calscot

How much did we pay for Papac? Soccerbase says 1M, wikipedia says 450k. I'm inclined to believe the latter.

Ok, I'll concede on Svensson but Gothenburg DID want more money - about 2M IIRC. We didn't play the softies though...

I think we need at least two players for every position. Therefore we need four central midfielders minimum. To me the question is not whether we should buy one, it's should we buy Brellier...?

XL is huge now. When I was younger I was slimmer but was generally a large, now I'm a stone heavier but the average girth of the nation has gone up so much they've changed the sizes and I'm now a medium... No smutty replies, please!!!

PS If footballers were older, I think they'd make different decisions. When you're young you're attracted by the bright lights of the likes of London, when you get older you can't be bothered with the hassle. So a twenty something will now easily choose the likes of Spurs over say Portsmouth. There are lots of rubbish places like Bolton, but now the Premiership itself has the bright attraction and buzz of London, while the SPL looks like the boring old sticks.

PS I think we used to easily compete with mid range English teams especially due to medals and European football. However they as much from TV as our turnover and so can afford higher wages and the standard of the league is as a result also much higher. If we ever looked like a backwater, it was never more than now...

If Alan Smith is Rangers fan, it's probably his second team or Scottish team - a preference rather than fanaticism. There is no way I can believe he is a dyed in the wool blue nose like us... I would say he "likes" Rangers rather than "loves".

Papac has been ok but would you have been happy if we'd paid much more for him than we did? We could have had him for the CL if we did... My point was that Austria Vienna tried to get as much money as they could out of us, we played hard ball, got them all much cheaper, but even then they were not exactly bargains... We played hard ball on Svensson too, using a clause in his contract. So we wasted most of our transfer budget last season, without stumping up over inflated prices. I think that's why we won't just be handing over the asking price this summer...

That run of games doesn't look as worrying as it would have last year... I just hope we can take Walter Smith's recent knack of getting the results into next season...

I think the sad thing is that an over-the-hill Fowler could still enhance our squad... At least he'll be free, unlike the 5.5M we paid for an over-the-hill Kanchelskis.

Yeah, he'd be good competition for Stevie Smith...

Nice to see them bring that back... Are there lots of other derbies for the rest of the SPL on that day? I think it's a good idea to minimise travelling for fans at New Year.

Well we've avoided the Aberdeen, Inverness away snafu at Christmas this time... Bit of a travel for the first game though... That reminds me of when Celtic fans complained of a conspiracy a while back, because they had to play the first game of the season away for the ninth time in a row! It just so happened that we won the league every year and the champions always play at home on the first game. The police will not allow the Old Firm to both play home games on the same weekend so the other has to play away... Just shows they will see a conspiracy anywhere.

Papac is little more than a squad player right now as is Svensson, however they are both our most expensive defenders... Papac is definitely not worth very much and we were held to ransom by AV.

I think you are underestimating the SPL, I'm not sure Fergie would do the same...

I for one am not too bothered that DM does not just cough up over-inflated fees. Brown was well overpriced at 4.4M, especially on our budget and I wouldn't want us to pay 2.7M for Cuellar. The only embarrassing one has been Naismith. We should be starting at about 1M plus add ons with him. The lower your starting offer the more the bargaining power, but derisory offers can make the selling chairmen more determined to get top whack, and I don't think the Rangers board have been prudent there. If Naismith was easily worth 1.7M then Celtic or an English team would have been straight in and snapped him up. Obviously they are hanging around to see if they can get him on the cheap at the last minute ie if Rangers drag their heals with say 800k, Celtic could jump in on deadline day with 1M. Their registering an interest is just so Kilmarnock will tell them of any bids so they can decide whether to trump it or not. Rangers were just as hard ball when signing Sebo, Papac and Svensson - and thank goodness they were or they'll all be an even bigger waste of money. In fact those three pretty much demonstrate how clubs are DEFINITELY being just as embarrassing with their demands.

The guy may have potential, but to be honest we can't afford to take any more risks with players. If he's failed once then he's no good to us at the moment. Too many players have not found previous form at Ibrox recently, especially with those we're giving second chances too - like Jeffers, and we've suffered badly for it. Right now we need to go for those who are at least on form. When we have a great squad we can start taking one or two risks again...

I think that knocks it on the head for me. I can't go to both. Hopefully they'll be on Setanta.

It would seem more logical to me if Killie PREFERRED Naismith was on the bench for another team. They get the money and while they are weakened, another SPL team are not significantly strengthened and it's less likely he'll come back to haunt them.

As for SDM, can he not see that Celtic are starting to take the piss out of us? We really look like the poor relations who are getting pushed around at the moment and that is lowering our kudos and reputation. How are we going to attract high profile players with that kind of reputation?

I agree about Novo, I can't see him wanting to leave and after last season I can't see us getting rid of a good, committed squad player who will not have an inflated wage. The thing about Novo is that he doesn't lack fitness or work ethic, I think he just slightly lacks that bit of extra skill that would make him a class player. He's a good player who punches above his weight due to running his arse off and giving 100%, rather than a great player. But for us, a good committed player is better than a very talented lazy player who just doesn't perform consistently eg Buffel.

As for Nakamura, I agree and was disappointed the rumour about Inamoto signing came to nought - except I've heard he's pants now. This is the kind of thinking we need if we want to hang on the coat tails of the rich leagues.

I get your point, but... Not sure Naismith will be worth 4M. How much is Boyd worth now? 1.5M? He was considered better than Naismith. How much is Thomson worth? No more than what we paid for him is my guess, maybe less. Brown will have to establish himself and show something special to appreciate in value. Barry Ferguson was 6M but he had a fantastic couple of seasons and showed his metal in Europe against the likes of Parma (at their best) and a decent Leverkusen. I'm starting to doubt that players in Scotland are worth much elsewhere. They rarely go to Europe and the richer the EPL gets, the more they unfairly see us as equivalent to Div 1. Your point has validity but to follow that road we might be better off with the best young English players as they sell for way over the odds - except we can't afford them in the first place...

Ah it's post now...

There's still the second half which the system seemed not to like... Talk about High horse, Mr Kettle. Mate, to be honest, I just don't think you understand my posts at all. You're looking to categorise and twisting the words in your head to fit how you want it to look. You are reading what you want to read, rather than what I am trying to say. Maybe it's my fault in the way I communicate but you are definitely looking to judge before looking to understand. I'm incredibly disappointed in you. Maybe you see something you disagree with, and so are out to "win" your point but that's not what I'm trying to achieve here. In fact, I'm no supporter of new-Labour or the old Tories BUT, who is to say either are completely wrong? Where is YOUR noble prize for how to create a utopia? I find that kind of twisted disparagement very undignified. After all you go on about, are you being "politicist"? - And getting it wrong, too. Stop trying to be so categorical, personal politics are far more complex than that and you it takes more than a couple of ââ?¬Å?floweryââ?¬Â sentences to gauge someoneââ?¬â?¢s politics ââ?¬â?? especially in a debate where they are making points, not extolling their philosophy. That is a bold statement to make and missed the point anyway. I may not be harmed by someone who is loud and abusive, but that does not mean I accept them being in my company. Anyway, some people go beyond banter and take it very seriously, ultimately resorting to violence. Mate, you are twisting my points again and trying to make them black and whit. Also you are resorting to name calling, but I suppose I sometimes do the same. I am not showing compassion for the trouble makers because that is not the point I'm making. The point is that there seems too much compassion for the trouble makers while they are playing the victim due to rules to stop their trouble making. And as far as I know, punishment has been used in almost every culture, how do you think you can run a society without it when no-one else has been able to? That is true, but then these rules are only necessary after persuasion has failed. Would we really have anything approaching equal opportunities with laws to uphold them? Would workers have proper rights without our employment laws? I think you are against rules as they restrict individual freedom, but you don't seem to realise we need them to bring order to society and allow some of that freedom. What would football be without rules? Even the much maligned off-side rule has a very important purpose for the sporting integrity of the game. The trouble with the SFA rule, is not's its purpose but the lack of definition - but that is a different discussion. You're missing my point of the metasemantics, which is many people DO mean Catholic when using the F word. In contrast I am sure pretty much nobody who does the bouncy is simulating stamping on someone's head. That is why one is contentious while the other is ridiculous. Seems obvious to meââ?¬Â¦ I think I may have expressed myself badly in haste in my first post, but I'm surprised that you have so readily gone to town to belittle anything I say and indeed showed undue contempt. I don't claim to have any of the answers but I do try to see things from many different angles. I was merely pointing out the angle that I thought many seemed to have missedââ?¬Â¦