We’ve sat back and watched them spend £20 odd mill

ALittleBitOfTheBubbly said:
You contradict your own point there in saying you don’t need to spend millions to find good players when mentioning 2 players that we couldn’t afford.

The comparisons you make really do sun up where we are just now and something a lot of our support are not onboard with or ready to accept but they’re going to have to. For every veerman we want , we’re at best getting a bacuna
Click to expand...
Well mate prepare for second for the next 5 years if that’s the height of our ambitions. If the board can’t stump up some cash then they should sell up.

And they two players were just examples cause we were linked with them. Look at there transfers across the city then, O’Reilly for 1.5 million, kyogo for a relatively small fee. There’s players out there who will make a massive difference who will cost peanuts in the grand reality.
 
BlueKeld said:
ASO has played 10, scored 4 times with 6 assists in Belgium. League and cup.

Some of us knew a RW was our most important position to fill, it would have taken some of the heat off of Kent and given us a genuine threat down both sides had we gone after ASO, we fucked up and paid the price.

This league defeat could set us back years, with them already organised and looking at another £20m to spend in the summer. On the back of the CL cash.

We may have stopped 10iar, but we’re on our arse again now.
Click to expand...
Aye but 4lads said skov olsen was too slow

Whilst championing Scott Wright as some high flying wing king
 
For me we had 1or 2 players sitting in the B team that could have made a difference and that is Lowery and McCann, but we preferred to keep them to 5 games for the B team and bring in a weaker youth player from Manchester and that was the manager's decision.
 
bob1873 said:
That my friend is the $64000 question and I have no answer but it doesn’t change the statement as being accurate. Feel free to disagree but the failure of the board to back Gerrard in the summer is why we are now here.
Click to expand...
Gerrard's failure to get past Malmo is why we are now here imo.
 
deedle said:
Brian Kennedy made the point that he couldn’t see why Rangers should generate less revenue than Celtic. Not so many years before, Rangers were generating far more.

Serious question - are they capitalising on transfer fees from past seasons? If not, where does the main difference lie? They hadn’t qualified for the Champions League group stages for the past three years.


I’m a bit concerned with how we are beginning to accept second-rate status.
Click to expand...
They are capitalising on player sales every year. That’s the only difference. That 20 million investment they made was actually funded by: edouard, Ajer and frimpong. They have a combined sales value of around 37 million pounds. They are net spenders. We, on the other hand, have Patterson and nobody of any real sales value in 4 years other than Windass (3 million).
 
Jelle1880 said:
Gerrard's failure to get past Malmo is why we are now here imo.
Click to expand...
True but he wasn't given funds to improve the team so it's a chicken and egg situation. I'd guess Dave King would have speculated where as the current board wouldn't. Rangers aren't Hearts or Aberdeen Park need to grasp that. IMO
 
We need to get a grip on reality here.The Club has been running at a deficit for years to support the recovery and rebuild phase.The covid pandemic has been a real setback as I believe we were heading towards a break even scenario before this happened. With a record 23 million deficit what are the Board expected to do?
We need to be selling a player a year and nurturing from within.We have some gems coming through like the recently sold Patterson and now Lowrie imo these guys should be in our first team and if buyers can be found some of our established players moved on.
 
1. they sold assets for big money in Scottish football terms & reinvested
2. we didn't sell so had no money

its that simple

guy on the subway complained that they signed players who "went straight into their 1st team" whereas we didn't
perhaps as simple as they were so absolutely dire last season, any signing walk in there

same should apply to us this summer
 
They spent 20 odd million because they received 30 odd million for Ajer, Edouard & Christie. It's that simple really,

Their recruitment has been very good but the last time I said that, I got the smiley faces and was told that they are shite.
 
Blu_ultra said:
They are capitalising on player sales every year. That’s the only difference. That 20 million investment they made was actually funded by: edouard, Ajer and frimpong. They have a combined sales value of around 37 million pounds. They are net spenders. We, on the other hand, have Patterson and nobody of any real sales value in 4 years other than Windass (3 million).
Click to expand...

They don’t have any high level sellable assets now though BU.

Winning 56 would have really put them in a bad place.

Now we’re struggling.
 
Viatrophy said:
Don’t let the door hit your arse. Self entitled, utterly ironic statement that one.
Click to expand...
I don’t agree with the self entitled part but I do agree with we need King back as this board don’t seem to see the footballing side of thing's money had to be spent last summer to get us into the champions league & at the winter window to push us on to win the league we should have used a bit of the Patterson money . As I think King would have the board Fu***d up .
 
Colinstein69 said:
The thing is, we absolutely did have enough to see off Malmo - the lack of readiness for that tie lies squarely with Gerrard & Co. and was indicative of the malaise that followed.
Click to expand...

We need to be trading players to make money like the scum do.

Its not sustainable to rely on UCL qualification (2 games) for our entire financial strategy.
 
BRaven said:
Hindsight is a wondeful thing.

Let’s remember we had a side that absolutely blew the league away last season. Very few would doubt their ability to carry a very strong challenge forward into this season.

Even after 10 or so games, Management and the board would have a lot of faith in our current squad of our players going forward

This isn’t on the board, yes we could have recruited a bit better, that isn’t always the positive effect you would imagine as we have seen this season.

At the time, Diallo, Ramsey etc looked like good business to see us through till the end of the season.
Click to expand...
Mitigating circumstances what with Celtic imploding the way they did and COVID,yes we still had to go out and win it,but given there was no fans actually helped us as well,which is a concern. Does the anxiety and pressure from fans get to certain players,difficult to say when you consider how we play in Europe.
 
JAC_1966 said:
We need to be trading players to make money like the scum do.

Its not sustainable to rely on UCL qualification (2 games) for our entire financial strategy.
Click to expand...
Agree about the player trading. We make a big thing about it being the cornerstone of our financial strategy, then proceed to make 1 significant sale in 3 years.

As far as Europe goes, we should budget for not making the group stages. Qualification and beyond should be seen as a bonus.
 
Live Forever said:
And done next to nothing. Negligence from our board IMO.

If they can’t find the cash, they need to invite fresh investment.

Huge alarm bells were ringing. We had to spend some of the Gerrard/Patterson cash in Jan.
Click to expand...
Gerrard wanted to keep the players rather than sell cant see how that's the board's fault when he walked after that.
Can you explain how it's the board's fault?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Latest posts

Back
Top