Jump to content

Charlie Adam

Tam3r0wn

By Tam3r0wn
in General Football & Sport

 Share

  

26 members have voted

  1. 1. Should we have stuck with him?

    • No, correct decision at the time
      22
    • Yes, could have been quality for us
      4

Recommended Posts

Tam3r0wn

Tam3r0wn 12

Posted
Posted

Watching the game last night, i started to think about Adam where he was with us, and where he is now.

On one hand it kind of pisses me off that we let him go so easily, but not many complained at the time. I didn't. He wasn't exactly an integral part of the team, and got a lot of stick. His first season under PLG showed he had talent and real promise, but somehow seemed to get lost along the way (like other prospects in the past few years - Burke, Hughes, Smith etc.)

It happens at all levels of the game. Players show early promise, only to fade away as time goes on. Usually these players have success elsewhere, but few become good enough to be courted by the biggest teams in the top league in the world (Rino apart). But Charlie was sold for a small fee, only to become a supposed 10m pound player.

Part of me wonders why we didn't see the ability in him, and give him an extended run in the side. Sure, in games he failed to excite, but surely something can be spotted in training to see that he may just need a little time. However, on the flip side, he may have reached his peak with Rangers, and pastures new was just what he needed.

Even if he did fulfil his potential here, how long would we have been able to keep him? We are never guaranteed a big fee for our players.

Either way, I am enjoying seeing Adam playing well. Now he looks a real classy midfielder, with a belter of a left foot who can dominate games against big teams if on song.

I reckon if we had given him a bit more support(although he didn't help himself at times) then we could have helped him realise his potential. It'd be interesting to see what others think.

But if my Aunt had baws she'd be my Uncle.

Link to post
Share on other sites
BlueSuedeSambas

BlueSuedeSambas 56,413

Posted
Posted

He played 100 games for us and the only team who wanted him were the favourites for relegation from the Championship.

People say we shouldn't have sold him but I don't think there is one person who could, hand on heart, say that they expected him to become the player that he hasand if they do then I think they are lying.

Charlie Adam was talented but he never once looked like a player who could play for Liverpool, Man Utd or Tottenham when he was with us.

Link to post
Share on other sites
ManchestGer

ManchestGer 351

Posted
Posted

The biggest headfuck is the price he's being touted as now, people looking at it and thinking we've lost out on all that money. If we'd kept him on for the extra 1.5 years and played him regularly how much do you think we actually would have got for him. We have one of the best goalkeepers in Britain who has been continuously performing for a good few years now and are still only linked with £5m for him. No one would have come in with a big offer for Adam even if he did prove his worth with us here at Rangers cause most people only really take REAL notice of the EPL, possibly £3m max if we were lucky.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Tam3r0wn

Tam3r0wn 12

Posted
  • Author
Posted

The biggest headfuck is the price he's being touted as now, people looking at it and thinking we've lost out on all that money. If we'd kept him on for the extra 1.5 years and played him regularly how much do you think we actually would have got for him. We have one of the best goalkeepers in Britain who has been continuously performing for a good few years now and are still only linked with £5m for him. No one would have come in with a big offer for Adam even if he did prove his worth with us here at Rangers cause most people only really take REAL notice of the EPL, possibly £3m max if we were lucky.

Theres a chance he might never have become the player he is at Rangers. And we may get close to that in sell on clauses anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Irwin Sparkes

Irwin Sparkes 97

Posted
Posted

He played 100 games for us and the only team who wanted him were the favourites for relegation from the Championship.

People say we shouldn't have sold him but I don't think there is one person who could, hand on heart, say that they expected him to become the player that he hasand if they do then I think they are lying.

Charlie Adam was talented but he never once looked like a player who could play for Liverpool, Man Utd or Tottenham when he was with us.

He was never played in his proper position. That is usually a kop out response but it was never more relevant than in Adam's case

Link to post
Share on other sites
jamesyboy93

jamesyboy93 2

Posted
Posted

No, i think Lee McCulloch and Maurice Edu are better than him

Of course we should've been more patient. But that's the one thing an Old Firm fan will never be

Are you trying to tell me that McCulloch and Edu are better players than Charlie Adam? :lol: :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites
aird

aird 3,950

Posted
Posted

always thought he had talent but i never thought i'd want adam over davis in a rangers midfield but just now i'd take adam over davis.

Hindsights a great thing.

Even if he was still here, he would be out on the left so he wouldn't be playing as well as he is now.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Gaz52

Gaz52 11,837

Posted
Posted

People like you.

People like me what?

The Charlie Adam you see now isn't the Adam we seen at Rangers, he simply wasn't good enough of course he was going to get stick, I don't know many fans who wanted Adam in the team week in week out, he was wanted rid of by most supporters and I bet at one point your good self wanted rid of him but now he's a big EPL player we look back and think what could've been, we wouldn't have won any more trophies with him here, believe me

Link to post
Share on other sites
swanseabear

swanseabear 25

Posted
Posted

Let's face it, he was not good for us at the time. I'm pleased he's doing well, but I for one thought it was the correct decision at the time, and he has thrived away from us. That said, he still hasn't proven that much. He played a role in getting Blackpool, and has had a half decent season in the Prem. 18 months, and just a few of those in the top flight, are not enough to judge whether someone is really a top player or not. It would have been ludicrious if Liverpool had met Blackpool's demands (even with the money they spunked on Carroll).

Of course it's frustrating when you see a player do well who we let go for a tiny fee, but it was what he was worth at the time and a reflection of how bad he was back then. It's time to move on. We will keep on winning trophies, and hopefully he'll continue his good form.

Link to post
Share on other sites
jamesyboy93

jamesyboy93 2

Posted
Posted

People like me what?

The Charlie Adam you see now isn't the Adam we seen at Rangers, he simply wasn't good enough of course he was going to get stick, I don't know many fans who wanted Adam in the team week in week out, he was wanted rid of by most supporters and I bet at one point your good self wanted rid of him but now he's a big EPL player we look back and think what could've been, we wouldn't have won any more trophies with him here, believe me

Your confident , how do you know that we wouldnt of won any more trophies with Charlie Adam in the team - if you were to put Charlie Adam into our midfield at this moment it would get stronger not weaker. . .

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Upcoming Events

    • Rangers v Hibernian
      29 September 2024 11:00 Until 13:00
      0  
      Rangers v Hibernian
      Ibrox Stadium
      Scottish Premiership
      Live on Sky Sports Football
×
×
  • Create New...