Patterson

If hes good enough for Scotland and we have reportedly knocked back 8 million from Everton then hes surely good enough to play against Motherwell. It's hardly throwing him into the firing line. Same goes for kelly. We have to find a way of fitting this boy into our team. The young lyon right back at 19 year old strolled it the other night

stephen O’Donnell plays ahead of him for scotland, Patterson played because of injuries.

when the players are ready they’ll be introduced. The coaching staff see these players everyday, we don’t

I have no idea the history or background of the Lyon right back so it wouldn’t be fair to compare him to Patterson who isn’t a better player than the 1st choice right back we are using.

hypothetically, who would you play Kelly instead of and with what other midfielders around him?
 
We should maybe cash in on Tav soon while his stock is still high, in a year or two his transfer value will be almost nothing as clubs don't pay much for 31-32 year olds.

We could still get 15 years service out of Patterson when we might only get another 3-4 years of service from Tav.

Quite understandably Patterson will probably want to leave soon if he is not starting regularly, he could get more money and more game time at an English premiership team lower down the table.
 
We should maybe cash in on Tav soon while his stock is still high, in a year or two his transfer value will be almost nothing as clubs don't pay much for 31-32 year olds.

We could still get 15 years service out of Patterson when we might only get another 3-4 years of service from Tav.

Quite understandably Patterson will probably want to leave soon if he is not starting regularly, he could get more money and more game time at an English premiership team lower down the table.
That's the risk, look at Hutton, we got half a season.

Id stick with Tav, he's super fit, club captain, goals/assists galore. Why even consider changing it
 
If we are playing 60 odd games a season, and that’s not including friendlies, and Patterson gets one in 4 or 5 then that’s ideal for the moment. He will also get international games hopefully as well.

If we want two good players for every position then there are always gonna be times when some of the younger ones like Bassey and Patterson go through spells without a game. I think because Patterson is young, Scottish and a Rangers fan, then there is perhaps more of a clamour than normal, but you when you are expected to win nearly every game then that sentiment can’t come into the equation. Tav’s goals and assists have been pivotal to our success, and Patterson still has a little bit to go in that respect.

He is still fairly young and if he was to play too much then he could be at the risk of burnout and susceptible to injuries like Tierney has proved. He played solidly for about 4 years, then has barely been fit for 10 games in a row since.

How do young players learn if they get to play just 1 in 4 or 5 games?
 
I know there's been a fair bit of discussion on how to play both Tav and Patterson in the same team with many suggesting we play Tav further forward. Could we fit Patterson in somewhere else?
 
How do young players learn if they get to play just 1 in 4 or 5 games?
He is 19, most young players need to be bedded in gradually. If he is playing occasionally, playing international football, and training with top players, then he will come along fine.

The alternative is we drop Tav, and Patterson plays 50 odd games a season. But that makes no sense, as Tav is still more effective for the team. Pattersons time will come though.

The team may need recycled a little in a year or two if some of the first choices leave, and a few others retire, so it is ideal if we have ready made young players ready to step in immediately as first choice.
 
This is it in a nutshell,the young man is great but won’t get a game because of Tav.
So will be off soon to make the club money. End of.
 
He is 19, most young players need to be bedded in gradually. If he is playing occasionally, playing international football, and training with top players, then he will come along fine.

The alternative is we drop Tav, and Patterson plays 50 odd games a season. But that makes no sense, as Tav is still more effective for the team. Pattersons time will come though.

The team may need recycled a little in a year or two if some of the first choices leave, and a few others retire, so it is ideal if we have ready made young players ready to step in immediately as first choice.

Im not getting how keeping young players from playing helps them develop. Im guessing our youth teams only play once a month.
 
I know there's been a fair bit of discussion on how to play both Tav and Patterson in the same team with many suggesting we play Tav further forward. Could we fit Patterson in somewhere else?
We should but i dont think we will simply because of the money spent on wages for players in these positions and the fact everyone will say well why didnt we do it in pre-season.

For what its worth i think they would link up well on the right and both could play a number of positions on the pitch. Seems obvious.

Rangers have lacked speed, energy and movement in important fixtures and yet Patterson still sits there waiting on the next league cup fixture.

We should also change that system for some games or even during the game, thats for another thread right enough.
 
Yeah if he continues to be overlooked Nathan will be starting to look elsewhere for regular football and that would be a huge loss
He isn’t exactly being overlooked.
There is no doubt that he’d get more game time elsewhere but he isn’t going to a better club than Rangers.
He isn’t going to win more medals than at Rangers.
He isn’t going to play in Europe more than with Rangers.
Any dreams he has of a top four English clubs won’t be made easier playing for a different club than Rangers.
It would take a big step backwards for him to be guaranteed first team football in this or next even next season.
I’m sure this’ll be along the lines of what Gerrard will be telling him.
 
Good point made, we may have considered selling Tav and making way for Patterson. We seem to let players stay too long, that is poor management.

Hate to say it but we could learn from the the unwashed how to deal in the transfer market
Who are you thinking of?
Remember too, that we might not be “letting” players stay.
They might be insisting on staying.
They cannot be forced out.
 
I have zero problem with Patterson not playing just now, I will have an issue with him not playing if tav loses his form.

Out of form out of the team, but don’t think gerrard thinks like that as he obviously prefer out of form kent to the likes wright.
 
Good point made, we may have considered selling Tav and making way for Patterson. We seem to let players stay too long, that is poor management.

Hate to say it but we could learn from the the unwashed how to deal in the transfer market
Like Edouard?
Or Christie?
Or any of another dozen big buys who’ve cost them big bucks.
All the way back to Balde.
Your judgement might be getting clouded by the few they've got very right.
 
If he went to Everton it wouldn’t take him too long to replace Coleman imo. He has been a terrific player for Everton over the years but isn’t half the player he used to be.

I wouldn’t be shocked if Everton came back in for him in January.
Everton would be a step backwards, in a professional sense.
What’s their aim this season?
Top half?
Decent run in the cup?
Other than money, where would the benefit be?
It’s a bigger window to a bigger move?
He can fulfil every ambition he has right here.
 
He is a good enough footballer to play midfield, drive/energy/skill and good for a goal, if you disagree let me know what makes you think he could not play there.
I agree he could play midfield but we have a few players probably more qualified to play there.
What I have posted in the past, since the summer, is that he could play in midfield to learn more about the game in general.
A bit like how Smith used Craig Moore initially.
 
I'm sick and tired of using a players age as the reason not too play them, if they are good enough they are old enough.

Patterson is a Scottish internationalist and will be itching too start more games for us. Imagine the scenario of Clarke advising Nathan that he won't be Scotland's 1st choice RB due too lack of game time with Rangers - I don't believe he'd quietly accept this, he would demand games or a move.

Kelly is 21. I have said this before, time for SG to be honest with the lad, he either has a future with us or not. If he has a future play him and rest Davis, who is being run into the ground.
He’d get his move at that point, I’d suggest.
I’d be raging if a qunt like Steve Clarke could influence Rangers team selection.
 
Every game we don't win we get this nonsense.

Funnily enough we didn't have it last Saturday after the captain bailed us out at St Johnstone.

Until Patterson adds more goals to his game then he will always be behind Tavernier.

Patterson was also off the pace against Dunfermline and wasn't brilliant for Scotland either.
 
I'm sick and tired of using a players age as the reason not too play them, if they are good enough they are old enough.

Patterson is a Scottish internationalist and will be itching too start more games for us. Imagine the scenario of Clarke advising Nathan that he won't be Scotland's 1st choice RB due too lack of game time with Rangers - I don't believe he'd quietly accept this, he would demand games or a move.

Kelly is 21. I have said this before, time for SG to be honest with the lad, he either has a future with us or not. If he has a future play him and rest Davis, who is being run into the ground.
You know all about the discussions between Gerrard and his players?
You know the career discussions Gerrard has had with Kelly?
 
Everton would be a step backwards, in a professional sense.
What’s their aim this season?
Top half?
Decent run in the cup?
Other than money, where would the benefit be?
It’s a bigger window to a bigger move?
He can fulfil every ambition he has right here.
Everton would be a good move for Patterson, an aging right back would see him potentially becoming a regular.

could be one of the only options for a prem move in the near future as most teams already have a quality right back
 
what’s that opinion based on that they


Why do you think they play under 23 football in some countries?

“If you are good enough, you are old enough” is also a horrendous saying. You may be technically gifted but physically and mentally not ready.

This season if we win the league we go straight into the champions league. So why would we play players that aren’t better than those ahead of them. Gerrard wouldn’t be doing his job properly if we dropped points by taking risks on young players

patterson and Kelly have a lot of potential but at this moment they aren’t better than tav or the other midfielders. They will get their chance when our coaching staff think it’s the right time.

With all the game time he had pre-season it looked to many as though Kelly was being groomed as Davis' successor however he appears as far away from competitive gametime as ever. He is 21, are we just going to keep him around, hanging on by a piece of string like we did with Barjonas, never playing the lad, and then sometime down the line letting him go?
 
Everton would be a step backwards, in a professional sense.
What’s their aim this season?
Top half?
Decent run in the cup?
Other than money, where would the benefit be?
It’s a bigger window to a bigger move?
He can fulfil every ambition he has right here.
Nah, that’s miles off for me.

He’d be first choice at Everton within a year or two, whereas he might not be first choice here for another 2-4 years given how much of a specimen Tavernier is.
 
Nah, that’s miles off for me.

He’d be first choice at Everton within a year or two, whereas he might not be first choice here for another 2-4 years given how much of a specimen Tavernier is.

That's assuming Everton don't go out and buy another right back for £20-30m+ which they quite easily could.
 
With all the game time he had pre-season it looked to many as though Kelly was being groomed as Davis' successor however he appears as far away from competitive gametime as ever. He is 21, are we just going to keep him around, hanging on by a piece of string like we did with Barjonas, never playing the lad, and then sometime down the line letting him go?

so you want him to play instead of Davis?
 
ffs, no I do not but like any player, until he gets decent minutes on the pitch in competitive games we'll never know if he is good enough.

of course you know if a player is good enough before he plays in the first team. He trains everyday, plays bounce games and has played competitive football for Rangers as well as out on loan. I’m pretty sure if the boy was smashing it then he wouldn’t be left on the bench. Have faith in our coaching staff
 
I’m hoping with the el games etc we will maybe start to see him get used a touch more
Yeah I hope so too. Tav plays on the Thursday in The EL and Patterson comes in on the Sunday for the league game. Absolutely now reason why Patterson can’t be starting against the likes of County, St Mirren etc.

I’d also be using him in all the domestic cup matches.
 
Back
Top