Mad Dog 2 Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 who would you play up front i'd go for Boyd and Darcheville with Naismith coming off the bench Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boab 73 Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 Gow and Boyd though could see a front 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny 9 Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 I'd be delighted to have such riches up front You also forgot Buffel.As for who I'd play; what encourages me is that any combination of those players is still quality, and the depth is what a club like Rangers needs.So, I ain't sure I have a strict preference, and feel reassured that any of them can come in and justify their selection. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Dog 2 Posted June 28, 2007 Author Share Posted June 28, 2007 I thought Buffel was prefered in a midfield role Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bauba30 1 Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 at home a front 2 of Frenchie and Naismith with Gow just behind - Boyd on the benchaway, Frenchie on his own - but Gow and naismith both coming from Attacking midfield areas Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davy 68 Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 Boyd and Darcheville. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
guvno0or 0 Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 if we were to sign naismith, which we won't, he would be starting upfront.... no question about it Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poetry_In_Blue 1,043 Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 I've been thinking about this more and more, and I don't think we should sign him, I don't think we need him.We have Novo (if he plays in a more central role), Boyd, JCD, Lennon (if given a chance), Sebo if he can find the back of the net but is still a handful.On top of that we have Gow (an attacking midfielder) who can also play as a striker.Probably other players I've forgotten about. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
papaguy51 912 Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 Darchville and Naismith, unless Boyd sticks to his word that he'd get fit and in shape over the summer. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlippinEck 3,787 Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 it would hopefully be naismith and boyd, they will also have an understanding of each other which could benefit us. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart_RFC 41 Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 JCD and Boyd preferably Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lancedeangers1 287 Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 I think if we get most of the players that we are chasing we will have fantastic options. Best would be Boyd and Darcheville as strikers, Beasley and Faubert on the wings and barry in the middle pulling the strings. I realise that this is all speculation but i strongly suspect that this would be Walters intended ideal attacking line up. And i'd be delighted with it too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nvager 498 Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 Lets not start dreaming guys - it is more likely than not that we will NOT get Naismith or Faubert.But if we get both - WONDERFUL - if we get one = GREAT Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaffbear 4,123 Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 Boyd and Darcheville.With Faubert and Beasley supplying and Fergie and Thomson controlling the midfield........sounds so much better than a week or so ago Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny 9 Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 I thought Buffel was prefered in a midfield roleHe plays in the Kaka role - just behind the strikers. That is his preferred position Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davy 68 Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 it is more likely than not that we will NOT get Naismith or Faubert.I'm not so sure... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rangersross 6,653 Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 it is more likely than not that we will NOT get Naismith or Faubert.I'm not so sure...Both deals look about 50/50 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueSuedeSambas 55,363 Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 it is more likely than not that we will NOT get Naismith or Faubert.I'm not so sure...Both deals look about 50/50I would say Faubert is looking more 70/30 in favour All we need to do is a gree a fee and if he is to be our "major" summer signing I expect us to to go all out to get him! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davy 68 Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 it is more likely than not that we will NOT get Naismith or Faubert.I'm not so sure...Both deals look about 50/50Naismith is ours if we match Kilmarnocks asking price, I am pretty confident about that.The same goes for Faubert, whom has stated that his heart is set on a move to Ibrox.Smith has obviously identidied both as players he wants and I think we may just match the asking price, certainly in the case of Naismith. Faubert may be out of our reach, I don't know.But I don't think it's more likely that we won't get them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmurray9 5 Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 Fecking hell I just realised if we signed Faubert and the spanish stopper from osusana and naismithI would actually be quite confident about next year Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts