der Berliner 3,267 Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 I may be old fashioned (at 32) however I want to see us sign players who play in one position. I want a right winger to be a right winger. I want a right back to be a right back. None of this hybrid rubbish. Yep. It is always good to have utility folk who can be a back-up option ... and e.g. Faure has done well. But options should primarily remain options and not become a habit. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Godfather Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 I hope not. We already wasted money bringing in Foster so another gamble at RB on a foreign player seems rash at our stage. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTP 0 Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 Yep. It is always good to have utility folk who can be a back-up option ... and e.g. Faure has done well. But options should primarily remain options and not become a habit. Just seems like alot we sign can play two or three positions, but never great at one of them, just average in all 3. Stop gaps really. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Godfather Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 Was somthing Smith likes and Ally has continued with it. Lafferty, Jig, Ortiz, Peralta ect 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy steel 0 Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 What does that even mean? We ARE developing young players - in what way are we not? People bandy this glib stuff around while being clueless to what it all means. We had an average of about 5 or 6 rookies in the team last season and we had inconsistent results and a lot of derision for how we played. We've changed that and massively improved in both results and performance and yet the whining continues. You really want to go back to last season? Perhaps you need to attend some U21 games to see if you enjoy the football, as that is the standard they will bring to the first team - except obviously worse due to playing more experienced players who have a point to prove over a bunch of cocky teenagers. As has been pointed out several times, how is shoving a load of players in the first team "developing" them? When has that ever worked as a strategy? Where is the development? As said before, if you take this to the extreme (which is not much more than last season) then every team would be playing 8 youngsters and three experienced players - but this is no different to the U21 league, so therefore the U21 league is already doing the exact same job. The only difference is the size of the crowd and the pressure for the result - both of which should be good for youngsters... The tried and tested way of developing youngsters is to put your best two or three in the team where they can benefit from playing beside experienced players - that doesn't happen when you flood a team with youngsters. You then give a number of others a taste of the top team here and there to see how they cope and to show them what it's like. There seems to be an obsession with filling teams with young players these days by people who seem to think they know about development so much better than just about everyone in the professional game. We are Rangers, our tradition is to put out as strong team a we can and try and win every game - it's a good tradition and yet one that most don't seem to give a damn about - until we draw or lose or play crap. Big Sam threw in half a dozen youngsters against Nottingham Forest last Sunday...how did that go? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 Proof, not that we needed it of course, that stats can be used to suit any agenda. Some people make up an agenda for notional reasons and try to find stats that suit while ignoring and disparaging those that don't. Other people look at the stats to try and make a conclusion from them or base a judgement, and so form an opinion. If the stats change the second type of person will change their mind. What does the first type of person do in that case? Maybe I should quote Keynes here: "When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?" Some people have an agenda set in concrete, some don't have one at all. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 Big Sam threw in half a dozen youngsters against Nottingham Forest last Sunday...how did that go? No idea, but I wouldn't base an opinion on one game anyway. How'd it work for us last season? If something really works, most will end up doing it most of the time. Simples. You have to wonder why Man U are not repeating their "winning it with kids" every season. The obvious answer is that you don't make great players, you discover them and then help them fulfil their potential. Now and again you'll discover a load at once, mostly they will be a lot more scarce. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 If you're signing players for free on two or three year contracts, does it really matter if they are 28? Aren't they young enough if they are good enough? Why is there so much ageism among the support these days? Even in Logan's Run people were allowed to live till 30... People on here seem to want to have compulsory retirement of 25 for football players. For me, I don't want the guy as I can't see how he would improve us and I'm not sure about his ability in the top league. However, the management may rate him highly as at the level to compete with Celtic and if he's available now for free, perhaps we shouldn't pass on the opportunity. I'm fine with us signing this guy if he's good enough. I didn't explain what I was thinking properly, so my fault. I mentioned the 28 age factor because other posters had called into question his age. I pointed out that he's actually at the younger end of the 28 age bracket having only turned 28 recently, so he would be (as I said) our youngest 28 year old, so that's a plus point. Personally, I don't have a problem with us signing 'experience' because it's a valuable asset to have in the team if the player is a good player, but we do seem to be (maybe) moving towards a situation whereby we could end up having a significant number of 30+ year olds in our first team squad upon our return to the top flight and that's perhaps (depending on who they are specifically) not the way I'd like to see us returning to the top flight. Most of us want to see a good balance of youth through to experience, but packing a small squad with 5 or 6 players approaching 30 and 3 or 4 over 30 isn't a very balanced first team squad unless you're looking at building it into a large top flight squad. Problem is, when you're a club trying to streamline your costs, you really don't want a large first team squad. Regarding ageism (in this context) in general though, I think most of us here are balanced enough in our mindset for it not to be an issue. Yes, there's been the quasi-utopian dreams of building a team full of youngsters predominantly from Murray Park into a top flight, title-winning squad, but that was never realistic. The squad was always going to need to be led by and supplemented with some experienced players. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Barristan Selmy 222 Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 Sounds a fantastic signing that will have a huge sell on value. Wonder how we found him. I doubt our scouting network is so advanced as to locate him on Football Manager. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Barristan Selmy 222 Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 If you're signing players for free on two or three year contracts, does it really matter if they are 28? Aren't they young enough if they are good enough? Why is there so much ageism among the support these days? Even in Logan's Run people were allowed to live till 30... People on here seem to want to have compulsory retirement of 25 for football players. For me, I don't want the guy as I can't see how he would improve us and I'm not sure about his ability in the top league. However, the management may rate him highly as at the level to compete with Celtic and if he's available now for free, perhaps we shouldn't pass on the opportunity. I'm genuinely at a loss as to whether you just blindly back whatever happens at the club, or whether you troll the board. I would have thought the disadvantages of signing an ageing player of likely limited ability with very little sell on value (if any) were quite apparent. I doubt there was much criticism when we signed 30 year old Ronald De Boer. Or the 34 year olds Frank De boer or Claudio Caniggia. 'Ageism'? More like a disregard for the typical shite we sign then pay off. I think the crux of the situation is that if we are singing players in the twilight of their careers, they need to provide a significant contribution. We have signed one too many Ostenstads, Emersons, Capuchos, Manieros etc for a life time 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.