Leaderboard

I've already said that numerous times in this thread alone. Much of the current opprobrium being flung in the Boards direction could have been avoided simply by them communicating, the fact they're currently firefighting is a problem of their own making. An effective PR and communication department allied with something resembling a customer service department would go a hell of a long way to preventing a recurrence. We allegedly appointed a new head of customer service but all we seem to have seen is the Ask Rangers stuff which is basically a list of faq's, honestly begs the question what was the point?

But they were two weeks ago? In all seriousness, I think they are worth it. They're talented lads; still only 20 and 21. They have a lot of potential. They may not show it consistently just yet, but I think there's potential there.

I always think wages freed up has to be taken with a pinch of salt because replacements may come with lower wages but they also come with transfer/signing on fees etc.....

Unlike Murray, who basically didn't have to listen to anyone, the current board does at least seem susceptible to supporter pressure. While they continue to make the mistake of not actively harvesting supporter opinion, on those occasions when the support gets particularly vocal the board does react, albeit never fast enough. I find myself wondering what "communication" actually looks like from the other side of the equation. I sometimes get the impression that the board is rather reluctant to engage openly because the directors don't particularly trust the support to interact in a measured and constructive manner. Frankly, while in no way condoning poor communication, some of the stuff I've read recently would only justify that view. I don't think the solution lies in simply criticising the board every time something goes wrong, especially when it involves the sort of wild mud-slinging we've all seen lately. What's missing is what's always been missing - a genuine supporters' organisation to gather and represent supporter views and to serve as a coherent bridge between club and support. And I think we also need to be honest ... every previous attempt to create supporter representation has either been a complete disaster or has been constructed on a confrontational basis rather than the constructive partnership we and the club actually need. After the Murray debacle and all that followed, it's hardly surprising that trust was in short supply but if we genuinely want to move things forward then it's time we, as well as the board, got our act together. For me, this should be one of the key priorities for club and supporters alike. It's time to abandon the archaic notions embodied in the RST and Club1872. The time has gone when our priority was to "keep an eye" on the board, whether by share ownership or media pressure. If supporters really want to contribute to the future development and direction of the club then we have to accept that constructive cooperation is the best way forward. I'm willing to bet that the directors would bite our hand off to get real supporter representation on the board if they felt it had genuine intent and could demonstrate true validity. Unfortunately, for too many fans, that would mean abandoning long held reactionary attitudes of blame and confrontation and is unlikely to happen any time soon. Which I feel is a great pity and a huge opportunity lost.

Has anyone ever seen a manager regain the dressing room. No? Me neither.

From the little I have seen, the board or whoever on their behalf, sometimes note what is going on or being questioned within the support (often via social media). They offer back soundbites, tweets, statements, occasional actions, etc to appease, sweeten up, keep happy, satisfy or similar, that line of supporter feedback. In some cases it is short term firefighting that actually makes things worse. For example, pushing the positive vibes about our finances, deals, etc and not a balanced picture. So the support expect more money spent in a transfer window and then further down the line, the board are on the back foot. Partly, their own fault. As for supporter groups to communicate/act as bridge....with the board. Forget it, it isn't happening any time soon. Twenty years of one disaster after another, for all kinds of reasons. We have what we generally deserve. The current board have enough real supporters on it. Re. Communication. They just have to improve in obvious areas. Not forgetting, the planting of money trees at Auchenhowie and winning Leagues.

Was John Greig their manager at the time?

They seemed to fall out with the support after the OZ backlash and avoid comms after that. Did themselves no favours there.

Thought we had a PR guy, David Graham. No idea what he does

None of us know for sure so i suppose its just wait and see. Yes lots of wages freed up, I didn't include Helander in my list as i doubt we will see him again but good to get him off the wage bill too.

And crucially, there’s a proper link to recruitment too. They buy players who will flourish in the system, and their recruitment is ambitious too.

I love Salzburg. They have a phenomenal football department. (It's no wonder Chelsea were after their DoF. He seems to have turned them down, though.) I especially like their managerial appointments. It's a who's who of some of the most innovative mangers you'll ever see: Schmidt, Hutter, Garcia, Rose, Marsch, and now Jaissle. They have a recognisable style that they want to implement and appoint young managers that can implement that style. Those appointed don't have track records with other clubs, their record comes from their ability to implement that desired style of play. Jaissle's record was as an assistant, their U18s and then their feeder club FC Leifering in the Austrian second division (he actually took over from Bo Svensson, another talented coach, currently with Mainz). Hutter, Rose, Marsch and jaissle were all involved with the Academy and feeder teams - and other Red Bull organisations. (It helps of you have a feeder club, or two... ) I hope that's part of the reason why we've brought in Bowley. Someone that can help us create and implement a style of play throughout the club, so we can then, ideally, promote managers from within. Perhaps not, though. It's certainly high level stuff. These managers have the ability to implement their styles on whatever players the club acquires. It's all linked up: The players they buy have to have certain traits, that align with their playing style, that the managers have a track record of being able to implement etc. That's the dream...

On this point, I’ve just checked what RB Salzburg’s wage bill is apparently 15 million euros. I find that figure hard to believe, but it will still be significantly lower than ours and I have no doubt that they have better players, and loads of assets, and they are coping fine with the Champions League. We need to be more ambitious and starting following the example of clubs like that.

There should be decent money to spend next summer with all the contracts expiring. Because the other big reason to refresh the squad regularly is that it keeps the wage bill low. By holding onto guys and handing out new contracts we end up with a huge wage bill but with an ageing and demotivated squad. By selling regularly you are bringing in fresh players on low wages and selling before you hand out the big wage rises.

I kind of forgot about Kamara tbh. I’ve long felt he would fetch decent money but things haven’t been trending in that direction recently. Hagi’s injury has killed anything for now. Recapturing form will take time too. The China one was very early, that was his first season I think. The Lille one was the one that annoyed me, I remember posting on here about it. But we turned down £16.5m and they walked away. With Kent it was Leeds 2 years ago, the figures were never released although £10m was rumoured.

Oh-no. I can only say it so many times: For me, a better manager gets more out of this squad. The squad is not inherently bad. (That's not to say it doesn't need refreshed, and it's certainly short in some areas - which I've stated regularly.) Your argument seems to be that motivation and results fluctuate, so the whole squad needs replaced. I'm not sure how one would measure motivation; it is too subjective. Results have fluctuated. If you can use bad results to suggest the squad is poor, I can use the good results to suggest the squad is good, or at least capable of being good. It's just different interpretations. For me, performances have been consistently bad under GvB. I even think they were better under SG, despite wanting him gone because it had become stale. Performances were poor, but I never thought we'd lose - we certainly didn't concede many. Under GvB, not only are the performances consistently poor - although there have been some superb tactical performances - but there's a softness to the team that wasn't there before. Even that winning run when he first arrived was lucky, in some cases: especially the last-minute penalty against Hibs to win 0-1. Again: a better manager gets more out of this squad.

Just a reminder now that Sir Duped or Mintyville is being mentioned that supporters are always right to ask questions of the club, and the club should be transparent as a result. Lets not get back into a place where those running the club should be above being challenged based on past achievements.

Your argument doesn't convince me.

The bulk of the starting XI have been around for years and there is a definite and clear distinct patterns regard apparent motivation/performance/results in both Domestic and European football (the one exception being domestic 55 season). Lets take since the start of last season. We had won the league a few months before but something wasn't quite right with the team/manager and this seemed to come accross on the field of play and we started 21/22 relatively poorly. We were undefeated Champions and had won 32 from 38 games and drawn 6, two of which came after we clinched the league. We didn't build on that win, we reverted to type (another manager and/or squad debate?). Under SG in the League 21/22 WLWWWDWWDWWDWW We couldn't put together a long winning run that helps you win a title. Gio comes in. The players seem to respond and it goes well at the beginning (League) WWWWWWW ......then it is the winter break For whatever reason, the squad revert to type as we return from winter break and the positive Gio effect wears off.......DWDLWWDDWWWLWWDWWW (League) The players do seem to motivate (themselves?) for Europe and we make the final. We come into 22/23 (League) and we resume where we had left off in May. WWWDWLW My conclusion is that this group of players have it in them to get to a decent level but have great difficulty in putting together the consistentcy needed to win league titles. When the domestic going gets tough, they are mentally weak and not sufficiently motivated enough to give it their best shot. In Europe, it has generally been a different tale. I think they basically get themselves up for it. I also see a manager who isn't going to be able to change things (league consistency). He doesn't appear to have the authority and respect of all the players. Always easier to get rid of the manager than change a squad but both are overdue. Obviously, finances make it impossible.

The most expensive thing any Rangers fan ever bought was David Murray's knighthood.

Interesting. I'm the opposite. To say I'm 'happy' with the squad would be a stretch, but I maintain that it is, on the whole, fine. It's the manager that is the issue, for me.