Charlie Adam, possible transfer to Liverpool & the sell-on fee

[caseyjones 3,009]

i would say that was fair enough.

when he was a regular at rangers he was lean as well. that happens to alot of players.

He was one of the ones who adapted to the continental methods introduced by Le Guen. When he departed Charlie went back to his old self, and more damning, he was allowed to.

[gunslinger 270]

He was one of the ones who adapted to the continental methods introduced by Le Guen. When he departed Charlie went back to his old self, and more damning, he was allowed to.

perhaps but at the start of smiths first full season he returned for pre season as the fittest player at the club. but he played less that year than the previous season. and perhaps his fitness dropped a bit.

though still that season he was still very fit.

by the season after he wasnt playing that much and went on loan to blackpool when our financial crisis started.

it should be noted when we sold him he was in fantastic shape and was begging for another chance at rangers. who knows where we would both be if he had been given it.

[caseyjones 3,009]

perhaps but at the start of smiths first full season he returned for pre season as the fittest player at the club. but he played less that year than the previous season. and perhaps his fitness dropped a bit.

though still that season he was still very fit.

by the season after he wasnt playing that much and went on loan to blackpool when our financial crisis started.

it should be noted when we sold him he was in fantastic shape and was begging for another chance at rangers. who knows where we would both be if he had been given it.

The loan spell did him the world of good, maybe jolting him into not wasting his career. For Smith to then sell him, despite his great form at Bloomfield Road, was the act of a stubborn old man. It also blows a hole in the myth, oft repeated on here, that he was sold because he was in shite form and overweight.

[gunslinger 270]

The loan spell did him the world of good, maybe jolting him into not wasting his career. For Smith to then sell him, despite his great form at Bloomfield Road, was the act of a stubborn old man. It also blows a hole in the myth, oft repeated on here, that he was sold because he was in shite form and overweight.

yes it does.

i do think the bank had alot to do with the sale though. regardles the decision was a scandal and the fee and clause a joke.

we could have loaned him for another year and look what we could have got then.

[WaltersGotStyle 160]

The best thing that happened to Adam was escaping the "hangers-on" telling him he was the big man etc...

Moving away from the "You play with Rangers - you have made it!" crowd let him get his head down and actually show what he is capable of

[TravelingWilBEARy 4,319]

Getting rid of him was the bad piece of business and those that were 'desperate' to do so were the stupid ones.

I agree - but the 10% sell-on fee was not a bad piece of business.

I liked Charlie Adam at Rangers.

[MosesMcNeil 1,664]

Getting rid of him was the bad piece of business and those that were 'desperate' to do so were the stupid ones.

Walter Smith nailed it recently when talking of Adam's departure. He wisely acknowledged that when the player was being booed before he came onto the park, it was best for all concerned that he moved on.

It really doesn't matter if you think Adam was good enough or not or if he was fat or thin - he was absolutely the whipping boy for the support. Smith has to manage these young men as people, too. Much more to that than simply picking a side when the audience they face is an adoring, but unforgiving Rangers support.

[yellowcross 5]

Getting rid of him was the bad piece of business and those that were 'desperate' to do so were the stupid ones.

Well we are all wrong sometimes I suppose.

Charlie was a very frustrating player for Rangers, he seemed slow and he seemed unfit...

I wanted him to do well but he seemed unable to speed his movement and thinking up.... it was so frustrating.

At the time I was one of the stupid ones that had pretty much given up on him and was glad to see him move on..

With hindsight that may look foolish but that is honestly how I felt at the time... no point denying it now.

[Big Amo 11]

Real radio tonight said 20%!!

[caseyjones 3,009]

Walter Smith nailed it recently when talking of Adam's departure. He wisely acknowledged that when the player was being booed before he came onto the park, it was best for all concerned that he moved on.

It really doesn't matter if you think Adam was good enough or not or if he was fat or thin - he was absolutely the whipping boy for the support. Smith has to manage these young men as people, too. Much more to that than simply picking a side when the audience they face is an adoring, but unforgiving Rangers support.

Smith's 'square peg in a round hole' philosophy had a big part to play in Adam getting booed. Did he acknowledge that in his assessment? Nah!

[Ben10 2,294]

Under Paul Le Guen he was in good shape, after that, he was out-of-shape at Rangers. For that, I would blame the management and player, although the player is the one who looks after his body and should want to be in as best shape as possible.

Guzzling kebabs, pizza huts, McDonalds... which Charlie Adam was prone to a lot of the time did not help. He also liked his drink and I seen him out quite a bit in Dundee with his mates.

So you were Charlie Adams fitness coach? Nothing you say seems to make sense and seems to me you as if you have more information about the players than the players themselves. Very odd

[Davie2909 21]

Either way if we get 10% or 20% of the fee its good business for us. So if he goes for £8mill we will get either £750,000 or £1.5mill which is pretty decnet for a player we couldnt get shot of quick enough

[MosesMcNeil 1,664]

Smith's 'square peg in a round hole' philosophy had a big part to play in Adam getting booed. Did he acknowledge that in his assessment? Nah!

It's common for some under-performing players to have a relatively easy ride from our support. Lafferty would be a decent current example. Laudrup, in his below par final season, another.

Others get it in the neck with ferocious severity. Big Hateley, when he first arrived, was presumed to be an expensive dud and got pelters. McCoist was another who got it in the neck at the start of his career. That pair had the class and courage to overcome and eventually become iconic figures.

Charlie Adam didn't. You can hardly say he didn't have the chance to turn it around as he played often enough.

[Ferdasyn 431]

It's common for some under-performing players to have a relatively easy ride from our support. Lafferty would be a decent current example. Laudrup, in his below par final season, another.

Others get it in the neck with ferocious severity. Big Hateley, when he first arrived, was presumed to be an expensive dud and got pelters. McCoist was another who got it in the neck at the start of his career. That pair had the class and courage to overcome and eventually become iconic figures.

Charlie Adam didn't. You can hardly say he didn't have the chance to turn it around as he played often enough.

'Start of their career' - They got the chance to eventually do something about it, Adam didn't.

[MosesMcNeil 1,664]

'Start of their career' - They got the chance to eventually do something about it, Adam didn't.

That would have been a reasonable comeback if it wasn't the case that Hateley managed it inside a single season and Adam had much, much longer than that to get it together.

He had that chance and did not deliver consistently. Not my opinion, just the facts of the matter. By the time he had fallen so far from grace that he was being booed onto the park it was the sensible thing for all concerned for Adam to move on.

[FlippinEck 3,737]

2 Assists against Man UTD, should up his value by £2Million

[fiddyp 15]

Having a cracking game. Playing for his big move and I hope he gets it ( and we pocket some money)

[caseyjones 3,009]

It's common for some under-performing players to have a relatively easy ride from our support. Lafferty would be a decent current example. Laudrup, in his below par final season, another.

Others get it in the neck with ferocious severity. Big Hateley, when he first arrived, was presumed to be an expensive dud and got pelters. McCoist was another who got it in the neck at the start of his career. That pair had the class and courage to overcome and eventually become iconic figures.

Charlie Adam didn't. You can hardly say he didn't have the chance to turn it around as he played often enough.

I know players get it in the neck from the demanding support. Did Hateley overcome that by being played at left back? No, he persevered and did what he did best. Adam wasn't given that chance under Smith.

[caseyjones 3,009]

Having a cracking game. Playing for his big move and I hope he gets it ( and we pocket some money)

It's nothing to do with playing for a move. He's been doing that since he went to Blackpool.

[fiddyp 15]

It's nothing to do with playing for a move. He's been doing that since he went to Blackpool.

Nice one

[caseyjones 3,009]

Nice one

What?

[MosesMcNeil 1,664]

I know players get it in the neck from the demanding support. Did Hateley overcome that by being played at left back? No, he persevered and did what he did best. Adam wasn't given that chance under Smith.

We'll have to disagree on that. I doubt many would argue he had ability, but Adam had plenty of chances and failed to delivery consistently. He wasn't the first (and certainly wont be the last) player to be asked to perform in a variety of roles and he could not offer enough regularly.

To return to the point about players being received differently by the support, let's look at Lafferty again as a current example. Just like Adam, he has been asked to perform in a few positions and, just like Adam, he has also been inconsistent - but do you see him getting booed onto the park?

The support adore and accept some players for many reasons, but reject others. Adam simply never got into the hearts of the support as others have. I don't really know why. But, JamieD perhaps touched on one reason when he recently mentioned that Lafferty has endearing qualities about him - that buys you a lot of good-will and second chances. I think we can all agree that Adam had the second chances, but very little of the good-will from the support at large.

[caseyjones 3,009]

We'll have to disagree on that. I doubt many would argue he had ability, but Adam had plenty of chances and failed to delivery consistently. He wasn't the first (and certainly wont be the last) player to be asked to perform in a variety of roles and he could not offer enough regularly.

To return to the point about players being received differently by the support, let's look at Lafferty again as a current example. Just like Adam, he has been asked to perform in a few positions and, just like Adam, he has also been inconsistent - but do you see him getting booed onto the park?

The support adore and accept some players for many reasons, but reject others. Adam simply never got into the hearts of the support as others have. I don't really know why. But, JamieD perhaps touched on one reason when he recently mentioned that Lafferty has endearing qualities about him - that buys you a lot of good-will and second chances. I think we can all agree that Adam had the second chances, but very little of the good-will from the support at large.

[Briton 394]

Walter Smith nailed it recently when talking of Adam's departure. He wisely acknowledged that when the player was being booed before he came onto the park, it was best for all concerned that he moved on.

Yes very wise, blame the Bears. It's not the Walter Smith didn't recognise that Adam did have something, (as many did), or that the management failed to get the best from him, it's all the Rangers supports fault. I think Walter was in error in the way he dealt with Adam at Rangers and this kind of apologetics doesn't change that.

[Chef 436]

cant recall folks saying he should have stayed at the time, funny that