Rangers always winning or competitive football?

Rangers always winning or competitive football?

  • Rangers always winning easily

  • Rangers always winning but being seriously challenged

  • Rangers always being in the mix with 4 or 5 others

  • Rangers winning half the time but the Mhanks win nothing

Results are only viewable after voting.
Fondablondes

Fondablondes

Well-Known Member
The John "Kitey" McPherson thread by dh1963 led to me looking for more info into our early history. We all know that we have an illustrious history of which we are proud. Looking back though, we had competition right up until the mid 80's and since then it's been them and us. Surely this isn't good?
My question is would bears be happy being one of a few good teams or the best of a bad bunch?
 
Rangers crushing all before them, f.uck Scottish football and all who sail in her. The spineless wankers in this country have surrendered to the dark forces at the piggery so we can't rely on them to do anything about the filth.
 
always wining but seriously challenged would be best for Scottish football.

but i wasn't complaining during 9 in a row. it wasn't our fault at the time everyone else was shit.
 
Leagues won last day of season, cups won in extra time are normally always better than leagues we strolled or finals we won easily.
 
wd1872 said:
Rangers always winning but being seriously challenged
Click to expand...
^^^^^^^ This
Doesn't seem that long since Aberdeen and Motherwell were challenging us for the title, along with them. Would be great if another team/s came from nowhere and started putting in a serious challenge, as long as we prevailed.
 
Seriously challenged but as long as the bheggars are also being seriously challenged - which they are not.

Every team is beat before kick off in games against them. Including us.
 
GavCo said:
Leagues won last day of season, cups won in extra time are normally always better than leagues we strolled or finals we won easily.
Click to expand...

I can get on board with this, however after 10,11 or 12 years it would become an expectation and possibly boring.
I personally think if we had 3 or 4 serious challengers (beggers excepted) who won titles and cups now and then, we'd (as in Scottish football) have a product worth selling and be in a position to attract a higher calibre of player to Scotland.
 
We went 44 games unbeaten and won a treble in 92/93

It's a total myth that we need a strong domestic game to thrive.
 
I would love it if another 2 or 3 sides could grw and develop enough to make themselves title contenders. A stronger league can only be good for us. Obviously if another few teams came into the reckoning because the standard dropped massively, that would not be a good thing
 
Rangers always winning easily in a "To crush your enemies, to see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentations of their women" kind of way.
Also, in games not featuring us (ie: moonhowlers versus sheep) the ground opens up and swallows them whole.
 
Cody said:
Rangers always winning easily in a "To crush your enemies, to see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentations of their women" kind of way.
Also, in games not featuring us (ie: moonhowlers versus sheep) the ground opens up and swallows them whole.
Click to expand...

2lbjc4i.jpg[
 
Fondablondes said:
2lbjc4i.jpg[
Click to expand...

Actually, I realise my reply isn't at all constructive and I probably shouldn't have made it.
It's just an instinctive response to how Scottish football didn't try to punish or place sanctions on us; they tried to end us.
Anyway, my apologies for the useless post. I look forward to reading more considered, thoughtful replies
 
Cody said:
Actually, I realise my reply isn't at all constructive and I probably shouldn't have made it.
It's just an instinctive response to how Scottish football didn't try to punish or place sanctions on us; they tried to end us.
Anyway, my apologies for the useless post. I look forward to reading more considered, thoughtful replies
Click to expand...

Behave ;)
 
bnigmother said:
Win in a competitive league
Click to expand...

Sounds good mate, but for Rangers to grow Scottish football has to grow. We need at least 4 or 5 strong teams to attract TV revenue, advertising, sponsorship and good players. 10, 11, 12 in a row, for any side, will only further humiliate our league and reduce outside interest.
 
Rangers always winning does it for me. Although having a stronger league with 4/5 teams in the mix is better in football terms, Rangers winning beats it all.
 
I would always argue that I want Celtic, Aberdeen, Hearts, Hibs etc to be the best they can be, then I want us to be better!
 
In 2003 and 2008 that was competition, we ran out of steam in 2008 but we need a competitive league with us at the top.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Latest posts

Back
Top