Gribz 743 Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 (edited) "I would say my three strengths as a manager are recruiting, improving people and getting the best out of them," Stuart those are strengths of a scout and a coach NOT A MANAGER. A manager has to apply tactics, take risks, pick formations and players that suit plus more and these are where you lack. Another wonderful player in his day but not a Rangers manager in a million years. Edited May 31, 2015 by Gribz 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calgacus 8 Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 I 've been told 100% he wont get the Job , usual sourcec I heard the same thing from a Motherwell source. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Real PapaBear 0 Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 I don't want McCall kept on but I totally agree that people are pointing out his failures and forgetting to add his positive side. I'm pretty much in this camp, too. I think McCall has proven himself as an excellent manager and if the board decide to give him the job then I'll support him. Having said that, I'm hoping that King pulls a blinder and we find ourselves on the brink of another Souness style revolution with a visionary appointment to match. McCall is a class act as a person; he has style, class and dignity, he's proved that he can get cash-strapped clubs to punch above their weight for extended periods. That may be where we are and what we need right now. Pragmatically, maybe McCall is the answer. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,050 Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 I'm pretty much in this camp, too. I think McCall has proven himself as an excellent manager and if the board decide to give him the job then I'll support him. Having said that, I'm hoping that King pulls a blinder and we find ourselves on the brink of another Souness style revolution with a visionary appointment to match. McCall is a class act as a person; he has style, class and dignity, he's proved that he can get cash-strapped clubs to punch above their weight for extended periods. That may be where we are and what we need right now. Pragmatically, maybe McCall is the answer. Pragmatically McCall and his ilk are absolutely the last thing we need. What we need is someone with a track record and a willingness to carry out what'll be nothing less than a revolution football wise. We need to think outside the box, hopefully the Board see this and recruit accordingly. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
barca72 440 Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 Pragmatically McCall and his ilk are absolutely the last thing we need. What we need is someone with a track record and a willingness to carry out what'll be nothing less than a revolution football wise. We need to think outside the box, hopefully the Board see this and recruit accordingly. No revolution is required. The principles of a good team are the same as they were in 1872. A good goalkeeper - to take care of the six yard box, a good centre-half - to take care of the eighteen yard box, and a good centre-forward - to instill the fear of hell into the opposition's defence. Get a man who can find these men, plus build the flesh around them of a good team and you will win. To continue to win, that good man will control future resources. This game does not have to be any more difficult than that. Who said it would be easy, though? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RANGERRAB 3,258 Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 No revolution is required. The principles of a good team are the same as they were in 1872.A good goalkeeper - to take care of the six yard box, a good centre-half - to take care of the eighteen yard box, and a good centre-forward - to instill the fear of hell into the opposition's defence. Get a man who can find these men, plus build the flesh around them of a good team and you will win. To continue to win, that good man will control future resources. This game does not have to be any more difficult than that. Who said it would be easy, though? We need more than that. We need a RB and more creatvity in MF as well. And pace up front too 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rousseau 9,374 Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 The season was going to be a failure no matter what McCall achieved. I think he's done well with the resources he was left. His previous managerial record was OK: a good three years at Motherwell where he got them punching well above their weight; his other managerial positions were average to unsuccessful. I think it's unfair to judge him without him being able to develop his own squad. He should be thanked for his work; he gave it a good try. I don't think he's the man to take us forward, but not because he has 'failed' as such--because I think that's unfair--but because he doesn't have the skills that we need. He's more of an 'old-school' manager from the old-boys club, whereas I think we need to modernise and go down a different route altogether. I wouldn't trust him to rebuild a squad for the long-term--He's an OK stop-gap, but that's it. We need a young coach with a modern sensibility on the game; and we need to give them time to develop the 'project', for a project is what we are. There needs to be a level of experience, so I wouldn't be averse to a more experienced man to rebuild, but I would prefer a younger coach with an experienced DoF. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gribz 743 Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 The season was going to be a failure no matter what McCall achieved. I think he's done well with the resources he was left. His previous managerial record was OK: a good three years at Motherwell where he got them punching well above their weight; . Alex McLeish also took Motherwell to 2nd place and we saw how bad his tenure ended. The best of the rest - whether that be 2nd or 3rd position - changes every season. Its a job well done to beat the rest but its also like a lucky dip and unless that club has been extraordinary than the manager shouldn't be considered for a position leading Rangers back to the top. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rousseau 9,374 Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 Alex McLeish also took Motherwell to 2nd place and we saw how bad his tenure ended. The best of the rest - whether that be 2nd or 3rd position - changes every season. Its a job well done to beat the rest but its also like a lucky dip and unless that club has been extraordinary than the manager shouldn't be considered for a position leading Rangers back to the top. Oh, I agree: he's not the man we need. I'm just saying he did well with Motherwell for three years; it doesn't mean he's the new Mourinho. There is no need to focus on his negatives or his positives--he does have both if we're all honest--, the fact is he's not the man to take us forward. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveC 150 Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 (edited) No revolution is required. The principles of a good team are the same as they were in 1872.A good goalkeeper - to take care of the six yard box, a good centre-half - to take care of the eighteen yard box, and a good centre-forward - to instill the fear of hell into the opposition's defence. Get a man who can find these men, plus build the flesh around them of a good team and you will win. To continue to win, that good man will control future resources. This game does not have to be any more difficult than that. Who said it would be easy, though? The game has changed out of all recognition since 1972 far less 1872. Watch some videos of so called classic games from the past - conference teams play at a higher level now. Look at 67's England 2 v Scotland 3 game now and you soon forget all the romantic hype about it. It's boring! And this with the finest Ranger (now Sunderland) I've ever seen, other all time great Scots v the then World Champions (utterly incredible watching the game and their performance, even given their home advantage and unsporting influence on refereeing and ground appointments throughout the tournament). One of the many differences is that it is now a squad game. You don't just need the players you mentioned, you need able deputies too.We had to let Scott and Stevenson go when we had Henderson and Baxter. Nowadays a team would need to keep all 4 - and not one of them a goalkeeper, centre half or centre forward. In 1872 a centre half just had to physically intimidate as did a centre forward. Tackles were like fights, brawn ruled the roost. Nowadays you get booked for virtually any contact. McCulloch would have been considered incredibly cultured, quick and mobile. I know you are just talking about the principle of a good spine, but all the changes that have happened mean it is more than that now. A spine is no longer enough, you need creaivity to unlock teams. Even the crappiest teams (us excepted) have organisation now. Edited June 1, 2015 by SteveC 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.