chilledbear 16 Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 http://t.co/PSk0f6x5yf At some stage this week, Graham Wallace and Ally McCoist will sit down together for a meeting that will shape Rangers' immediate future. The chief executive wants to draw up and implement a football player asset strategy, and that begins with a discussion with the manager. They have the same aim, for Rangers to be successful on the field, and they need not have competing interests, since McCoist will have no more wish to spend money that Rangers cannot afford than Wallace himself. None the less, the complexities of the process and the dynamic at play will be significant for the club. By his own admission, Wallace needs to cut the cost base at Ibrox, as well as raising revenue streams. During last month's annual meeting of Rangers International Football Club shareholders, he said that the "cost structure is currently too high for the top division, never mind for the lower leagues", meaning that the business needs streamlined regardless of any commercial uplifts. This is a sensible and prudent strategy, and one that was critically missing from his two predecessors, Craig Mather and Charles Green. They were both courting public approval, but Wallace is a time-served corporate figure, and so brings the financial and business rigour that they did not apply. Indeed, any drastic cuts ought to have been implemented by Green in the summer of 2012, when the consortium he fronted bought the business and assets of Rangers Football Club plc in liquidation; that was the fresh start. Rangers need a coherent plan that addresses both short and medium-term progress, which is why the immediate issues Wallace will tackle cannot be considered in isolation. The extent of the required cost-cutting is unknown, but it is balance that is more important than simply reducing the bottom line. With Rangers potentially returning to the top-flight in 18 months, it would be a false economy to diminish the quality of the playing squad. There are players earning good money who have not contributed this season, either through the form of themselves or others; Emilson Cribari, David Templeton, or injury; Dean Shiels, Ross Perry, Kyle Hutton, but Rangers will also need to strengthen for next season's campaign. Wallace and McCoist, in their assessment of the squad's strengths and weaknesses, need to find where costs can be trimmed without affecting the strength of the playing staff overall. The manager and his coaches have agreed to take a wage cut, but any overall assessment of Rangers' football department needs to take into account the requirement for a chief scout to be appointed and for the youth development set-up and sports science department to be able to operate best practice throughout. The planning for the next two years needs to begin now, and that will be as much a part of the meeting between Wallace and McCoist as any element of initial cost cutting. As Wallace has acknowledged, once he has balanced the incomings and outgoings he will draw up a business plan to enable fresh investment to be sought. If Rangers are to return to the status that the club previously held, and which supporters continue to expect, then the requirement is not just to apply some commonsense to the business as it stands, but generate new funding to invest principally in the team. It is a question of priorities, but every decision made now has an impact in the coming years. That is where Wallace and McCoist need to work together, to ensure a strategy that strengthens the football department in time. Supporters will tolerate cuts at this period in time, but there remains a sense of the fanbase making its own assessments of the current regime. The inevitable rise in season ticket sales for the Championship will be borne without complaint because fans understand the financial necessity, but also because of the excitement that will come from the campaign to try to return Rangers to the top flight. There will be wariness, though, if there is a perception that the squad is not good enough to take that challenge on. These are the demands and obligations that every club faces, of course. From the summer of 2012, when a registration embargo loomed and Rangers were in the bottom tier, to last summer, there has been an element of improvisation to the club's signings. Rangers were restricted as they sought to add to the squad, and not least because the manager was never given a budget to work to. The working relationship between Wallace and McCoist is critical, and in a sense they are both under scrutiny; McCoist for the team's performance, and Wallace for the business's. He has already begun a review of every aspect of Rangers' operations, so it is not just the football budget that is being assessed. Rangers are, effectively, in the middle of the journey back to the top flight. Decisions made in the coming months will determine what kind of force they will be when they do return. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juancornetto 1 Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 "Rangers are, effectively, in the middle of the journey back to the top flight. Decisions made in the coming months will determine what kind of force they will be when they do return." It now looks all the more ridiculous that we assembled a squad of highly paid Internationals to begin life in the lower divisions instead of cherry picking the cream of the crop already playing there for a quarter of the wages. We either faced up to it and paid the price then or (as is about happen now) pay the price further down the line. We may lose our best players this month and face going into the penultimate phase of our journey with a weaker squad than we had for starting in Division Three. Something went horribly wrong and McCoist has to shoulder a huge chunk of the blame. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,245 Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 "Rangers are, effectively, in the middle of the journey back to the top flight. Decisions made in the coming months will determine what kind of force they will be when they do return." It now looks all the more ridiculous that we assembled a squad of highly paid Internationals to begin life in the lower divisions instead of cherry picking the cream of the crop already playing there for a quarter of the wages. And you think the "defiance mode" would have made 38k season ticket holders coming back? Not that I saw any highly paid "internationalists" in our squad either, unless you mean Templeton and Shiels? Scotland and Ulster peripheral players. Last season we had to shoulder much of the wage bill of Boca and Goian, possibly some old deals with Alexander, McCulloch and Co.. But where do people start with a wage limit with new signings "because we are in the lower tiers"? At 2k max? To get 2nd and 3rd tier "cream" people on a free (up till last Wednesday), btw? How do you entice players to come to Rangers? With our name and stature? Just saying. We either faced up to it and paid the price then or (as is about happen now) pay the price further down the line. We may lose our best players this month and face going into the penultimate phase of our journey with a weaker squad than we had for starting in Division Three. Something went horribly wrong and McCoist has to shoulder a huge chunk of the blame. For the time being, no star-player has left, no bids have come in ... and McCoist, like any Rangers manager, has a wishlist and the board and CEO said and say yes or no. McCoist looked and looks to improve the team, which is his job. And I whether that line about our squad might become weaker on the eve of a possible top tier return than it was when we started life in SFL 3 is a joke or not. Right now, McCoist and Wallace can send up to 10 "first team" people away, either on loan or for good, without horribly weakening the side for this season's challenge. That is what they should do. We have no clue about the current finances, future income, potential investors ... and thus far, for all the doom-mongering in the media and the focus on Wallace's words about the "cost structure", we have to wait and see what will actually transpire. And while we are at it, we all knew that the first couple of years down here would be a struggle finance wise. Maybe we should look for a financial deal with some bank institution or folk like King to get us through there with a devent enough 5-year financial plan et al, rather than wanting to cut costs and staff to break even in an environment where it is virtually impossible? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gribz 743 Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 "Rangers are, effectively, in the middle of the journey back to the top flight. Decisions made in the coming months will determine what kind of force they will be when they do return." It now looks all the more ridiculous that we assembled a squad of highly paid Internationals to begin life in the lower divisions instead of cherry picking the cream of the crop already playing there for a quarter of the wages. We either faced up to it and paid the price then or (as is about happen now) pay the price further down the line. We may lose our best players this month and face going into the penultimate phase of our journey with a weaker squad than we had for starting in Division Three. Something went horribly wrong and McCoist has to shoulder a huge chunk of the blame. Im with you on that but that is down to hindsight. But the other option of course was to go with the young ones and let them loose, while retaining experience like McCulloch to get them over the line. A big error IMO even with or without money was to sign run of the mill SPL players to get us through the leagues on contracts that means they will still be there in the top flight. Unless they drastically improve then will they be good enough to finish top 2 in the league or will be have to splash more to sign a better quality of player. 2 examples are Templeton and Shiels, both have been a disaster. Templeton should be cruising this league and going with the same attitude as Wallace in getting into the Scotland squad. Shiels has been unlucky with injury but when he has played has been a disappointment. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 "Rangers are, effectively, in the middle of the journey back to the top flight. Decisions made in the coming months will determine what kind of force they will be when they do return." It now looks all the more ridiculous that we assembled a squad of highly paid Internationals to begin life in the lower divisions instead of cherry picking the cream of the crop already playing there for a quarter of the wages. We either faced up to it and paid the price then or (as is about happen now) pay the price further down the line. We may lose our best players this month and face going into the penultimate phase of our journey with a weaker squad than we had for starting in Division Three. Something went horribly wrong and McCoist has to shoulder a huge chunk of the blame. Just what is McCoist to blame for? The players that TUPED over? A current wage bill which is about 25% of turnover, which is immensely low in the business? A team that are winning almost every game? Instead you'd rather have tied up a Queen of the South level of team that would have had a risk of non-promotion, punters not happy with the quality, and a team that is battling to avoid relegation in the Championship. When you're paying £16 for a ticket, do you really want only say £2 to be spent on the players wages and a proportionately weak team to watch? People went on and on about the QotS model last season and have been proved to be totally wrong as I predicted. Let it go, the evidence is overwhelmingly against you and the extreme danger for our club from that sort of hindsight thinking is there to see. Maybe we're using a sledgehammer to crack a nut but we're pretty much betting our life on succeeding on the first strike. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 Can I also point out that players require at least two or three year contracts, which is why we have a squad which is capable of winning the league next season with not too many comings and goings. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 "implement a football player asset strategy" What a load of bullshit. This is how you should speak if you want to earn big money. You get paid a fortune to make up high faluting sounding terms for every day stuff. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Cooper 0 Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 We need rid of so much dross. That will hopefully be the priority. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juancornetto 1 Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 Just what is McCoist to blame for? The players that TUPED over? A current wage bill which is about 25% of turnover, which is immensely low in the business? A team that are winning almost every game? Instead you'd rather have tied up a Queen of the South level of team that would have had a risk of non-promotion, punters not happy with the quality, and a team that is battling to avoid relegation in the Championship. When you're paying £16 for a ticket, do you really want only say £2 to be spent on the players wages and a proportionately weak team to watch? People went on and on about the QotS model last season and have been proved to be totally wrong as I predicted. Let it go, the evidence is overwhelmingly against you and the extreme danger for our club from that sort of hindsight thinking is there to see. Maybe we're using a sledgehammer to crack a nut but we're pretty much betting our life on succeeding on the first strike. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrahimHemdani 1 Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 I thought the meeting was supposed to be yesterday? 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.