Thermopylae 15,288 Posted February 16, 2013 Share Posted February 16, 2013 I would hope so ... having said that McCoist is stressing that we want to keep him which usually means we want to sell and are keeping the price up Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muirheadbear 1,483 Posted February 16, 2013 Share Posted February 16, 2013 Alexander is on 13k a week and McCulloch is on18k. Now you know why they stayed. At their age where else would they have got that money? If they were 7-8 years younger they would have been away with the rest of them. Lee Wallace is the real deal and no one else. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluenose48 956 Posted February 17, 2013 Share Posted February 17, 2013 How can you say that without all the facts! Perhaps he is asking too much in which case he has to go and try to get it elsewhere. I don't care who they are I want to see Rangers showing fiscal responsibility.I agree with that. The whole story could be a load of shite, knowing the scottish media.However if it is true I still think it is harsh. Also I don't think Cammy Bell is as good a keeper. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iron Curtain 60 Posted February 17, 2013 Share Posted February 17, 2013 Loyalty should have nothing to do with it, we're a football club, not a charity. It should come down to ability and value only, "Aye he's not good enough anymore but he was loyal so let's jsut throw £10k a week at him"As it happens I think we should be keeping him but only because he's still one of the best keepers in the country.Cobblers, a lack of loyalty to present players will simply encourage other pro's to go elsewhere in future, this matter would be raised at the PFA Scotland discussions for starters.Attempting to change a player's contract in this manner is a joke, having hung around for so long Alexander will be disgusted and don't bet against him advising other potential signings of this fiasco when they phone him for advice. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ritchie Rich 27 Posted February 17, 2013 Share Posted February 17, 2013 Although the deal is signed now doesn't mean its terms start now. As the terms being offered are lower then I would suggest they would come into effect at the end of the current deal.Contrary to what has been said I do believe Rangers are showing loyalty to Alexander. Rangers are honouring his current contract, and in addition, are now offering terms in excess of those being offered to a new keeper of similar value for his services next season. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
topgoalie 637 Posted February 17, 2013 Share Posted February 17, 2013 Alexander is replaceable,some others are not,simples........ Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
theblueoysterbar 19,938 Posted February 17, 2013 Share Posted February 17, 2013 RFC does not need a goalkeeper who costs over half a million pounds a year in wages at the moment. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beaujolais 1,371 Posted February 17, 2013 Share Posted February 17, 2013 RFC does not need a goalkeeper who costs over half a million pounds a year in wages at the moment.This is totally correct. I would even add- Rangers cannot afford a goal keeper who costs over half a million pounds a year at this moment.As a loyal player who stayed with the Club in its darkest hour, then no one should realise that more than Neil Alexander himself.In terms of the story of the way this new deal is being presented to Neil Alexander- what was the source? It seems to appear as if it is from a representative of the said goal keeper and only gives his side of the contract negotiations. So what is his motivation to stay, money or loyalty?I respect Neil Alexander for what he has done for the Club- he clearly has honoured his contract. But it is now changed times and I equally respect the present Directors of the Club for recognising that and making the necessary difficult decisions. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WATP-FOREVER 5,231 Posted February 17, 2013 Share Posted February 17, 2013 Neil has been a great servant for us but the reality is football doesn't have room for sentiment and if we are going to continue moving forward we will need to make some tough and at times unpopular decisions.Green has stated he wants to change our wage structure and the way we buy/pay players. We should no longer be paying big money to over 30's with no sell on value especially when there are players we can bring in who are equally as good and younger on half the wage in that position.I'm not going to believe the story fully (figures) yet based on the source but If Neil thinks there's a club out there willing to offer him a longer term contract on the money he is on then good luck to him.Football has no room for sentiment. In that case the traitors cannot be challenged. Alexander may well be playing the diviii, but he's not at a diviii club. He should be respected & treated far better than this. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beaujolais 1,371 Posted February 17, 2013 Share Posted February 17, 2013 Football has no room for sentiment. In that case the traitors cannot be challenged. Alexander may well be playing the diviii, but he's not at a diviii club. He should be respected & treated far better than this.Whilst I understand your first point and agree with your second point. I struggle to understand the third point for the following reasons:1) This is a story released by the press- and clearly angled to hurt Rangers.2) If true what the Club could be argued to be saying is- Look Neil we cannot afford your current terms- we are currently in a loss making situation. If you wish to stay and are happy to accept reduced terms immediately we then have a contract available for you. However if you choose not to accept that- as is your right. Then simply stay on your present contract until it is concluded. However if you choose to do that we will need to organise and fund a replacement - hence the reason we need a quick decision. I cannot see how offering to pay some one in excess of 1/4 of a million pound a year is in fact treating them badly. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
livibear101 248 Posted February 17, 2013 Share Posted February 17, 2013 I really think alexander is only holding out for a longer deal I dont think the wage cut would be an issue to him but its probably his last contract and you can see why he wants a 2 year deal Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Creampuff 22,630 Posted February 17, 2013 Share Posted February 17, 2013 I really think alexander is only holding out for a longer deal I dont think the wage cut would be an issue to him but its probably his last contract and you can see why he wants a 2 year dealAbsolutely.I can understand Alexander wanting a two year deal, but if he gets it then it should be on reduced terms and it should be made clear to him that he isn't necessarily going to be number one.Cammy Bell Loyal. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scarkev 3,540 Posted February 17, 2013 Share Posted February 17, 2013 Football has no room for sentiment. In that case the traitors cannot be challenged. Alexander may well be playing the diviii, but he's not at a diviii club. He should be respected & treated far better than this.I don't know what you want or expect from the club....do you want to go through everything we did last summer again? We cannot make the same mistakes as before and pay over the odds for players....yes it may be harsh on Alexander who has been a good reliable keeper but we have to start running our club as a business...In the lower leagues how needed is a top keeper? We are paying 10k a week to a player who maybe touches the ball 10 times max in a game...it's not sustainable. He is in his 30's and has no sell on value. He has done very well out the club to this point and if he is unwilling to accept the contract offered he can leave with dignity and try to find a club willing to offer him what he want, personally think he will struggle to be honest.It's not the same with the "traitors" at all....they deprived the club of money for their own pockets and in some cases spoke poorly of the club. I personally didn't expect any if them to stay in sfl3 and I don't blame them for that...it is a short career but had they got the club a fee by transferring over there would have been no issue. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spectre 1,663 Posted February 17, 2013 Share Posted February 17, 2013 Cobblers, a lack of loyalty to present players will simply encourage other pro's to go elsewhere in future, this matter would be raised at the PFA Scotland discussions for starters.Attempting to change a player's contract in this manner is a joke, having hung around for so long Alexander will be disgusted and don't bet against him advising other potential signings of this fiasco when they phone him for advice.Just utter madness, we've got guys greeting about Rangers losing out on a few quid in advertising revenue because people post articles from the site on here and at the same time people are suggesting loyalty should be a big factor in contract extensions. Again can you not see hwo foolish it would be to give someone who is no longer good enough a large contract . If you want to reward loyalty put a loyalty bonus in the original contract, don't extend the contract of a player who is no longer good enough.Again though in Alexanders case I think he is good enough still although we need to have one eye on our future but people had started talking generally, and generally loyalty should have nothing to do with contract extensions unless you want to just throw money away. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WATP-FOREVER 5,231 Posted February 17, 2013 Share Posted February 17, 2013 Whilst I understand your first point and agree with your second point. I struggle to understand the third point for the following reasons:1) This is a story released by the press- and clearly angled to hurt Rangers.2) If true what the Club could be argued to be saying is- Look Neil we cannot afford your current terms- we are currently in a loss making situation. If you wish to stay and are happy to accept reduced terms immediately we then have a contract available for you. However if you choose not to accept that- as is your right. Then simply stay on your present contract until it is concluded. However if you choose to do that we will need to organise and fund a replacement - hence the reason we need a quick decision. I cannot see how offering to pay some one in excess of 1/4 of a million pound a year is in fact treating them badly.Aye you're right, but i didn't read it that way. I read that they gave him an ultimatum 1 year, not two, and 5k notnegotiable. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KERRZO 5 Posted February 17, 2013 Share Posted February 17, 2013 He stood by the club because he was on money no one else would give him and got greedy in negotiations for a new deal. Will not be any great loss. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlBear. 8,499 Posted February 17, 2013 Share Posted February 17, 2013 So despite him saying he never wanted to leave us, and he was one of only 6 players to turn up for preseason training. 'He only stayed for more cash after bleeding us dry sitting on the bench doing nothing for 4 years.'Fair enough people think he doesn't deserve any loyalty, but how about just a wee bit more respect shown by some? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
radlord 24 Posted February 17, 2013 Share Posted February 17, 2013 saying he 'deserves better' is all well and good but what should we practicably actually do? Offer an average keeper who will be 36 during the contract 10k a week, who will be 38 by the time we reach the top league a big contract? Just because he is deemed to have fitted the nebulous requirements to be deemed 'loyal'?Nah, give a young guy that sort of money and he can rise with us. I'm quite sure Neil will see our side of it with the perspective of time. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plymouthranger 3,965 Posted February 17, 2013 Share Posted February 17, 2013 He's not even in the top 5 goalkeepers in this country at the moment. Paying him silly wages is obscene given our current position. Surely we must have a good keeper in the youths who could cope at this level, and would take £500 a week? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlBear. 8,499 Posted February 17, 2013 Share Posted February 17, 2013 He's not even in the top 5 goalkeepers in this country at the moment. Paying him silly wages is obscene given our current position. Surely we must have a good keeper in the youths who could cope at this level, and would take £500 a week?Name 5 better keepers then... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WATP-FOREVER 5,231 Posted February 17, 2013 Share Posted February 17, 2013 He stood by the club because he was on money no one else would give him and got greedy in negotiations for a new deal. Will not be any great loss.you're talking about the wrong guy ya clown. you're talking about greggor & naismith & co. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RikkiMiller 87 Posted February 17, 2013 Share Posted February 17, 2013 Kind of on the fence here. He stood by us and we should be standing by him, but not if the financial details are not right. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Del 667 Posted February 17, 2013 Share Posted February 17, 2013 Im actually not too sure what to think about this...People are saying he deserves better and has shown loyalty etc but lets look at it impartially here...there are hundreds of goalkeepers who are numbers 2's or back up for their whole career and Alexander he signed knowing that McGregor was going to be our number 1. He played in cup finals, won leagues all the while getting a better wage than he would have got at most other clubs so lets drop the "he deserves better" hes done pretty well out of it!Hes played around 50games for us in all the time hes been here and theres no doubt hes a good goalkeeper but we dont need to paying 34 (soon to be 35) year old goalkeepers 10k a week.I dont think Cammy Bell is the answer either but IF Neil doesnt want to take a wage cut then we should let him go. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drunk and disorderly. 14,797 Posted February 17, 2013 Share Posted February 17, 2013 I accept alexAander has shown us loyalty but I aleways have one nagging doubt about his loyalty....would he still be here if he had been offered similar terms at another club in a higher league? Perhaps he never had the choice of naismith and the other moneygrabbers to walk out. I'm sure he could have moved and been paid more. I don't doubt Neil's loyalty. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plymouthranger 3,965 Posted February 17, 2013 Share Posted February 17, 2013 The Dundee united keeper with the polish name? Looks a class act. Bell, Forster, Randolph and langfield. That's 5, all performing far more consistently than Alexander whose had plenty of clangers this season 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.