Jump to content

Rangers players out of contract at end of season

BlackyBear

By BlackyBear,
in Jimmy Bell's Kitroom

 Share

Recommended Posts

BlackyBear

BlackyBear 16

Posted
Posted

Which of our players are out of contract in the summer?

I think Cribari, Hegarty, Hutton and Simonsen are, so that will be a good bit of money saved straight away.

What about Faure, Gallagher, Perry, Smith, McCulloch, Little? I'm sure they haven't all got long contracts either.

Link to post
Share on other sites
BlackyBear

BlackyBear 16

Posted
  • Author
Posted

surely it would of made sense to give all our players shorter deals so as we move up the leagues they can be moved on much easier

Aye, unfortunately we dangled a long lucrative contract in front of these players to persuade them to drop down to Div 3. This has came back to severely bite us in the erse!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Bluepeter9

Bluepeter9 5,164

Posted
Posted

surely it would of made sense to give all our players shorter deals so as we move up the leagues they can be moved on much easier

Short deals means if someone is interested in our players then there is no or low transfer fees - also sometimes ( for experienced players) the length of the contract is part of the negotiation. It's not as simple as short contracts for all nor long contracts for s but a Bali cing act any every player is different based on potential / age

Link to post
Share on other sites
scarkev

scarkev 3,540

Posted
Posted

Which of our players are out of contract in the summer?

I think Cribari, Hegarty, Hutton and Simonsen are, so that will be a good bit of money saved straight away.

What about Faure, Gallagher, Perry, Smith, McCulloch, Little? I'm sure they haven't all got long contracts either.

Did cribari not sign a 3 year deal? Jig is definitely next year as is perry (unfortunately).

Link to post
Share on other sites
nelsonRFC82

nelsonRFC82 305

Posted
Posted

Short deals means if someone is interested in our players then there is no or low transfer fees - also sometimes ( for experienced players) the length of the contract is part of the negotiation. It's not as simple as short contracts for all nor long contracts for s but a Bali cing act any every player is different based on potential / age

You are right about the balancing act, the only players who should have been given a long-term deal were those who, realistically, would be part of an SPL squad. However, I feel it is a balancing act we got wrong!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Bluepeter9

Bluepeter9 5,164

Posted
Posted

You are right about the balancing act, the only players who should have been given a long-term deal were those who, realistically, would be part of an SPL squad. However, I feel it is a balancing act we got wrong!

It is always easy with hindsight to say what we should have done with individuals - very different when you have to decide in advance. Folk on here are brilliant at second guessing what SHOULD have happened after the fact. No club gets this right and much of it is just the general to-ing and fro-ing of a football squad.

Link to post
Share on other sites
ianb1547

ianb1547 3,532

Posted
Posted

It is always easy with hindsight to say what we should have done with individuals - very different when you have to decide in advance. Folk on here are brilliant at second guessing what SHOULD have happened after the fact. No club gets this right and much of it is just the general to-ing and fro-ing of a football squad.

Spot on with this.

Cardiff have just sold Cornelius back to his former club after paying 7.5 million for him...and a weekly wage of 45k on a 5 year contract He only played 11 times and has gone back to old club and accepted his old wage.....of 6k a week!!!

The joys of footy, eh?

Link to post
Share on other sites
nelsonRFC82

nelsonRFC82 305

Posted
Posted

Spot on with this.

Cardiff have just sold Cornelius back to his former club after paying 7.5 million for him...and a weekly wage of 45k on a 5 year contract He only played 11 times and has gone back to old club and accepted his old wage.....of 6k a week!!!

The joys of footy, eh?

FFS, surely he must be still taking money of Cardiff or a large pay off to accept that deal?

Obviously easier with hindsight but there is a worrying trend at our club to pay over the odds and on long deals to the extent that we end up paying people off or selling at a loss. Obviously the non-TUPE of players needs to be taken in to account but even going back further than that, I am struggling to remember the last time we made money on a player in the transfer market....Cuellar, obviously..other than that?

Yes it is easy to judge with hindsight, but part of that is that it is imperative you then learn from your mistakes...not sure we are doing that! At point does it stop being me, or anyone else, being wise after the fact and simply become a failure in the clubs strategy?

Link to post
Share on other sites
iain1712

iain1712 336

Posted
Posted

Short deals means if someone is interested in our players then there is no or low transfer fees - also sometimes ( for experienced players) the length of the contract is part of the negotiation. It's not as simple as short contracts for all nor long contracts for s but a Bali cing act any every player is different based on potential / age

I get what your meaning here, but the way I see it all the free agents we signed daly,law,bell,etc. would have came if we offered them only a one or two year deal maximum.

Nobody else was going to pay them as much per week and the prestige of playing for Rangers would have convinced them to sign.

And if it all goes well we just sign them up for another year, IMO that would keep them on their toes knowing that they're always playing for a new contract.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Bluepeter9

Bluepeter9 5,164

Posted
Posted

I get what your meaning here, but the way I see it all the free agents we signed daly,law,bell,etc. would have came if we offered them only a one or two year deal maximum.

Nobody else was going to pay them as much per week and the prestige of playing for Rangers would have convinced them to sign.

And if it all goes well we just sign them up for another year, IMO that would keep them on their toes knowing that they're always playing for a new contract.

A one year deal is a pretty shit deal and 3 year deals for the likes of bell, black and law are certainly not unreasonable IMHO in fact probably good business.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...