How many of Advocaat's signing were a complete success?

JimmysGers

Well-Known Member
I happened to skim through a very Celtic-minded article recently about Martin O'Neill's time there, and how they've more or less dominated ever since. Their train of thought was that, excluding the Mowbray season, all our title wins have been won on the last day. We were obviously good in those seasons, but Celtic weren't far away. Just not quite good enough of course ;)

They claim O'Neill's tenure finally changed the mindset of a losing club. He made some pretty decent signings. Sutton, Lennon, Thompson, Valgaeren, Agathe and later Hartson and Balde were all pretty successful you'd have to say. They all stuck around for years. You can chuck Rab Douglas in as well I suppose, despite him giving us our own good memories. Keeping Larsson fit obviously helped.

Anyway, that's more than enough about them. It brings me Advocaat and the money spent. I'm sure the discussion has already been had on the various podcasts etc. these days. Just how many of his signings were out-and-out successes? I know we had to replace an ageing squad but the money could have been spent far more wisely. Was the scatter-gun approach necessary?

Nj3wmHz.png


Numan, Gio, Wallace, McCann, Klos, Reyna - absolutely. I'll reluctantly give him Moore. Was Kanchelskis really worth the money?

ye2NLbw.png


Mols, of course. Dodds probably. Not sure Tugay can be classed as a complete success.

9I0VKAj.png


Lovenkrands and Ricksen through McLeish, yes. De Boer. Flo's fee will always go against him.

Bp0PS4F.png


Caniggia and Arveladze, yes. Difficult to include Ball given the fee.

14 players and I'd say that's being generous. How much money spent?
 
It's a decent selection you have there of out and out successes under Advocaat. I couldn't disagree much.

Though to counter the point that you included from the mentally challenged you'd have plenty, and I mean plenty, of dross that MoN signed and money wasted. He also spent a f*cking fortune.
 
I happened to skim through a very Celtic-minded article recently about Martin O'Neill's time there, and how they've more or less dominated ever since. Their train of thought was that, excluding the Mowbray season, all our title wins have been won on the last day. We were obviously good in those seasons, but Celtic weren't far away. Just not quite good enough of course ;)

They claim O'Neill's tenure finally changed the mindset of a losing club. He made some pretty decent signings. Sutton, Lennon, Thompson, Valgaeren, Agathe and later Hartson and Balde were all pretty successful you'd have to say. They all stuck around for years. You can chuck Rab Douglas in as well I suppose, despite him giving us our own good memories. Keeping Larsson fit obviously helped.

Anyway, that's more than enough about them. It brings me Advocaat and the money spent. I'm sure the discussion has already been had on the various podcasts etc. these days. Just how many of his signings were out-and-out successes? I know we had to replace an ageing squad but the money could have been spent far more wisely. Was the scatter-gun approach necessary?

Nj3wmHz.png


Numan, Gio, Wallace, McCann, Klos, Reyna - absolutely. I'll reluctantly give him Moore. Was Kanchelskis really worth the money?

ye2NLbw.png


Mols, of course. Dodds probably. Not sure Tugay can be classed as a complete success.

9I0VKAj.png


Lovenkrands and Ricksen through McLeish, yes. De Boer. Flo's fee will always go against him.

Bp0PS4F.png


Caniggia and Arveladze, yes. Difficult to include Ball given the fee.

14 players and I'd say that's being generous. How much money spent?

If my maths is correct all the signings named above cost- £84.85 million
 
Kanchelskis is often labelled a failure in his time at Rangers, mainly because folk expected him to be the same player as he was with Man U. However the reality was he was never going to have that freedom of role under Advocatt, who employed him in a rigid 4-4-2 system. Anytime he played he was an integral cog in the Dutchman's system.
 
Quite a few of his signings you might not call a "success" but i wouldn't call them failures either.

Folk like Kanchelskis/Tugay were decent enough for us.
 
Kanchelskis was just too much money for what we got. He was good.
Ditto Colin Hendry. We got a good season out of him. Too expensive.
Fernandes was worth it for his first second goal at Motherwell alone.
Marcus Gayle we got our money back on.
Latapy wasn't terrible for a free.
Some horrible misses in there.
 
There was a near ruinous waste of money under Advocaat, but few complete failures.

I'd really only say Ball, Guivarc'h, Konterman and Prodan could be viewed as such - £15m for very little in return.

I think it's also fair to say the likes of Hendry, Amato and Flo didn't really deliver value for money, maybe Kanchelskis too to some extent, but they all played more of a part so it's difficult to be as critical of them.

What's undeniable is that for the money we spent we really should have fared better in Europe.

At the time we were more accepting of it because our performances felt like a huge step up from the pitiful attempts of Smith's latter continental forays, but in hindsight two CL group stage qualifications in three seasons was scant return for the huge outlay we made on that squad.
 
O'Neill success stories transfer wise end in 2001 and every one of them were either huge transfer fees and mental wages except for Balde and Agathe

How many of his signing 2002-2005 could be labelled a success ? He bought some absolute carthorses that the Tims struggled to get shot of.

Huge reason McLeish beat him two years out of three. Tims hit a brick wall with their squad and aged almost overnight
 
Though to counter the point that you included from the mentally challenged you'd have plenty, and I mean plenty, of dross that MoN signed and money wasted. He also spent a f*cking fortune.
That's not actually true.

The big money he did spend was primarily on the players I've mentioned.

He did waste money but not anything like the same scale as Advocaat.
 
I happened to skim through a very Celtic-minded article recently about Martin O'Neill's time there, and how they've more or less dominated ever since. Their train of thought was that, excluding the Mowbray season, all our title wins have been won on the last day. We were obviously good in those seasons, but Celtic weren't far away. Just not quite good enough of course ;)

They claim O'Neill's tenure finally changed the mindset of a losing club. He made some pretty decent signings. Sutton, Lennon, Thompson, Valgaeren, Agathe and later Hartson and Balde were all pretty successful you'd have to say. They all stuck around for years. You can chuck Rab Douglas in as well I suppose, despite him giving us our own good memories. Keeping Larsson fit obviously helped.

Anyway, that's more than enough about them. It brings me Advocaat and the money spent. I'm sure the discussion has already been had on the various podcasts etc. these days. Just how many of his signings were out-and-out successes? I know we had to replace an ageing squad but the money could have been spent far more wisely. Was the scatter-gun approach necessary?

Nj3wmHz.png


Numan, Gio, Wallace, McCann, Klos, Reyna - absolutely. I'll reluctantly give him Moore. Was Kanchelskis really worth the money?

ye2NLbw.png


Mols, of course. Dodds probably. Not sure Tugay can be classed as a complete success.

9I0VKAj.png


Lovenkrands and Ricksen through McLeish, yes. De Boer. Flo's fee will always go against him.

Bp0PS4F.png


Caniggia and Arveladze, yes. Difficult to include Ball given the fee.

14 players and I'd say that's being generous. How much money spent?
Reluctantly give him Moore? Really? He was absolutely immense for us.
 
There was a near ruinous waste of money under Advocaat, but few complete failures.

I'd really only say Ball, Guivarc'h, Konterman and Prodan could be viewed as such - £15m for very little in return.

I think it's also fair to say the likes of Hendry, Amato and Flo didn't really deliver value for money, maybe Kanchelskis too to some extent, but they all played more of a part so it's difficult to be as critical of them.

What's undeniable is that for the money we spent we really should have fared better in Europe.

At the time we were more accepting of it because our performances felt like a huge step up from the pitiful attempts of Smith's latter continental forays, but in hindsight two CL group stage qualifications in three seasons was scant return for the huge outlay we made on that squad.
Big Bertie's goal against the mochit mob surely justifies his transfer fee. :D
 
Complete successes from that list ?
Numan, Van Bronkhorst, Wallace, McCann, Klos, Mols, Lovenkrands, Ricksen (maybe swayed by recent events)
A lot more were decent signings but either consistency or fee paid to return on the pitch wasn't quite there for me - De Boer, Flo, Kanchelskis, Reyna, Tugay, Moore
 
Their train of thought was that, excluding the Mowbray season, all our title wins have been won on the last day
They are right that Celtic fundamentally "overtook" Rangers in 2000 under Martin O'Neill, however Rangers re-overtook Celtic under Walter in 2007 and we would have walked the league that season were it not for the UEFA Cup. And even having not won it that season he still won us 3 in a row and we were on track for 4 in a row before disaster after disaster struck.

2012 onwards is hardly relevant, it goes without saying that we've been working our way back since then.
 
Last edited:
Complete successes from that list ?
Numan, Van Bronkhorst, Wallace, McCann, Klos, Mols, Lovenkrands, Ricksen (maybe swayed by recent events)
A lot more were decent signings but either consistency or fee paid to return on the pitch wasn't quite there for me - De Boer, Flo, Kanchelskis, Reyna, Tugay, Moore
Numan was injured far too much to be considered a complete success.
 
Getting Klos for under £1m is a ridiculous bit of business.

Mad seeing us signing players from top clubs - pipe dream these days.

FWIW I think Flo gets a hard time of it across the board. I know he cost £12m, but his goal return was actually pretty good and didn't we sell him for £8/9m?

Was it O'Neill who paid £5m for Scheidt?
 
Complete successes from that list ?
Numan, Van Bronkhorst, Wallace, McCann, Klos, Mols, Lovenkrands, Ricksen (maybe swayed by recent events)
A lot more were decent signings but either consistency or fee paid to return on the pitch wasn't quite there for me - De Boer, Flo, Kanchelskis, Reyna, Tugay, Moore
Reyna was sold for considerably more than we paid for him. Moore was sold to Palace but returned when they couldn’t keep up the payments.

Aside from any financial implications both players were excellent for us although personally I wouldn’t have let Moore back through the marble halls when he jibbed off our biggest game of the season for the Olympics.

For me a significant factor in our dramatic decline in 00/01 was Moore’s season-long absence obvs combined with persisting with Big Bert at CH
 
For a player to be a complete success then he has to do well then sell him on for profit. Only Van Bronckhorst and Reyna spring to mind.
 
Flo averaged a goal evey 2 games and was sold for £6m. If he was signed for half of what we paid for him he would be classed as a pretty good signing.
 
We spent 36 million in season 98/99. Just let that sink in. How the %^*& we didn't win a European trophy is mind boggling.
Advocaat’s first season was a massive rebuilding job.
Winning the league was success enough.
There is no doubt though that we should have done better in the CL in the following years.
Then again, so should Smith from 95 to 98.
Goram, Gough, Gascoigne, Laudrup, Hateley and McCoist is quite a backbone.
 
Over Klos for £0.75m?

Not disagreeing as I was a youngster, just interested.

Klos is a good shout too and a fantastic Advocaat signing. He is certainly up there with our other great goalkeepers that I can recall, Billy Ritchie, Peter McCloy, Chris Woods, Andy Goram, Alan McGregor etc. I think Klos cost £700.000 but he apparently contributed to his transfer fee out of his own pocket from Borussia Dortmund. His contract at Rangers made him one of the highest paid players in Europe at the time. He played about 300 times for us and saved us more times than I can remember like those goalies mentioned.

I only put Rod Wallace ahead of him (and some other great Advocatt signings) in financial outlay terms. Wallace was a Bosman signing so he was a free. I don't think his salary would have been OTT. At the time he wasn't one of our 'box office signings' and some supporters were taken aback when he first signed and saw him as a squad player. However, he was no squad player and played 122 games and scored 56 goals in a couple of seasons for us. His winning goal (the only goal of the game) against Celtic in the 1999 SFA Cup final was sublime and it gave us the 'Treble'. Wallace was our top scorer that season with 27 goals. I think he was also our top scorer the following season too.
 
Last edited:
I happened to skim through a very Celtic-minded article recently about Martin O'Neill's time there, and how they've more or less dominated ever since. Their train of thought was that, excluding the Mowbray season, all our title wins have been won on the last day. We were obviously good in those seasons, but Celtic weren't far away. Just not quite good enough of course ;)

They claim O'Neill's tenure finally changed the mindset of a losing club. He made some pretty decent signings. Sutton, Lennon, Thompson, Valgaeren, Agathe and later Hartson and Balde were all pretty successful you'd have to say. They all stuck around for years. You can chuck Rab Douglas in as well I suppose, despite him giving us our own good memories. Keeping Larsson fit obviously helped.

Anyway, that's more than enough about them. It brings me Advocaat and the money spent. I'm sure the discussion has already been had on the various podcasts etc. these days. Just how many of his signings were out-and-out successes? I know we had to replace an ageing squad but the money could have been spent far more wisely. Was the scatter-gun approach necessary?

Nj3wmHz.png


Numan, Gio, Wallace, McCann, Klos, Reyna - absolutely. I'll reluctantly give him Moore. Was Kanchelskis really worth the money?

ye2NLbw.png


Mols, of course. Dodds probably. Not sure Tugay can be classed as a complete success.

9I0VKAj.png


Lovenkrands and Ricksen through McLeish, yes. De Boer. Flo's fee will always go against him.

Bp0PS4F.png


Caniggia and Arveladze, yes. Difficult to include Ball given the fee.

14 players and I'd say that's being generous. How much money spent?
Who Alexander Hauser?
 
Kanchelskis is often labelled a failure in his time at Rangers, mainly because folk expected him to be the same player as he was with Man U. However the reality was he was never going to have that freedom of role under Advocatt, who employed him in a rigid 4-4-2 system. Anytime he played he was an integral cog in the Dutchman's system.
Also that he wasn’t Laudrup.
 
Nonsense.
Absolute tripe.
Would you like a list some players who wouldn’t be a complete success under this stupid caveat.

Its not tripe though, we had two good years under Advoccat and then were financially stricken for about a decade thereafter. A club like ours needs a business plan, you buy young, develop them then sell for profit. Van Bronckhorst was a great example of this, that Tamudo who we missed out on would have been another example. Players like Konterman, Kanchelskis, Hendry, Flo and Ball were terrible for the fees and wages being paid too them. Prodan didn't even kick a ball.
 
I have to say, it really does bug me that they've had a sustained period of dominance. I know most of it is down to circumstance over the last 7 years, but they've won 14 of the last 19 titles.
That needs to stop now.
With O'Neill's 3 you could counter with Advocaat's 2 before and McLeish's 2.
With Strachan's 3 you had Walter's 3. But tailing 8IAR onto them and them having 14 out of 19/21 sticks in my throat.
They need put back in their place pronto. I truly hope that SG is the man to do that, and do it this season.
 
Back
Top