minstral 5,375 Posted December 4, 2008 Share Posted December 4, 2008 i would say scot symon by a mile. when you think 6 titles,5 scottish cups, and 4 league cups. twice he won the double, plus in 1964 the treble, also reached the final of 2 european cup-winners cup finals. fantastic record any thoughts.? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOLUWDC 1 Posted December 4, 2008 Share Posted December 4, 2008 Never saw Scot Symon's team but that is some record he has Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnGalbraith 0 Posted December 4, 2008 Share Posted December 4, 2008 i would say scot symon by a mile. when you think 6 titles,5 scottish cups, and 4 league cups. twice he won the double, plus in 1964 the treble, also reached the final of 2 european cup-winners cup finals. fantastic record any thoughts.? My only thought is that there's no comparison. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cumbria_blue 51 Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 i would say scot symon by a mile. when you think 6 titles,5 scottish cups, and 4 league cups. twice he won the double, plus in 1964 the treble, also reached the final of 2 european cup-winners cup finals. fantastic record any thoughts.? He shot himself in the foot though, with the way he treated Jim Forrest and George McLean after the Berwick game. Had he not sold those 2, we could have won the 66/67 season and stopped their nine-in-a-row in its tracks. We might even have won the cup winners cup that year. Still great record though, a true rangers legend. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSRFC 0 Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 i would say scot symon by a mile. when you think 6 titles,5 scottish cups, and 4 league cups. twice he won the double, plus in 1964 the treble, also reached the final of 2 european cup-winners cup finals. fantastic record any thoughts.? You cannot compare they were completely different eras and decades Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddrock 107 Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 based on record they dont compare Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thermopylae 15,288 Posted December 6, 2008 Share Posted December 6, 2008 Tough to answer because Scott Symon is really just a name from history for me, I suppose a similarity is that they both had the best team in the country with the best players in the country. Alex Ferguson mentions their first meeting in his book, Scott Symon turned up at his house in Simshill to sign him. I've always found it quite a charming thought that 2 giants of the Scottish game first met in a thoroughly suburban scene with Fergie doing the lawn Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
docspiderman 1,303 Posted December 6, 2008 Share Posted December 6, 2008 i would say scot symon by a mile. when you think 6 titles,5 scottish cups, and 4 league cups. twice he won the double, plus in 1964 the treble, also reached the final of 2 european cup-winners cup finals. fantastic record any thoughts.? He shot himself in the foot though, with the way he treated Jim Forrest and George McLean after the Berwick game. Had he not sold those 2, we could have won the 66/67 season and stopped their nine-in-a-row in its tracks. We might even have won the cup winners cup that year. Still great record though, a true rangers legend. He didn't make the decision, Mr Lawrence said these two were never to wear the jersey again. Just like in his building empire he made decisions like that; happy to give instructions to sack people with no reason and those who questioned got the same treatment. Symon was a great manager in a completely different era of football and had to run the business and administration of the club as well as team matters. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wreckedroy 33 Posted December 6, 2008 Share Posted December 6, 2008 Different eras, different demands on a manager. The 2 can't be compared. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
minstral 5,375 Posted December 6, 2008 Author Share Posted December 6, 2008 i would say scot symon by a mile. when you think 6 titles,5 scottish cups, and 4 league cups. twice he won the double, plus in 1964 the treble, also reached the final of 2 european cup-winners cup finals. fantastic record any thoughts.? You cannot compare they were completely different eras and decades of course you can compere just look at the money that walter was given, symon by a mile. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coopermania 1 Posted December 6, 2008 Share Posted December 6, 2008 Symon was before my time but he is a clear winner to me. Can't argue with that record. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wreckedroy 33 Posted December 6, 2008 Share Posted December 6, 2008 i would say scot symon by a mile. when you think 6 titles,5 scottish cups, and 4 league cups. twice he won the double, plus in 1964 the treble, also reached the final of 2 european cup-winners cup finals. fantastic record any thoughts.? You cannot compare they were completely different eras and decades of course you can compere just look at the money that walter was given, symon by a mile. Money was less important in building a team in Symons day though, we could still sign almost any player in the world. Also, Smith won as many league titles in 6yrs as Symon won in 13yrs. And he also took us to the brink of a European Cup Final, and in fact was probably cheated out of that prize by Marseilles. Add in a UEFA Cup Final and he has one of the most impressive records of any Rangers manager. I still believe they can't really be compared, as the managers job in Symons day was totally different from the job in the present era. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wreckedroy 33 Posted December 6, 2008 Share Posted December 6, 2008 Symon was before my time but he is a clear winner to me. Can't argue with that record. His record is on a par with Smiths, and no more than that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
1690 Posts 71 Posted December 6, 2008 Share Posted December 6, 2008 It was relatively easy for Scottish clubs to get to European finals in those days. Dundee made the European Cup semi final only losing to AC Milan. Nowadays it's far harder and not only because you play twice as many games. European football has moved on while Scottish football is only just escaping from the 'kicking lumps out of' stage. That's not to say Symon wouldn't have been a success in this day and age. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
minstral 5,375 Posted December 6, 2008 Author Share Posted December 6, 2008 Symon was before my time but he is a clear winner to me. Can't argue with that record. His record is on a par with Smiths, and no more than that. no chance symon by a mile. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
1690 Posts 71 Posted December 6, 2008 Share Posted December 6, 2008 Symon was before my time but he is a clear winner to me. Can't argue with that record. His record is on a par with Smiths, and no more than that. no chance symon by a mile. Easy to work out. Number of trophies divided by the number of years it took to win them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cumbria_blue 51 Posted December 6, 2008 Share Posted December 6, 2008 i would say scot symon by a mile. when you think 6 titles,5 scottish cups, and 4 league cups. twice he won the double, plus in 1964 the treble, also reached the final of 2 european cup-winners cup finals. fantastic record any thoughts.? He shot himself in the foot though, with the way he treated Jim Forrest and George McLean after the Berwick game. Had he not sold those 2, we could have won the 66/67 season and stopped their nine-in-a-row in its tracks. We might even have won the cup winners cup that year. Still great record though, a true rangers legend. He didn't make the decision, Mr Lawrence said these two were never to wear the jersey again. Just like in his building empire he made decisions like that; happy to give instructions to sack people with no reason and those who questioned got the same treatment. Symon was a great manager in a completely different era of football and had to run the business and administration of the club as well as team matters. Didn't know that, as Im only 18 and obviously wasnt around at the time, but its amazing to think that the chairman had that much power to just sell those players like that. Im not sure it would happen now. BTW I heard that there was something contraversial about the way in which Scot Symon was sacked, what happened? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wreckedroy 33 Posted December 6, 2008 Share Posted December 6, 2008 Symon was before my time but he is a clear winner to me. Can't argue with that record. His record is on a par with Smiths, and no more than that. no chance symon by a mile. First time around, Smith won 6 League titles out of 7. Symon won 6 out of 13. So how it can be "Symon by a mile" is beyond me. And apart from the league stats, there trophy count is fairly similar along with their European records. I do rate Scott Symon as a Rangers Great, but I also believe that in 40yrs time Walter Smith will be almost universally thought of in similar terms, if not even higher. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cumbria_blue 51 Posted December 6, 2008 Share Posted December 6, 2008 I wonder what people's thoughts on Walter would be if he wasn't hadn't come back a second time and struggled so much as he is now. Perhaps now is not a fair time to judge, maybe a few years after Walter's tenure is over and we can all look back and judge Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wreckedroy 33 Posted December 6, 2008 Share Posted December 6, 2008 I wonder what people's thoughts on Walter would be if he wasn't hadn't come back a second time and struggled so much as he is now. Perhaps now is not a fair time to judge, maybe a few years after Walter's tenure is over and we can all look back and judge Very good point CB. For a good few years after his sacking Symon wasn't looked on as favourably as he is now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thedarvelmarvel 795 Posted December 6, 2008 Share Posted December 6, 2008 scot symon .his numbers dont match but he built an all conquering team out of the wreckage of 7/1 and remember s.s had more competition how many different sides won the league and the cup during his time.walter has a better record but ss.didnt buy his team. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
McBoyd 355 Posted December 6, 2008 Share Posted December 6, 2008 Different times, different game. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thermopylae 15,288 Posted December 6, 2008 Share Posted December 6, 2008 scot symon .his numbers dont match but he built an all conquering team out of the wreckage of 7/1 and remember s.s had more competition how many different sides won the league and the cup during his time.walter has a better record but ss.didnt buy his team. Suppose you could make the point that the standard of player in the country was better back in the 60s so Walter had to import players Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wreckedroy 33 Posted December 6, 2008 Share Posted December 6, 2008 scot symon .his numbers dont match but he built an all conquering team out of the wreckage of 7/1 and remember s.s had more competition how many different sides won the league and the cup during his time.walter has a better record but ss.didnt buy his team. Very true, but at that time he didn't have to buy a team. At least 80% of Scottish boys played football, so the talent pool was huge compared to Walters 1st time here. And I would argue that Symons left us a poorer team than he inherited, although that's a moot point. I still don't see how the 2 managers can realistically be compared, given the enormous differences in the game and in the managers role between the 2 eras. We'll never know if Symon would have coped in the present set-up, or whether Smith would have succeeded in the 50s/60s. The only thing I do know is that both have been very successful Rangers managers, and both will be held in high regard as long as Rangers exist as a football club. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott-RFC 308 Posted December 6, 2008 Share Posted December 6, 2008 As been said its very hard to judge If pushed id say Walter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts