Ally wants another goalie

[Super Cooper 0]

Loan spells done wonders for guys like Szczęsny and McGregor. A year or two of regular football for Gallacher will make or break his Rangers career.

[DUDE 0]

Yeah Super you're making a valid point. I can see why it's nice for a manager to have a variety of players obviously but at some point I think it's up to Mather to either send people on or stop bringing new lads in. Anything else seems unrealistic and not very sensible.

[der Berliner 3,286]

Players get used to sitting about doing nothing, offering nothing and picking up wages for nothing. We have had players like that by the bucket load at Rangers for the last 20 odd years. Millionaire passengers. I thought Ally would have learned from all the obvious mistakes made in the last 2 decades.

 

You can a) easily run out of players, as we have seen last season, and b) we don't have millionaire passengers for quite some time.

 

We've got 27 first teamers, of which we have loaned 1 (Naismith) and will probably loan at least one (Gallagher) more. I wouldn't be surprised at some permanent exits as well.

Mitchell, Gasparotto, Macleod, Crawford, Aird, and McKay are all upcoming talents, but I reckon that no manager would have given them as extensive a run in the team as we did, unless he's forced to. Macleod, Mitchell, McKay and to an extent Aird and Crawford proved valuable assets for the team, but any manager would rely on more seasoned pros for an entire season. And better pros than we got last time around.

[Zappa 0]

Sending Gallacher out on loan is fine and I agree that it'll help his development, but I don't understand why we would need to replace him with another keeper.

 

Just put a return/call-back clause or whatever it's called in Gallacher's loan deal, so that if Cammy Bell gets a serious injury we call back Gallacher. If Bell get's a little niggle that's only going to see him resting for a game or two, then we just play Alan Smith or Liam Kelly for a game or two.

 

Seems crazy to bring in another experienced keeper to warm the bench considering the club's financial position and the league we're playing in.

[Guest cail]

Unless there is something going on behind the scenes that we know nothing about then yes.

Even if there is i see nothing that warrants a 4th goalkeeper in the Scottish 2nd iv. though.

[RANGERRAB 3,299]

Gallacher surely can't go out on loan until the end of next month when the transfer window closes? Bell can only play 3 games as a trialist can't he?

[DUDE 0]

Gallacher surely can't go out on loan until the end of next month when the transfer window closes? Bell can only play 3 games as a trialist can't he?

 

Until his contract officially starts on Sep. 1, exactly.

[the gunslinger 3,366]

the lad kelly is a great prospect and frankly would be fine as first choice never mind second.

[Super Cooper 0]

You can a) easily run out of players, as we have seen last season, and b) we don't have millionaire passengers for quite some time.

 

We've got 27 first teamers, of which we have loaned 1 (Naismith) and will probably loan at least one (Gallagher) more. I wouldn't be surprised at some permanent exits as well.

Mitchell, Gasparotto, Macleod, Crawford, Aird, and McKay are all upcoming talents, but I reckon that no manager would have given them as extensive a run in the team as we did, unless he's forced to. Macleod, Mitchell, McKay and to an extent Aird and Crawford proved valuable assets for the team, but any manager would rely on more seasoned pros for an entire season. And better pros than we got last time around.

 

A) We can only play 11 at a time. The squad this year is incomparable to last years. With a first team squad as you say, 27 strong, (I say it's 34) 2 out on loan, possibly and the manager desperate to sign another 4, that would leave us with 29 with your numbers(It would actually be 36). We also have numerous youths we can call upon to compete at the level we find ourselves. There is no chance we will run out of players.

 

B) Have not or didn't have? We had them up until very recently, every year from the 1990's.

 

Mitchell, MacLeod, Crawford, Aird and McKay maybe up and coming but they are now established first team squad members. Their only handicap is their age and lack of experience but that is something that every other team on the planet has to work with. That is football.

 

You have brought up two managerial weaknesses. Why does one have to be forced into playing kids? Why would managers have to rely on more seasoned pros? Especially when the kids are doing the business, holding their own and showing up their older more mature team mates like ours have. Last season our kids put our experienced players to shame, some would argue seeing our kids last season was the most exciting part. The game is littered with players who all got a chance as kids and grabbed it whilst getting their game in the first team regularly.

 

It's my opinion you are putting up a slightly weak argument for carrying a huge squad, an unnecessary squad and possibly even a squad we cannot afford. We are not playing in Europe and we are not playing in the EPL. We don't need the numbers we currently have never mind any more.

Edited July 16, 2013 by Super Cooper

[der Berliner 3,286]

A) We can only play 11 at a time. ... There is no chance we will run out of players.

 

We only have one recognized right-sided attacking player (Little), just a couple of left-sided defenders. And we all know how we all love having utility folk being shifted around the park.

 

Some first team (!) squads in the EPL, for comparison: Hull 23, Arsenal 25, Southampton 26, Aston Villa 28. Some may say that they need this, but we have a full league programme and three cup competitions ahead of us too. The wage bill will still be one of the lowest in recent decades.

 

TBL - To be loaned, TBS - To be sold, *fringe

 

Bell (24)

Gallagher (23, TBL)

Smith (20)*

 

Mitchell (21)* - Hegarty (20) - Cribari (33) - Wallace (25)

Foster (27) - Perry (23) - Faure (22) - Smith (27)

Cole (21) - Gasparotto (18)* - McAusland (20)* - . . .

Argyriou (25, TBS) - [Mohsni] - . . . - . . .

 

Little (24) - Law (25) - Black (28) - Templeton (24)

. . . - Macleod (18) - Hutton (22) - McKay (18)*

. . . - Crawford (20) - Shiels (28) - Aird (18)*

. . . - Peralta (23) - . . . - . . .

 

McCulloch (35) - Clark (22)

Daly (30) - . . .

 

Including all but Mohsni, that's 29 players. I expect that at least two will go on loan or be sold (already excluded Naismith). The * marks fringe players, who will of course feature on occasion for the first team, but now that we have more experienced folk, they will most likely get their greatest game time for the reserves et al. When all are fit, the core will probably be ...

 

Bell (24)

 

Foster (27) - (one other CH) - Cribari (33) - Wallace (25)

 

plus Smith, Mitchell, Hegarty, Gasparotto, Faure

 

Little (24) - Law (25) - Macleod (18) - Templeton (24)

 

plus Black (28), Peralta (23), Hutton (22), Shiels (28), McKay (18)

 

Daly (30) - Clark (22)

 

plus McCulloch (35) and the odd outing for Little and Templeton in attack

 

I actually very much expect that more of those youngsters who shone last season will be loaned to get more experience and competitive game time. And, BTW, as has been said, playing games in front o 2000 people in the Third was sure great for some of the youngsters, not a few excelled at times. But as we saw since January and not least at Ibrox with 40k people full of expectation looking on, having a team of inexperienced folk* or youngsters does has it weaknesses. We couldn't raise our games when required, the spark went, the pressure grew, people went off the boil. And that obviously does not hold true for the youngsters alone, but nigh the full team. This time around, McCoist has gone for experienced people who can handle such circumstances. That was desperately needed and if it means that we have to shed some of those "Heroes of the Third" or put them on a backburner again, so be it. No-one of us likes that. And while we are at it, it is a bit misleading to talk of squads of 27, 30 or even 37 players, not to mention first team players. At Rangers, nigh all folk who are shy of 20 are at best first team fringe players (of whom we played, out of necessity, up to 19 last season), most of them reserve or youth team chaps. And these hardly count in any player list, unless you whip up Chelsea and ManU squads of 50odd players too.

 

 

*And for such occasions, this actually includes a Templeton.