Do you think we can play Tav and Paterson together?

Can either play on the left. Genuine question. Patterson seems versatile so maybe he could fill in for that side. There's every chance Borna might need rested or there could be an offer comes in for him
 
SecondBestIsNothing said:
How can you say that for certain? The guy has been our mainstay RB, captain and arguably our predominant creative outlet for years and you think a breakthrough youngster, who’s not exactly had many senior games, will probably be in place to overtake him after 1.5 seasons?
Click to expand...

I’m not saying anything for certain. It’s an opinion.
 
Tav will be used sparingly, CL games and bigger SPFL games imo. Patterson will play cups and other SPFL games. They will clearly be on bench for each others games but thats how id use them and keep them both happy
 
200.gif
 
The Goal Machine said:
Watching Tierney and Robertson for Scotland I am sure a lot of us are wondering if we could do the same.

Two superb players that if it worked would be superb for Rangers bringing pace, invention, skill and goals.

Then there is the counter argument do we have to tinker with a new formation, is it worth it? And as I sometimes think with the Scotland pair does it dilute what each of them brings in their regular position?

The other question is how many games will Paterson play, because like Billy Gilmour they are ready.

I am sure Steven Gerrard and the coaching staff are thinking of this very thing.

What say you?
Click to expand...
I’ve been having identical thoughts.Tav would have to move forward,to make room for our very own “Rampaging” wing back Patterson;)
 
Tavernier will be the first choice right back this upcoming season with Patterson gradually getting blooded in more and more. I wouldn’t be shocked to see Tavernier moved on next year though as Gerrard won’t want to stifle Patterson’s progress.
 
I doubt Patterson is going on loan id be surprised if that happened, he may have to accept the bench but then theres the danger he becomes unhappy and thinks hes never going to take the right back position... so aye play both that would work i dont see any negatives in it i could see it working.

Most teams are just going to crowd the box and blooter us next season so we probably want a few defenders on the park that can easily push right up and join the attack.... i dont think they will get in each others way but the penalty box will certainly be packed in plenty of home games anyway.
 
Tavernier for me stays at right back and plays there as our regular right back.

We shouldn't shoe horn Patterson into the team but as well as being cover/replacement for Tav, for me has the pace and energy to be considered for midfield this season.

Much depends on comings and goings in the next month and the durability of Jack and Davis as the season unfolds.

Under no circumstances would I loan him out.
 
The Goal Machine said:
Watching Tierney and Robertson for Scotland I am sure a lot of us are wondering if we could do the same.

Two superb players that if it worked would be superb for Rangers bringing pace, invention, skill and goals.

Then there is the counter argument do we have to tinker with a new formation, is it worth it? And as I sometimes think with the Scotland pair does it dilute what each of them brings in their regular position?

The other question is how many games will Paterson play, because like Billy Gilmour they are ready.

I am sure Steven Gerrard and the coaching staff are thinking of this very thing.

What say you?
Click to expand...
I suggested this last season and got laughed at. Still think there’s merit in the idea. Tav would offer plenty of attacking and defensive qualities in the RM role that Aribo is often given.

I think it would be worthwhile in some scenarios to give this a go.
 
Tav could play as an 8. He's got all of the attributes to play there imo. It wouldn't hurt us to experiment with it. Obviously I'd prefer everyone to play in their natural positions but it's a solution to a couple of issues we have in terms of midfield depth and getting Patterson decent developmental minutes.

I was roundly mocked on here for suggesting this a few months back. Only for Gary Mac to suggest as much a month or so later.
 
TheDerryend said:
Did sandy jardine not play right midfield for a time, john greig played in different positions.

I agree with you, we must find a way of playing them both.
Click to expand...
I know that Tav and young Patterson are different types of players but following on from the Jardine/Greig reminder, other old timers may recall that Rangers had a very good player called Sammy Cox, who was a regular full back in the Scotland team but played left midfield for our club.
 
Tomted said:
I know that Tav and young Patterson are different types of players but following on from the Jardine/Greig reminder, other old timers may recall that Rangers had a very good player called Sammy Cox, who was a regular full back in the Scotland team but played left midfield for our club.
Click to expand...
I might be an old timer my friend, but sammy cox has really added a few years to my aging bones, I've not even got my bus pass yet :)
 
Hurricane Run said:
When the 2 have almost identical skill sets, then thats not possible.

Tav isnt good enough at ball retention to play in our midfield. For me the only way you could play both, is if you stuck one of them at LB after selling Borna. Even then it wouldnt really work, because you would need a left foot to provide the width on the left. Best solution is to give Tav more frequent rest this season and try and get young Patterson somewhere in the region of 15 games, or more if he actually wins the RB position from Tav on merit.
Click to expand...
I've spent about a fortnight reading on here, how Paterson should be playing at the euro's up against the best players europe has to offer.

Good players don't need to be stuck in a rigid position. It may or may not work, but to suggest the team can't find a way to play both of them is way off.

It's nothing new with players being moved to different positions. In fact to have a flexible player in any team is a good thing.
 
No, one thing I been very critical of Steve Clarke for is trying to force to LBs into the back line. (Ironically I think KT would make it as the LCB in a back for for Scotland without having to change it.)
 
TheDerryend said:
I've spent about a fortnight reading on here, how Paterson should be playing at the euro's up against the best players europe has to offer.

Good players don't need to be stuck in a rigid position. It may or may not work, but to suggest the team can't find a way to play both of them is way off.

It's nothing new with players being moved to different positions. In fact to have a flexible player in any team is a good thing.
Click to expand...

Thats not true though is it? Its not way off at all. Infact its far more likely not to work. Being realistic, you couldnt play Tav as a 10. You could possibly put him into midfield, but like i said previously, he would struggle with the ball retention required.

When you say "good players" im assuming you mean technically good. Tavs not technically good enough. Watched him for 5 years, and no chance could you give him a ball in tight space like Kamara, Aribo or Davis. I also dont agree with shoe-horning players in, just because of their name. Tav would easily be behind Hagi, Roofe, Kent and Wright for a 10 position and definitely behind Jack, Davis, Aribo and Kamara in midfield.

I wouldnt even bother moving Patterson. Its hard enough mastering one position, without being shunted about in your formative years.

All about opinions though, i suppose mate.
 
Hurricane Run said:
Thats not true though is it? Its not way off at all. Infact its far more likely not to work. Being realistic, you couldnt play Tav as a 10. You could possibly put him into midfield, but like i said previously, he would struggle with the ball retention required.

When you say "good players" im assuming you mean technically good. Tavs not technically good enough. Watched him for 5 years, and no chance could you give him a ball in tight space like Kamara, Aribo or Davis. I also dont agree with shoe-horning players in, just because of their name. Tav would easily be behind Hagi, Roofe, Kent and Wright for a 10 position and definitely behind Jack, Davis, Aribo and Kamara in midfield.

I wouldnt even bother moving Patterson. Its hard enough mastering one position, without being shunted about in your formative years.

All about opinions though, i suppose mate.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. I'm not really talking about tav, he's set in his ways. Paterson, well you just never know. There maybe a game comes up when he might be needed to replace an injured player. Who knows, but he's still young and if he can be a versatile player, then it's a win win for us.

I think we can agree that we're glad both of them are Rangers players
 
We have a dilemma. A good one but a dilemma just the same. Tav isn’t a midfielder and needs space on the flanks to charge up and down. I don’t think retaining possession and receiving the ball in tight areas with back to goal is his game.
To have two such valuable players is a luxury we can’t afford. We may have to cash in on Tav as outrageous as that sounds.
 
We need to play Paterson because if we dont he will be for the off. He is now more than ready to play in our first team and he knows it. If hes only a bit part player he will leave. Yes I think both can be accomodated in the same team.
 
Rotation and options that challenge for a place will strengthen our team.

I'm sure they'll both feature regularly in their proper position.
 
ronadamus_prime said:
Tav could play as an 8. He's got all of the attributes to play there imo. It wouldn't hurt us to experiment with it. Obviously I'd prefer everyone to play in their natural positions but it's a solution to a couple of issues we have in terms of midfield depth and getting Patterson decent developmental minutes.

I was roundly mocked on here for suggesting this a few months back. Only for Gary Mac to suggest as much a month or so later.
Click to expand...
Aye alright Pep, pretty sure Gary Mac didn't mention anything about Tav as a number 8, just said they were looking at ways to play them both.
 
Tavernier has the qualities to be a good Number 8 type of midfielder.

But he is too good at RB to move so he stays there until Patterson moves him out the way.
 
It isn't sensible to play for 60+ games and it would not do us or Patterson any favours to play him that often (the young man needs properly looked after). They'll both play right back and get a good share of games to suit the team.
 
I always thought loans we're for players surplus to requirements .... Very few players ever come back from loans better or fitter players?

Can anyone remember a player that came back a better or fitter player? I cant?

Most of them come back slow, lazy and full of bad habits gained from dud trainers, lowly teams and crap managers?

Leave it to our own manager and coaches they have done a great job so far!
56 on the way.
 
The Goal Machine said:
Watching Tierney and Robertson for Scotland I am sure a lot of us are wondering if we could do the same.

Two superb players that if it worked would be superb for Rangers bringing pace, invention, skill and goals.

Then there is the counter argument do we have to tinker with a new formation, is it worth it? And as I sometimes think with the Scotland pair does it dilute what each of them brings in their regular position?

The other question is how many games will Paterson play, because like Billy Gilmour they are ready.

I am sure Steven Gerrard and the coaching staff are thinking of this very thing.

What say you?
Click to expand...
Might solve Tav's defensive weaknesses.
 
The best right back in the country has just had the season of his life.

Patterson needs to rise to the challenge and sieze any opportunity he gets to push Tav out the way. This is exactly what the manager has been trying to implant in the players heads since coming here. That's what we're striving for now under Gerrard, the persuit of excellence in the shape of fierce competition for places. It's win win for Rangers.
 
People are being dismissive but it is a dilemma. The problem is that Tavernier has been sensational at right back though and it just doesn’t make sense to change that.
 
................... .... McGregor
Patterson Goldson Hellander Barisic

...Tav................Davis............Kamara

.Roofe.................Alfie..........Kent
 
MearnsUnionist said:
In a nutshell.

Tav is the best right back to play in Scotland since Gary Stevens and Nathan is still developing and learning off him.

I think he could become even better than Tav, but he's still a season (at the earliest imo) away from that.

He'll keep improving and play more and more, particularly in domestic cups and league games after midweek European matches.
Click to expand...
If we qualify for CL you almost need two teams. Nathan will get good game time IMO.
 
brain said:
People are being dismissive but it is a dilemma. The problem is that Tavernier has been sensational at right back though and it just doesn’t make sense to change that.
Click to expand...
I'm sure McAllister acknowledged the dilemma some months ago. Whatever the plan is or isn't the club and management are on top of the puzzle. Tav is captain and exceptional and Patterson can be anything he wants to be! Cannot wait to see Rangers back playing
 
We will have plenty games and both will have enough time at right back without having to move positions.

Tav is 29 now and covers a ridiculous amount of ground getting up and down the wing each game. Having an able back-up who can cover and give him more rest might help keep him fresh for the most important games next season, whilst giving Patterson valuable experience.
 
As good as Patterson has been since he had his chance, he's not at a stage where we're going to alter our shape/style just to accommodate him.
 
As good as Patterson seems to be and as much as i’d like to see us bring him into the starting eleven more, I can’t see our captain/such a key player being dropped/rotated as regularly as would be required for this
 
Monty_greenock34 said:
If you think Clark shoehorning robertson and tierney is a good idea then why not? o_O

In reality though when its plain to see it's a no.

Patterson is 19, he will bide his time and replace tav when time is right, whether that's when tav leaves or when Patterson is too good for tav. Just need to wait n see. No rush.
Click to expand...
He is now a full international and will be looking for a regular game. As next season progresses we will have to come up with a solution
 
when you’ve two talented players you always go with the youngster...

Patterson is 19 already, he’s not 16/17. he’s on the cusp of making his position his own on the international stage for the next decade

the idea we should be keeping him on the bench unless Tav needs a rest is ludicrous. Patterson, quite rightly, will be wanting to play every week and will have plenty of suitors to offer him it

you play the youngster. He won’t let us down
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Latest posts

Back
Top