Who should be the new manager?

[buster. 5,598]

1 minute ago, L72 said:

You were being funny as if it's going to cost us a great deal to get rid of the manager, staff, and overhauling the player squad.

 

I pointed out to you that you'll need to remember the management team has already been paid off, Ferguson and his coaches are only contracted to the end of the season, and we have player loans that are expiring in Cerny, Kasanwirjo & Fernandes. 

 

So we're actually going to be quite clear when it comes to the summer - that's not incorrect to say as many of the things you said, have already been cleared or will when the season ends. 

 

Thanks.

No, the overhauling of the playing squad is going to cost an arm and a leg. At least if we are to do so using your views.

 

That is, pay off all the duds and bring in players of a level that will bring success.

 

Not "quite clear".... A relatively large outlay will be required.

 

 

 

 

[L72 134]

2 minutes ago, buster. said:

No, the overhauling of the playing squad is going to cost an arm and a leg. At least if we are to do so using your views.

 

That is, pay off all the duds and bring in players of a level that will bring success.

 

Not "quite clear".... A relatively large outlay will be required.

 

 

 

 

Have you actually looked at our squad?

 

We have 25 players, three of them are away straight away with the end of their loans, another six with their contracts set to expire this summer.

 

So that's 9 players gone. 

 

We'll have 16 players. 

 

And then you factor in any that gets moved on.

 

I say again mate, the decks will be quite clear.

[Rousseau 11,644]

1 hour ago, L72 said:

There's no mistake. 23/24 arrivals, Koppen starts at Cortes (players highlighted are his January signings 👍🏻)

If you're looking at that record and think it's bad, then we'll have to agree to disagree. 

[CammyF 9,328]

This notion that the overall of the squad is going to cost a fortune us not true. 

 

If the footballing structure is correct and functioning properly, the playing side will instantly improve. Then the footballing side sell players at the right time, identify and secure low cost prospects.

 

This acceptance of what the current board tell us as "fact" has led to an acceptance of 2nd best and an acceptance that everything we need to be better will cost the earth. 

 

Neither is true.

 

 

[buster. 5,598]

5 minutes ago, CammyF said:

This notion that the overall of the squad is going to cost a fortune us not true. 

 

If the footballing structure is correct and functioning properly, the playing side will instantly improve. Then the footballing side sell players at the right time, identify and secure low cost prospects.

 

This acceptance of what the current board tell us as "fact" has led to an acceptance of 2nd best and an acceptance that everything we need to be better will cost the earth. 

 

Neither is true.

 

 

So it's pish easy, won't cost that much and it will be "instant improvement" !! One of those instant 'Acme Player trading models' that only requires a drop of water, perhaps.

 

What timescale do you put on us winning and successfully defending a League Championship?

[CammyF 9,328]

4 minutes ago, buster. said:

So it's pish easy, won't cost that much and it will be "instant improvement" !! One of those instant 'Acme Player trading models' that only requires a drop of water, perhaps.

 

What timescale do you put on us winning and successfully defending a League Championship?

It'll depend on who we get as manager, sporting director etc. 

 

I didn't say it would be pish easy, far from it, but done correctly it won't cost the earth and shouldn't take too long to implement. 

 

To win the title, we only have to finish above 1 team. We've beaten them twice this season. We've lost the league due to our inability to create a playing style that can beat the low block. 

 

We needn't spend a fortune to beat Hibs, Hearts and Killie. 

 

A well coached, hungry and fit team will win us the league. 

 

As for your final question, that also depends on the above.

 

 

[Uilleam 6,375]

Some interesting, and objective, observations from The Times' football stats and data man, on BF. 

 

Barry Ferguson’s tactical notes left Rangers lost in Bilbao

The interim head coach’s instructions confused his own side in their Europa League quarter-final second leg and reflect a wider theme from the Premiership

Ferguson passes on a tactical note to Tavernier during the Europa League defeat

ANDER GILLENEA/AFP

Hamzah Khalique-Loonat, Football Data Journalist

Friday April 18 2025, 7.20pm, The Times

 

Barry Ferguson initially attempted to bat away questions about his Rangers future but, eventually, bit at one, “I know I can do the job,” he said.

The Rangers manager was in a defiant mood. Coaches have a short time to compose themselves after a match before heading into their post-match press conferences, but more often than not, they are still stinging after defeat. This was no exception and when Ferguson spoke, his words came from his heart.

So despite advancing his own ambitions to lead Rangers permanently, Ferguson also channeled his emotions as a proud supporter and former player.

“I’m just concerned in terms of what happens; I just want my club to get back to where it should be,” he said.

“That’s my main concern. Whether that’s me or somebody else, and if it’s not me, I’ll fully support them. I’ll go back and do what I was doing before and get right behind [them], making sure that we get the club back to winning trophies on a regular basis.”

 

This was not his finest hour. The manager had reshuffled and reorganised his team throughout the game via slips of paper delivered onto the field, and they looked lost for large periods of it, as only Bilbao’s errant finishing spared Rangers an embarrassing scoreline.

Most of ’recent failings cannot be laid at Ferguson’s door. He inherited a listing side, whose failings look worse because of Celtic’s brilliance in the league, and bravely offered to help right the ship.

But that makes no difference to Rangers’ board who, come the end of the season, will have to consider whether Ferguson, at this point in his managerial career, is the figure to lead the club.

 

Underlying statistics suggest that Rangers have got worse under Ferguson

ION ALCOBA BEITIA/GETTY IMAGES

 

Since Ferguson took charge in late February, Rangers have won and lost four apiece and drawn two matches.

Among those ten games are outstanding results, such as Rangers’ victory over Jose Mourinho’s Fenerbahce, memorable wins, like Rangers’ first win at Parkhead since 2020, and stirring acts of defiance evidenced this weekend against Aberdeen and at Ibrox against Athletic Bilbao.

 

But the performances have not been as convincing; Rangers have been riding their luck, and their defeat to Bilbao was another demonstration of this.

The first half was an almighty mess: Rangers had two — extremely optimistic — efforts from range, while Bilbao should have scored four, with Nico Williams (twice) and Oihan Sancet having golden opportunities before John Souttar fouled Maroan Sannadi inside the penalty area to give Sancet a spot kick.

The shot count in the first half was 15-2; Bilbao had 268 passes to Rangers’ 175; and 22 touches in the opposition’s penalty area to Rangers’ none.

Had Rangers come to play a defensive, tight first-half, those numbers would have made sense. There is logic in soaking up pressure, and playing to counter.

Yet, the manager stressed before the match the difference between this match and the first leg was that his team needed to show some quality with possession — within seven seconds of kick-off, they booted the ball out of play.

 

Ferguson’s words were not mere rhetoric, either: Rangers had come to play, but simply couldn’t. They strung together possession sequences of 10 or more passes on just three occasions.

The visitors were pinned back by Bilbao, who found it easy to play through their press, albeit more challenging to pick apart their back five.

 

But there was nothing redeeming about their work with possession; the forwards were isolated, the defenders unsure of when and where to pass to, playing short when direct options were better and going long when they were unprepared to contest the second ball — no better exemplified than in the moments leading to Bilbao’s penalty: Liam Kelly kicked long, with not long until half-time. Bilbao made uncontested contact on the first ball, and recovered it near their own penalty area. Dessers ran forward, to apply pressure, but behind him Rangers’ midfield four was disorganised. Bilbao had two midfielders unmarked in the centre of the pitch, and it took just one pass infield to precipitate a break which ended with Souttar felling Sannadi.

There were countless examples of similar disorganisation across the opening 45 minutes.

Yet across both halves, Ferguson made constant changes to his team, supposedly to fix these issues. These were not small adjustments or tweaks, but fundamental alterations to the team’s structure and how they played.

 

Rangers started the match using a 3-4-2-1 with possession and a 5-4-1 without, but both systems were altered via messages to James Tavernier, scrawled onto scraps of paper, and the captain was then tasked with ensuring his team-mates understood the changes.

The confused and unsure reactions of the players as they attempted to slot into position, only to look over to the bench and see Ferguson clarifying via finger motions, meant the changes were often not in effect until two or three breaks in play after the initial message had been passed on. Bilbao, meanwhile, were slicing through the spaces with ease. It was difficult to communicate amid the din, but Rangers’ players looked unprepared.

 

After the match, the manager was unrepentant about how he set his team up, “My formation, I thought, was good enough,” he said. The subsequent first-half tactical changes, he explained, were injury-induced, referring to Ridvan Yilmaz.

“You can’t help an injury after 23 minutes, then you have to shuffle, [there’s] people running about and it unsettles us for a small period of time,” he continued.

“After getting in at half-time, I have to make another change, and then, obviously, [there’s] changes in the second half — but that’s part of football.”

Advertisement

The second half, to Ferguson’s credit, showed more promise.

When Rangers built out, their structure was visible. The back four, spread across the pitch and supported by a midfield double-pivot, looked stable. With those players in place, the visitors could advance. Combination and approach play followed.

Possession rose from 39 per cent in the first half to 50 per cent in the second. The shot count looked more even: Bilbao had seven to Rangers’ five; between the 58th and 69th minutes, Rangers had three to Bilbao’s none.

 

Then came another of Ferguson’s tactical tweaks, and with it went Rangers’ momentum. Even then, Rangers were, frankly, lucky to still be in the game.

Ferguson may point to the two penalty decisions he believed went against his team — the first, a shirt pull on Cyriel Dessers, the second a handball — and it’s entirely true that a penalty decision may have changed the course of the game.

However, neither of those opportunities appeared to have been caused by Rangers continually stressing Bilbao in the way Souttar’s foul on Williams was.

And this performance and Ferguson’s constant tactical tinkering sits among a wider backdrop of Rangers striving to find a playing identity, and somehow alighting on a defensive, counter-attacking gameplan that is not befitting of Rangers.

 

Ferguson’s changes and tweaks have not been working, as evidenced by how his team’s attacking production has worsened, just like their defensive record 

 

 

 

But Ferguson stood by his changes. “That’s my job, as manager,” he said. “I need to try and find a formula to try and get back into the game. I’m not scared to make changes.

“I said that when I took the job, watching Rangers week in, week out, there was no flexibility whatsoever — that’s a difference we’ve made since we’ve come through the door.

“Whether that’s a back three, four, or a five, whatever, I’ve got to try, come up with scenarios that can get us back into the game.”

The problem is, his constant tinkering quashed Rangers’ chance of a comeback on Thursday, and have left his team more generally without an identiy and idea to draw upon when they need to.

 

The former midfielder has every right to make his case to Rangers that he should be the man to lead the club, that he can find a style of play that can bring the best out of these players, but right now, as Rangers’ performance against Bilbao showed, and the preceding nine games have intimated, it appears Rangers require a steadier, more experienced hand with a greater sense of clarity to return the club to the top of Scottish football.

e

[Rousseau 11,644]

An xG rolling chart? 

 

Woke nonsense. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mine is better... 

[buster. 5,598]

21 hours ago, CammyF said:

It'll depend on who we get as manager, sporting director etc. 

 

I didn't say it would be pish easy, far from it, but done correctly it won't cost the earth and shouldn't take too long to implement. 

 

To win the title, we only have to finish above 1 team. We've beaten them twice this season. We've lost the league due to our inability to create a playing style that can beat the low block. 

 

We needn't spend a fortune to beat Hibs, Hearts and Killie. 

 

A well coached, hungry and fit team will win us the league. 

 

 

We should have got you in as sporting director 10 years ago.

 

It is so straightforward and cheap. At least in your make believe world where everything is done correctly and your logic actually applies itself to the real world.

 

 

Was it you that said or someone else who said a few months ago, ..."all we have to do is start winning our away games and we'll be fine" (our home record was excellent at that point in time) ?

 

Logic that on the face of it made sense but the real world didn't agree. We improved our away form and our home form fell off a cliff.

 

 

[CammyF 9,328]

27 minutes ago, buster. said:

We should have got you in as sporting director 10 years ago.

 

It is so straightforward and cheap. At least in your make believe world where everything is done correctly and your logic actually applies itself to the real world.

 

 

Was it you that said or someone else who said a few months ago, ..."all we have to do is start winning our away games and we'll be fine" (our home record was excellent at that point in time) ?

 

Logic that on the face of it made sense but the real world didn't agree. We improved our away form and our home form fell off a cliff.

 

 

I'm nowhere near capable of being a Sporting Director. I'm simply a fan.

 

It is simple - our league is a two horse race and has been for what, 3 or 4 decades. 

 

It shouldnt take untold millions to beat the rest of the SPFL - all It takes is a style the blows them away (look at 55 as an example). 

 

This season we have beaten Celtic twice in the league, if we had beaten the rest on a consistent basis, we'd be challenging for the title. That's all down to the style of football, or lack off style under Clement and now BF. Our mangers are being out-thought week after week. 

 

Last season we were challenging for the title and at one point we were favourites. Then Clement changed our style of play, starting making random team selections and subs. We also lacked fitness, something he said he would improve. 

 

We need to stop this "mental" block we have when it comes to overtaking Celtic. Make the correct appointments, get the squad fit, hungry and playing a relentless style of football and we will have a very good chance of being successful. 

 

We've failed in all of the above, with the exception of SG. Gio came close, and with hindsight was maybe removed from the role prematurely. 

 

A forward thinking board could achieve all of the above quickly and without spending untold millions.

 

All our issues stem form a board who fell asleep at the wheel and have made a catalogue of woeful decisions and I can't believe some fans still think otherwise. 

 

If the takeover doesn't go ahead, what evidence is there that current board will have us winning titles in the next decade? 

 

That's where we are, and the blame lies squarely in the boardroom.. 

 

Change or die? I think that's where we currently are.