Who could we replace Ange with?

Do you think they stopped backing him because they knew he was working his ticket?

 

Some are rewriting history now that the bad transfers are all because of the board and lawwell not backing him, which is frankly nonsense, when he came in him and congerton were given a * of a lot of control over our recruitment and * money up the wall, then just wanted more money without selling players when the money was there like boyata.

We've been operating so well in our recruitment the last two seasons, I really hope if Rodgers comes back he has less say than before, any talk of us having to give him assurances over transfers to get him on board worries me.

 

When are we thinking for an announcement?

 

It's not about needing to outspend the opposition. Domestically he will be fine with what we have. But if we want to progress as a football club and begin making inroads into Europe it is critical we gradually develop our trading model - both in terms of the numbers we bring in and the numbers we spend. Benfica just spent £30m on a player from Feyenoord - if we want to begin emulating these types of clubs in terms of their trading model it's only realistic to expect we will begin spending a wee bit more than we currently do.

 

Short answer. I don't trust him with the money.

 

Whilst that is true he isn't going to rubbish players that the board have limited him to. For example, they miss out on castagne and and we get toljan, Brendan wouldn't come out and say yeah 'he isn't anywhere near the required standard but you know what the board couldn't land castagne or option 2 so I had to settle with this'.

We all know that the relationship soured with Brendan and the board, the reason seems very centred around signings.

My point being, if Rodgers comes back you have to believe that some sort of promises or middle ground has been met, which is exciting

 

That's fair. I have my reservations too.

 

He didn’t even bother with the interview


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Tbh id prob take both.

 

I can understand the concern in terms of spending it wisely, but I’ll say it again, there was a total lack of ambition when he was here, it’s not a big surprise his signing record was pretty poor, because we were bringing in a raft of loans and free transfers, or spending buttons on many players. I’m still unsure how much control he had over transfers also. Alarm bells were ringing when he made the comment about not wanting Shved.

 

This really. The idea that we could sell our best assets and replace with players on a simmilar budget (as we have been doing under Ange) and progress in Europe is a fallacy. The truth us we need to sell and then pay the money for better not be looking for another bargain. Otherwise we either stand still or trade in any progress we made with the players sold and go back the way.

 

So I think we're all coming to a bit of a consensus.

This is NOT a guaranteed win of an appointment, his transfer history needs addressed on both sides, ie. The club's and his. And that his ego will ultimately be a long term issue, but not for now.

But, it has the possibility to be a very good appointment, if the he and club are on the same page about a raft of issues.

Still holding out for Knutsen or Iraola.

 

What’s the bets when fixtures released first game is at ibrox


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

We already know that it is, it alternates every year.

 

Fully agree we all need to get behind him, but it’s like taking back an ex that has cheated on you, there’s never going to be that full trust again. If he starts hitting out with the Tommy Burns quotes again then I think it will alienate a lot of the support for him.