calscot

The reporters are there to write up what's going on so fans will buy their newspaper... In this case, Celtic fans.

Most Americanism words originated in the UK and then adapted for modern use. Roster is a valid word but not in common parlance of football in the UK. Another example is that we have transfers while they have trades. Now I don't think the word trade has an American origin. Others are goal keeper and goal tender, strip and uniform, offence and attack, zero-zero and nil-nil. The reason terms like Roster are creeping into the language here, is in my opinion, from ignorant computer game developers.

Those guys should be banned as they don't come under any dictionary description of reporter or journalist. Propaganda officer maybe. Cetlic fans show the most despicable behaviour at a friendly in England, and instead of writing factually about it or giving a social commentary on it, the story is that somehow, without causing any trouble, we're just as bad. However, a certain large section of our fans do like to give them a stick to beat us with at every game. Maybe they should concentrate on football enough to know what an own goal is. I don't know what they sang in Germany, but watching footage of the Bristol game you could clearly hear sectarian singing of the F T P type, I can't imagine it was totally different abroad.

Bit off topic and being picky about words, but do we have to endorse the American word, "roster"? I hate the Americanisation of everything and don't see the point with a game like soccer[sic] that doesn't have a big American audience. Can we use "squad" instead?

Just what are the normal salaries for a company with say a £25m turnover? 2% of turnover seems pretty high no matter what division you are in. I would say half that is a pretty good wage.

If nothing else, the hard line approach will make players think twice about talking to agents while under contract..

Who needs Spiers et al when you have so many Rangers fans desperate to turn any story into an attack on the club. With the exception of actual negative stuff like sectarian behaviour by fans of course.

I know what your saying and after decades of closely watching what they eat and exercising hard every day, it probably feels they deserve to let themselves go. But, these guys eat at Murray Park which has an expert nutritionist and cooks who make meals accordingly... Also they have access to a gym and are training players almost every day and so can join in. Surely they also enjoy a game of 5 a-side? They also have access to fitness experts. And it seems they have a lot more free time than most. They have public and television image to consider as part of their job. A low carb diet with portion control, cutting out the crap, but having one day a week to eat anything you like, two 40 minute workouts a week plus a couple of one hour, hilly cycle rides (or games of squash/badminton/5aside/spin classes/circuits) would work wonders for them. That works out at half an hour a day of exercise. It's hard work to get a really athletic body, especially a six pack, but it doesn't take that much effort or knowledge to keep a build where you don't have a big belly and instead look medium with just a couple of inches to pinch. It's even easier to look medium build these days as the average size is getting porkier. The coaches in particular might get a bit more effort from the younger players if they themselves don't look like they'd wheeze and collapse if they did a fraction of what their asking the kids to do.

A bit off topic but looking at the pictures, all our non-playing people seem to be on the plump side. Surely that's a bit poor for a sports club? I can never understand why coaches become fat, it just seems a bit unprofessional and gives the impression you don't know much about fitness. I work with a bunch of people sitting at a desk in an office and the vast majority are pretty slim (with many in their 40's). If we can do it, why can't those in the business?

Why not put it under your nick name? It gets tiring reading the same signature over and over and interrupts the flow of the thread.

Maybe we should just allow "journalists" in. Some aren't fit to call themselves such and so shouldn't be admitted...

Not on any other forum - could you elaborate?

The Dutch attendances look much more healthy than ours, especially when you look at percentage full. The point of a northern European league would not be about attendances per se, it's the expanded number of people willing to pay for TV rights. Top clubs of most countries can compete with the top five in the gate receipts stakes but can't compete with the population size that pays for footie on TV. We're a great example of this considering we're one of the biggest clubs in the same "country" as the EPL and yet even when in the SPL command a tiny fraction (3%?) of the TV fees of the relegated sides. Seems to me that our biggest ever mistake was to resign from the FA and join the SFA. In fact Scotland going its own way has led to the rise and catastrophic fall of Scottish football. The top two Welsh clubs are showing us the long term rewards of sticking around. Or we should have attempted to join the English league in the early 90's when they needed a boost in ratings. Although I still think that we missed a trick last summer and should have tried harder to get into the Conference. It's still a better league than SLF3 and at least is on the road to riches instead of the road to nowhere.

Dutch top ten: [TABLE=class: stat, width: 684] [TR=class: headingblue, bgcolor: #E6E6E6] [TD][/TD] [TD][/TD] [TD]Average[/TD] [TD]Minimum[/TD] [TD]Maximum[/TD] [TD]Total[/TD] [TD]Capacity[/TD] [TD]%Full[/TD] [/TR] [TR=class: trow2, bgcolor: #DEDEDE] [TD=align: center]1[/TD] [TD=align: left] Ajax Amsterdam [/TD] [TD=align: center]51,078[/TD] [TD=align: center]46,772[/TD] [TD=align: center]60,965[/TD] [TD=align: center]868,330[/TD] [TD=align: center]60,965[/TD] [TD=align: center]83.8%[/TD] [/TR] [TR=class: trow3, bgcolor: #F8F8F8] [TD=align: center]2[/TD] [TD=align: left] Feyenoord [/TD] [TD=align: center]45,294[/TD] [TD=align: center]42,000[/TD] [TD=align: center]47,500[/TD] [TD=align: center]770,000[/TD] [TD=align: center]51,577[/TD] [TD=align: center]87.8%[/TD] [/TR] [TR=class: trow2, bgcolor: #DEDEDE] [TD=align: center]3[/TD] [TD=align: left] PSV Eindhoven [/TD] [TD=align: center]33,176[/TD] [TD=align: center]32,000[/TD] [TD=align: center]34,600[/TD] [TD=align: center]564,000[/TD] [TD=align: center]35,119[/TD] [TD=align: center]94.5%[/TD] [/TR] [TR=class: trow3, bgcolor: #F8F8F8] [TD=align: center]4[/TD] [TD=align: left] FC Twente [/TD] [TD=align: center]29,452[/TD] [TD=align: center]29,000[/TD] [TD=align: center]30,000[/TD] [TD=align: center]500,700[/TD] [TD=align: center]30,000[/TD] [TD=align: center]98.2%[/TD] [/TR] [TR=class: trow2, bgcolor: #DEDEDE] [TD=align: center]5[/TD] [TD=align: left] Heerenveen [/TD] [TD=align: center]24,732[/TD] [TD=align: center]20,000[/TD] [TD=align: center]26,100[/TD] [TD=align: center]420,444[/TD] [TD=align: center]26,800[/TD] [TD=align: center]92.3%[/TD] [/TR] [TR=class: trow3, bgcolor: #F8F8F8] [TD=align: center]6[/TD] [TD=align: left] FC Groningen [/TD] [TD=align: center]21,237[/TD] [TD=align: center]20,448[/TD] [TD=align: center]22,505[/TD] [TD=align: center]361,041[/TD] [TD=align: center]22,579[/TD] [TD=align: center]94.1%[/TD] [/TR] [TR=class: trow2, bgcolor: #DEDEDE] [TD=align: center]7[/TD] [TD=align: left] Vitesse Arnhem [/TD] [TD=align: center]18,395[/TD] [TD=align: center]16,357[/TD] [TD=align: center]22,315[/TD] [TD=align: center]312,724[/TD] [TD=align: center]26,800[/TD] [TD=align: center]68.6%[/TD] [/TR] [TR=class: trow3, bgcolor: #F8F8F8] [TD=align: center]8[/TD] [TD=align: left] FC Utrecht [/TD] [TD=align: center]17,632[/TD] [TD=align: center]15,147[/TD] [TD=align: center]20,119[/TD] [TD=align: center]299,748[/TD] [TD=align: center]24,426[/TD] [TD=align: center]72.2%[/TD] [/TR] [TR=class: trow2, bgcolor: #DEDEDE] [TD=align: center]9[/TD] [TD=align: left] NAC Breda [/TD] [TD=align: center]17,323[/TD] [TD=align: center]15,500[/TD] [TD=align: center]19,000[/TD] [TD=align: center]294,500[/TD] [TD=align: center]19,000[/TD] [TD=align: center]91.2%[/TD] [/TR] [TR=class: trow3, bgcolor: #F8F8F8] [TD=align: center]10[/TD] [TD=align: left] AZ Alkmaar [/TD] [TD=align: center]16,191[/TD] [TD=align: center]15,495[/TD] [TD=align: center]17,016[/TD] [TD=align: center]275,262[/TD] [TD=align: center]17,023[/TD] [TD=align: center]95.1%[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE]

Surely £3m in one off expenses will likely be amortised over several years? Do Rangers fans really want to do a Queen of the South multiplied by say 3 or 4? Buy a squad of unknown 1st division players with a 1M-1.4M wage bill? Not withstanding the lower likelihood of winning the league and type of football the players would be capable of playing, it's just not good box office sense. For me, I think we need to look at our turnover and expenses and budget accordingly. 33% of turnover seems low enough for me as long as it's not causing us great losses. If it is, then it would seem to me the problem lies not with the player budget, but the running costs that come to over 67% of income. It's funny that up to a couple of years ago I was arguing with people who were annoyed we didn't sign such and such a player because we didn't offer enough cash, with comments such as "just pay up, this is embarrassing" etc. I was pointing out that we have to watch the budget and just can't give in to players crazy demands. Now we seem to have bounced to the other extreme where the complaint is we're paying too much (at much reduced wages) - although it's easier to complain given the comfort of the signings we've made rather than have an effect and really have to put up with a lower quality of squad. Why can't we find some middle ground where everyone can stop jumping up and down in anger? For a start, let's see the audited accounts before jumping the gun. It's all very well saying, "be vigilant" but there seems to be a lot of time and energy invested in worrying about stuff that may not even be a real concern and nothing can be done about it in any case. Not spending all your time worrying about everything, is not the same as burying your head in the sand.

I can't believe someone once said McCulloch needed to lose about two stone. The guy looks about 10% body fat MAX, I'd say about 8% - and suspect he has a six pack. If he's about 13 stone then that would be about 1st 4lbs in TOTAL body fat. losing even half a stone would be incredibly difficult and probably leave him too weak to play pro football. Ian Black is also looking lean and very muscular. Most of the older guys look really fit. It's harder to tell with the youngsters.

I think we're getting carried away with our standard of player, many of whom are from the teams we think we are much better than. I'm sure we'll be hearing how rubbish we are as the season progresses... I think most fans know far more about their own players than other teams which makes them think they are better than they are - as they must be better than unheard of players in other teams. I also think we're the second best but not by much and while I don't really know Celtic's team right now (or really care), their CL showing last season (even if fluky) suggests to me that they are a level above us at the moment, not surprisingly. The players we've been signing are below the standard we would have been looking at had HMRC and Whyte never darkened our door. We'd be building a team to beat Celtic and we'd need at least our previous standard of squad to do so. I don't think with our first team of three or four seasons ago we'd be frightened of any team picked from our current squad whether it was Hearts, Aberdeen or Celtic.

So to recap we have around 30 players. Around 50% are home grown. About 33% are under 22. 10% cost a transfer fee. Average age is about 23.5.

Are you saying we need to axe five or six youngsters? If we cut all the U21s then we'd have 8 less... I don't think it would do the wage bill that much good though. Or maybe we have a smaller squad than people think but we are now counting U21s...

I think some people forget we are Rangers. We are not like other clubs and you can only really compare us with the top few sides of any country - and even then their relative success pales in comparison to the world record holders. There is NO club in the world where domestic success is expected of them to the same extreme as Rangers, and that includes Barcelona and Man U. Rangers are not renowned for playing a load of youths and yet we have won the most championships; could there be some cause and effect there? We have far less scope for playing youngsters and with all the pressure to do it, when we actually played about 5 or 6 home grown players with a few more coming on as subs, the fans spat the dummy out with the type of football we played and the manner of the success of winning the league by a mile. People may say that it was the experienced players that let us down, but in a team game, how do you really know what the effect is on experienced players with half a team of inexperienced guys. Add in less successful players not used to the demands of a 45k crowd and the goldfish bowl of playing for Scotlands biggest club and perhaps we're better off with more season pros in the team. The ironic thing is with this argument going on is that around half that squad are home grown - are people not seeing the wood for the trees? As for goalies, isn't this a special situation? You need someone as number 2 who doesn't mind possibly not playing a competitive game but can do a good job with no nerves when called upon occasionally. Is that the best way to develop a keeper? There seems to be a bit of a paradox here - people want us to develop youngsters and then using their own argument, they want to "ruin" them by sitting them on the bench for a season. Seems to me we need a guy who is skilled and experienced enough but also happy to collect the money while not getting much of a game. An older player looking for a pension seems to be the best fit.

You can't even expect the most expensive Rangers team of all time with a top international manager to win a cup in any given season... If it was that straightforward we'd have won the treble far more times than we have, and not had any barren seasons. We have a reasonably strong side but no better than a top six SPL side (and certainly not Celtic) and not a patch on previous Rangers sides without the money and division situations. The difference between the league and a cup is that in a league you can have a few off days or unlucky days, lose the game and still win the league by a distance. In a cup, it just takes a bad day at the office to put you out. It's what the romance is all about with so called shocks being pretty commonplace. I would be hopeful we could win the Ramsden Cup as we should be the best team by a fair distance. However, the cups will throw up the SPL sides and while I think we have the edge on 11 of them, an edge is not enough to expect a definite win. I'm still optimistic though.

I think if you're mixing up being a Protestant and being a Rangers fan, then you're definitely not a Protestant. I do find it strange that people say they are of a religion but don't go to church. If you believe in your religion then it's all about your immortal soul, so why wouldn't you spend a fair bit of your time investing in it? You invest time in work and family which affect your mortal life, but surely it's just a blip in the context of eternity? If you believe in it, why neglect it? If you don't really believe in it, why say you are of that religion?

Yes, I meant the opposition - they are interesting but not exciting. Looking forward to the new season too. I was hoping to take in the Brechin game as I'll be in Aberdeen the night before - although the 12:45 kick off could be a killer knowing the amount of drinking I tend do with my friends there, and will be driving to Glasgow the next day. Can you pay at the gate these days, or pick up spares?

As a home game they'll earn less than their league homes against us as they have to give us a portion of the gate...

Seems if you buy the print book, you are avoiding the tax of the electronic version...