Economics ?

[Bluedell 5,356]

As I see it, there are 2 issues with the wages cap (if there is one in place):

 

1. If we break it for Boyd then we would have many other players in the squad wanting it broken as well, and it would lead to general unhappiness. What's the point in a cap if it is going to be broken at the first hint of an issue.

 

2. We are working within the confines of the bank-imposed business plan. We don't know what it says but it could be that iot does not allow us to offer wages over a certain level.

 

It also may just boil down to what the club/Walter believed Boyd was worth. If they felt that the offer on the table was the maximum that they could offer to a player who tended to be played in around 1 out of every 5 big games then they are correct in sticking to their guns.

[wabashcannonball 0]

It's worth it if he's a better player. We'll all have our opinions on whether he is, and none of them will be sensible as we don't know that much about Jelavic to say. But if he's better, then it's worth it - both in terms of team contribution and sell on value.

 

Operative word "IF". No if with Boyd.

 

...................................................

Another twist or journalistic licence ?

 

 

Rangers had agreed a fee with Rapid Vienna for Jelavic but are some �£10,000-a-week short of the player's wage demands.

 

The Light Blues have said they can't meet Jelavic's wages and Express Sport understands that there have been no contact between the two parties since Sunday.

 

Reports that a hitch between Jelavic and Rapid Vienna over a sell-on was holding up the deal are wide of the mark.

 

 

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/192726/Smith-s-not-for-Rangers-that-s-Tommy-not-Walter

[Bluedell 5,356]

That is simply not true mate , like everythinmg else Boyd's deal has become something of an urben myth , Muir never signed it off , simple as , even Smith at the end gave up hope of getting it done .

 

 

I don't know how you can say that so definitively given the duff info that's been flying around during the last 6 months, from the best of sources.

[bmck 117]

Operative word "IF". No if with Boyd.

 

Sure there is. There's no if in terms of what he'll give, but there is an if as to whether we'd be better with someone else. As I said, we all have our opinions, but it's only Wattie's that matters. I don't think we'll sign this boy, but he may (yup, that word) be better than Boyd, and actually have some sell on value as a young prospect. I was a big Boyd fan, but he's off now. I want the best possible replacement and would rather pay more for someone with at least the possibility of being atypically good than a workhorse. We've lost a few strikers so paying him a little more doesn't bother me, so long as it's within reason.

[Guest Flying Hippo]

Calling Boyd "the finished article" is literally one of the most ridiculous things i've ever read. It is bordering on obsession, your insistance that no forward could do a better job than Boyd - not least because he wasn't even the best forward at the club at any point during his 4 years here

 

You can harp on about me having an anti-Boyd agenda but when you spout nonsense about 'finished articles' as if he was our Wayne Rooney, i'm compelled to respond

Edited August 12, 2010 by Flying Hippo

[rbr 1,247]

but i'm sure IF boyd really wanted to stay he could've done more himself. i.e. keep asking if there is a contract on the table for him. i think there was fault on both sides here..

 

There possibly was but the same scenario happened with Thomson , he wanted to stay but Smith told him he wouldn't be in a position to offer him a new contract , so he left .

 

You either believe that the club ,Murray , Muir etc or you believe the management ,Smith Bain , I stick with Smith and Bain

[Stimpy 0]

That is simply not true mate , like everythinmg else Boyd's deal has become something of an urben myth , Muir never signed it off , simple as , even Smith at the end gave up hope of getting it done .

 

However some even on here still shout from the stands about how lucky we are to have MUIR here .

 

I know sources on the internet are somewhat out-there at times, but this did come from Boyd's family and friends.

[rbr 1,247]

I don't know how you can say that so definitively given the duff info that's been flying around during the last 6 months, from the best of sources.

 

Simply because Walter talks off record to the press every day , just because it doesn't make it onto the back pages doesn't mean it hasn't happened . Waltrer is as much to blame in all this as anyone I agree , but on cetrtain things I believe him 100%

 

Let's be brutally honest here , as a club we are an absolute shambles , we have the management team briefing against Muir on a near daily basis , we have Muir attempting to have wee cosey meetings and chats with certain supporters , it's a bloody shambles

[rbr 1,247]

I know sources on the internet are somewhat out-there at times, but this did come from Boyd's family and friends.

 

nope the management team , and it wasn't second hand either

[wabashcannonball 0]

Calling Boyd "the finished article" is literally one of the most ridiculous things i've ever read. It is bordering on obsession, your insistance that no forward could do a better job than Boyd - not least because he wasn't even the best forward at the club at any point during his 4 years here

 

You can harp on about me having an anti-Boyd agenda but when you spout nonsense about 'finished articles' as if he was our Wayne Rooney, i'm compelled to respond

 

You of course will point out where and when I said, "that no forward could do a better job than Boyd" of course you won't.

 

You are right about one thing, he was our WR, look in the goals column....