Rangers looking to terminate Josh McPakes contract.

Empire said:
He still played for us and made it into the first team and played and scored in Cup final wins.
Click to expand...

I think this is something people forget when discussing youth players who break into our team. Not every one of them is going to be a Barry Ferguson, sometimes us developing and progressing youth team players into useful squad additions benefits other areas of the squad.

Take our 10 worst signings over the past 5 seasons. Nobody would be able to convince me that we couldn't be developing youth players of a better or even an equal standing. Then factor in those transfer fees saved in not having to pay for squad fillers etc.

Maurice Ross and Bob Malcolm have 10 winners medals for us between them, and whilst never being close to being the star men - they have deemed to be useful squad members in successful trophy winning Rangers teams.

I'm not expecting a superstar a season from the youth ranks, but I think we could do better in regards to youth player progression.
 
Grumpy Old Git said:
Why??
He has become an unattached free agent and has no club and therefore can be signed outside the transfer window as has been quoted.

Think of it this way why would you have a rule for free agents different from other players??
They wouldn’t need a specific rule if all got treated the same.
Click to expand...
Dunno mate, I don't make the rules.

He can't be signed outside the window unless he was unattached when the window closed, no point bringing hypotheticals into it.
 
Grumpy Old Git said:
Why??
He has become an unattached free agent and has no club and therefore can be signed outside the transfer window as has been quoted.

Think of it this way why would you have a rule for free agents different from other players??
They wouldn’t need a specific rule if all got treated the same.
Click to expand...
It's been explained numerous times that you're wrong FFS B-D
 
Kirbys House said:
Dunno mate, I don't make the rules.

He can't be signed outside the window unless he was unattached when the window closed, no point bringing hypotheticals into it.
Click to expand...
We can agree to disagree.
Ain’t a problem.

If Mcpake does get his contract terminated we can see what happens with him.
No problem.
 
Grumpy Old Git said:
Why??
He has become an unattached free agent and has no club and therefore can be signed outside the transfer window as has been quoted.

Think of it this way why would you have a rule for free agents different from other players??
They wouldn’t need a specific rule if all got treated the same.
Click to expand...
They have to be a free agent when the window closes.
 
Saturnblue said:
When was the last time a youth player went on loan to another Scottish club and got better?

Any youth player that goes on loan to another Scottish clubs just seems to stagnate or get worse.

We should only loan them to clubs in Belgium, Netherlands, Spain or Portugal etc. where the standard of coaching is higher and to get them away from their Scottish peers who might encourage them into drinking etc.
Click to expand...

Its like some of these kids go to smaller clubs and have the attitude of "I'm a Rangers player" so expect to be treated with golden gloves.

I think its more a society problem to be honest. Too many lads think they have made it before they have even stepped on the pitch at Ibrox just because they have signed a contract with Rangers.

I wonder just how many real talent that has been lost to this attitude over the years.
 
Saturnblue said:
When was the last time a youth player went on loan to another Scottish club and got better?

Any youth player that goes on loan to another Scottish clubs just seems to stagnate or get worse.

We should only loan them to clubs in Belgium, Netherlands, Spain or Portugal etc. where the standard of coaching is higher and to get them away from their Scottish peers who might encourage them into drinking etc.
Click to expand...
100%.

Who was it who chose hibs over a move to holland (I think)?
 
Commander Bjorklund said:
I think this is something people forget when discussing youth players who break into our team. Not every one of them is going to be a Barry Ferguson, sometimes us developing and progressing youth team players into useful squad additions benefits other areas of the squad.

Take our 10 worst signings over the past 5 seasons. Nobody would be able to convince me that we couldn't be developing youth players of a better or even an equal standing. Then factor in those transfer fees saved in not having to pay for squad fillers etc.

Maurice Ross and Bob Malcolm have 10 winners medals for us between them, and whilst never being close to being the star men - they have deemed to be useful squad members in successful trophy winning Rangers teams.

I'm not expecting a superstar a season from the youth ranks, but I think we could do better in regards to youth player progression.
Click to expand...

I've been saying this for what feels like decades now.

There's always the thought process from the club that we need an experienced player.

Think of Amdy Faye as an example. There was absolutely no need for that signing on an "experienced" professional player's wage when we had the likes of Andrew Shinnie captaining the u19s at the time.

Now, Shinnie's proven with his career that he was never capable of playing 250 games as our main central midfielder but Faye was useless and didn't help make a difference when required with our first choice players unavailable.

There's a hundred examples exactly the same. When we rely on those sort of donkeys (Faye, Margus Gayle, Gareth McAuley, Russell Martin) , we invariably drop points in those games anyway

Are we not better dropping the points anyway and not costing ourselves higher wages in the first place? Or, maybe even doing better than that points wide and possibly even seeing progression of a youth player we can sell for a higher fee. There's nothing to lose compared to what we achieve with 2nd rate back up players.

Unless we're signing experinced professionals to improve the starting XI or at least be part of a regular 14, the options beyond that should be youth first.
 
Last edited:
a_weir said:
Makes sense. I was holding off abusing him on Twitter but that's the green light I needed!
Click to expand...
Pete O'Rouke thinks he's being clever making it seem like we need to save money on a youth player but when he's reduced to writing for Football Insider maybe he should concentrate on getting a real job.
 
ElBuffalo said:
Because it’s the instant lazy argument to apply to any youngster that doesn’t ‘make the grade’.

There are a million and one reasons why someone might look really good at 16/17 but not be able to find the next level. It’s not always because they have a ‘bad attitude’ but that’s what journalists and some fans instantly go to.
Click to expand...

ssblue said:
Always?
Click to expand...

Josh McPake
Ciaran Dickson
Kai Kennedy
Alex Lowry
Jamie Barjonas

That's off the top of my head.
 
Grumpy Old Git said:
We can agree to disagree.
Ain’t a problem.

If Mcpake does get his contract terminated we can see what happens with him.
No problem.
Click to expand...
It’s in the rules mate it’s not really an agree to disagree thing. He can’t play for anyone else if he gets terminated outside of the window. Sign for a team and play for a team are two different things. You’re right he can sign, but he can’t play.

Here’s the official SPFL rules on player registration.

PART B PARTICULAR PROVISIONS RELATING TO PROFESSIONAL PLAYERS
3. REGISTRATION PERIODS
3.1 Registration Periods will apply to Professional Players who compete in football at Scottish Professional Football League level.
3.2 To those Clubs to which Registration Periods apply, a Professional Player may only be registered to play with such a Club during one of two Registration Periods per year as determined by the Board from time to time. Notwithstanding the foregoing provision, and subject to Paragraph 3.3 below, a Professional Player who at the conclusion of a Registration Period is not registered to a Club, may sign and be registered for a Club outwith the Registration Period

Therefore he would be a free agent and yes could sign for any club any time. However he cannot be registered to play outside the registration period if he was registered somewhere else (us) at the conclusion of the registration period (transfer window).

Someone could sign him, train him, pay him and make him theirs, as would be his right as a free agent, however he couldn’t actually play until he’s registered and he can’t be registered until summer, as he was registered with us at the conclusion of the last registration period.
 
ShieldhallBear said:
It’s in the rules mate it’s not really an agree to disagree thing. He can’t play for anyone else if he gets terminated outside of the window. Sign for a team and play for a team are two different things. You’re right he can sign, but he can’t play.

Here’s the official SPFL rules on player registration.

PART B PARTICULAR PROVISIONS RELATING TO PROFESSIONAL PLAYERS
3. REGISTRATION PERIODS
3.1 Registration Periods will apply to Professional Players who compete in football at Scottish Professional Football League level.
3.2 To those Clubs to which Registration Periods apply, a Professional Player may only be registered to play with such a Club during one of two Registration Periods per year as determined by the Board from time to time. Notwithstanding the foregoing provision, and subject to Paragraph 3.3 below, a Professional Player who at the conclusion of a Registration Period is not registered to a Club, may sign and be registered for a Club outwith the Registration Period

Therefore he would be a free agent and yes could sign for any club any time. However he cannot be registered to play outside the registration period if he was registered somewhere else (us) at the conclusion of the registration period (transfer window).

Someone could sign him, train him, pay him and make him theirs, as would be his right as a free agent, however he couldn’t actually play until he’s registered and he can’t be registered until summer, as he was registered with us at the conclusion of the last registration period.
Click to expand...
Thanks SB for obtaining that clear and unambiguous statement which clarifies.

Not sure I said anything different to that.
Did I?

If I did and am wrong I’ll end up in the bad fire and if it lets others feel better about themselves can’t be a bad thing.
Ha ha

Anyway it’s been done to death.
 
Grumpy Old Git said:
Thanks SB for obtaining that clear and unambiguous statement which clarifies.

Not sure I said anything different to that.
Did I?

If I did and am wrong I’ll end up in the bad fire and if it lets others feel better about themselves can’t be a bad thing.
Ha ha

Anyway it’s been done to death.
Click to expand...
Not a big deal at all mate lol just a confusion, with the difference being signing for and playing for. I suppose it’s to stop teams using under the table negotiations with other clubs to release players outside of the window so they can sign somewhere else, with payments being made in underhand ways.

For example Morelos and Colak get injured and we want shankland, all of a sudden hearts and shankland come to a mutual agreement to terminate contract during season, shankland signs for us in March as a free agent and helps us win games, then we give hearts 2 loan players in summer and buy one of their youth players for £3m, essentially cheating the transfer window.

Everyone knows what’s happened but there’s no way to prove it. It would just lead to players moving all year round. That’s why they could do that and we could sign him, but we couldn’t register him to play. Or Dundee are short of a striker and Motherwell are short of a defender, Dundee defender gets released, Motherwell striker gets released, quick swap, who needs a transfer window anyway lol.

Overly simplified hypothetical but that’s why the rules there.
 
Funkhouser said:
I'd wrap the youth side of Rangers up and invest the money into the Women's side.
Click to expand...

Why? It can be profitable for us if done correctly. Look at Nathan Patterson who we apparently got £12m for, potentially reaching £16m. That transfer alone allowed us to recruit for the first team and covers some of the cost of the youth side.

I believe the biggest transfer in women's football is around the £500,000 mark. Worldwide. I'm not saying women's football can't be profitable nor am I saying we shouldn't invest in it as a club but I don't see how winding down the youth programme benefits us in any shape or form.

Even if it were running at a loss, as long as that lot across the city have a youth intake then we have no choice but to have one. We'd essentially be letting them take the best youth the country has to offer without any opposition. They'd make a fortune out of it.

The very last thing I'd be thinking of changing to be honest...

I'd shut down the women's game before I even began to think about winding RFC youths down.
 
Grumpy Old Git said:
We can agree to disagree.
Ain’t a problem.

If Mcpake does get his contract terminated we can see what happens with him.
No problem.
Click to expand...
Read the rest of the BBC quote posted, in particular the bit about being a free agent , namely ‘if they are unattached free agents when the window closes’ mate.
 
Last edited:
Echo_1 said:
Why? It can be profitable for us if done correctly. Look at Nathan Patterson who we apparently got £12m for, potentially reaching £16m. That transfer alone allowed us to recruit for the first team and covers some of the cost of the youth side.

I believe the biggest transfer in women's football is around the £500,000 mark. Worldwide. I'm not saying women's football can't be profitable nor am I saying we shouldn't invest in it as a club but I don't see how winding down the youth programme benefits us in any shape or form.

Even if it were running at a loss, as long as that lot across the city have a youth intake then we have no choice but to have one. We'd essentially be letting them take the best youth the country has to offer without any opposition. They'd make a fortune out of it.

The very last thing I'd be thinking of changing to be honest...

I'd shut down the women's game before I even began to think about winding RFC youths down.
Click to expand...

Think he’s at it Trigger
 
5cotland said:
Sources: Rangers to resolve future of Josh McPake as off-pitch discipline issues revealed.

Rangers are looking to resolve the future of Josh McPake after failing to offload him in the January transfer window, sources have told Football Insider.

Rangers were hoping to offload McPake permanently in January to save money, but there was no concrete interest to take him.

The forward, 21, is currently on loan at Championship side Queen’s Park, but he has endured a mixed time at the club due to form and discipline issues off the pitch.

Scouts from a number of clubs watched him in action last Friday for Queen’s Park against Ayr, but the attacker failed to impress.

McPake has 18 months to run on his contract at Ibrox, but they are looking for a resolution on his future as he’s a high earner among the fringe players at the club.

One option being considered is to terminate his agreement and hand him a sizeable pay-off.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1622957083703271425
Click to expand...
What off field behaviour
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Latest posts

Back
Top