JohnMc

I imagine it's partly due to the precarious and public nature of a manager's job. In England the average tenure for a manager is now 477 days, I can't imagine it's very different in Scotland. If you know at the outset that you've pretty much only got 18 months in the job then I imagine the people who have the greatest affect on your role are the ones you're most likely to come into conflict with. Players cost manager's their jobs, it's probably easy to blame the person who chose those players, rather than yourself. Add in the public nature of a manager's job, constant scrutiny from the media and clueless fans waiting for the kettle to boil before starting work writing about them as if they have the first idea what they are talking about. Few jobs are so public and watched by people who think they know better. It's a wonder managers aren't in conflict with everyone all the time. in American sport the average MLB baseball coach tenure is 3 seasons, and in American football it's 4.3 seasons, in the NBA it's 3.7 years. It's not always easy to compare sports but structurally the American system seems to be what's coming into European football, so maybe we'll see a time where managers are given longer.

I read English's article and it was hardly a hatchet job, I'm surprised how touchy Celtic are. If Celtic don't start the season well it won't be long before the media and some of their support turn on them. I look forward to that.

They had to buy quite a bit of land adjacent and around the old stadium. They somehow even managed to get a compulsory purchase put in place on a decent sized steel fabricating business nearby, how they got that through I'll never know. The new stadium is adjacent to the old one and does overlap, but it's not exactly in the same place, a bit like us building a new stadium on the site of the Ibrox primary school across Edmiston Drive.

I don't think there's anything 'bad' about them, they're simply getting older and as buildings get older they incur increasing maintenance costs. I imagine they'll be fine for another 20 years albeit the money required to maintain them will take up a larger percentage of our costs. They're too small, demand outstrips supply currently, we'd sell another 10,000 or so seats based on season ticket demand. That of course could change in the future. I wasn't comparing our finances with those English sides, simply the reported costs of their new stadiums. They seemed more relevant than Danish or German stadium costs. I don't think I need to point out that the club haven't actually asked me to explore this, I was just a little bored while having a cup of tea earlier.

The cost of building a 'new' Ibrox is worth investigating, the Copland, Broomloan and Govan are over 40 years old now even if there have been changes to each over that time. Everton have estimated £500 million for their proposed new stadium. Spurs apparently spent around £1 billion on their ground. Brentford built a new stadium for £71 million. Some fairly big differences in costs there. I suspect we'd want to keep the Main Stand, so it's a 3 sided bowl or similar we'd be looking at. We wouldn't need to buy land, unlike Spurs and Everton, so that's a saving right away. We'd clearly need to borrow the money for the project, and if we assume the 'new' Ibrox would have a higher capacity and more corporate boxes to pay for the build. If we needed £250 million then in simple terms we'd be looking for £10million a season plus interest over 25 years. Not impossible if we add another 10,000 seats plus more hospitality. The danger is that the initial cost grows. That happened when we rebuilt back in the late 70s and it had a huge effect on the quality of the team on the park. Match day revenue continues to be our most important source of income, so investigating how to increase that makes a lot of sense.

It feels a little like 'toys out the pram' from us because the Conference League idea was rejected so strongly. If the Lowland League was good enough last season and the season before I'm not sure why it isn't this coming season. Ironically with Linlithgow and Albion Rovers joining the league is arguably stronger than it's ever been, it's certainly on a par with League 2 quality wise. I'm still not sure the B Teams idea is the answer but young players need to play first team football, or be in squads where first team football is a realistic possibility, I agree with that. Football at that level isn't great and most should be playing aThat requires systemic change and as the clubs won't vote for proper change we're going to continue having the same conversations. When we were stumbling around the fishing villages and market towns of Scotland trying to find our way back to the SPFL Celtic had no real challenge and were able to play youngsters. During that time they developed Tierney, Callum McGregor, Ryan Christie and James Forrest into first team and international players. Since our return and sorting ourselves out on the pitch they've not developed a single young player worth mentioning. That's not a coincidence. The jeopardy of the SPFL, where 2 sides fight for the title, the losing manager almost certainly getting fired, and every other side potentially facing relegation and financial catastrophe creates an environment where experienced journeymen are preferred to mistake prone youngsters. Half the sides in the SPFL changed manager during the last season. A further 3 only appointed their current manager during the season before. Scottish football is doing everything it can to ensure young players get nowhere near first team football.

I was reading a review on a recent book on him just last week, oh for the days when Fife coalfields produced international players with regularity.

I'm old and don't always follow some of this chat, but are we saying he's a 6'3" dribbler who doesn't score many goals? I suppose Aribo could have been described similarly.

As in Pollok and Yoker, teams like that? I doubt it, the days of Junior (few of them are Junior anymore since league reconstruction) clubs developing players is largely gone. Most players come through at senior sides and 'drop down' to that level if it doesn't work out for them further up. To be honest there's little difference in quality in those playing in the West and East Of Scotland League and the Lowland League and Divisions 1 and 2. Player regularly move between them.

POTS - Tillman; consistently above average all season, no one else was. Flop - Matondo; might still come good, but enormously disappointing signing so far. Most Improved - Sakala; looked like he'd no future with us at one point, improved to the point that with a touch more composure he might become a star... Unsung Hero - Tav; 55 appearances (more than any other player) and 18 goals from fullback despite a dip in form and struggling with injury at times. Best Signing - Colak; joint top scorer this season with Tav and vital goals in Europe. Lawrence looked good before injury, Souter looked good after injury, Cantwell and Raskin haven't played enough matches yet, all 4 of them may prove better signings in the long run.

I think this confirms what we already knew, namely that pod contributors know nothing.

No real surprises. Kai Kennedy looked like he was destined for great things at one time, but during his spells out on loan he's simply not kicked on. He should still have a career in football at Championship/League 1 level, but can't help but feel it couldn't have been more. Likewise with Charlie Lindsay, he was (may still be) the youngest ever player for Glentoran. He's another I thought had a real chance at one time. It must be hard for these players, even if it wasn't a surprise. I can't imagine being that age and being told you're not good enough to do the thing you've always assumed you would do.

For a lot of players there's financial incentive in making international squads. Not only from whatever the SFA pays them but from personal sponsors and also from their club contracts. Often a player's contract will have levels (games played/cups won/European qualification etc) and making international squads is often one of them. A player who is a current full international also has a higher value than one that isn't, even if it's for a 'poorer' footballing nation like Scotland. International football is seen as a higher level of competition than domestic league football and enhances a player's transfer and salary value.* I can understand why we're nervous about two players with poor injury records playing more football when we'd prefer them to rest. I suspect both quite like playing international football, it's a different type of challenge for a player. Whatever your views on Steve Clark he's done well with Scotland and we've a reasonable chance of qualifying for a tournament, something almost every professional would like to be part of. *Some 20 or so years ago there was a scandal in Brazil when it was discovered their national team manager was getting paid by agents to give random players one cap. These were players who would normally be nowhere near the Brazil squad. These agents were then able to tout their player to European clubs as a 'Brazilian international' and command a larger fee and salary for an often very average player. One team who fell for this were from Glasgow, they bought a Brazilian international centre half to some fanfare. It turned out he was the most aptly named player of all time - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rafael_Scheidt

That's interesting. I thought he was poor last night and his crossing is surprisingly bad for a specialist full back. A bit like Sakala he works hard but I'm not convinced by him yet. Still early days in terms of playing time of course.

Effort and hard work excuse a multitude of sins in the eyes of most Scottish football fans. Sakala's a better player now that at the start of the season. His covering and tracking back are impressive and he can challenge and sometime win arial duels now too. His finishing is still way below what's required and his decision making remains patchy at best. But he doesn't hide and he keeps at it, it's hard not to like him while still hoping we sign someone better.

The self confidence some people possess constantly surprises me.

I knew someone who had something like I8ROX on a Porsche (he may still, I've not seen him in a long time). He had a business in Glasgow and was running an important customer to Glasgow Airport after a meeting, in the days when you could drop off and pick up on the road right outside the terminal. Unfortunately several plane loads of Celtic fans were returning from a European trip at the same time. This resulted in an unexpectedly rowdy send off for the bemused and concerned important customer as voices were raised and threats exchanged.

I'm really not. Since making his first team debut in 2011 he's only spent 2 seasons as the first choice keeper for a side in the English Premier League. One of those seasons saw his side relegated. Every other season in his career he's either been the back up making a single figure number of appearances, out injured or he's been in League 2 or the English Championship. I'm not sure clubs signing him and then choosing not to play him really enhances his reputation either. Look, I think that Butland is a 'better' keeper than McCrorie currently, he's significantly more experienced and at the perfect age for a keeper. However, I don't believe, based on what he's done to date, that Butland is a 'top' keeper and so significantly better than McCrorie as to warrant the expenditure. With the limited budget we've got I'd gamble on McCrorie, keep McLaughlin as back up and invest our money elsewhere in the squad.

That's very true and is at the heart of the dilemma. What's our budget for a keeper, £2 million, £3 million, £4 million? What kind of keeper will that buy us? It's certainly not going to get us a Stefan Kloss equivalent today or an Allan McGregor in his prime. Jack Butland, who we're continuously linked with, is the 3rd choice Crystal Palace keeper. He's had an ok career, but he's a Championship level keeper with an iffy injury record. At 30 he's a good age for a goalie, but he will make occasional mistakes, he has done his whole career, and he'll be worth nothing at the end of his contract. He might not incur a transfer fee, but his signing on fee and wages will be substantial. Is that a good investment when we could have a great keeper at the club who just needs a run of games? It's a gamble, I accept that, but then so is signing a new keeper too. McCrorie isn't a teenager, he's 25, he's coming into his prime as a player. But he needs games, he needs first team football. The difficult reality is we're not able to compete like for like with Celtic currently. They have bigger budgets and will continue to have for at least another 12 months. We need to develop players, we somehow need to figure out how to do that while winning. It's a conundrum, but it's essential to the long term health of the club. I'd be nervous if we were deciding to replace Morelos with Robbie Ure, or Kent with Josh McPake, but McCrorie feels like a gamble where the odds a bit more in our favour.

Surely if we want to build the type of club we claim we do, one that develops players and sells them on, then McCrorie needs to be given the jersey and allowed to make some mistakes but ultimately become the best keeper he can be. McCrorie is inexperienced, but has potential. He could become the Rangers number 1 for 15 years saving the club a fortune, he could become our number 1 for 18 months and then sold to England making the club a fortune. Or he could prove a limited keeper and be dropped by October. But we'll never know if we don't give him the jersey and a little bit of slack. McCrorie will be targeted by our opponents, he'll be viewed as a weak link, they'll put a player on top of him at corners, they'll look to rough him up at any opportunity. How McCrorie deals with that will tell us a lot about him and his future, but surely we give him the chance, let him stake his claim rather sign a big name and discourage him.

I fear for the English Channel.

That's a fair point and I assume that's what we tried to do with Sands. I think we are able to attract players from mid table Bundesliga and lower EPL or Championship clubs depending on their circumstances. We're unlikely to sign Reyna's boy from Dortmund but as Tillman and Cantwell have shown we can shop at the next level down successfully.

To be clear, I'm not saying we shouldn't sign Americans, far from it. But Reyna joined us from the Bundesliga, Beasley from PSV Eindhoven and Bocanegra from Fulham. Tillman has shown enough this season to further demonstrate there are very good players with American passports. I'm just not convinced the MLS is a strong league and our previous purchases from it have underwhelmed. South Americans haven't done particularly well in Scotland either, I'm not sure the football here is a great fit for them before we take in the cultural and climatic challenges they'll face. Now, having said all that I sincerely hope someone quotes this post to me in 12 months time after a storming first season for Cifuentes.

Have we ever signed a good player from the American league? Edu scored a memorable and very enjoyable goal but he was pretty average apart from that. Sands was ordinary, not the worst but not nothing special. The least said about Matt Polster the better. I'm surprised we're shopping there, it's a league that Lewis Morgan looks like a world beater in.

Ure, Fraser and Lovelace, who I'd talked up in a different thread, were really disappointing. None of them will make our first team based on that performance. Lovelace scored the second and made the third to be fair, but he's slow and was easily dispossessed by a Celtic defence that didn't loom all that good either. Ure will be lucky to make it as a footballer at any level if that's the standard he performs at. As has already been mentioned Bailey Rice, at 16 one of the youngest on the pitch, really stood out. I thought Arron Lyall had some nice moments too, but at 19 you have to assume he's not going to make it at Rangers now either. The lad Graham who came on as a sub did well, albeit he should never be allowed to take a penalty again. Lowry is a frustrating player. He clearly has so much ability but every pass he tries is a Hollywood pass and so many simply don't come off. If he could understand when it's better to simply retain possession he'd be a much better player. Some day a manager will figure out how to get into his head and get the best from him, I hope that's Beale but I worry it might not be. Celtic had a few players who were very fast, much faster than anyone on our team. They also had a forward who scored two goals who looked like he really knows the way to goal, his second was a superb finish. Beyond that I didn't think they were anything great. Like us they'd a few bombscare moments in defence but perhaps had a better keeper. It'll be interesting to see if Rice can progress.