McGregor signs new 6 year deal - Official

[Gazza_8 233]

Infact come to think of it, he isn't worth that a week. He's a feckin footballer!

 

No footballer is but it's not his fault or Rangers fault that the money in football these days is disgusting!

[pete 2,499]

Agree totally.

[Frankie 8,146]

In the real world no player is worth that.

 

Football isn't the real world.

 

As for the cost, well �£26K x 52 x 6 = �£8.1million. A lot of money. However, what we have is a first class 'keeper tied down long term with a large fee on his head should interest increase in him.

 

Could we guarantee a better 'keeper if we sold him? After all says a �£4million fee with �£13K per week wages for 6 years also comes to �£8million.

[Gazza_8 233]

In the real world no player is worth that.

 

Football isn't the real world.

 

As for the cost, well �£26K x 52 x 6 = �£8.1million. A lot of money. However, what we have is a first class 'keeper tied down long term with a large fee on his head should interest increase in him.

 

Could we guarantee a better 'keeper if we sold him? After all says a �£4million fee with �£13K per week wages for 6 years also comes to �£8million.

 

Frankie, McGregor deserves the best deal he can get as he's a top class goalkeeper but it kind of sickens me that nurses, polis () and army dudes don't get what they deserve for the stuff they do.

 

I definately wouldn't sell him, no way but I get a bit angry and the money these guys earn.

[Frankie 8,146]

Mate, some of the sums involved for playing a game really are quite unhealthy but c'est la vie.

 

Take up darts is what I say!

[pete 2,499]

In the real world no player is worth that.

 

Football isn't the real world.

 

As for the cost, well �£26K x 52 x 6 = �£8.1million. A lot of money. However, what we have is a first class 'keeper tied down long term with a large fee on his head should interest increase in him.

 

 

Could we guarantee a better 'keeper if we sold him? After all says a �£4million fee with �£13K per week wages for 6 years also comes to �£8million.

 

 

You forgot to include the 8-10 million we would get for McGregor in your calculation so as I see it we would save quite a bit of money.

[Gazza_8 233]

Mate, some of the sums involved for playing a game really are quite unhealthy but c'est la vie.

 

Take up darts is what I say!

 

Darts? I'm not fat enough.

[Frankie 8,146]

You forgot to include the 8-10 million we would get for McGregor in your calculation so as I see it we would save quite a bit of money.

 

Of course we could cash in but whose to say all that money would be reinvested into the club in any case?

 

Add in the risk of a new goalkeeper then I don't think it's as simple as saying sell and we profit hugely. Sure, it makes sense to move players on to keep the money flowing but sometimes re-signing your better players is the equivalent of making a big-money purchase and spreading the payments over the term of the contract.

 

Yes, this holds an element of risk as well (injury, loss of form, loss of value, age etc) but I'm reasonably comfortable with holding onto McGregor at an acceptable cost.

 

It also shows the rest of the squad what a consistent run of form could realise them in future years.

[calscot 0]

I'm ambivalent about selling MacGregor as although we have an able deputy and the money could be incredibly useful, our top goalie is of a level that could be the difference to us winning or losing the league. We have won three times in a row with very small margins so it would only take the removal of the odd extra special save to lose us a couple of points. He is a proven match winner and loss preventer.

 

It's like the marquee signing we're supposedly not going to make - except he's just about affordable and wants to play for us. How many players in the UK who are in the top bracket can we say that about? You could say he's "effectively" costing us �£8M but when you think about it, to buy a player of similar standard to him from the Prem (even if they would want to come and their club want to sell) would IMHO be more like �£25M and at least 40k a week in wages, so he's a real bargain in reality.

[craig 5,195]

Why do we try to keep players well beyond their thirties? While I can agree on a goalie, Whittaker is a touch strange to me. Of course, it could also mean - at least in McGregor's case - that and potential buyer needs to dig deeper now.

 

(And no, I doubt Whittaker will play as well and long as Weir.)

 

Whittaker is only 27. A 5 yr deal takes him till he is 32. It provides the club security in the sense that any suitors will have to stump up decent cash to purchase him but also provides security in that the club don't have to sell if they dont want to. They also get the player for the best years of his career. Once he hits 32 the club wouldnt expect to get a fee for him anyway.