craig 5,199 Posted April 10, 2016 Share Posted April 10, 2016 The new board have done well so far. The stadium is almost full for every home game & that in itself tells its own story.Next season will be the big test for us however. A lot of decisions on & off the park need to be taken and it's imperative we make the right decisions. Simply making up the numbers in the Premiership next season is not acceptable. The yahoos have been in decline year on year since we left. They are not formidable opposition by any means and we should be challenging for the title next season. And there has been nothing that has emanated from the Boardroom to suggest otherwise Rab. In fact, King has said more than once that he will provide funding to MW to challenge at the first attempt next season. We also must remember that MW is his own man, likes a lean squad and doesn't necessarily believe in spunking a ton of money at a situation. In other words he has a philosophy. He's already said e believes his players should be paid similar amounts as they are all in it together. This may require every players basic salary to increase as we chase better players, which is fine within reason. But it may also be that he continues to look for those "value" purchases that we haven't heard of before. I believe he deserves our trust for next season and if we aren't successful then he deserves, IMHO. At least a second season in the top flight to correct where things may have went wrong. Preferably longer than that too. I'm not a big believer in chopping and changing managers because of an unsuccessful season. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RANGERRAB 3,307 Posted April 10, 2016 Share Posted April 10, 2016 And there has been nothing that has emanated from the Boardroom to suggest otherwise Rab. In fact, King has said more than once that he will provide funding to MW to challenge at the first attempt next season. We also must remember that MW is his own man, likes a lean squad and doesn't necessarily believe in spunking a ton of money at a situation. In other words he has a philosophy. He's already said e believes his players should be paid similar amounts as they are all in it together. This may require every players basic salary to increase as we chase better players, which is fine within reason. But it may also be that he continues to look for those "value" purchases that we haven't heard of before. I believe he deserves our trust for next season and if we aren't successful then he deserves, IMHO. At least a second season in the top flight to correct where things may have went wrong. Preferably longer than that too. I'm not a big believer in chopping and changing managers because of an unsuccessful season. Unfortunately I think the more successful MW is at Rangers the sooner he'll be tempted back down south. That is why the board must plan ahead & identify successors even at this early stage. I'm not sure DW would be the obvious shoe-in either as he's no real record in management. I'd fear a McCoist II - the sequel. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted April 10, 2016 Share Posted April 10, 2016 Unfortunately I think the more successful MW is at Rangers the sooner he'll be tempted back down south.That is why the board must plan ahead & identify successors even at this early stage. I'm not sure DW would be the obvious shoe-in either as he's no real record in management. I'd fear a McCoist II - the sequel. Sadly I believe you are correct. In fact the manner in which he has us playing after just one season, the fact he did it on a relative shoe-string budget, the class he exudes in press conferences etc... all have me surprised that some of the lesser BPL teams haven't been sniffing around him. I suspect his lack of BPL experience is helping us retain him at present. However, I also believe that he would be the type of person (given his previous professional background) that in the event he left would also assist the Club, or at least make recommendation, on who should replace him. I wouldn't suggest DW is a "shoe-in" because I don't like the idea of ANYONE being a shoe-in as the Club should exhaust all avenues when looking for a replacement manager. However, I personally would like to see DW get the opportunity (man, we are talking as if MW has already exited the building... we should leave this chat to the Tims, lol). Why would I give it to Weir and why would I not fear a "McCoist II" ?? Because although Weir hasn't any significant record in management he has said on a number of occasions that his philosophy when he went to first work with Warburton was different from MW's, but that after watching him, listening to him, studying him, he believes that Warburton's philosophy is the right way. Weir was convinced to change his own philosophy as he believed he was wrong and MW was right. That is important for a number of reasons, not least that it shows Weir has humility and enough flexibility to accept he may be wrong sometimes (which I think is very important) but also because it shows that his own philosophy now matches that of Warburton so, in the event Warburton left, we would have continuity in terms of philosophy and playing style, again important when you have a successful playing style. One other important reason that I wouldn't fear a "McCoist II" is who both of those learned from. Walter is, rightly, a Rangers legend and hugely successful. But the manner in which his teams played is very, very different to the manner in which Warburton's does. McCoist learned from Walter, Walter is from a different era and football has certainly changed in the last few years, one small example is the use of technology - I would be fairly certain that Warburton has a reasonable grasp on the advances of technology from a footballing perspective, though I doubt Walter did in his later years at the Club, and possibly didn't even trust them (am I being ageist ?). Warburton is a progressive which I prefer. Not only that but Davie Weir and Ally McCoist are two very different people. If Weir was manager I get the impression that players would like him but that he would also ensure that there would be a seriousness about the job at hand. There would be time for fun but the players would be under no illusions as to who was boss and what would be expected of them. Ally was fiercely competitive as a player and I am sure as a manager too, but he still was the joker in the pack. Weir we know was fiercely competitive but more a "silent assassin" when it came to his persona, yet very well liked and someone who demands respect from the staff. I think that even though neither McCoist nor Weir had any significant managerial experience, assuming Weir becomes our next manager (hopefully many years from now.....), it is fairly clear that their experiences as backroom staff have been largely different, and their personalities are also very different. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexscottislegend 2,091 Posted April 10, 2016 Share Posted April 10, 2016 I'd worry about losing Weir as well if MW went. Successors? We should keep an eye on McInnes; can't think of anyone else at the moment... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rousseau 9,513 Posted April 10, 2016 Share Posted April 10, 2016 Any potential manager needs to be similar to Warburton. In other words, any potential candidate must be able to fit seamlessly into the system that Warburton has started/built. That would rule out McInnes IMO, because he's nothing like Warburton. (Not that he's a candidate, but Brendan Rodgers would be a fit.) A candidate must fit into the system, rather than us renewing the whole system every time we change manager. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrahimHemdani 1 Posted April 10, 2016 Share Posted April 10, 2016 Any potential manager needs to be similar to Warburton. In other words, any potential candidate must be able to fit seamlessly into the system that Warburton has started/built. That would rule out McInnes IMO, because he's nothing like Warburton. (Not that he's a candidate, but Brendan Rodgers would be a fit.) A candidate must fit into the system, rather than us renewing the whole system every time we change manager. Why can't a new manager have a new system? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrahimHemdani 1 Posted April 10, 2016 Share Posted April 10, 2016 Weir has had one attempt at being a manager and failed miserably. If Warburton goes I'd rather he went with him and proved he could succeed as a manager elsewhere before he might be considered as a possible Rangers manager. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrahimHemdani 1 Posted April 10, 2016 Share Posted April 10, 2016 How will we know if we are in Europe next season after the Cup Semi Final? Does Warburton not know that we have to WIN the cup to qualify for Europe? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rousseau 9,513 Posted April 10, 2016 Share Posted April 10, 2016 Why can't a new manager have a new system? He can, but it'll be detrimental to our continuity. I'd prefer to see us go down the Southampton/Swansea route, whereby any potential candidate has to conform to the system already in place. It's not great to have to start again every time a new manager is announced. If we had a manager that could've built upon what Advocaat started, then we'd be in a better position IMO. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted April 10, 2016 Share Posted April 10, 2016 (edited) Weir has had one attempt at being a manager and failed miserably. If Warburton goes I'd rather he went with him and proved he could succeed as a manager elsewhere before he might be considered as a possible Rangers manager. We will agree to disagree Edited April 10, 2016 by craig 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.