CammyF 6,787 Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 Your still going by your own opinions Cammy. No facts whatsoever. Would we/Rangers rather he left on a Bosman than offering even a token contract to bring in a fee. Hemdani wasn't part of the team for a long time, Boyd still is. Thats the difference I make there. I'm sure everyone is aware that we haven't signed any players, thank you for pointing out the positions we need. I really don't think you were the only one that grasped this fact. Why offer a 'token' contract to a player who you are actively trying to get off the books? Say Rangers offer Boyd a 4 year dedal at �£7-�£10K per week just to get someone to offer a bid for him. Boyd, well within his rights knocks back all these bids. Rangers then have to pay him his wages for the term of the contract. It may just be my opinion, but it is the reality of what is happening. If you care to tell me any other option we have to reduce the wage bill and squad size that doesn't require us to sell players or let them go, then I'm sure not only me, but Martin Bain would like to hear them. Cammy F 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon 0 Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 My only point is that Boyd has shown his desire to stay by refusing moves away. He may well have been shown he is not wanted by these actions, yet he still plays and scores. I'd rather pay to guarantee goals than lose him for nothing under a Bosman. I understand your points, why can't you understand my reasoning? I thought I was being quite rational. No opinion on reducing the wage bill as I am not a business man or involved in the finacial side of football I'm afraid. We have however already reduced the wage bill by a good amount I owuld imagine. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CammyF 6,787 Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 My only point is that Boyd has shown his desire to stay by refusing moves away. He may well have been shown he is not wanted by these actions, yet he still plays and scores. I'd rather pay to guarantee goals than lose him for nothing under a Bosman. Even to the deprement of the long term stability and financial health of the club? One man bigger than the entire club? I understand your points, why can't you understand my reasoning? I thought I was being quite rational. I can and you were. However, the club aren't whoring Boyd around for no reason. They (rightly or wrongly) believe that for the short term good of the club, Boyd has to be sold (or let go). That may change over the coming year, but I doubt it. No opinion on reducing the wage bill as I am not a business man or involved in the finacial side of football I'm afraid. We have however already reduced the wage bill by a good amount I owuld imagine. We have, but obviously not by enough as we are still looking to off-load players before the transfer window slams shut. Cammy F 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 Rangers can afford to let Boyd's contract expire, they done it with Hendami who was on more than Boyd. Cammy F No, I'd suggest that Rangers can't afford to let his contract expire. AFAIC, they only accepted the �£3m+ offer from Brum 8 months ago because the club desperately needed cash at that point. He'll still be here tomorrow night when the window closes imo & it would be idiotic of the club to not renew his contract before xmas. If they renew it sometime in December & he's scored a good number of goals for us by then, his selling value will have increased since last January & the club would probably not be willing to accept an offer as low as �£3m again. I doubt that there are many people at the club who don't think Boyd's goals will be crucial to us retaining the SPL title & that's another part of my reasoning for suggesting that the club can't afford to not renew his contract. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CammyF 6,787 Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 No, I'd suggest that Rangers can't afford to let his contract expire. AFAIC, they only accepted the �£3m+ offer from Brum 8 months ago because the club desperately needed cash at that point. He'll still be here tomorrow night when the window closes imo & it would be idiotic of the club to not renew his contract before xmas. If they renew it sometime in December & he's scored a good number of goals for us by then, his selling value will have increased since last January & the club would probably not be willing to accept an offer as low as �£3m again. I doubt that there are many people at the club who don't think Boyd's goals will be crucial to us retaining the SPL title & that's another part of my reasoning for suggesting that the club can't afford to not renew his contract. Why? What if Boyd signs a new contract and then REFUSES any offers that come his way. Rangers are left to pay him for the time of his contract. Hardly makes financial sense does it Cammy F 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 Why? What if Boyd signs a new contract and then REFUSES any offers that come his way. Rangers are left to pay him for the time of his contract. Hardly makes financial sense does it It makes financial sense if we retain the SPL title this season. If they sell him now or don't renew his contract before the next transfer window & he leaves, I know what the support will be saying if we don't retain the title & I'm sure the powers that be are on the same wavelength whether we're in financial trouble or not. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CammyF 6,787 Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 It makes financial sense if we retain the SPL title this season. If they sell him now or don't renew his contract before the next transfer window & he leaves, I know what the support will be saying if we don't retain the title & I'm sure the powers that be are on the same wavelength whether we're in financial trouble or not. So you are saying that Boyd is BIGGER than the club? Offer Boyd a new contract no matter the consequences? If the powers that be are on the same wavelength why are they actively trying to sell Boyd? Why haven't they offered him a new contract that would be to an end all this 'speculation'? Cammy F 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 So you are saying that Boyd is BIGGER than the club? Offer Boyd a new contract no matter the consequences? No I'm not saying Boyd is bigger than the club. I thought I was making my POV quite clear. To reiterate, I think it makes more financial sense to keep Boyd than it does to sell him. Selling him now doesn't even make short-term financial sense never mind long term unless the offer for him was crazy money. If we sell him before tomorrow at 5pm it will no doubt be for less than �£2m. If we sell him or let him go in January it's an even worse decision financially, unless we renew his contract in December & get a very substantial offer for him in January. If the powers that be are on the same wavelength why are they actively trying to sell Boyd? Why haven't they offered him a new contract that would be to an end all this 'speculation'? I don't think they are 'actively trying to sell him' as such. Did the same person negotiating the offers for our players in January accept the offer for Boyd at the same time as f*cking up the transfer of Beasley to Schalke? We could have got Beasley off the wage bill by letting him move on a free, but screwed it up & kept him on the books on high wages when he only cost us about �£700k. Getting rid of whoever is responsible for f*ck ups like that is what can help the club financially, not selling star players that are likely to be a critical part of our title retaining chances. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fraser54 0 Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 What a depressing las week i have had, this just adds to it ! Think it's just really hut me how the finances are affecting us !! Boydy don't go 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super_Ally 0 Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 Gotta say I agree with Shroomz here. Short term selling Boyd now makes godo financial sense to the club (not me) and Smith obviously thinks, of our few saleable assets, he can do without Boyd. Should he stay this window, he has no value to the club in forthcoming transfer windows unless we extend his contract. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.