Rangers will need to match Celtic's £24million wage spend to challenge...

[limeburner 0]

Agree, could pay the wages of 5 players for that but it's not exactly closing the gap by enough. Actually, it would be more like two or three if you consider wages as 50% of turnover.

 

I can see league sponsorship, prize money and TV increasing by about £4m also, so perhaps we could go from £6m in wages to £9m... But much of that will be taken up by automatic pay and bonus rises to our current squad, so we need to find more money from somewhere.

 

It all looks depressing when you consider the £90m from TV that the likes of Watford rake in.

 

Not so depressing really,Watford could rake in 900 million-------it would make no difference to us,we dont compete against them.

[blueflag 378]

I wouldn't say the gulf between premiership and championship is anywhere near what some might think. We could after all have two championship teams in the Scottish cup semis

[RANGERRAB 3,258]

I wouldn't say the gulf between premiership and championship is anywhere near what some might think. We could after all have two championship teams in the Scottish cup semis

 

Perhaps there isn't a gulf between the top of the Championship & the bottom of the Premiership but I think there is a gulf between the top of the Championship & top of the Premiership.

I also think cup games are one offs mostly & you can get upsets from time to time

[blueflag 378]

Perhaps there isn't a gulf between the top of the Championship & the bottom of the Premiership but I think there is a gulf between the top of the Championship & top of the Premiership.

I also think cup games are one offs mostly & you can get upsets from time to time

 

I can see where your coming from.

Guess we will find out on the 17th. (Despite it being a cup game)

But I don't think so. Hearts have went straight up and into 3rd. Aberdeen are just bottle merchants. Celtic really should have lost there title this year if the sheep didn't have there annual meltdown

[craig 5,195]

Outwith the veracity of his figures, I don't really disagree with what he is saying. Celtic do indeed have a much bigger budget, but I don't think it'll require us to match it per se. There is a gulf in class, but I don't think it's as big as he suggests -- although he is one manager who'd know. I think Hearts have reverted to a more simple game. They played some nice stuff last year, but have since gone back to a game that simply seeks to match opponents for energy, strength, desire etc. If we can add that without having to sacrifice our philosophy, then we'll do alright IMO.

 

To be honest, I don't think we'll be competing with Celtic next year. I'd just like to see us get top 3, and to compete with Hearts and Aberdeen. Not what we want, of course, but I think that's a reasonable target for our first year back.

 

I find it hard to disagree with much of this Rousseau.

 

Unfortunately many of our fans will be demanding instant success next year. I think it is achievable, but I am realistic enough to know that our management team and players (aside from Wallace, Wilson, Law & Shiels - the latter two are likely not to be there for next season's campaign) have no experience of the SPL. Next season, for me at least, is a season I want to see us challenging for the league but will accept that it may be a year too early - but still will be expecting us to be pushing for 2nd even if we aren't having a great season.

 

I'm not in agreement with Neilson's assertion whatsoever. Clearly he has paid absolutely zero attention to the English Premiership this season where it has been proven that having similar wage budgets does not guarantee you to be challenging and, likewise, Leicester have proven that you CAN challenge with good management, good coaching, good scouting and a squad of honest, hard-working professionals. Neilson is, IMHO, talking guff.

 

We don't need to match Celtic in the wage department - what we DO need to do is realize in what areas we need strengthening personnel wise - but our footballing philosophy of "dominating the ball" is something most of the Premiership teams haven't come up against previously, so it will be interesting to see how they handle that. You don't need to spend the same to get the same results. One simple question answers this..... "Do you think you will get a player nearly as good as Scott Brown for 20k a week ?" and the answer should be "for 20k a week I would hope to get 2 or 3 players, all of whom are better than Scott Brown". Celtic are over-paying their players for the league they are in, of that I have no doubt. So why would we need to match their financial profligacy ?

 

Warburton has managed to pick up some excellent journeymen on a shoe-string budget. Now he will have an increased budget to prepare for the top flight - it will be interesting to see what caliber of player he will be able to bring in with an increased transfer budget.

 

I haven't watched much of Celtic this season but I tortured myself and watched the 2nd half of their match with Killie the other week - and they were horrible. The defense all wanted to leave the ball to each other, when Killie ran at them they looked like folding like a deck of cards and, in an attacking sense, they were disjointed and couldn't string passes together. Only a wonder strike from Rogic saved them (a strike that just as easily could have ended up in row z). The only player I was relatively impressed with was Bamford (don't be surprised to see Deila swap him to the left wing to run at Tavernier in the semi-final).

 

I don't think we need to match their wage bill at all. A good management team, with a proper philosophy, and a squad of hard-working, honest professionals will counter-balance a team of over-paid good-time charlies. Just ask Claudio Ranieri.

[craig 5,195]

We won it before with about 16 million wage bill. I suspect that's the bare minimum. Nielson isn't far wrong.

 

Even using YOUR number he is about 50% wrong. I disagree.

[craig 5,195]

I believe Dutch ace, Derk Boerrigter takes a third of that £26million. He cost £3million from Ajax some three seasons past, a work in progress I hear?

 

That cant be right... 8 mill a year for one player ? Have they gone nuts over there ? That surely isn't right 26th !

[Bearman 9]

That cant be right... 8 mill a year for one player ? Have they gone nuts over there ? That surely isn't right 26th !

 

He was on 1mill a year (£19,500 pw) according to this....

 

http://tsmplay.com/football/celtic-players-salaries/

 

No idea if these figures are accurate, but it's peanuts to what Commons takes home.

[calscot 0]

Not so depressing really,Watford could rake in 900 million-------it would make no difference to us,we dont compete against them.

 

There is a chance we could meet them in Europe - and we'd be the underdogs. I find that depressing. Also we compete with them and other clubs for players - the better the likes of them can afford, the lower down the skill levels we have to look. I find that a bit depressing also. We might be busting a gut and our wage structure to lure a Championship player, and they could swoop in and take him, just as we sometimes used to do. Not a happy thought either.

 

That's three differences I can see...

[the gunslinger 3,366]

Even using YOUR number he is about 50% wrong. I disagree.

I make it 33 percent. Which makes him more right than wrong.