How long should Walter Smith remain Rangers Manager?

[Bluepeter9 5,167]

I have this question that bothers me a lot about football in general - and Rangers in particular. What is a reasnoble time to give a new manager to 'turn a team around' or to reach a new level? In particular how long should Walter Smith be given and how long should he remain Manager?

I look at arguebly the two best managers in England - Ferguson and Wegner and one thing they both seem to have is the faith of their boards and were both given time to BUILD teams - both came under fan pressure when they rebuild teams and have a poor season or two (by their standards) but then go on to sucess for a decent period. At Rangers we hounded out Walter Smith first time round, for losing 10 in a row and not bringing European sucess and now in his second spell we have a sizable portion of our support who seem to be waiting for him to fail and every decision that he gets wrong - and every draw or loss has this section calling for his head. Walter was followed by Advocaat - who was given a massive budget to rebuild a squad that had had its time and needed refreshed, and yet this budget was denined to Walter as the fans in particular seemed to want change.

So how long should a manager get?

I think any manager needs at least 3 years to fully stamp his personality on a team but to get three years he is required to demonstrate progress along the way. Alex McLeish had this time but with a severely reduced budget compared to previous managers and gave Rangers sucess but a year without trophies, despite taking Rangers to the last 16 of the Champions League was put under intense fan pressure and left. Rangers followed this up by bringing in yet another 'well respected' forieng manager Paul Le Guen and again there was money made available to him that was denied McLeish.

Paul Le Guen was sacked, sorry parted company by mutual agreement, and was NOT given any time to stamp his personality on a team. Why was this? Money talks in football and Le Guen did not make Rangers money talk. It is clear that in football terms Money does talk - if you have the biggest (or even second biggest) budget in a league a reasnoble expectation from the management and team is that you are in the first 2 of your league and have a strong showing in any cup you enter. This was not the case with Le Guen having been put out of the league cup by St. Johnstone (at Ibrox) and 17 massive points behind Celtic in the league and with unrest in the dressing room brought to a head by trying to sell the Club Capain Barry Ferquson, Sir David Murray stepped in and Le Guen parted company with Rangers.

So the first criteria for keeping any manager is the ability to put out a team capable of competing at a minimum level in relation to their budget. In the case of St. Mirren that is probably survival in the SPL, for Rangers that is being in a competitive position in the league (first or second and within striking distance of first place if second) and a strong performance in any cup competition.

The second criteria for keeping a manager is to build on a previous years record and improve. In rangers case that would suggest that in the case of Walter Smith his first 6 months were a sucess because he stabilised a team that was underperforming against budget and took them to second in the league securing Champions League football. This season so far Rangers are competing on all fronts, and while some fans are critical that Rangers did not make the last 16 of the champions league, the performance level was creditable overall and a UEFA cup spot that many would have gladly accepted when the draw was made was achieved. For the rest of the season being a close second in the league should NOT be viwed as failure (although like many other Rangers supporters I am hopeful we can pull the league win off) and strong performances in both domestic cups should be expected.

For season 2008/2009 for a Rangers manager winning the league would be a must if we fail this year. But what should be our expectations of a manager who wins the league (whether this year or next) in the subsequent season). The reality is we cant win every cup, and every league (sad though that fact may be) so if our Manager wins the league and loses the next one are we going down hill and should change the manager - or should we accept that, in Rangers case, once a manager has won the league he is secure as long as the team remains competitive in all competitions does NOT go longer than two years without a league win?

Once a manager has won the league twice, in say 3 years, have Rangers then found their level - why change the manager to get us to the next level, when competing in the champions league group stages, based on budget, is realisticaly, the best Rangers can do on a year on year basis. If Walter Smith is delivering on these targets then we should show faith in him and keep him for many years to come. No change for change's sake - once we have found our level keep faith in the manager and build long term sucess.

[bluenose4life 5]

You would have given le guen 3 years? to what, drive us in to the 2nd division? lol

I think with walter, what he has done over the last year, taking us 4 points clear at the top of the SPL, bringing in so many good players (beasley, JCD, naisy, etc..) he is the manager that can take us. We got rid of him last time as he couldnt take us further (despite all the silverware in the cabnet) - main question is, how far can we go with the current board? Without big money going in to the team, we cant buy bigger players, and therfor wont go far in the champions league / uefa cup.

Now how long we should give walter, its how long we should give the board imho

[minstral 5,375]

I have this question that bothers me a lot about football in general - and Rangers in particular. What is a reasnoble time to give a new manager to 'turn a team around' or to reach a new level? In particular how long should Walter Smith be given and how long should he remain Manager?

I look at arguebly the two best managers in England - Ferguson and Wegner and one thing they both seem to have is the faith of their boards and were both given time to BUILD teams - both came under fan pressure when they rebuild teams and have a poor season or two (by their standards) but then go on to sucess for a decent period. At Rangers we hounded out Walter Smith first time round, for losing 10 in a row and not bringing European sucess and now in his second spell we have a sizable portion of our support who seem to be waiting for him to fail and every decision that he gets wrong - and every draw or loss has this section calling for his head. Walter was followed by Advocaat - who was given a massive budget to rebuild a squad that had had its time and needed refreshed, and yet this budget was denined to Walter as the fans in particular seemed to want change.

So how long should a manager get?

I think any manager needs at least 3 years to fully stamp his personality on a team but to get three years he is required to demonstrate progress along the way. Alex McLeish had this time but with a severely reduced budget compared to previous managers and gave Rangers sucess but a year without trophies, despite taking Rangers to the last 16 of the Champions League was put under intense fan pressure and left. Rangers followed this up by bringing in yet another 'well respected' forieng manager Paul Le Guen and again there was money made available to him that was denied McLeish.

Paul Le Guen was sacked, sorry parted company by mutual agreement, and was NOT given any time to stamp his personality on a team. Why was this? Money talks in football and Le Guen did not make Rangers money talk. It is clear that in football terms Money does talk - if you have the biggest (or even second biggest) budget in a league a reasnoble expectation from the management and team is that you are in the first 2 of your league and have a strong showing in any cup you enter. This was not the case with Le Guen having been put out of the league cup by St. Johnstone (at Ibrox) and 17 massive points behind Celtic in the league and with unrest in the dressing room brought to a head by trying to sell the Club Capain Barry Ferquson, Sir David Murray stepped in and Le Guen parted company with Rangers.

So the first criteria for keeping any manager is the ability to put out a team capable of competing at a minimum level in relation to their budget. In the case of St. Mirren that is probably survival in the SPL, for Rangers that is being in a competitive position in the league (first or second and within striking distance of first place if second) and a strong performance in any cup competition.

The second criteria for keeping a manager is to build on a previous years record and improve. In rangers case that would suggest that in the case of Walter Smith his first 6 months were a sucess because he stabilised a team that was underperforming against budget and took them to second in the league securing Champions League football. This season so far Rangers are competing on all fronts, and while some fans are critical that Rangers did not make the last 16 of the champions league, the performance level was creditable overall and a UEFA cup spot that many would have gladly accepted when the draw was made was achieved. For the rest of the season being a close second in the league should NOT be viwed as failure (although like many other Rangers supporters I am hopeful we can pull the league win off) and strong performances in both domestic cups should be expected.

For season 2008/2009 for a Rangers manager winning the league would be a must if we fail this year. But what should be our expectations of a manager who wins the league (whether this year or next) in the subsequent season). The reality is we cant win every cup, and every league (sad though that fact may be) so if our Manager wins the league and loses the next one are we going down hill and should change the manager - or should we accept that, in Rangers case, once a manager has won the league he is secure as long as the team remains competitive in all competitions does NOT go longer than two years without a league win?

Once a manager has won the league twice, in say 3 years, have Rangers then found their level - why change the manager to get us to the next level, when competing in the champions league group stages, based on budget, is realisticaly, the best Rangers can do on a year on year basis. If Walter Smith is delivering on these targets then we should show faith in him and keep him for many years to come. No change for change's sake - once we have found our level keep faith in the manager and build long term sucess.

now you are telling a blatant lie walter was not hounded out of the club, he announced he had taken the club as far as he could, and that was before we lost ten in a row.

[mannan 0]

You would have given le guen 3 years? to what, drive us in to the 2nd division? lol

I think with walter, what he has done over the last year, taking us 4 points clear at the top of the SPL, bringing in so many good players (beasley, JCD, naisy, etc..) he is the manager that can take us. We got rid of him last time as he couldnt take us further (despite all the silverware in the cabnet) - main question is, how far can we go with the current board? Without big money going in to the team, we cant buy bigger players, and therfor wont go far in the champions league / uefa cup.

Now how long we should give walter, its how long we should give the board imho

the board has to change sometime soon, i agree, either that or give a significant kitty to the manager....problem i have is that smith has had these funds in the past and PROVED he cannot cut in the top level ie. Champions League

No doubt he is a TOP manager as for as the SPL goes, but lets go futher afield and he has proved he cannot cut it

short term he is a solution, but in 3 seasons if he is still here, will the majority of the fans be happy at the continuing failed attempts to make an impact in europe? i think not, then his time will come, again.......

[nvager 498]

Walter did extremely well to get 9iar. He left because he felt his time was up and it probably was THEN.

He has been excellent in bringing in players and steadying the ship and the improvement considering the necessary changes has been remarkably good.

SDM provided Walter Smith with more funding this past summer than anyone thought likely. Walter has on the whole spent very wisely too.

The team is in pole position in the SPL and still in all the cup competitions. Can we ask for more - yes, but it will take time.

How long has Walter got here - as long as he wants if he is reasonably successful.

Thats the way it should be too.