calscot

I prefer to watch the Hibs Celtic game. Hibs are playing fantastic football at the moment and Celtic are not too bad either. I think it could a be a very good game and fancy Hibs to nick the points... I'll be cheering them on anyway. Let's hope we can get the three points against Kilmarnock first so that we can either narrow the gap against the Tims or take a step ahead of Hibs or both.

The SPL wouldn't die just like the 1st division isn't dead. You'd be left with something between the bottom of the SPL and the top of the 1st. The standard wouldn't be the same without the money the big clubs bring but some of the teams would thrive when they can actally win something and qualify for Europe. I think it would be far better than the Welsh league who also do without their best three teams as we have more people and our first sport is football and not Rugby. For the similar reasons it would be better than the Irish league too. Possibly similar to the Scandanavian leagues. I don't think travelling fans would be a big part of it and for the bigger teams they wouldn't miss it any way. We don't get much income from Dunfermline fans etc. You don't get many Portsmouth fans going to Newcastle and vice versa. The away games in other countries would all be live on television anyway. However if you want to travel, my scenario only has travel to Belgium and Holland which are next to each other and can be pretty cheap by easy jet - as cheap as a train to Aberdeen. I'm sure there would be cheap charters too. And there are the overnight ferries from Newcastle. It wouldn't be that much harder than if we joined the Premiership - it's more expesive to fly to Liverpool or Portsmouth than Amsterdam and quite a lot of hours by coach. Basically I don't think it's a problem as there would just be less travelling to away games except the five in Scotland and fans would watch them on telly instead. The money saved could be used to cherry pick the away games at Ajax, PSV, Feyenoord and Anderlecht. It would probably mean more subscribers to the telly package and so more tv money to the clubs. But think of the demand for tickets for home games - I think we could justify expanding the stadium for even more income as well as an increase in ticket price for a higher quality product.

I didn't supply the figures but that's the rumour. The reason they are in debt is probably because, just like DM and Romanov, even though Abrahamovich is filthy rich, he doesn't want to risk his own money. If he leaves then he will sell Chelsea with the debt there. Also like DM and VR he will have guaranteed the loans so that they will never be called in or be put under much pressure to repay it early. The huge debt with probably have a decently low interest rate similar to a mortgage as it will probably also be secured on the Chelsea real estate. So say about 5% or 9M a year. With over 200M turnover, they can easily afford to service that debt. At least their debt is for money spent on football, Man Utd's debts are there to pay for the club - they are paying off the Glazers' debts and so they'll eventually own the club for free. Any of us could do the same to own a big club for free - you just need a big enough credit rating and a club which is almost guaranteed to make a profit. I think it should be illegal.

I foolishly thought that with DM bringing in Le Guen and promising huge new funding that we were about to overtake them again... How naive I was.

So the conclusion must be that we need TWO centre halves...

With only 2 of Le Guen's signings starting the game last night, and one of them having a nightmare, I'm not confident at all in his ability to choose the right players. He may be the kind of manager who's better at tweaking a team that is already pretty good than building one from scratch. Remember he inherited a title winning side at Lyon. I think Walter Smith and Eck were both a bit like that too as they had their best success with a mostly inherited side. Smith to his credit however, spotted quite a few gems, but weakened his side with players such as Bollan and Clelland, but maybe he was best with inherited tactics. As soon as he changed from 4-4-2 to 5-3-2 we were useless in Europe.

Without a couple of last minute goals Celtic could have been heading for 7 in a row... 5 out of 7 is still pretty dominant especially when they are averaging about 12 points more than us a season with our titles included. And their European record is better too.

The thing that I don't get, Craig, is that DM has pretty much paid off the debt with a share issue that we probably wouldn't have had, so our turnover would be similar to now if we hadn't got into debt and I so can't see us having any more money - in the long term you can only spend what you earn. Celtic also had a share issue which put them back in the black and right now both teams have pretty stable finances, so how come they are so much better off than us? Is because they are balancing out their finances by borrowing when they are cash poor and paying it back when they are cash rich, whereas we borrow when we're cash rich and pay it back when we're cash poor...? I've said it before but: The way I see it, as a business we really need to borrow now to get us out of a slump or we'll enter a vicious circle where our income reduces with our lack of success. The top end Scottish Hifi manufacturer Linn did this to great effect - borrowing to spend on research, retooling and training during the recession, the Labour party did it to get the UK out of a recession, so why can't one of Scotland's top businessmen understand it?

I think the Celtic board have learned a lot after not strengthening the the team after Seville... DM has not learned a thing in 18 years of ownership and only ever acts reactively. Also they are very concious of not reducing the quality while reducing the spending and have done a reasonable job. DM is only focused on reducing debt, not quality on the pitch. We used to think they would never catch us until DM ruined our finances... but I can't see Celtic doing the same. We dominated Celtic for the first 10 years of DM's tenure but that was mostly due to them being totally mismanaged and having a biscuit tin mentallity. We beat them by spending two or three times as much as them. That is the only way DM can win. The last 8 years have been more of a level playing field and Celtic have completely out played us in the management of their club and they have taken over as the dominant force in Scotland despite us nicking a couple of leagues at the death and a bunch of cups. You have to wonder what it is that DM has brought to the party when Celtic have a bigger stadium, a bigger average crowd, a bigger turnover, a better UEFA ranking, a bigger player budget, and most importantly a far better squad of players who will be much more successful than us this season. And that it despite them having no money, a dump of a stadium, a shit team and being close to bankruptsy about 12 years ago while DM inherited one of the best stadiums in the UK (already paid for), a fantasic team and manager, and a very healthy bank balance and turnover. The Celtic boards of the last 12 years have made their club far better, ours have made our club far worse...

I think the worrying thing is that our manager brought in TWO centre halves for the first team and they are both mince. Who is to say he won't bring in another chump in January. We need a Scottish influence in the purchase of players.

PS We might not have the best engine but it does actually go but we need new brakes to pass our MOT.

If the midfield is the engine then the defence is the brakes, and with the state of ours, we're a car crash waiting to happen...

At the moment I'd go for Ponroy and Ure/Kinniburgh/McMillan. Can't be any worst than those we've got.

Don't you know it's a historic occasion (or for those who don't speak English properly, "an [h]istoric ocassion.") They are the first Scottish team to qualify for the last 16 of the Champions League with the new rules which changed in the summer... They are also saying they're historically the first Scottish club to qualify with one game to go... a bit pathetic but then we're no better, in fact we're worse as we insulted our own team of 92/93. They are historically the first Scottish team to qualify with more than 7 points. They may historically be the first Scottish team to qualify while losing all their away games... The permutations are endless, but then, we started it - "we're historically the first Scottish team to get to the last 16 of the European cup SINCE it changed to the Champions League AFTER the first of MANY times they fiddled with the format..." Basically we were the first Scottish team to get to the last 16 in the Champions Cup SINCE we already did it in 93... and a few times before that. It'll be interesting if they get to the quarter finals, whether all the bears who go on about how historic it is for us getting to the last 16 will change their mind and include Walter's class 92/93 to be the first Scottish team to the last 8 in the CL. I would put money on it... Isn't it great being in a time where all this history being made...

I've been caught out before so checked the sky listings this morning.

The only way we can survive as a top European team is to leave the SPL be it for the EPL, an Atlantic league or a Euro league... The way things are going in the big 5 countries, I think an Atlantic league model is almost inevitable but may be too little too late. I think the best solution for us would be to form a league with Holland and Belgium with 6 teams from each league and the top 8 qualifying for Europe - 4 CL and 4 UEFA, plus four in the Intertoto. Less than we have collectively at the moment but then the succession leagues in each could also get 3 places each. Bigger teams could easily get through the intertoto. So the question is, would a league of say: Celtic Rangers Aberdeen Hibs Hearts Kilmarnock PSV Ajax Alkmaar Feyenoord FC Twente FC Groningen Genk Anderlecht Brugge Charleroi Standard Liege Westerlo make you more excited enough to pay more for tickets and live games on TV? Would you be more likely to take in a home game at a higher price to warrant a stadium expansion? That's at least another 7 top teams. The bottom three teams could be relegated and replaced by the three champions of the country leagues. And the 3 second places plus the fourth bottom could play off for a spot too. I think it's the only we we can keep up.

Well he was given about 4.5M to turnover the squad and brought in 11 new players, but how many players bought with that money will play tonight? I make it two at the cost of 1.8M... (although he has introduced two Murray parkers to the team).

We should remember that Auxerre is a town of about 50 thousand people - about the size of Kilmarnock. Under Guy Rioux they punched above their weight but despite having two high profile managers to succeed him they seem to be dropping back to their natural level. On paper we should easily win this but if Le Guen thinks his team finds it harder to win against lesser teams then we could be in trouble.

Don't Rangers (well DM really) have a policy of not paying dividends? I think DM prefers to look altruistic by putting all the profits back into the club while making his money from Rangers in less transparent ways - like the building work all done by his companies and the catering etc, etc. He also doesn't take a wage. I think paying a dividend would be 100% transparent and would not go down well at all with the fans or press while we are not spending on the team. As DM owns over 90% of the shares it's all too obvious where the money would be going. I think that would be a big no-no. To me a loan would be far less transparent as who the loan goes to does not seem to appear in the accounts. But what about loan repayments? He could easily have tied up some of the loans to his companies, and to take the money out, he just needs the loans repaid... However, I don't think that's his style at all and suspect the money is reasonably safe. His MO is to skim off the top rather than drink the milk.

If he lives up to his reputation in France, and he signs promising young Scots, it could mean that they have a very good education which can only be good for Rangers and Scotland. However, as we all know PLG has struggled to live up to his reputation so far.

Can't remember where I put it - sometimes you just start a new thread without realising where you are in the forums...

Yeah I think they are a given although moving them on probably won't be easy...

Makes it easier for a new owner to turn things around and be popular though...

PS I got that right for Sunday...

I'd like to see the same team that beat Hearts. They weren't pretty but they got the required result. I'm totally fed up with player changes, we needed a settled team. Those players also played the full 90 minutes which suggests PLG was happy with them and if he was going to play Sioko or Buffel, wouldn't he have given them a bit of time on the park? So I go for: ..................MacGregor Hutton...Svensson...Hemdani...Smith ............Ferguson...Clement .......Novo.........Prso.........Adam .....................Boyd