Thomas Milton
Well-Known Member
Now do the football board ..
This Board’s last chance.
- Thread starter Eighteen Seventy Two
- Start date
High Society
Well-Known Member
You never stop prattling nonsense about Gerard, it’s boring
GBY74
Well-Known Member
A lot of fans will continue this as he's the only manager we've had since Smith who regularly had the beating of them.
ResoluteLoyal73
Well-Known Member
I don’t think any one should be demanding the sacking of the board, this doesn’t mean we all need to conform to an appreciation society of their performance either.
I hope they start developing the commercial income of the club , in a transformative way .
We need much more finance from sponsorship , this is the way around FFP .
I hope they start developing the commercial income of the club , in a transformative way .
We need much more finance from sponsorship , this is the way around FFP .
Albertz78
Well-Known Member
As fans we can have an opinion. We are not paid to seek investment, project manage the required change, implement the required infrastructure to get us back to winning ways season after season.
This is on those that are paid to do their highly paid jobs.
If they have no idea how to resolve this then they are not fit to do their jobs. Simple.
Boycie
Active Member
Maybe the board didn't know any roofers ?
Cooper's left peg
Well-Known Member
Clearly they didn't mate.
SuperGers07
Well-Known Member
Clement has laid down the gauntlet there with his comments re end of the cycle
Proper investment needed. It’s going to take a minimum of £20m to start turning this round.
How do we fund it? I think we can have a guess.
Proper investment however is key rather than hoping someone buys our players
Proper investment needed. It’s going to take a minimum of £20m to start turning this round.
How do we fund it? I think we can have a guess.
Proper investment however is key rather than hoping someone buys our players
Los Pollos Hermanos
Well-Known Member
They had one in the building in Kemar, although maybe they thought he was a roffer?
Boycie
Active Member
A cowboy if i'd ever seen one!
Los Pollos Hermanos
Well-Known Member
and not a cheap one.
Kinghornloyal
Well-Known Member
We cannot just add investment. More shares have been allowed to happen but not to the level of a rebuild. Nowhere near it.
Boycie
Active Member
heard he earned as much as John Wayne and Clint Eastwood
WarnbroTavernier
Active Member
I’m referring to the wage bill
wullies bunion
Well-Known Member
Unless you have a couple of million in your back pocket, this Board is here to stay and any fan who wants rid of it can fuggetaboutit. It is a Board of Directors and will do what the Hell they want. If they are secret papes supporters even, there is nothing the fans can do except protest and stop going to games.
Sorry and all that but Rangers are a money making business and that is all. It is the fans who give it the trappings of Protestantism and Unionism of which, the Board cares little unless it affects their bottom line.
Sorry and all that but Rangers are a money making business and that is all. It is the fans who give it the trappings of Protestantism and Unionism of which, the Board cares little unless it affects their bottom line.
Which is still not true. I've no idea why people on here keep repeating our wage bill is higher than theirs right now.
There's a degree of truth in that but in part it compares Apples and Oranges. The Scottish Top Division was more competitive in the 50s, 60s, 70s and 80s. During the period from 1950 to 1985, 8 different clubs won the top division. Only Rangers and Celtic have won since 1986. As usual, the main cause is cash and, as time advances, the gap between the haves and have nots has increased. Rangers and Celtic apart, there has been little incentive to invest in Scottish football or its clubs in recent years. Cash differentials are not just a Scottish phenomenon, they apply almost across the board. In England, 14 clubs won the top division from 1950 to 1985, falling to 8 in the 40 odd years to 2023. Only 6 clubs have won the Premier League in its 30 years or so. Man City have won it 6 times in the last 10 years. That even with a substantial boost to every club from TV.
Most SPL clubs have seen a decrease in home attendances since the 50s whilst Rangers and Celtic have more demand than supply. Merchandising also reflects that shift. European money has also risen sharply as we recently saw.
That is a very fair request. There are 3 directors of the football company, Robertson and Taylor were appointed to the football board this year and Bisgrove in 2020 although he was only appointed CEO in 2023. So, it ain't exactly fair to blame them meantime. The RIFC board is less about detail, signings etc than about strategy, funding and budgets but since none of them work full time for Rangers they set strategy and the like and consider the recommendations coming from the football side. Who are all new to post. They need time to settle.
Easily said, more difficult to do. At current prices, the value of Rangers shares is £112 million. As per the most recent published accounts, the value of its net assets is £40 million. A bit of a gap. Often, asset values are less appropriate a tool than a multiple of its bottom line earnings when clubs are growing or restructuring. That doesn't help either since we continue to be loss making, £4m in the latest reported year. OK so our assets ain't enough and we are losing money but we have huge potential in Europe and growing TV revenues. Ah but wait there's not a lot of new investment in Scottish football and both Rangers and Celtic get skelped where the real money is in Europe. And Sky? What now? Get behind the club and the directors and work through the issues sensibly.
Thomas Milton
Well-Known Member
A thoughtful post in a thread of roasters.
The new football board had to give Beale a chance - they couldn’t sack him until he failed but I expect they knew he wasn’t going to last.
They have hired Phil and Koppen - who look like serious people - let’s see where we are in 6 months.
WarnbroTavernier
Active Member
At this stage there’s a very good chance we’ll be looking for a new manager in 6 months. It’s up to those in charge to jettison Tavernier and co but Clement’s recent comments give me hope
Big Negri
Well-Known Member
100% correct.
Big Negri
Well-Known Member
This is where the problem lies. These are the guys who are our voice v the SFA and the rest. They are also the main decision makers. Not an ounce of top level, first team football experience between them. I’m sure if you look at our new football board the Manager and Doctor are the only two guys on it who have previous experience in their current roles. We need experienced football people to assist Clement from boardroom level.
Barrymoped
Well-Known Member
I don’t think there is.
As long as the board back Clement, I have confidence he will bring us success. We can’t just keep binning managers every year.
Thomas Milton
Well-Known Member
Based on what evidence other than your PTSD ?
GBY74
Well-Known Member
Are you confident the board will back him enough because I think Celtic will spend big after us allowing them straight access to champions league money.
Thomas Milton
Well-Known Member
We’ve been carrying an 8 player sick bay - even if we don’t spend a penny more we will have a stronger team on the park- and Celtic have a roaster who flops in Europe in charge - they will implode soon enough.
GBY74
Well-Known Member
Hopefully sooner rather than later.
Barrymoped
Well-Known Member
I’m confident they will back him with whatever we have within our budget plus any player sales, yes, in recent years that’s always happened.
You are correct in saying Celtic will probably spend big, but therein lies the main issue for me. If we spend what we can, and spend it well, but Celtic spend double, and also spend it well, they will still be ahead of us.
Do you still sack the manager? I can’t see what possible benefit that would have
Calls for the Board or the Managerial team to go are well wide of the mark.
Clement and his team are hardly in the door. Got us to the last 16 of the Europa, both domestic cup finals and back into a league title race.
It's the old guard of players who now need to go for us to progress.
If we line up with the usual suspects next year I fear we will fall short again.
Big calls to be made but it needs to happen, it's went on far too long now.
Clement and his team are hardly in the door. Got us to the last 16 of the Europa, both domestic cup finals and back into a league title race.
It's the old guard of players who now need to go for us to progress.
If we line up with the usual suspects next year I fear we will fall short again.
Big calls to be made but it needs to happen, it's went on far too long now.
Nikau's Mullet
Well-Known Member
Having a more civilised support base works against us sometimes.
Can't recall fans wanting to "shoot the board". Wouldn't go as far as that but maybe the fans need to put any displeasure across in a better way.
Can't recall fans wanting to "shoot the board". Wouldn't go as far as that but maybe the fans need to put any displeasure across in a better way.
Class of 72
Well-Known Member
Look im not getting into the politics of it as I don’t really know why folks dislike him. its just an observation from the outside, stabilised the club to lay the foundations for the above. We weee in a position of strength after 55 and absolutely blew it.
ArmchairBear
Well-Known Member
Didn’t realise Anastacia had a login for FF.
Thomas Milton
Well-Known Member
Do we deserve better ? This thread is full of posters clueless about who actually runs the club day to day, seem to have deep rooted mental health issues and are unable to see anything positive as positive. Not sure they deserve feck all..
jdm1873
Well-Known Member
I get why people are saying this but who comes in if it's not them? It's just not that simple.
We will never be fan owned as people will always put their own interests first.
It's a massive season next season but this season, I still think the board should have pushed the boat out for a striker in January as that would have made the difference.
We will never be fan owned as people will always put their own interests first.
It's a massive season next season but this season, I still think the board should have pushed the boat out for a striker in January as that would have made the difference.
blueintheface
Member
We will never be fan owned because it's not conducive to getting outside investment into the squad.
All our fans brought up on the success during the 90's can't fathom a club without a 'money man' pumping money in.
The main reason we lost the league is because we gained only 1 point in the 4 matches against Celtic - compared to their 10. Frankly we couldn’t cope with the pressure. Agreed we needed another striker but the lack of one didn’t stop us winning more points than them in the non-Old Firm matches - 83 to their 80. The deciding factor was a lack of gonads - against Celtic but also at the death against Dundee and Ross County when we were favourites for the title.
More than a striker, we need players who can cope with pressure because this squad couldn’t and that hurt us badly.
SaulBearenson
Well-Known Member
A lot of our fans, but not all. And it's not just those brought up on our success either, there's a lot of elder bears who had their expectations signed by the Murray era and can't fathom that the board can't just 'dig deep' every time there's a problem.
Side note, and I know you were quoting, but I really can't stand the tabloid style talk used at times 'money men', 'warchest', 'beaks' or 'blazers' etc.
ibroxbound
Well-Known Member
You can stick them with the youths and test their resolve to stay then.
If their not giving their all in the first team then it's no loss to demote them
SaulBearenson
Well-Known Member
Was it a lack of gonads, or did we just run out of steam due to injuries?
The timing of our loss of form was key. If we'd dropped points earlier in Clement's time there wouldn't have been anything like the outpouring of anger. For me, it comes down to our individual perspectives - if you are of the view that the players are 'serial losers' or 'bottlers' then you'll naturally come down on the side of it being a bottle job. If you think they gave it what they had and were affected by injuries, then it will be the latter.
SaulBearenson
Well-Known Member
It's no loss? We're still paying them first team wages.
You've also got the message it sends to anyone coming in - that 4 year contract is actually a 2 year contract regardless of what it says on paper.
ResoluteLoyal73
Well-Known Member
I wholly agree that we need to spend within our income, the substantive point , will always be , are we really doing enough to generate maximum income generation?
The club needs to get sponsorship finance that is transformative .
I think anyone who fails to realise , local independent traders , on our jersey , as opposed to a global business with real hard cash , is ignorant of what FTSE companies would seek from a marketing strategy with our club.
The top companies want exclusivity with a sporting partner , or association with elite branding, that compliments their values , and profile. I’m afraid the local wheel seller , is a rather uninspiring association for a global company.
The number of sponsors on the jersey , clouds the benefits of a sports franchise agreement with the most influential companies .
Rangers need to provide the best environment for real terms external investment . With respect , I don’t think the progress is anywhere good enough from the board or directors .
We are now a regular participant in the final stages of European football competition. The volume of cash needs to be reflective of this . We shouldn’t be advertising , to help sell more wheels for the local trader, in these momentous occasions .
Minkia
Well-Known Member
Pretty much a textbook example of constructive dismissal.
Why do people believe that employment law doesn't relate to football?
SaulBearenson
Well-Known Member
I've mentioned this a few times over the years - I remember people saying that Pena should be told to be in for 6am to train alone until he's close to fit, and to be out before anyone else arrived.
The reason he goes on about Gerrard is because when he came the club was a shitshow, no vision and no hope of catching the scum.
When he was here the structure of the footballing side of the club was improved beyond recognition from what it was. He asked for 3 years and he delivered the title after 3 years. He got us back onto the European scene and playing at a level that earned us our respect back.
Respect from the players to the manager was evident. Gerrard knew what it took to ensure the footballing side was at a level that would get us back on top.
All he asked was for to be backed when we were on top and not to stand still. The board ignored this and look where we are now.
Unless the structure of the footballing side of the club is improved then we will continue to go backwards.
After Seville, the board cashed on on the success of the previous two seasons, sold two of our fittest most important players in Aribo and Bassey and did not reinvest that cash properly.
They fxxked up completely with the resigning of Beale.
The fans need to make a decision what is important to us.
ibroxbound
Well-Known Member
That would be a case of constructive dismissal.
I would challenged your views on my proposal.
You obviously can't give oral or written warnings in football but dropping a player to the reserves,or not playing him at all because of his lack of interest wouldn't be a tribunal case.
BluenoseDoug
Well-Known Member
They are in a privileged postion with being Rangers's board. But I feel they are relying on past glories and what Rangers were as a means of commercial and branding the club. The museum the retro tops are examples but this will soon dry up if for 20 years we've only won a few cups. Need to focus on getting the right footballing men in to acheive our true potential.
SaulBearenson
Well-Known Member
Prove 'lack of interest' - if they show up to training on time and do what is asked then they are doing what they are contractually bound to do and you're singling them out because they won't renew a contract or leave, with the sole purpose of testing their resolve to stay and be paid what was contractually agreed at commencement of employment.
