Ally won't play too many kids

[calscot 0]

Calscot may also want to take a look at the current Ajax squad, where 18 players are developed by their youth academy. The rest were all bought at a young age bar Schone.

 

To say it's what small clubs do is outright bizarre.

 

I haven't looked at the Ajax squad but will take your word for it. And it sounds impressive.

 

But in the scheme of things don't you think they may be an exception? It kind of comes across to me like saying Mexico is one of the fattest nations and then you find some really skinny Mexican to prove me wrong... If you can show me most large and successful clubs are usually like this then I'll acquiesce and agree I'm wrong.

 

Don't you think the Dutch grass roots system might have something to do with this example? I doubt it is something where we have the natural resources of talent to emulate. They are playing a different scale of numbers game to us.

 

What is bizarre about saying it is what small clubs do? Are you unable to conceive that they might? Do you believe most of the largest clubs in Europe put more emphasis on developing youth to sell on than buying players? Maybe you should take a look at the Man City or Real Madrid squads and come back to me. I haven't looked lately but I'm fairly confident they will fit with what I'm saying.

 

For me, I don't see the evidence that it is a recipe for success - and obviously if it was, everyone would be doing it and you wouldn't see the huge transfer fees that are flying around. There would be no need and players would probably have to retire in their mid-twenties as they wouldn't be able to compete with the younger, fitter, better trained and cheaper players.

[calscot 0]

calscot

We aspire to be a top two club. Until we are then erm we are not!

 

I can't see how that makes a difference. You try to find the talent for where you aspire to be or you will never get there. We will not be a top two club by grooming players who are of a top 3-7 club level. The aspiration we're talking about here is just one year away.

 

Your post was about how hard it is for a top seven club to develop youth. We had the comfort of lower leagues to do that before we got near top seven..

 

I don't see how the lower leagues are comfortable. There is far more pressure in them for Rangers to win the league than the SPL. With no-automatic promotion, coming second is not a viable option. Actually we're talking about a crowd who seem very unhappy despite winning 33 games and drawing 3 - just where is the comfort? There are plenty of other factors with all the teams treating games against us as different from all their other games which makes them not an easy place for youngsters to feel comfortable.

 

Short term policy to have a realistic plan that enhances the club each year ongoing? Do you know anything about planning?

 

I don't know anything about your concept of planning but I refer to what I said in my first paragraph. Grooming players for Divison 3, then new ones for League One etc, doesn't seem like good planning to me.

 

I'm not saying a player should have set position but when a player eg fleck( you dredged him up on other thread) has played mostly centre mid then he he gets his opportunity at left mid. Gallagher a centre forward at right mid. The list goes on..How the hell does that encourage and help a youngster cement his position in first team. If you were cynical you could almost say they were being set up to fail!

 

This is something where I don't see a right answer to. It seems to happen everywhere and I have no idea what young players best positions are and what is the best way of introducing them to the team. Maybe you're right but I need convincing evidence.

 

Lastly on ally it's all in the fruits of his labours mate..

 

Don't know what you mean here. It's hard to judge Ally in the position he's in and his priority is to get us back to the top league without delay - he seems to be doing that. Is he the best man for the job that we can afford and who would jump at the chance? I really don't know but I can't think of any that would be cast-iron guaranteed to do a better job. There are some around that might but it's speculation and a big risk. The biggest problem is doing a proper comparison without some parallel universe. The problems of the task change year on year and sometimes month on month. He will only objectively be proven to be doing a bad job if he finishes second. Unfortunately that's the situation which is not ideal.

 

To get me excited about replacing Ally, we'd have to first get rid of the board, bring in 50M investment, and then get someone who is incredibly highly regarded. Even then, they might turn out to be another PLG.

[craig 5,195]

Yeah those years in the Bundesliga and Serie A were really hard. We need shot of this man as a matter of urgency. Doing more harm than any sp$v could ever dream of.

 

The general slant of your post aside I find this piece hard to believe.

 

The Board have ploughed through over 70 million in 2 years, yet you think McCoist has done more damage than them ? I highly doubt it. Even if you believe people are turning their backs because of the turgid nature of what is being served up it wont amount to 70 million in 2 years.

 

What your post does show is that we are completely rudderless from top to bottom. But McCoist will be safe until such time as he fails to win a league. Besides, even though many want rid of Ally.... would you trust this Board with getting a suitable replacement ? Or do we fear they would get a replacement that can help them line their pockets further ???

[calscot 0]

Fabregas, Alba, Iniesta, Xavi, Puyol, and some guy called Lionel Messi.

 

Figo, Nani, Quaresma, Moutinho and some guy called Christiano Ronaldo.

 

Bridge, Walcott, Oxlade-Chamberlain, Shaw and some guy called Gareth Bale.

 

De Guzman, Martins Indi, Clasie, De Vrij and some guy called Robin van Persie.

 

Robinho, Pepe, Coutinho, Neymar and some guy called Pele.

 

Beckham, Scholes, Neville, Pique and some guy called Ryan Giggs.

 

De Boer, van Basten, Bergkamp, Vemailed and some guy called Johan Cruyff.

 

 

A mixture of past and present, also using clubs of varying size. The bottom line is that if the will, the expertise, the finances and the planning is there, major successes can be achieved.

 

Small club game indeed.

 

I'll have to repeat my analogy earlier. If I say that Mexico is one of the fattest nations in the world, I'm sure you could show me a bunch of pictures of skinny Mexicans. It doesn't prove anything. All clubs produce players, but the bigger the club, the more exceptional they have to be to make the grade and the harder that is. I have already agreed that the best scouts and coaches will help as will high numbers of youth players.

 

The point is that any team can bring through a superstar every few years, it's how often this happens consistently for the same club which is what we're talking about.

 

The Man U one is a great example, thank you for pointing it out. Where are most of these players now? The question is if Man U have a philosophy and process that produce so many superstars for one team, why has this not repeated itself every few years? Or let's be generous, every decade? As I said, it's a numbers game and sometimes your numbers come up, which happened for Man U. What are the chances of winning this lottery twice?

 

I'm afraid that bringing a smattering of players over a couple of decades is just making my point.

 

The very fact that these players are superstars works against your argument. If it's a well defined big club process then why so many who fail to meet this grade? Why not have a team of them all the time?

 

For you to be right, most of the big clubs would need to consistently have about half their players as homegrown which is kind of the argument against McCoist. And in fact when he actually did this, his team were pilloried.

[craig 5,195]

Gasparotto looked poor in a lot of games for the u20s last year - people seem to hype him up without any real reason.

 

As for Robbie Crawford - he is nothing more than average.

 

I would like to see McKay get a run out next season as I think he has a raw talent that could be developed into something special.

 

I agree with this. More often than not we actually create a player from our own wishes rather than what we are witnessing. Crawford is average, for sure. Nothing to write home about - other than his age.... Gasparotto has done OK in the 1st team but nothing more.

 

I also heard from within that McAusland, when playing in the reserves, had his fair share of howlers too - the thing is, we only really see snippets of the players, whilst those within the club see them every day. And when they have off-days it makes it easier to not select them.

 

My issue isn't with using experienced guys. It is with those guys retaining their place even when they are clearly out of form. Daly, & Law for example, had periods of poor performances last season, yet retained their places. That is not acceptable to me. Play a youngster when the experienced guy isn't doing well. No harm, especially with an off-form player.

[Super Cooper 0]

The general slant of your post aside I find this piece hard to believe.

 

The Board have ploughed through over 70 million in 2 years, yet you think McCoist has done more damage than them ? I highly doubt it. Even if you believe people are turning their backs because of the turgid nature of what is being served up it wont amount to 70 million in 2 years.

 

What your post does show is that we are completely rudderless from top to bottom. But McCoist will be safe until such time as he fails to win a league. Besides, even though many want rid of Ally.... would you trust this Board with getting a suitable replacement ? Or do we fear they would get a replacement that can help them line their pockets further ???

 

£70 wasn't wasted though Craig, it was £67m spent over 18 months, but some of that, if not most, were necessary costs, running costs, operating costs, footballing costs supporting Ally, administrative costs keeping the club going, utility bills, maintenance etc etc. Of the £67m there may have been a few million squandered unnecessarily, of that we know for certain. Ally has cost us a hell of a lot more than that in his 3 years in charge, from lost revenue from European football, for 3 years, lost revenue from trips to Hampden for 3 years, lost revenue for fans turning their back on anti-football, over £20m in the last 2 years on first team footballing costs, his own personal fortune earned at the club at it's lowest ebb and lost money for paying off duds Ally signed or gave new contracts to only to then pay off. He has cost us so much it is impossible to put an exact figure on it. He is dangerous and has absolutely 100% got us on that road to run once again. It's so obvious.

 

I am not sure i would trust this board to find the right man but even they could do so much better than what we have. That's the easy bit, the right man is the hard one.

Edited July 3, 2014 by Super Cooper

[Rangersitis 0]

I'll have to repeat my analogy earlier. If I say that Mexico is one of the fattest nations in the world, I'm sure you could show me a bunch of pictures of skinny Mexicans. It doesn't prove anything. All clubs produce players, but the bigger the club, the more exceptional they have to be to make the grade and the harder that is. I have already agreed that the best scouts and coaches will help as will high numbers of youth players.

 

The point is that any team can bring through a superstar every few years, it's how often this happens consistently for the same club which is what we're talking about.

 

The Man U one is a great example, thank you for pointing it out. Where are most of these players now? The question is if Man U have a philosophy and process that produce so many superstars for one team, why has this not repeated itself every few years? Or let's be generous, every decade? As I said, it's a numbers game and sometimes your numbers come up, which happened for Man U. What are the chances of winning this lottery twice?

 

I'm afraid that bringing a smattering of players over a couple of decades is just making my point.

 

The very fact that these players are superstars works against your argument. If it's a well defined big club process then why so many who fail to meet this grade? Why not have a team of them all the time?

 

For you to be right, most of the big clubs would need to consistently have about half their players as homegrown which is kind of the argument against McCoist. And in fact when he actually did this, his team were pilloried.

 

I could look into it further, provide a list of names for many clubs and you would still dismiss it all, so to save time I will pose you one question:

 

What is stopping Rangers from being one of those skinny Mexicans?

[Ser Barristan Selmy 222]

I haven't looked at the Ajax squad but will take your word for it. And it sounds impressive.

 

But in the scheme of things don't you think they may be an exception? It kind of comes across to me like saying Mexico is one of the fattest nations and then you find some really skinny Mexican to prove me wrong... If you can show me most large and successful clubs are usually like this then I'll acquiesce and agree I'm wrong.

 

Don't you think the Dutch grass roots system might have something to do with this example? I doubt it is something where we have the natural resources of talent to emulate. They are playing a different scale of numbers game to us.

 

What is bizarre about saying it is what small clubs do? Are you unable to conceive that they might? Do you believe most of the largest clubs in Europe put more emphasis on developing youth to sell on than buying players? Maybe you should take a look at the Man City or Real Madrid squads and come back to me. I haven't looked lately but I'm fairly confident they will fit with what I'm saying.

 

For me, I don't see the evidence that it is a recipe for success - and obviously if it was, everyone would be doing it and you wouldn't see the huge transfer fees that are flying around. There would be no need and players would probably have to retire in their mid-twenties as they wouldn't be able to compete with the younger, fitter, better trained and cheaper players.

Perhaps you should take a look at the Real Madrid squad because they have the likes of Casillas, Carvajal, Arbeloa, Nacho, Morata, Jese etc all playing regularly last season and came through their youth ranks. I also already told you that Barca are an elite team who do it.

 

The fact of the matter is youth development is of crucial importance to clubs of all sizes, particularly ones like us who have no money and thus need to focus on it.

[calscot 0]

I could look into it further, provide a list of names for many clubs and you would still dismiss it all, so to save time I will pose you one question:

 

What is stopping Rangers from being one of those skinny Mexicans?

 

Firstly, I would say that we don't have the grass roots talent and infrastructure in Scotland - probably why the most significant player we have had a hand in developing was Italian.

 

To take the figurative to the literal, we're not a skinny nation ourselves and one of the fattest and unhealthiest in Europe, with crap weather and an certain affluence which helps create very sedate and over fed kids with not much modern culture for playing sport. We've cut back in sport in schools and after school. We've built on playing fields and the old red gravelly pitches. We've got school sports halls which are empty out of school hours. We haven't got a good coaching network for kids. We don't have an "inclusive" attitude where everyone gets to play and instead have a tradition of only allowing the biggest lads to play regardless of skill and potential. This continues today with my diminutive 8 year old nephew told not to come back to a team due to his height.

 

However, given the talent handed to us, we have still produced a reasonable proportion of Scottish internationals - even currently: MacGregor, Hutton, Burke, McCormick and Adam, which is five out of about 50. 10% from one club. Not fantastic, but a reasonable proportion of "skinny Mexicans" for a club which is normally at the top of the tree and therefore a buying club.

 

Of course we could do better but I don't see where the talent and money are going to come from to do it. I think we're currently doing a reasonable job considering our circumstances and we have McLeod, Air and Crawford as regulars. Little and Perry were given a good run last season but just aren't up to the standard required.

 

But it's going to be far easier to regain our place by investing money and buying the top Scots with a smattering of non-Scots that are a good bit better than your normal SPL level.

 

I used to crave us producing youngsters when as was younger but Gordon Dalziel and Graeme Souness cured me of that. I think we need to emphasise this side of things again as the spending days seem to be long over, but unless something fundamentally changes in Scotland, I think the numbers are stacked against us.

[BEARGER 1,829]

McCoist is without doubt the worst manager we have had in my lifetime.