Transfer Talk: Rangers return on the cards for Scotland ace Billy

Sounds like a lazy rumour to me.

He left to develop at an elite level EPL club with wages to match.

It’s highly unlikely that at 21 years of age he’s suddenly going to do a u-turn, take a pay cut and return to a much less competitive league.

More probably he’ll end up at another bottom half EPL side.
 
Stoorie said:
He would not sign a contract to become a professional footballer with Rangers.

I think you might be changing history here.

Edit: Don’t try to make me out like an agitator here. I would have him in a heartbeat, as a Rangers player.
NOT a Chelsea player.
Click to expand...

He wasn't making the first team, despite being levels above what we had. People talking about him not being a fan are talking shit. There's so much things involved that have nothing to do with being a fan, or not.

I agree on the loan or permanent situation.
 
Stoorie said:
Money.
If he was such a “supporter“ of the club, he wouldn’t have left in the first place.

As good a player as he is, he chose money before ‘his club’, and therefore he’s someone else’s player.
If he rips up his contract and signed for us, no problem, I’d have him, but he’s just another high profile talent that hasn’t fulfilled his ego, or arguably his talent.

We have just been in a major European final, which Chelsea would love. We don’t need their cast offs. (Harsh. I would take him back for free).
Click to expand...
Are you the ghost of Jock Wallace?
 
albop said:
id like to hope he would, he needs to kick start his career

as for jack, hes made of glass unfortunately

even when fit he is not the same player as last season
Click to expand...
I still think that Jack with a full pre season behind him and the long term calf problem behind him is a great asset and more realistic than Gilmour coming home
 
I personally think he’s overrated. A good player but not as good as made out.

After some very impressive games for Chelsea there was a game away to Palace where they got right in his face and didn’t give him the space other teams had.

A really good player would relish that because the quicker you try to close them down the easier it is for them to beat you. Gilmour didn’t seem to have that ability.

In subsequent games others have done the same with success and to an extent he’s been worked out.

Very nice passer and always looks to go forward but passing aside I’m not sure how many boxes he can tick. I always think a good passer in midfield needs at least one more string to his bow, be it goals, dribbling, tackling or an engine.
 
Zwingli'sSausages said:
He wasn't making the first team, despite being levels above what we had. People talking about him not being a fan are talking shit. There's so much things involved that have nothing to do with being a fan, or not.

I agree on the loan or permanent situation.
Click to expand...
He can’t make the first team if he’s not a professional footballer.
He wasn’t.
He signed his first professional contract with Chelsea.
We missed out, because of money and promises that Chelsea could offer that we could not.
He’s a Chelsea player.

If he signs for us, it has to be permanent. We should not be developing other’s players.
 
Yes please.

The return of Billy would be an outstanding bit of business if we could make it happen. Preferably on a perm and I'd even be comfortable with us paying 5-10 mil if required to make it happen. Given that his profile has stalled somewhat down there this seaons with an underwhelming loan spell at Norwich, I don't really see how Chelsea can ask for much more. I also think he was a bit unlucky with the change of manager...lampard seemed to really rate him and would have played him a lot more often in their first team, where as Tuchel hardly used him and presumably sanctioned the loan deal.

But the lad is quality. His performance in the Scotland v England match last year was rightly lauded by all and sundry. Composed, intelligent and seems like he has the ability to control a midfield and dictate tempo. He's the natural ready made Davis replacement for our midfield (and at least a level above Jack imo).

Still not particularly convinced there's any real truth in that article right enough.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lwl
NJA said:
I’ve said before, I don’t want him back till he is late in his career. However, if the price is right, like £3m, maybe £4m I’d take him as long as he takes his medicine for leaving the club. Like a few bench appearances early on.

He is at a cross roads, a promising glittering career has now became a shell of what that promise was. He has improved at Chelsea no end, however he needs to decide if he wants to become a English Championship/Relegation Premiership player or come back and get regular first team football and European football.

He is on a reported £50k a week, I’d say £5m would be my top value for him. If he is willing to take the pay cut to our levels.

If we can get a group of 19-24 year olds with good sell on appeal, with enough 25-32 year olds in there plus the players willing to stay, that’s what I’d go for. He may just be able to do that.
Click to expand...

Takes his medicine for leaving.

Behave
 
GreigK_RFC said:
He's out of contract next season (as a poster on the thread mentioned) and we could get him for nothing next season. So I'd loan him then see how he does. If it goes well sign him. And he's more of a defensive mid so won't stop a path way for Lowry or McCann who are more attacking.
Click to expand...
Well said, far too much sense all in one post.
 
NJA said:
I’ve said before, I don’t want him back till he is late in his career. However, if the price is right, like £3m, maybe £4m I’d take him as long as he takes his medicine for leaving the club. Like a few bench appearances early on.

He is at a cross roads, a promising glittering career has now became a shell of what that promise was. He has improved at Chelsea no end, however he needs to decide if he wants to become a English Championship/Relegation Premiership player or come back and get regular first team football and European football.

He is on a reported £50k a week, I’d say £5m would be my top value for him. If he is willing to take the pay cut to our levels.

If we can get a group of 19-24 year olds with good sell on appeal, with enough 25-32 year olds in there plus the players willing to stay, that’s what I’d go for. He may just be able to do that.
Click to expand...
Ridiculous post.
He’ll stay in England and have a good few choices.
If he went to the championship he’d still bag huge wages
 
kenikinif said:
I think last night showed that we can't keep on hoping for a fit Ryan Jack and i doubt he was anywhere near fully fit
Not a criticism of him but we need someone who can play most games
Click to expand...
He was subbed off in every europa league knockout game including the final bar one against dortmund. Love Jack time to replace him though. He should be the arfield in our team in n out and try and get a mainstay - shit to say as I really like him but moving forward we need a guy u can get 90 out of
 
'RANGERS FUND PUTIN'S WEAPONS THAT MURDERED LITTLE CHILDREN AND PUPPIES'

That is of course we hand over £7 million to Chelsea for him before the takeover is done ....
 
A move is in the cards and is only missing any actual evidence this could be the case.

Lack of that aside it’s only 3 other huge obstacles to overcome:-

Chelsea want to loan him in the SPL
Gilmour wants to play in the SPL
Rangers can afford the wages/fee
 
Chelsea will give him a new long term deal then loan him out season after season (with associated loan fees) until selling him around age 24.
 
No more loans unless they are loans with an option to buy.
Loaning glamour players in is just a waste of money, I would sooner the money was spent on an honest pro who adds depth to the squad or a young project who could turn into a star or just save the money and put it towards a really good signing.
 
No to a loan move, I think our own youngster's have shown we can trust them and they deserve a chance to show that they can handle playing for us. It is a no brainer, show's other academy players a way to the first team and we can make money on them.
As far as I am concerned loan moves should be stopped and trust our own academy players, so IF we can get him on a permanent move then hell yes.
 
Don’t see the harm in loaning players as long as they are big contributers, the scum won the league because of loan players. Don’t really see the point in loaning youth players though to come off the bench and try and squeeze them in game time, unless as others have said there’s an option to buy.

Would only want him on loan if he was coming to play the majority of games from the start and help us win the league, rather than take development game time from others.
 
I do like Gilmour, good player, it would be mental not to consider him.... but all this loan business isn't the answer, especially when we have promising up and coming young players like Lowery and Devine (among others). We should have a bit more faith in them.
 
If he wants a move, and Chelsea aren't willing to loan him out unless he signs a new deal, why doesn't he just sit it out for one more season and leave on a free?

If he signs a pre-contract in Jaanuary they migt let him leave on a reduced fee. He'll probably get a better wage if he does that anyway, and he's young enough for another season on he sidelines not to make too much difference in his career.
 
We’re probably going to need to replace Davis so Gilmour looks a good fit in terms of style, but the best we can probably hope for is a season long loan.

I understand those saying we need to stop relying on these as they rarely seem to work out, but Gilmour is a little bit different given he already knows the club, the setup, the Scottish game, the city, etc.

I wouldn’t be adverse to it; he’s certainly not signing anything more longer term.
 
Even a loan for next season is amazing. Even at 40k a week that's £2M. Better than signing a 5M player as they also will want 20 or 30k a week.
Then when he is out of contract in a year snap him up.
Great replacement for Kamara who I'm sure will leave.
 
Not really one for wanting to resign players , McGregor and Davis were different circumstances, but Gilmour I would like to see.
I could justify it by saying he never signed professionally so would be a new signing :))
It would probably be good for his development as a player as well, he wasn’t suited to the struggle at Norwich and the only loans he would get in England would be to clubs in similar circumstances.
 
Chelsea currently have 18 players out on-loan. Add the new loan limit, the fact that Gilmour will not exactly be delighted with his current loan, the new ownership coming in at Chelsea, him being in his last & probably wanting to now establish himself as a key player in a side (especially in WC year) then this will probably be our best chance of getting him for another 10 years.

However, this probably just some lazy, clickbait nonsense.
 
Boabinho said:
So Lowry didn't get a huge offer from Chelsea means he stood by the club and Gilmour who had a potentially life changing offer with one of Europes top clubs abandoned Rangers?
Click to expand...
How do you know what Lowry did or didn‘t get offered.
Ditto
Billy Gilmour.
 
Davester said:
Permanent deal yes.
Loan. No.
Sharpening up another teams player.
Click to expand...
Definitely this.
I’d take permanent, or with an option to buy but not a loan.
I’d rather we bought potential and gave McCann, McKinnon and Lindsay more opportunity.
Lowry being a cert.
In saying that if the first three went on loan to better than Lowlnd, like wherever Kevin Thomson is, I’d be happy.
 
WDYGH said:
No thanks. He chose to leave and he is not what we need.
Click to expand...
In your opinion.
I would think the only real opinion which matters is the recruitment team at Rangers.
As for he chose to leave plenty have chosen to leave and been welcomed back, it's not unusual.
 
Monty_greenock34 said:
That mob across the roads two loan players won them the league imo.
Click to expand...
And they may go back to their own clubs, or the rodents have to pay, what, £14m for the 2, to maintain the same team. You're just pushing the real need further down the line.
If we are going down the loan route, we really need to be a whole lot better at it.
 
Sandbear said:
In your opinion.
I would think the only real opinion which matters is the recruitment team at Rangers.
As for he chose to leave plenty have chosen to leave and been welcomed back, it's not unusual.
Click to expand...
With Lundstram, Kamara and Lowry, we don’t need him. An expensive addition that adds nothing.

Do you think the Rangers recruitment team have done their job well over the last 4 or 5 windows? They haven’t and that’s not an opinion, that’s fact.
 
Davester said:
And they may go back to their own clubs, or the rodents have to pay, what, £14m for the 2, to maintain the same team. You're just pushing the real need further down the line.
If we are going down the loan route, we really need to be a whole lot better at it.
Click to expand...
If it helps us bank £40m CL money im all for one or two loan deals as long as they enhance the team.
 
davyboy83 said:
I know he's only a year to go , but Chelsea will either want a permanent deal for him now or want him to sign a new deal before they allow him to go on loan . That's the way a lot of epl teams work.
Click to expand...
No other EPL teams are operating under Chelsea’s conditions at the minute though. Unless the sale goes through they can’t buy or sell anyone. They could be happy to ship him out on loan again to get his wages off the books. Everything is dependent on the sale.
 
Monty_greenock34 said:
If it helps us bank £40m CL money im all for one or two loan deals as long as they enhance the team.
Click to expand...
Our loan recruitment has to be levels better than currently. Diallo and Ramsey should have been there to get us over the line in the league. Ramsey has gave the doctors plenty extra shifts and nothing else. We played Diallo at the midden ,he shat it (like a good portion of the team), and was barely seen after. We need far better impact than those 2. Someone else on the thread said, the poets seem to rinse the loan market pretty well. No reason why we can't.
 
WDYGH said:
With Lundstram, Kamara and Lowry, we don’t need him. An expensive addition that adds nothing.

Do you think the Rangers recruitment team have done their job well over the last 4 or 5 windows? They haven’t and that’s not an opinion, that’s fact.
Click to expand...
In fairness, those windows have seen us recruit Hagi, Bassey, Lundstram, Roofe, Wright, McLaughlin, Balogun and Defoe. They've also broken even in that time.
They've obviously been shopping in the bargain basement, and had some failures too, which is natural. Their failings have been blown out of proportion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Latest posts

Back
Top