Leeds_Bear 8,110 Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 Regardless if the figure is 5, 10, 15 or 50 percent - the fact we find ourselves in this position, again, is embarrassing. A complete an utter lack of financial management - if we couldn't afford to the sign the players we did in the summer we should not have signed them it's as simple as that. I'd say there are two people to blame for this Stockbridge for not putting the correct budget together and Ally for signing far to many players we don't need Foster, Smith, Peralta etc. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
North Rd 2,860 Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 Reports in Daily Mail Wallace being lined up for move to Hull City Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Fantana 28,894 Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 Can I ask why is it bye Wallacebecause he would yield the biggest return. I'm not interested in the figure of money to be saved that thetabloids bandy about, I've always thought players would go this window and as he would get the biggest fee the board will hope to get a good return on Lee Wallace, they are business men not fans.to think we will not sell is foolish and to think he would turn down a move to an EPL team is even more so. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clyde Valley 234 Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 Is it not something like 50K per annum.That's what Hart and Smith were on. Stockbridge 200k? Easdale said he didn't take a wage.Is Somer on 50 grand? Same for Crighton? No idea what Wallace is on but in reality he should be on a huge wedge and if he runs the business well and brings in investment why not. Was Green on 600 k? Whats the going rate for a financial guy at a company with 18 million turnover?Just using those numbers that's a million quid and it appears 3 of the guys in the dugout make 1.3 million. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
STEPPS BOY 74,051 Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 The only way Wallace shpuld be leaving is if we're absolutely desperate for a cash injection.If it's just abpit lowering wage bill then theres plenty deadwood there to get rid of. Getting rid of Cribari,shiels and Templeton would save us over 750k a year alone! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaddistonKnight 1,567 Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 How was McCulloch a bombscare? we didn't conceed a goal and he was at the heart of defence... if you going to use that logic on Foster and Daly then you can apply it to Jig too.Jigs getting a bad press just now for no reason IMO he's one of our better and more consistent players.Well, in the second half Jig managed to tangle with the keeper, mishit a clearance badly, let the ball bounce off him in the 6 yard box and let a man in behind him which surprised me that we didn't lose a goal. Daly and Foster did alright, McCulloch didn't. By the logic you are applying a result determines the level of performance of every player in a team - a 5-0 win means everyone was good, a 5-0 defeat everyone was shite. I don't think you can do that.I don't think Jig does very well at centre half. He gets next to no stick about it either which is beyond me. If that is because he is deemed to be one of us then that says more about the lack of perspective by some supporters in determining what is actually good or bad for Rangers. I'd much rather have a good player who isn't a Rangers man than a bad player who is a Rangers man. Many seem to think differently. That's their call.If we have a good player who is a Rangers man, all to the good. But please don't defend poor play because the person doing it is a Rangers man. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoldierBlue1 499 Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 If these cuts go through Graham Wallace should also be looking at the old boys holidays ie end of last seasons jolly boys outing for Ian Durrant and the old players to Hong Kong , wtf was that about ? WATP. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Fantana 28,894 Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 I like Jig - but he's not needed at this level. Will we just play him till he's 40 then give him a blazer and job upstairs cos he stuck with us? if cuts need to be mad, i'd rather Jig went before Wallace if we're looking at the top earners. Shiels, Black, Foster and Smith should all go before Jig though. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
docspiderman 1,229 Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 The only way Wallace shpuld be leaving is if we're absolutely desperate for a cash injection.If it's just abpit lowering wage bill then theres plenty deadwood there to get rid of.Getting rid of Cribari,shiels and Templeton would save us over 750k a year alone!The problem we have is the wages our players are on; no club will pay Shiels etc anywhere these wages so I doubt they will accept a move even if a club did want them. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaddistonKnight 1,567 Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 I like Jig - but he's not needed at this level. Will we just play him till he's 40 then give him a blazer and job upstairs cos he stuck with us? if cuts need to be mad, i'd rather Jig went before Wallace if we're looking at the top earners. Shiels, Black, Foster and Smith should all go before Jig though.I think Jig has his place, but its up front. And I've been saying it since I first came on here. But he is paid way too much for what he's doing. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Figo 91 Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 I would have thought McCulloch could have left? the league is sewn up and he is on between 12 and 15k a week. that is a saving of a little over 300,000 over the next 6 months. He is too old now and we really need to look to the future.is he really on 15k a week though or are we basing all this speculation on Football Manager stats....I highly doubt that Jig alone takes up 13% of our assumed wage budget. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaddistonKnight 1,567 Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 is he really on 15k a week though or are we basing all this speculation on Football Manager stats....I highly doubt that Jig alone takes up 13% of our assumed wage budget.If he is, fucking hell!Whoever sanctioned that deserves shooting. Get the Met! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clyde Valley 234 Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 While some look for directors to take pay cuts will it mean any player,coach or manager who doesn't agree to a salary reduction then becomes a spiv in their eyes? A contract is a contract after all. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Young Bob 1,360 Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 Cant see wage deferrels being part of the plan. Could get interesting if the employees who stuck by the club get militant. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thehost 11,061 Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 is he really on 15k a week though or are we basing all this speculation on Football Manager stats....I highly doubt that Jig alone takes up 13% of our assumed wage budget.he was on over 10 last seasonunder 10 this seasonsee he's generous Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Fantana 28,894 Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 I think Jig has his place, but its up front. And I've been saying it since I first came on here. But he is paid way too much for what he's doing.we have plenty to play up top though. Wage cut or he should go after Shiels etc. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adoniram 1,919 Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 McCulloch was on circa £18k before administration. He then renegotiated the contract.Can't say for certain what he is on but as club captain and McCoist's main man i would be amazed if he was on less than £10k per week.After this season is up it would be best for us if McCulloch moved on but if McCoist is still there so will he.Any signings from now on shouldn't be over 25 thereby giving us some resale value if we do need to sell at a later date.Daly, Cribari, McCulloch,Black,Smith,Foster will all more than likely have their contracts terminated as no one in their right mind would buy them for even £1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gogzy 31,195 Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 I also think it's amazing how McCoist is never accountable for either singing these players or giving them these contracts in the first place.Then it's poor Ally - player cuts Ally doesn't give them contracts mate. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
norgerpd 280 Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 Don't think there is any chance of losing our better players(unless they ask to go).As plenty have said on here there is a batch of obvious candidates to be moved on...........we all know who they are.But,surely,Shiels is one of our more talented players(massively under-achieved so far,I admit)If he can stay fit he's a cert for a place in the squad.Will do a job in the prem(can't say that about many!) Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dude 20,026 Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 I also think it's amazing how McCoist is never accountable for either singing these players or giving them these contracts in the first place.Then it's poor Ally - player cuts That would normally be the chief execs job to negotiate contracts. McCoist identifies who he wants to sign/keep and the CEO will carry put negotiations. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scarkev 3,540 Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 The first thing for our CEO to sort is the reduction in salary paid to the management team which us scandalous! After that there are many cuts that can be made that won't affect quality or our expectant path back to the top division.....I see hibs are being credited with an interest in sheils.....shame utd not worked out for him but moving him on would be ideal and would free up a reported 250,000 a year. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
legalbeagle 3,734 Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 How exactly do people foresee just 'getting rid' of players? Easy with Wallace where there would be buyers, but McCulloch? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
1st_Jan_1994 4,868 Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 Ally doesn't give them contracts mate.Never said he does but the fact is he's the person that's signed them or told the directors he wants then on extended contractsThere's blame there Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cushynumber 25,178 Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 I would be surprised if it was only the 15% mooted by the mail and if it is only that, thenwe have won a watch - i am anticipating far more sweeping cuts to our playing and management staff. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
1st_Jan_1994 4,868 Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 That would normally be the chief execs job to negotiate contracts. McCoist identifies who he wants to sign/keep and the CEO will carry put negotiations.See above He's responsible for identifying and wanting ones kept All the money men have done is back him and he's never accountable for anything Hopefully that's changing 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.