Summer Transfer Thread

RFC97

Well-Known Member
Was the same with the defender from France, you seem confused by the idea of squad depth
My post talked about the problem of loaning players (therefore on the expectation they will play plenty) and having to limit games for a key player to do so.

The suspicion then arises that the formation may change to accommodate both.
 
Saw us linked with a few left backs. I don't get it. We're fine there.

Flanagan had a great end to the season and is in possession of the jersey. It's been a while since we had a real old school hard bastard.

It was a poor season for BB but he clearly has talent and deserves another crack during pre-season. Ideally he'll come in and be the long term option.

Halliday is what he is.

I don't see the need for a Max Lowe or whoever.
 

MSF

Well-Known Member
Saw us linked with a few left backs. I don't get it. We're fine there.

Flanagan had a great end to the season and is in possession of the jersey. It's been a while since we had a real old school hard bastard.

It was a poor season for BB but he clearly has talent and deserves another crack during pre-season. Ideally he'll come in and be the long term option.

Halliday is what he is.

I don't see the need for a Max Lowe or whoever.
Its a weak area & the shirt is up for grabs. No outstanding candidate.
 

Sasa-

Well-Known Member
Saw us linked with a few left backs. I don't get it. We're fine there.

Flanagan had a great end to the season and is in possession of the jersey. It's been a while since we had a real old school hard bastard.

It was a poor season for BB but he clearly has talent and deserves another crack during pre-season. Ideally he'll come in and be the long term option.

Halliday is what he is.

I don't see the need for a Max Lowe or whoever.
It's by far our weakest position.
 

strider

Well-Known Member
Who makes way for most of the games then ?
That'll be the dilemma. Especially with Murphy also fit and very much suited to that role.

I've said for weeks that I'm concerned about the size of the squad, even with the prospect of European football. If we go out before the groups, we'll be looking at a lot of players in the stands each week.
 

ICA_86

Well-Known Member
Saw us linked with a few left backs. I don't get it. We're fine there.

Flanagan had a great end to the season and is in possession of the jersey. It's been a while since we had a real old school hard bastard.

It was a poor season for BB but he clearly has talent and deserves another crack during pre-season. Ideally he'll come in and be the long term option.

Halliday is what he is.

I don't see the need for a Max Lowe or whoever.
I think the end of the season has rewritten history for a lot of people in regards to Flanagan.

He done well but he’s not good enough to be our first team left back, I definitely wouldn’t be against spending a bit of money for a proper full back out there.
 

Recoba

Well-Known Member
Official Ticketer
I’d be more willing to accept this if we owned the players. But when they’re on loan, it tends to be that it’s them who’ll be playing.

So is he taking Airfields place or sitting out on the bench a fair bit?

Doesn’t really add up.
Who knows what will happen, why worry about it ? its better to have good players and wonder how they all fit in than to have 11 certain starters every week with little competition
 

Superrangers

Well-Known Member
Loans make an absolute shit load of sense to a team looking to stretch their budget and put as much quality on the park as possible.

You also suffer no long term burn from them if it doesn't work - see Sadiq and Coulibally being a million miles removed from the exit strategy Herrara and Pena have been.
Swings and roundabouts. You also have greater player churn and end up developing other people’s players to their financial advantage, not your own. If you develop your own talent and sell it on, you can build a more valuable squad that you actually own, which is a better situation.
 

RFC4ME

Well-Known Member
Swings and roundabouts. You also have greater player churn and end up developing other people’s players to their financial advantage, not your own. If you develop your own talent and sell it on, you can build a more valuable squad that you actually own, which is a better situation.

The standard across the board would drop if Rangers owned all their own players - thus chances are we drop the quality of our own "sellable" assets by "owning" them.

Look at last season, we had a CB valued at 8 million in England, a winger valued at 10 million in England - we just don't have the budget to afford players of that standard, what we would have bought last season would have been wayyyyy less than that

As an addition to that IF we had bought all our players last summer we likely wouldn't have had players like Goldson, Katic or even Defore and Davis on our books as the budget wouldn't have stretched that far.

If we "bought" every player we owned we would decrease the standard, and thus the value of the assets we can sell.
 

Superrangers

Well-Known Member
The standard across the board would drop if Rangers owned all their own players - thus chances are we drop the quality of our own "sellable" assets by "owning" them.

Look at last season, we had a CB valued at 8 million in England, a winger valued at 10 million in England - we just don't have the budget to afford players of that standard, what we would have bought last season would have been wayyyyy less than that

As an addition to that IF we had bought all our players last summer we likely wouldn't have had players like Goldson, Katic or even Defore and Davis on our books as the budget wouldn't have stretched that far.

If we "bought" every player we owned we would decrease the standard, and thus the value of the assets we can sell.
The loan market inflates player prices. If there were the restrictions that there should be, clubs wouldn’t be able to stockpile players and loan them out for others to develop for them. Clubs would have to have smaller player groups and prices would fall.

The last sentence makes no sense at all. We would be able to afford better players and sell them on.
 

RFC4ME

Well-Known Member
The loan market inflates player prices. If there were the restrictions that there should be, clubs wouldn’t be able to stockpile players and loan them out for others to develop for them. Clubs would have to have smaller player groups and prices would fall.
A bit moot, that's just a scenario you want to be rather than the scenario that is - which is the scenario Rangers have to live in.
 

jackstar

Well-Known Member
Swings and roundabouts. You also have greater player churn and end up developing other people’s players to their financial advantage, not your own. If you develop your own talent and sell it on, you can build a more valuable squad that you actually own, which is a better situation.
For me this is the down side,take Kent for example,before he came to Rangers he was largely unheard of and could've had him for 3/4 million,now after his spell at Rangers is being touted at 12 million,so I agree I'd much rather we brought our own on. In the short term as a quick fix I can see the point,but long term all we're doing is swelling the coffers of other clubs.
 

Superrangers

Well-Known Member
For me this is the down side,take Kent for example,before he came to Rangers he was largely unheard of and could've had him for 3/4 million,now after his spell at Rangers is being touted at 12 million,so I agree I'd much rather we brought our own on. In the short term as a quick fix I can see the point,but long term all we're doing is swelling the coffers of other clubs.
Exactly and the whole thing is self-perpetuating.
 
Its brutal, 4 weeks tomorrow before we have our first competitive game.
All we have until then are the training camp videos and any pre-season friendlies to tide us over.

This is an absolutely awful stretch of the sporting calendar. And for some reason all the American sports (except baseball) take this time of year off too, once the NBA and NHL finals are done.

Some smart sport that wants to make a few quid and raise it's profile will reconfigure it's calendar so that it can offer exciting sport through June and early July.
 

Recoba

Well-Known Member
Official Ticketer
All we have until then are the training camp videos and any pre-season friendlies to tide us over.

This is an absolutely awful stretch of the sporting calendar. And for some reason all the American sports (except baseball) take this time of year off too, once the NBA and NHL finals are done.

Some smart sport that wants to make a few quid and raise it's profile will reconfigure it's calendar so that it can offer exciting sport through June and early July.
Every 2 years we have the World cup or the Euros to tide us over but it is difficult when we don't, thats why we need some signings to keep us going.
 

Portrushbear

Well-Known Member
All we have until then are the training camp videos and any pre-season friendlies to tide us over.

This is an absolutely awful stretch of the sporting calendar. And for some reason all the American sports (except baseball) take this time of year off too, once the NBA and NHL finals are done.

Some smart sport that wants to make a few quid and raise it's profile will reconfigure it's calendar so that it can offer exciting sport through June and early July.
The cricket world Cup is on...
 
Top