Is the manager's job on the line

[ForeverAndEver 71,374]

4 minutes ago, magic8ball said:

So is mine 

Wrong.

[Smile 26,600]

On 02/02/2020 at 14:31, 2nd Flute said:

Mate, in the space of a couple of months, we've went from a hard run of away games, in which we done well, the last one beating the reptiles at parkhead, that winter break, and I don't give a fuck if its Dubai or Saltcoats, whatever we are doing isn't working.

 

 

 

That's the thing we coped well with all the hard games but after Dubai we have came back leggy and tired and have looked very poor.

[Coop 654]

Two years in a row we've gone into the winter break on a high then come back still in holiday mode.  Gerrard should have been wise to that this season and yet it's been a repeat of last season.

As to whether the managers job is on the line, I don't think we could afford to sack him and his backroom team then hire a whole new management team who will also want a hefty budget for their own players.. I think if he can't win a bit of silverware this season he'll have a think seriously about things but a lot may depend on potential openings down south.  I'm not sure he'd quit just to spend time on the Sky TV couch.

[GlasgowRangers1983 461]

To even mention sacking the manager and back room staff is mental.

Rangers are back challenging with them for the league which we have all been waiting for over the past 8/9 years.

Effectively 4 points behind them is not the end of the world and even when we have had other successful managers in the past we have won and lost leagues by the slightest of margins.  I think that everyone is concerned about the sudden loss of form (2 years in a row) and quite rightly so but to even question if he is the right person to take the club forward is crazy.

People forget that as recently as 2 years ago the filth were scudding us 5-0 on a regular basis and we looked like men against boys. The manager has brought pride back to our club and has proven we are more than a match against them. Now he needs to find away to beat the rest of the clubs and stop dropping the silly points which I have full belief that he will.

League far from over, albeit we cant afford to lose much more ground on them but lets get behind the manager and help drive us towards 55.

[Jelavic191 4,399]

No I don’t think he should be. Would we really get anyone better if he doesn’t win the league and they are on the verge of 10? Would we really want to start all over again for a fourth time? 
Although I do expect the “Gerrard Out” narrative to come next from those celtic cheerleaders in the media if we go any further behind. 

[Jimfanciesthedude 24,506]

4 hours ago, GlasgowRangers1983 said:

To even mention sacking the manager and back room staff is mental.

Rangers are back challenging with them for the league which we have all been waiting for over the past 8/9 years.

Effectively 4 points behind them is not the end of the world and even when we have had other successful managers in the past we have won and lost leagues by the slightest of margins.  I think that everyone is concerned about the sudden loss of form (2 years in a row) and quite rightly so but to even question if he is the right person to take the club forward is crazy.

People forget that as recently as 2 years ago the filth were scudding us 5-0 on a regular basis and we looked like men against boys. The manager has brought pride back to our club and has proven we are more than a match against them. Now he needs to find away to beat the rest of the clubs and stop dropping the silly points which I have full belief that he will.

League far from over, albeit we cant afford to lose much more ground on them but lets get behind the manager and help drive us towards 55.

As recently as 2 years ago we werent spending 7mill on a winger and 4mill on a centre half

Pre gerrard results shouldn't be used as an improvement indictaion for his results because he's been allowed to spend an absolute fortune compare to pedro and warburton

[Shuggy 1,308]

Hardly think so. Rangers are further ahead in points than some title winning sides of the past.

 

[graeme_4 34,375]

18 hours ago, magic8ball said:

Noticed a few comments from the usual haters ,there will be pressure on Gerrard if he doesn’t win a trophy this year 

We’ll if it wasn’t for a corrupt group of officials he would have the league cup on the mantle piece ,the loss of that cup had fuck all to do with him or his players 

Well, we did get a penalty and they had a man sent off - and we still fucked it.

[graeme_4 34,375]

48 minutes ago, Jimbeamjunior said:

As recently as 2 years ago we werent spending 7mill on a winger and 4mill on a centre half

Pre gerrard results shouldn't be used as an improvement indictaion for his results because he's been allowed to spend an absolute fortune compare to pedro and warburton

Pedro spunked a fair amount of cash in one window, plus huge wages. 

Warburton got a bit of a raw deal in the transfer market though. 

[giffnockger 4,840]

Lock this thread

[ElBufalo20 7,875]

1 hour ago, Shuggy said:

Hardly think so. Rangers are further ahead in points than some title winning sides of the past.

 

That’s totally irrelevant 

[Shuggy 1,308]

2 minutes ago, ElBufalo20 said:

That’s totally irrelevant 

WIn ratios are always relevant.

 

[coopsleftboot 5,512]

1 hour ago, Jimbeamjunior said:

As recently as 2 years ago we werent spending 7mill on a winger and 4mill on a centre half

Pre gerrard results shouldn't be used as an improvement indictaion for his results because he's been allowed to spend an absolute fortune compare to pedro and warburton

....but still pocket money when compared to who he's trying to topple.

[BlueMe 25,327]

2 hours ago, Jimbeamjunior said:

As recently as 2 years ago we werent spending 7mill on a winger and 4mill on a centre half

Pre gerrard results shouldn't be used as an improvement indictaion for his results because he's been allowed to spend an absolute fortune compare to pedro and warburton

celtic spent half of our spend on 1 player and they never had to build an entire squad capable of competing for trophies either.

I said it in another thread, but I'll say it again.

The finance = success argument is a stupid one tbh. People expect us to be blowing away every team in the league because we've spent this much on one player and that much on wages, but also expect us to be winning trophies and competing against celtic, whose budget, turnover and wages are massive in comparison to ours.

[ForeverAndEver 71,374]

2 hours ago, coopsleftboot said:

....but still pocket money when compared to who he's trying to topple.

We spent roughly the same did we not?

[ElBufalo20 7,875]

4 hours ago, Shuggy said:

WIn ratios are always relevant.

 

Of course not. It’s about the challenge you are facing in that moment.

 

[Jimfanciesthedude 24,506]

3 hours ago, BlueMe said:

celtic spent half of our spend on 1 player and they never had to build an entire squad capable of competing for trophies either.

I said it in another thread, but I'll say it again.

The finance = success argument is a stupid one tbh. People expect us to be blowing away every team in the league because we've spent this much on one player and that much on wages, but also expect us to be winning trophies and competing against celtic, whose budget, turnover and wages are massive in comparison to ours.

Squad wise your last part is correct, however the 11 put on the pitch isnt massive compared to ours, but our 11 compared to say aberdeen and hearts is and thats whats bothering people

Gerrard has beaten aberdeen twice since coming here, murty managed that twice in a month with pedros team, records like that are brutal when you compare spends between the teams 

[BlueMe 25,327]

25 minutes ago, Jimbeamjunior said:

Squad wise your last part is correct, however the 11 put on the pitch isnt massive compared to ours, but our 11 compared to say aberdeen and hearts is and thats whats bothering people

Gerrard has beaten aberdeen twice since coming here, murty managed that twice in a month with pedros team, records like that are brutal when you compare spends between the teams 

It depends how you measure success and improvement tbh.

You could argue that we've only beaten Aberdeen twice and i could argue that we were robbed in a cup final, still in the Scottish cup, still in the title race against a team who's probably further away from us financially than we are to Aberdeen, we're also in the last 32 of the Europa league.

Add in the fact we're on a higher points total at this point in the season for the first time in nearly twenty years. 

We needed to spend to improve and we obviously have - but so have celtic and there's nothing we can do about that.

 

[Jimfanciesthedude 24,506]

4 hours ago, BlueMe said:

It depends how you measure success and improvement tbh.

You could argue that we've only beaten Aberdeen twice and i could argue that we were robbed in a cup final, still in the Scottish cup, still in the title race against a team who's probably further away from us financially than we are to Aberdeen, we're also in the last 32 of the Europa league.

Add in the fact we're on a higher points total at this point in the season for the first time in nearly twenty years. 

We needed to spend to improve and we obviously have - but so have celtic and there's nothing we can do about that.

 

Theres no way celtic are further away financially to us than we are to aberdeen

As for spending to improve, this is where gerrard needs to be smarter imo, arguably our greatest assets werent gerrard signings 

[BlueMe 25,327]

19 minutes ago, Jimbeamjunior said:

Theres no way celtic are further away financially to us than we are to aberdeen

As for spending to improve, this is where gerrard needs to be smarter imo, arguably our greatest assets werent gerrard signings 

I did say probably, but i don't know Aberdeens financial situation, so you could be right. The point stands though- we're nowhere near celtic financially, yet some still expect us to compete with them and the same people go mental when we drop points against lesser teams then use finances as a stick to beat Gerrard with, it's weird.

He's made a few poor signings, but a lot were loans, so no harm done tbh - also, Grezda Lafferty and Sadiq fucked it for themselve imo.

Gerrard also got a lot right. Using our starting line-up as an example: Kent, Goldson we could easily get our money back on them and probably more for Kent in a couple of years, he's still young.

Katic, Barisic, Aribo will, imo, be sold for a massive profit.

McGregor, Davis, Arfield, Jack and Kamara cost us £50k - Jack and Kamara combined will go for over £10m.

You're right, Morelos and Tav weren't Gerrard signings - but they've both improved massively under his coaching staff, so he's played a part in their development/value.

[gersfc86 39]

25 minutes ago, BlueMe said:

I did say probably, but i don't know Aberdeens financial situation, so you could be right. The point stands though- we're nowhere near celtic financially, yet some still expect us to compete with them and the same people go mental when we drop points against lesser teams then use finances as a stick to beat Gerrard with, it's weird.

He's made a few poor signings, but a lot were loans, so no harm done tbh - also, Grezda Lafferty and Sadiq fucked it for themselve imo.

Gerrard also got a lot right. Using our starting line-up as an example: Kent, Goldson we could easily get our money back on them and probably more for Kent in a couple of years, he's still young.

Katic, Barisic, Aribo will, imo, be sold for a massive profit.

McGregor, Davis, Arfield, Jack and Kamara cost us £50k - Jack and Kamara combined will go for over £10m.

You're right, Morelos and Tav weren't Gerrard signings - but they've both improved massively under his coaching staff, so he's played a part in their development/value.

Scotty arfield will probably go for 6 million aswell 😂 

[HG5 11,082]

10 hours ago, BlueMe said:

celtic spent half of our spend on 1 player and they never had to build an entire squad capable of competing for trophies either.

I said it in another thread, but I'll say it again.

The finance = success argument is a stupid one tbh. People expect us to be blowing away every team in the league because we've spent this much on one player and that much on wages, but also expect us to be winning trophies and competing against celtic, whose budget, turnover and wages are massive in comparison to ours.

How did Leicester win the Premier League, then, against all the clubs with bigger budgets than theirs?

The financial imbalance argument stacks up to a point, but a decent team with an effective management can still see off supposedly superior teams who aren’t making the most of their resources.

 

 

[BlueMe 25,327]

5 minutes ago, HG5 said:

How did Leicester win the Premier League, then, against all the clubs with bigger budgets than theirs?

The financial imbalance argument stacks up to a point, but a decent team with an effective management can still see off supposedly superior teams who aren’t making the most of their resources.

 

 

That's the point I'm making - the financial argument is nonsense.

That doesn't stop people using it when we drop points to a lesser team though.

[HG5 11,082]

3 minutes ago, BlueMe said:

That's the point I'm making - the financial argument is nonsense.

That doesn't stop people using it when we drop points to a lesser team though.

👍

 

[falkirkNS 6,298]

3 hours ago, BlueMe said:

I did say probably, but i don't know Aberdeens financial situation, so you could be right. The point stands though- we're nowhere near celtic financially, yet some still expect us to compete with them and the same people go mental when we drop points against lesser teams then use finances as a stick to beat Gerrard with, it's weird.

He's made a few poor signings, but a lot were loans, so no harm done tbh - also, Grezda Lafferty and Sadiq fucked it for themselve imo.

Gerrard also got a lot right. Using our starting line-up as an example: Kent, Goldson we could easily get our money back on them and probably more for Kent in a couple of years, he's still young.

Katic, Barisic, Aribo will, imo, be sold for a massive profit.

McGregor, Davis, Arfield, Jack and Kamara cost us £50k - Jack and Kamara combined will go for over £10m.

You're right, Morelos and Tav weren't Gerrard signings - but they've both improved massively under his coaching staff, so he's played a part in their development/value.

Aribo.... hmm