Walter: We'll Build A Team Around Boyd

[craig 5,195]

Craig nearly winning the league means we lost it. The CL\UEFA run is a debate in itself was it unlucky good management or lucky bad management?

This season is still too early to make any judgement although i agree the football has improved immensely. We have at least gotten a bit of hope back though.

 

Wait a minute Pete..... so going by your "unlucky good" and "unlucky bad" scenario then it could also be argued that going out to Kaunas was "unlucky good" management, no ?

 

Or is it going to definitely be bad management when things don't go our way and just "luck" when they do go our way?

 

I think that would be harsh on the management.

 

Yes, we lost the league but look at the circumstances Pete. Yes, at the end of the day we lost the league and history will show only that. But the number of games to be played in a short space of time did not help and neither did the VERY dodgy refereeing decisions which went Celtic's way. Also don't forget just how far behind the team were in the previous two seasons when WS came back in.

 

He came back and our club was an utter shambles from top to bottom - it can be argued it is still a shambles in some regards but, on the pitch, I don't think so.

 

He came in and, from what I see, had his first objective as being to steady a sinking ship. Mission accomplished in just 6 short months. He made us much more difficult to beat and that was his aim when he came in, again mission accomplished.

 

The football was dire at times but the formation & tactics were a means to an end (making us hard to beat).

 

So after steadying the ship in that initial 6 months I don't think that any of us could have EVER have expected that 10 months later and the team would be on the verge of a QUADRUPLE. The fact that we didn't get it surely doesn't take away from the fact that we were so very close to accomplishing it.

 

Now, new season, having seen the dire performances (at times) last season he adds faces who actually look like they may make a BIG difference to our club on the pitch. We are 2 poins short of maximum having played away to, arguably, the three most difficult grounds for us to go to and won two and drawn one (should have been a win) CONVINCINGLY.

 

I think that WS and his management team deserves a lot of credit for just how far he has dragged our club up from the bootstraps in just over 18 months.

 

But no matter what he will never win in some fans eyes. Slagging off the manager is no better than slagging off players who give their all, in my opinion of course.

[pete 2,499]

Wait a minute Pete..... so going by your "unlucky good" and "unlucky bad" scenario then it could also be argued that going out to Kaunas was "unlucky good" management, no ?

 

Or is it going to definitely be bad management when things don't go our way and just "luck" when they do go our way?

 

I think that would be harsh on the management.

 

Yes, we lost the league but look at the circumstances Pete. Yes, at the end of the day we lost the league and history will show only that. But the number of games to be played in a short space of time did not help and neither did the VERY dodgy refereeing decisions which went Celtic's way. Also don't forget just how far behind the team were in the previous two seasons when WS came back in.

 

He came back and our club was an utter shambles from top to bottom - it can be argued it is still a shambles in some regards but, on the pitch, I don't think so.

 

He came in and, from what I see, had his first objective as being to steady a sinking ship. Mission accomplished in just 6 short months. He made us much more difficult to beat and that was his aim when he came in, again mission accomplished.

 

The football was dire at times but the formation & tactics were a means to an end (making us hard to beat).

 

So after steadying the ship in that initial 6 months I don't think that any of us could have EVER have expected that 10 months later and the team would be on the verge of a QUADRUPLE. The fact that we didn't get it surely doesn't take away from the fact that we were so very close to accomplishing it.

 

Now, new season, having seen the dire performances (at times) last season he adds faces who actually look like they may make a BIG difference to our club on the pitch. We are 2 poins short of maximum having played away to, arguably, the three most difficult grounds for us to go to and won two and drawn one (should have been a win) CONVINCINGLY.

 

I think that WS and his management team deserves a lot of credit for just how far he has dragged our club up from the bootstraps in just over 18 months.

 

But no matter what he will never win in some fans eyes. Slagging off the manager is no better than slagging off players who give their all, in my opinion of course.

 

 

Just giving my opinion on what he has done up until this season and up until now he is the nearly man

I have sex nearly every night. Monday i nearly had it. Tuesday i nearly had it.etc.

Last season he steadied the ship but this year he sunk our Euro hopes.

Over this season it looks good at this moment, but as you say we will need to wait for the hindsight before we can make any conclusions.

[calscot 0]

I think it's hard to fathom how you can take a team that were a whisker away form the quadruple, to losing a few players and not being good enough to beat a team like Kaunas. Then with the addition of a few players become a really good team again.

 

Surely there must be some circumstantial reasons? Three players surely do not make such a difference?

 

Seems a good fit that we had an incredibly hard season, and then mentally just weren't prepared again until August.

 

Most of the players are the same. I could easily use hindsight to say that had the CL qualifiers started two weeks later we would have definitely qualified.

 

It's much more plausible than "bad management" seeing how that the team has been successful, before and after the fact.

 

There was an obvious dip in form from our players from about the last 10 games of the season in a horrendous fixture pile up that I can't recall any other team having to endure.

 

Walter Smith totally predicted that Zenit would have an advantage in the final due to having two weeks off compared to our 3 days. Does that mean he was 100% right and it was the ONLY factor?

 

He predicted it would be difficult to win the league without extending the season and again was 100% right. So then it mus have been the ONLY factor.

 

Pete, you were no more right in your predictions that WS.

 

The players ran out of steam about May either phycally or mentally or most probably both. They didn't get it back till August. It's unfortunate that five of our most pivotal games were during that time.

 

I also think it's incredibly harsh to call "nearly" winning a 100% failure especially under very difficult circumstances.

 

If that's the case then you have no right to be bothered at all about going out to Kausas as it's the same failure we've had every year in Europe in our history, bar one. You've made your own complaints competely irrelevant.

 

In fact your argument makes it look like a master stroke. It's obvious that our attempt at winning a European Cup (which was futile as usual) lost us the league. Therefore why not fail early in a competition where you always fail anyway to allow us a better chance of winning something eminently winnable?

 

If going out in the first tie is the same as losing the final. What's the difference?

[pete 2,499]

Three players surely do not make such a difference?

 

Sorry Guy's you will have to wait until tonight for an answer. Work beckons.

[pete 2,499]

Originally Posted by calscot

I think it's hard to fathom how you can take a team that were a whisker away form the quadruple, to losing a few players and not being good enough to beat a team like Kaunas. Then with the addition of a few players become a really good team again.

 

Look at Spurs. Riding high last year,bottom of the league this year. Yesterdays successes are no guarantee for tomorrows battles. As i said in another thread, you can have a Rolls Royce sitting outside that looks great, but if there is no engine in it, it won't move.

 

Surely there must be some circumstantial reasons? Three players surely do not make such a difference?

 

Look at the difference Mendes alone has made to our team. One man can't make a team but he can be the keystone that holds the bridge together.

Three player can make a hell of a lot of difference in my eyes.

 

Walter Smith totally predicted that Zenit would have an advantage in the final due to having two weeks off compared to our 3 days. Does that mean he was 100% right and it was the ONLY factor?

 

He predicted it would be difficult to win the league without extending the season and again was 100% right. So then it mus have been the ONLY factor.

 

 

Quite easy to predict when your calling the shots. Is it not more of a managers job to motivate the players rather than keep telling everyone it will be difficult because we're jaded. Could it not be these negative thoughts that brought in his negative tactics that resulted in our negative results.

All fits in with the Walter Smith's negativity theory.

 

I also think it's incredibly harsh to call "nearly" winning a 100% failure especially under very difficult circumstances.

 

If that's the case then you have no right to be bothered at all about going out to Kausas as it's the same failure we've had every year in Europe in our history, bar one. You've made your own complaints competely irrelevant.

 

In fact your argument makes it look like a master stroke. It's obvious that our attempt at winning a European Cup (which was futile as usual) lost us the league. Therefore why not fail early in a competition where you always fail anyway to allow us a better chance of winning something eminently winnable?

 

If going out in the first tie is the same as losing the final. What's the difference?

 

Surely if something is eminently winnable and you lose then it wasn't eminently winnable but eminently loseable. Just like the Kanaus game according to you and Walter it was eminently winnable but we lost which made it eminently loseable. Surely a good manager should know that a game that is eminently winnable is just as easy to be eminently loseable and therefore my argument stands. Confused? So am I!

[Zappa 0]

Have to agree with Craig on this. FWIW, I think WS has achieved a remarkable amount with the team. I read (&hear) people saying elsewhere that Scottish clubs 'can't & won't' win a European competition, but that's complete BS. If both sides of the old firm can make it into a European final within such a short space of time, we can certainly win one in the future. That's the sort of negativity we DON'T need.!!

[calscot 0]

Originally Posted by calscot

 

Surely if something is eminently winnable and you lose then it wasn't eminently winnable but eminently loseable. Just like the Kanaus game according to you and Walter it was eminently winnable but we lost which made it eminently loseable. Surely a good manager should know that a game that is eminently winnable is just as easy to be eminently loseable and therefore my argument stands. Confused? So am I!

 

 

Of course you can lose anything that is eminently winnable. The point is that we when something is eminently winnable, you have a very good chance of winning it. Whereas something that isn't eminently winnable, means your chances are a long shot.

 

Even just taking history as an example, it shows we've about 40% chance of winning the league whereas we have about 1.5% chance of winning a European trophy.

 

So my point is that it could be seen as a better strategy to focus more on the trophy you have a better chance of winning.

 

If coming second is as bad as last then losing in the first round of something you have little chance of winning means almost nothing and probably advantageous for winning something you have a much better chance at.

 

Your attitude to losing means that you can have no complaints about going out of Europe as we have little chance of winning a trophy if we had gone through. Walter Smith in your eyes can be no more culpable than any other Rangers manager in history, bar one. So what's the problem?

 

Had we gone through against Kaunus and gone on the the CL final to ultimately lose, you'd be no more impressed. A loss is a loss you say.

 

The league is a far more realistic proposition and becoming a necessity so you should be pleased that we can concentrate on it seeing as a good European run means nothing to you.

 

Walter Smith has won 6 SPL's and lost 2, that's as good a record as any manager in Scottish history. Seeing as winning and losing are the only things that count, you should be right behind him.

[pete 2,499]

Of course you can lose anything that is eminently winnable. The point is that we when something is eminently winnable, you have a very good chance of winning it. Whereas something that isn't eminently winnable, means your chances are a long shot.

 

Even just taking history as an example, it shows we've about 40% chance of winning the league whereas we have about 1.5% chance of winning a European trophy.

 

So my point is that it could be seen as a better strategy to focus more on the trophy you have a better chance of winning.

 

If coming second is as bad as last then losing in the first round of something you have little chance of winning means almost nothing and probably advantageous for winning something you have a much better chance at.

 

Your attitude to losing means that you can have no complaints about going out of Europe as we have little chance of winning a trophy if we had gone through. Walter Smith in your eyes can be no more culpable than any other Rangers manager in history, bar one. So what's the problem?

 

Had we gone through against Kaunus and gone on the the CL final to ultimately lose, you'd be no more impressed. A loss is a loss you say.

 

The league is a far more realistic proposition and becoming a necessity so you should be pleased that we can concentrate on it seeing as a good European run means nothing to you.

 

Walter Smith has won 6 SPL's and lost 2, that's as good a record as any manager in Scottish history. Seeing as winning and losing are the only things that count, you should be right behind him.

 

Sorry Cal but you have lost me. My original argument was that Walter should have strengthened to win the Kaunus game. I never said getting to the final wasn't a great thing for Rangers. But you have to take each game independently. Was it a good thing getting to the final then the answer is yes. could we have done better with a more positive coach,then i also believe Yes. I still think we could have done more in the CL if Walter hadn't shit himself into a 4-5---------1. whether or not the UEFA run was a better prize is another argument. I personally think you should go into every game to win and a manager should prepare the team to be as strong as possible. So losing in a cup to defend the league is not something that i would do.

It was obvious to everyone at 10 in a row that the team was needing revamped but Walter never saw it or didn't want to see it. Now he has fallen to the same mistake again. He sits in the stand to get a better perspective but what he seems to see things most supporters don't see,thinking his team is doing well. Personally i think it is the other way about. He doesn't see what most supporters see. In how bad we were at the beginning of the season.

By the way German amateur teams only start training about the same time as us,so they weren't well into their season.

 

Off to work!

[craig 5,195]

Sorry Cal but you have lost me. My original argument was that Walter should have strengthened to win the Kaunus game. I never said getting to the final wasn't a great thing for Rangers. But you have to take each game independently. Was it a good thing getting to the final then the answer is yes. could we have done better with a more positive coach,then i also believe Yes. I still think we could have done more in the CL if Walter hadn't shit himself into a 4-5---------1. whether or not the UEFA run was a better prize is another argument. I personally think you should go into every game to win and a manager should prepare the team to be as strong as possible. So losing in a cup to defend the league is not something that i would do.

It was obvious to everyone at 10 in a row that the team was needing revamped but Walter never saw it or didn't want to see it. Now he has fallen to the same mistake again. He sits in the stand to get a better perspective but what he seems to see things most supporters don't see,thinking his team is doing well. Personally i think it is the other way about. He doesn't see what most supporters see. In how bad we were at the beginning of the season.

By the way German amateur teams only start training about the same time as us,so they weren't well into their season.

 

Off to work!

 

Pete, to say that with a more positive coach we would have done better is not your best argument because we had a more positive coach and he did absolutely NOTHING...... or are you forgetting the bad old days of Paul Le Guen ???

 

I won't get into the politics of the club at that point but he was also culpable.

 

So we had a positive coach in PLG would you agree ? And just what did our club do with him at the helm ? Nothing.

 

I know this is conjecture but I would be willing to bet that if we had ANY other coach at the club we would not have got to the UEFA final last year. ANY other coach.

 

It truly amazes me that WS gets dogs abuse because we finished third ina group that included Barcelona, Lyon and Stuttgart and one in which we were expected to win ZERO points. WS took us to the brink of qualification and, but for a missed sitter from JCD, would have done so. Yet WS gets lambasted.

 

I have said it before and I say it again - very harsh on the management team.

 

When will WS receive the credit he is due for just how far our club has come in the last 18 months ?

 

I wasn't a huge proponent of bringing him back in at the time (don't really believe in back to the future) but the improvements we have seen certainly have me convinced he is the right man for the job.

 

And for those who say that he will get us nowhere in Europe..... getting to the group stages and every now and then qualifying out of that is a reasonable target for us - but getting to the group stages is crucial financially - which means that it becomes more important to win the league as it, right now, guarantees automatic entry.

[pete 2,499]

Pete, to say that with a more positive coach we would have done better is not your best argument because we had a more positive coach and he did absolutely NOTHING...... or are you forgetting the bad old days of Paul Le Guen ???

 

I won't get into the politics of the club at that point but he was also culpable.

 

So we had a positive coach in PLG would you agree ? And just what did our club do with him at the helm ? Nothing.

 

I know this is conjecture but I would be willing to bet that if we had ANY other coach at the club we would not have got to the UEFA final last year. ANY other coach.

 

It truly amazes me that WS gets dogs abuse because we finished third ina group that included Barcelona, Lyon and Stuttgart and one in which we were expected to win ZERO points. WS took us to the brink of qualification and, but for a missed sitter from JCD, would have done so. Yet WS gets lambasted.

 

I have said it before and I say it again - very harsh on the management team.

 

When will WS receive the credit he is due for just how far our club has come in the last 18 months ?

 

I wasn't a huge proponent of bringing him back in at the time (don't really believe in back to the future) but the improvements we have seen certainly have me convinced he is the right man for the job.

 

And for those who say that he will get us nowhere in Europe..... getting to the group stages and every now and then qualifying out of that is a reasonable target for us - but getting to the group stages is crucial financially - which means that it becomes more important to win the league as it, right now, guarantees automatic entry.

 

Getting Automatic entry to the CL on a yearly basis is never going to happen in it's current form. It would be great for us if it did but not good for football in general. That being the fact then the years that we don't get automatic entry,it is imperative that our team is ready and fighting from round 1. Taking a gamble on playing so called weaker teams with a severely weakened team should not even be an option. Now that McCulloch has moved back to Centre-back means we had six centre-backs in the team(unfair i know but McCulluch played like a CB even then:) ) The whole engine room was, and was known to all to be extremely weak. Except WS seemingly.

I know buying Davis earlier was not a guarantee but at least he was a real midfield player and that is what we needed.

 

Firstly i don't think Paul le Guen is a ruler to measure the success of Walter Smith. I don't want to bring up the whole PLG argument again but i am still not sure he could not have turned the club round. Walter Smith has spent about 30million(I believe) to get us where we are. PLG spent or was allowed to spend about 4 million. PLG lost the dressing room because he dared to take a stand against Fergie and his cronies and it is a bit funny how it was when Fergie came back into the team that things went pear-shaped.

 

When will i give Walter his credit? When he builds his own team that plays entertaining football and can win things, mainly the league.