The confidence in Michael Beale

[OrangeRab 3,384]

2 minutes ago, Jimbeamjunior said:

Gerrard was on course for a sub 90pt season as well before he jumped ship, why didnt the board look at sacking him? 

It’s a good question. 1) because the season before we put up 102 points. So there was more reason to believe he could do the same than Gio when he was sacked in 2 seasons hadn’t shown a trajectory above 90.

and 2) we were top of the league. So the board might have been comfortable with the current trajectory. Ie why take the risk of bringing a manager that could get you 82 points if 90 would do it (obv underestimating celtic at the time).

[OrangeRab 3,384]

3 minutes ago, The Dude said:

And neither half of the Old Firm has a budget which dwarves the other so if Beale fails to win the title, budgets don't hold any weight as an excuse.

Well yes. If the budgets are equal there is 0 excuse. If the budgets are 5 million apart there is a small advantage for celtic. I’d the budgets are 30 million there is a bigger advantage to point to.  

[The Dude 20,027]

Just now, OrangeRab said:

Well yes. If the budgets are equal there is 0 excuse. If the budgets are 5 million apart there is a small advantage for celtic. I’d the budgets are 30 million there is a bigger advantage to point to.  

So if we spend more, we're favourites?

[OrangeRab 3,384]

5 minutes ago, Jimbeamjunior said:

Thats not the argument, the argument is that the tarriers having say an extra ten mill to spend means us dropping points against teams whos budget we absolutely blow out the water, is somehow kinda allowed

It’s not a case of it being “allowed”. The league is a relative battle between two teams. If they have an extra 10 million to spend on players. That is a relative advantage.
 

[OrangeRab 3,384]

2 minutes ago, The Dude said:

So if we spend more, we're favourites?

If we spend more we’d improve our chances. If we could get Bassey back tomorrow you don’t think we’d pick up more points next season? It wouldn’t be guaranteed but we’d be more likely.

If Beale is given 10 million a pop to go sign the two strikers he wants. That in expectation will improve us more than if he has no money to sign a striker. We can’t say for certain it will. But we’d be more likely to win the league

[SIRB_72 4,148]

We'll be fine, we'll win the league with 100+ points and 100+ goals

[The Dude 20,027]

2 minutes ago, OrangeRab said:

If we spend more we’d improve our chances. If we could get Bassey back tomorrow you don’t think we’d pick up more points next season? It wouldn’t be guaranteed but we’d be more likely.

If Beale is given 10 million a pop to go sign the two strikers he wants. That in expectation will improve us more than if he has no money to sign a striker. We can’t say for certain it will. But we’d be more likely to win the league

Probably not, no.

[graeme_4 37,500]

I think far too much is being made of the difference in budgets. There’s a difference, but it’s not to the extent that we shouldn’t be able to compete and win trophies.

It’s not Man City we’re competing against. 

[mitre_mouldmaster 21,511]

18 minutes ago, The Dude said:

So if we spend more, we're favourites?

If we have more money to spend then we would have a better chance, yes.

If we are looking at bringing in Pereira, but get priced out of the move and instead end up with Shankland, then we would probably be in with a lesser chance of winning the league.

[OrangeRab 3,384]

10 minutes ago, graeme_4 said:

I think far too much is being made of the difference in budgets. There’s a difference, but it’s not to the extent that we shouldn’t be able to compete and win trophies.

It’s not Man City we’re competing against. 

TBC I’m not saying there is going to be a massive difference in budget. Just acknowledging the obvious fact that budgets matter. And you take that into account along with other factors when assessing a manager.

I don’t think they would have been as good as they have been without spending the 50+million or whatever it was under Postecoglou.

This Summer hopefully there isn’t much difference and Beale is properly backed to get his targets 

[mitre_mouldmaster 21,511]

13 minutes ago, The Dude said:

Probably not, no.

Thats wild mate.

You dont think the team might somehow be improved a little by having Bassey back playing at left back?

He is miles better than Ridvan never mind Borna.

[The Dude 20,027]

Just now, mitre_mouldmaster said:

If we have more money to spend then we would have a better chance, yes.

If we are looking at bringing in Pereira, but get priced out of the move and instead end up with Shankland, then we would probably be in with a lesser chance of winning the league.

So if we spend 30m on 10 players we'll have a better chance than if they only spend 15m on one player?

[Jimfanciesthedude 25,609]

22 minutes ago, OrangeRab said:

It’s not a case of it being “allowed”. The league is a relative battle between two teams. If they have an extra 10 million to spend on players. That is a relative advantage.
 

But the whole debate here is why the budget will be given as an excuse (or partial one) if we are dropping points against the shite of the league, when in seasons previous the budget was never used in the same circumstances 

If Beale draws with livingston in october, and falls behind the papes in the league, will he be criticised or will the fact the tarriers spend more (if they do) will be used to defend the points dropped to a team whos budget we smash out the park

[The Dude 20,027]

1 minute ago, mitre_mouldmaster said:

Thats wild mate.

You dont think the team might somehow be improved a little by having Bassey back playing at left back?

He is miles better than Ridvan never mind Borna.

It might be improved a little, I don't think he makes that much of a difference though. It's not as if we were romping to titles when he was playing regularly here. He was playing nearly every week as we handed them another title under GvB.

 

[OrangeRab 3,384]

3 minutes ago, Jimbeamjunior said:

But the whole debate here is why the budget will be given as an excuse (or partial one) if we are dropping points against the shite of the league, when in seasons previous the budget was never used in the same circumstances 

If Beale draws with livingston in october, and falls behind the papes in the league, will he be criticised or will the fact the tarriers spend more (if they do) will be used to defend the points dropped to a team whos budget we smash out the park

I can’t fast forward to October to give you an answer. But we can talk hypothetically which is what we have been doing. If the board said there’s no money and Beale drew the OF, won every game barring one draw with Livi and was 2 points behind at Xmas. People would probably look more favourably upon that in the context of the manager not being backed. 

I agree with you that Gio inherited a squad that should have been freshened. Our resting on laurels/lack of good transfer business after 55 put us at a disadvantage in Gio’s first season. 

You’re right that Gio had a smaller budget compared to celtic. But I think the reason more wasn’t made of it as an “Excuse” was he spent what money he did have (the 15 million and the loan signings) poorly. And he was on target for 84 points. If he’d been on course for 95 and been behind a point in the league. I don’t think he would have been let go. (Or at least when he was). But that’s just one aspect amongst others including fitness, injuries, playstyle etc

[mitre_mouldmaster 21,511]

12 minutes ago, Jimbeamjunior said:

But the whole debate here is why the budget will be given as an excuse (or partial one) if we are dropping points against the shite of the league, when in seasons previous the budget was never used in the same circumstances 

If Beale draws with livingston in october, and falls behind the papes in the league, will he be criticised or will the fact the tarriers spend more (if they do) will be used to defend the points dropped to a team whos budget we smash out the park

I think it has been considered by many for long enough.

When we came back up from the lower leagues, right through to giving Gerrard more time. We might not have debated it much on here, but it was always pretty much a given.

We always talked about the need to get back into the CL and use the extra cash to consolidate our position.

I think we have known for a long time that we have been financially at a disadvantage and we have taken it into account.

When we tend to lose our shit with managers is when we see regression or stagnation. GvB visibly started taking the team backwards, which is when he was given the sack.

[The Dude 20,027]

1 minute ago, OrangeRab said:

I can’t fast forward to October to give you an answer. But we can talk hypothetically which is what we have been doing. If the board said there’s no money and Beale drew the OF, won every game barring one draw with Livi and was 2 points behind at Xmas. People would probably look more favourably upon that in the context of the manager not being backed. 

I agree with you that Gio inherited a squad that should have been freshened. Our resting on laurels/lack of good transfer business after 55 put us at a disadvantage in Gio’s first season. 

You’re right that Gio had a smaller budget compared to celtic. But I think the reason more wasn’t made of it as an “Excuse” was he spent what money he did have (the 15 million and the loan signings) poorly. And he was on target for 84 points. If he’d been on course for 95 and been behind a point in the league. I don’t think he would have been let go. (Or at least when he was). But that’s just one aspect amongst others including fitness, injuries, playstyle etc

They haven't. Beale is on record as saying he has a substantial budget.

Van Bronckhorst DID refresh the side by bringing in the likes of Lawrence, Souttar, Davies, Ridvan, Tillman, Colak and Matondo and spending around £15million on 7 players and substantially increasing our wagebill.

Celtic spent c20m last summer on 11 players.

[mitre_mouldmaster 21,511]

15 minutes ago, The Dude said:

It might be improved a little, I don't think he makes that much of a difference though. It's not as if we were romping to titles when he was playing regularly here. He was playing nearly every week as we handed them another title under GvB.

 

See this is just the "Tav is shit because we have not won many trophies!" line for me.

Bassey is an incredible talent who massively improved at his time with us and by the end of his spell was one of our key players.

Bassey leaving weakened us, just as if Tav was to leave and we replaced him with a lesser player.

[The Dude 20,027]

2 minutes ago, mitre_mouldmaster said:

See this is just the "Tav is shit because we have not won many trophies!" line for me.

Bassey is an incredible talent who massively improved at his time with us and by the end of his spell was one of our key players.

Bassey leaving weakened us, just as if Tav was to leave and we replaced him with a lesser player.

It's really not. He definitely improved while he was here but he's struggled over the last year - even losing his place in the Nigerian starting XI. He was also prone to some absolute stinkers while he was here.

[Jimfanciesthedude 25,609]

9 minutes ago, mitre_mouldmaster said:

I think it has been considered by many for long enough.

When we came back up from the lower leagues, right through to giving Gerrard more time. We might not have debated it much on here, but it was always pretty much a given.

We always talked about the need to get back into the CL and use the extra cash to consolidate our position.

I think we have known for a long time that we have been financially at a disadvantage and we have taken it into account.

When we tend to lose our shit with managers is when we see regression or stagnation. GvB visibly started taking the team backwards, which is when he was given the sack.

Arguably the team only went backwarda because both injuries to key players and our expectations from making the europa final

Fact is the shitty dropped points to shite had been happening every season since gerrard came including horrendous cup performances 

Remember when gerrard left we had dropped 9 points from what should have been the easiest 39 points we had a chance of getting 

But again we're going off tangent here, gio is gone blah blah

If we are 6-9pts behind the tarriers at xmas next season, after spending what we are, surely no one is going to say "aye but the papes spent more" given the points we'll drop will be to teams with wage budgets around 1/10th of ours

[SIRB_72 4,148]

46 minutes ago, graeme_4 said:

I think far too much is being made of the difference in budgets. There’s a difference, but it’s not to the extent that we shouldn’t be able to compete and win trophies.

It’s not Man City we’re competing against. 

I agree. Especially when our wage budget dwarfs the third club in Scotland by about 5 times.

[Jimfanciesthedude 25,609]

12 minutes ago, mitre_mouldmaster said:

See this is just the "Tav is shit because we have not won many trophies!" line for me.

Bassey is an incredible talent who massively improved at his time with us and by the end of his spell was one of our key players.

Bassey leaving weakened us, just as if Tav was to leave and we replaced him with a lesser player.

Bassey was part of the squad that lost the title including OF games at the piggery and ibrox where we failed to lay a glove on them, nevermind shite like ross county away (he cost us that day) amongst other shite results

[mitre_mouldmaster 21,511]

2 minutes ago, The Dude said:

They haven't. Beale is on record as saying he has a substantial budget.

Van Bronckhorst DID refresh the side by bringing in the likes of Lawrence, Souttar, Davies, Ridvan, Tillman, Colak and Matondo and spending around £15million on 7 players and substantially increasing our wagebill.

Celtic spent c20m last summer on 11 players.

Last 3 years spending according to Transfermarkt:

Rangers:

20/21: E11.7m

21/22: E3.7m

22/23: E17.4m

Total : E32m

celtic:

20/21: E15.7

21/22: E26.4

22/13: E30.1

Total : E72m

Thats 40m more in transfer fees paid in the last 3 years alone.

These are not insignificant figures.

[OrangeRab 3,384]

17 minutes ago, The Dude said:

They haven't. Beale is on record as saying he has a substantial budget.

Van Bronckhorst DID refresh the side by bringing in the likes of Lawrence, Souttar, Davies, Ridvan, Tillman, Colak and Matondo and spending around £15million on 7 players and substantially increasing our wagebill.

celtic spent c20m last summer on 11 players.

A lot of waffle. Not sure what point you are agreeing with or disagreeing with that I made

[OrangeRab 3,384]

Just now, mitre_mouldmaster said:

Last 3 years spending according to Transfermarkt:

Rangers:

20/21: E11.7m

21/22: E3.7m

22/23: E17.4m

Total : E32m

celtic:

20/21: E15.7

21/22: E26.4

22/13: E30.1

Total : E72m

Thats 40m more in transfer fees paid in the last 3 years alone.

These are not insignificant figures.

Honestly don’t even know what argument half the posters are trying to make. “Budgets don’t matter” is the biggest load of shite I’ve read on this forum.