow football outside Rangers.

McInnes if he arrived would imo get two years before the support had us back where we are right now.

Regular rogerings by the manks, which he seems to have got used to wouldn't be tolerated by our guys.

If he does arrive he'll certainly have my support. But to me it'll speak volumes about our board.

 

I happen to share DK's view on this.

 

You have to manage risk in difficult circumstances and I don't think that allows us to take a punt on an unknown from abroad that could be termed as 'viable'.

 

It would be fair to say that it was down to the previous bad appointment (here DK/the board should own up to a major F-up) that now the risk factor is higher.....but if nothing else, learn from it and don't repeat the same mistake.

 

There are certainly managers out there that would be better, but they aren't viable.

[Gribz 850]

As you say, the need for stability and re-building means Advocaat would be very unlikely.

 

Re. Stability: One of the positives about McInnes is that if he were to sign a contract, he'd more than likely, fully intend to see it out.......rather than be willing from the outset to use us as a stepping stone.

 

He spent 4 years at St.Johnstone, got the team promoted to the top tier (something Owen Coyle hadn't been able to do).

 

At Bristol City, he joined (in the October) with them bottom of league and kept them up. Following season went badly and he was sacked. People talk of mitigating circumstances re. state of club but I don't know to what extent they apply.

 

He's been 4 years at Aberdeen and has built an effective sqaud on relatively little money, which is capable of a consistency that brings 2nd place. (Best win % since Alex Ferguson). Only one League Cup win.

 

10 years of management and only one sacking.

 

I would take into consideration in that time he hasnt had to play Rangers, nor even Hibs, Hearts and Dundee Utd every year in that time for the full time in charge. Its a percentage against Ross County, Kilmarnock etc and Aberdeen who are the so called Liverpool of Scotland should be ahead of the lower sides every year considering. Plus their European qualification games have not went well at all, typical Scottish mindset of glorious failure - that concerns me. I would much prefer a winning mentality.

 

Speaking of of the Scottish / British experience I wonder if Sir Alex fancies coming home

[der Berliner 3,744]

When we speak of Aberdeen being "the Liverpool" of Scotland, we should keep in mind that in those years of our absence, Aberdeen were - outside the Hooped Horrors - the only team able to pay a transfer fee for a player, namely McLean of St. Mirren. None of the rest, 11 teams per 5 seasons, paid a single penny in fees and had to rely on freebies and loanees. That is the state of the game in Scotland, thanks to the machinations of Whyte, SPL, SFA, and the anarchy that they let rule in 2012. I have little sympathy for any of this lot (bar Dundee, perhaps), but the bare-bones scenario needs to be taken in account when debating what was possible to achieve. Even without the money, they probably had the best pool of players outside the HH's to chose from. Here's what they managed ... and ICt for comparison:

 

2012/13 - 8th [iCT 3rd, John Hughes]

2013/14 - 2nd (25 points adrift, won League Cup on penalties against ICT) [iCT 5th]

2014/15 - 2nd (7 points adrift) [iCT 3rd & Cup Winner]

2015/16 - 2nd (8 points adrift) [iCT 7th, John Hughes leaving at end of season]

2016/17 - 2nd (24 points adrift) [iCT 12 & relegated]

 

Essentially, it was always "make the best of the rest", which should not be disregarded. McInnes would get into a new environment at Ibrox and it is not that bad to have someone who knows the Scottish game - which caused our side so much bother over the last two seasons - inside out. As opposed to previous gaffers, he will have a DoF at his side, which may take some of the burden of identifying transfer targets outside Scotland off him - or any other new coach.

[Gaffer 1,665]

I think he will come in and make us hard to beat. I even think he will get us three wins in a row. However, what I find uninspiring is that we won't have our own style, and this is something I'm desperate for us to develop. He is a safe pair of hands, and perhaps I (and many others on here) just have to accept that we need stability for a while, at the expense of hope. PC and MW created hope and I liked that. They came with a chance of building something unique and special. I was excited by MW and PC, and there's no doubt that they brought an identifiable style of play with them. Some of the football we played (notwithstanding the poor results) is some of the best I've seen in years. If only the players had the determination, character, and aggression to go with it, things would be vey different now.

 

However, DM has shown at previous clubs that he can get results at the expense of anything particularly inspiring. If he is appointed, I'll have to adapt to taking enjoyment from results rather than style. That's not something I'm going to find easy. I've really been hoping that MW left his magic hat behind so Mark Allen could pull someone exciting from it.

[Oleg_Mcnoleg 50]

I think he will come in and make us hard to beat. I even think he will get us three wins in a row. However, what I find uninspiring is that we won't have our own style, and this is something I'm desperate for us to develop. He is a safe pair of hands, and perhaps I (and many others on here) just have to accept that we need stability for a while, at the expense of hope. PC and MW created hope and I liked that. They came with a chance of building something unique and special. I was excited by MW and PC, and there's no doubt that they brought an identifiable style of play with them. Some of the football we played (notwithstanding the poor results) is some of the best I've seen in years. If only the players had the determination, character, and aggression to go with it, things would be vey different now.

 

However, DM has shown at previous clubs that he can get results at the expense of anything particularly inspiring. If he is appointed, I'll have to adapt to taking enjoyment from results rather than style. That's not something I'm going to find easy. I've really been hoping that MW left his magic hat behind so Mark Allen could pull someone exciting from it.

 

I know what you mean but we, as a support, don’t seem to have the patience to be ‘a project’ that takes years to develop. We don’t have the cash to buy instant success either so we need some pragmatism. You’d hope that, behind the scenes, ‘the project’ and the style of play will continue to develop and that that ultimately benefits the first team.