Totti 0 Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 (edited) A year or so ago we had Boyd and Miller, a good partnership, playing very well and linking well together. Who would have thought two of our best performing first team players would be gone for practically nothing? It is hard to imagine what price the pair were worth, but combined you would have to say they were worth 5-6m+ and maybe considerably more. I would hazard a guess that Boyd could have generated 4-5 million (when he had more time on his contract remaining), considering interest from England. Then considering Miller performing at a bigger club, he surely would have been worth at least 2 or 3 million. Of course, often our players are worth poultry sums so it is hard to gauge things. Unless we have 100% standout top performing players like Boumsong, Hutton, Cuellar etc, our players seem to be worth peanuts. Then you have to look at the sales of Charlie Adam and Barry Ferguson, both leaving for nominal fees. Granted, both were not performing at Ibrox but questions have to be asked when two of the top performing midfielders in the premiership this season played for us recently yet little money changed hands. That might not be entirely Bain's fault - both appeared to have little to offer by the end of their times at Ibrox. Walter Smith has to be held accountable for sure. Why do two players who looked rubbish against teams like Hamilton go two pretty average teams in England and shine? Both have been man of the match at least more than once this season, with Charlie seemingly winning it or getting close near every other game he plays. Is it any wonder the bank are coming down so hard on a club so inept at running things? Key players should be tied down with 18 months or 12 months at the latest remaining on contracts. Failure to negotiate a deal should result in the player being sold. This is how other successful clubs would conduct business. Maybe the banks involvement makes increased and longer contracts difficult but it is the club that got us in this mess in the first place. The club think that by offering deals at the last minute they don't have to get tied to overly long contracts or increased wages. Well in the process we have lost 2 strikers that both cost a considerable sum and should have been sold for considerable profit. Buy for a dime, sell for a nickle, that's the Rangers way. I wonder what the average amount of money we generate is for the players that leave Ibrox - not a lot I'd guess. Edited January 13, 2011 by Totti 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,145 Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 But the problem is the bank are allegedly party to not offering these players extended and/or improved contracts so it's difficult the lay the blame squarely at the door of Bain et al. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gribz 743 Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 But the problem is the bank are allegedly party to not offering these players extended and/or improved contracts so it's difficult the lay the blame squarely at the door of Bain et al. And i suppose that creates the catch 22 situation where a) we should sell those with 12-18 month contracts, but b) if we sell them we dont have funds (or not allowed funds) to replace them. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,145 Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 And i suppose that creates the catch 22 situation where a) we should sell those with 12-18 month contracts, but b) if we sell them we dont have funds (or not allowed funds) to replace them. Exactly... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,195 Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 What Frankie said. I have heavy suspicions that the reason neither Boyd nor Miller were offered contracts early enough is because of the bank. So instead of "No wonder the bank is bleeding us dry" it is more a case of "the bank has contributed to us losing 7 mill in transfer fees, or retaining our best goalscorers". 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
maineflyer 0 Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 What Frankie said. I have heavy suspicions that the reason neither Boyd nor Miller were offered contracts early enough is because of the bank. So instead of "No wonder the bank is bleeding us dry" it is more a case of "the bank has contributed to us losing 7 mill in transfer fees, or retaining our best goalscorers". Except of course that our transfer dealings were equally inept before the bank issue arose. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Totti 0 Posted January 13, 2011 Author Share Posted January 13, 2011 Except of course that our transfer dealings were equally inept before the bank issue arose. Bang on. And of course contract dealings, this sort of thing has happened before. Did Dodgy Dave not openly say a while back its the clubs policy to only offer new deals when there's a short period left? Sasa Papac has 6 months left and still hasn't signed a contract and wasn't even offered one until recently, something he openly spoke out about. He could have told the club to fuck off and he still could do that. He's proven to be a solid defender in the champions league and is easily worth 2-3 million (would be worth more at another club). 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,145 Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 Nope, we do offer contracts in advance to certain players (or rather they accept the offers quickly)... McGregor, Adam, Naismith, McCulloch etc have all accepted extended deals in recent years well before their contracts run out. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Totti 0 Posted January 14, 2011 Author Share Posted January 14, 2011 I'm talking about a while ago. Murray said something about it being policy to offer contracts late on. It might be in one of the other previous occasions we were in the shit financially 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,145 Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 Ah, no probs... 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.