Follow Follow Rangers. Season 2023/24

[bennett]

Any competition is better than no competition, apart from when it involves Sevco.....

[BawWatchin]

28 minutes ago, WeWereThePeople said:

I did read your request, but then you went off on some odd straw man tangent that was nothing to do with what I actually posted. Other teams are free to mount a title challenge, which would be equally beneficial to Scottish football. If you seriously think a one horse race is good for football, I don't think any facts I could provide would convince you otherwise.

 

You're right, other teams are free to mount a challenge, including The Rangers. If nobody else is challenging however, you have a one horse race.  Not really sure what point you're trying to make here. One horse races occur when other clubs either don't have the financial resources at their disposal or they're just plain shite. Which one is it for your club?

[WeWereThePeople]

23 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

Not good enough I'm afraid.

Other teams aren't "free" to mount a challenge in any meaningful sense, because they lack the resources to do so.  Surely you're not embarking on the same flight of fancy as our wastecoated chum?

You did come up with a list you described as "off the top of my head", but when pressed on how a title race would be beneficial in terms of any of them, you skulked away.  Another Rangers fan piped up with similar drivel, but when invited to provide figures, he beat a similar retreat.

I'll ask again.  How does all of Scottish football benefit ultimately from a title race?  

Ok, I'll humour you.

A duopoly by it's very definition is better than a monopoly. It shares the wealth at the top of the tree. The effect of this is trickle down economics, as I previously mentioned. A real life example would be teams challenging each other buying players from smaller teams, e.g, Docherty from Hamilton, and the boy the the unwashed bought from Dundee recently. This helps balance the books of diddy teams. Hamilton or Dundee may then buy one of your diddy players for say 100k. This helps balance your books. You then pay say 20k for a diddy player from a lower league team. This helps balance their books.

This all stems from money created and shared at the top of tree. With a monopoly, which is where we were heading before Murty stopped the rot, there would be quite different results. The top team would grow so rich that they could afford to shop in better markets, England for example. This already happened to an extent, but has been slowed somewhat by Rangers return.

If you want to make a case for income being shared more equitably between Scottish teams, then I would fully support that, but it's not really how  the free market works. Football is a product, and like any product, it thrives with healthy competition, in theory to the benefit of everyone. If you're hoping for some utopian model, then you'll have  a very long wait. The competition model is far from perfect, but it's the best system humans have so far devised.

In summary, title races are good for everyone, even diddies.  Taking away financial issues, we all want to see good sport, and title races provide this, even for neutrals. You all claim to hate the 'old firm' but you'll all be tuning in, even if just to have a moan about the singing.

Can we now get back to keeping the thread on topic, which is Rangers playing fantastic football and storming their way to a possible 55 record titles.

[WeWereThePeople]

24 minutes ago, BawWatchin said:

You're right, other teams are free to mount a challenge, including The Rangers. If nobody else is challenging however, you have a one horse race.  Not really sure what point you're trying to make here. One horse races occur when other clubs either don't have the financial resources at their disposal or they're just plain shite. Which one is it for your club?

Neither. We have mounted a challenge from a poorer financial position, because we're not shitebags like Aberdeen or hibs, and it's in our dna to challenge for titles.

[Monkey Tennis]

14 minutes ago, WeWereThePeople said:

Ok, I'll humour you.

A duopoly by it's very definition is better than a monopoly. It shares the wealth at the top of the tree. The effect of this is trickle down economics, as I previously mentioned. A real life example would be teams challenging each other buying players from smaller teams, e.g, Docherty from Hamilton, and the boy the the unwashed bought from Dundee recently. This helps balance the books of diddy teams. Hamilton or Dundee may then buy one of your diddy players for say 100k. This helps balance your books. You then pay say 20k for a diddy player from a lower league team. This helps balance their books.

This all stems from money created and shared at the top of tree. With a monopoly, which is where we were heading before Murty stopped the rot, there would be quite different results. The top team would grow so rich that they could afford to shop in better markets, England for example. This already happened to an extent, but has been slowed somewhat by Rangers return.

If you want to make a case for income being shared more equitably between Scottish teams, then I would fully support that, but it's not really how  the free market works. Football is a product, and like any product, it thrives with healthy competition, in theory to the benefit of everyone. If you're hoping for some utopian model, then you'll have  a very long wait. The competition model is far from perfect, but it's the best system humans have so far devised.

In summary, title races are good for everyone, even diddies.  Taking away financial issues, we all want to see good sport, and title races provide this, even for neutrals. You all claim to hate the 'old firm' but you'll all be tuning in, even if just to have a moan about the singing.

Can we now get back to keeping the thread on topic, which is Rangers playing fantastic football and storming their way to a possible 55 record titles.

My God.

You grasp could not be weaker.

Apart from the absurd, discredited,  right wing belief in the absolute power of free market economics to benefit everyone, we get a throwing around of figures which is just ludicrous.

Dundee or Hamilton don't pay clubs like us £100k for players and we don't pay those beneath us, £20k for players either.  Such things don't happen and haven't since well before the duopoly got broken.

Once more, you simply cannot offer anything remotely convincing in support of your claim.

You want a two horse race because your club is best placed to become a runner.  You should not however, say that it's of benefit to the whole game, because as you've so clearly demonstrated, it's not a claim that you can begin to provide evidence for.

Edited March 3, 2018 by Monkey Tennis

[Ken Fitlike]

Rangers have actually 'bought' Docherty?

[Ken Fitlike]

With all this money at the top of the tree, why did Old Rangers go bust and New Rangers need a loan from Close Brothers?
Oh right... It's in their DNA.

[WeWereThePeople]

10 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

My God.

You grasp could not be weaker.

Apart from the absurd, discredited,  right wing belief in the absolute power of free market economics to benefit everyone, we get a throwing around of figures which is just ludicrous.

Dundee or Hamilton don't pay clubs like us £100k for players and we don't pay those beneath us, £20k for players either.  Such things don't happen and haven't since well before the duopoly got broken.

Once more, you simply cannot offer anything remotely convincing in support of your claim.

You want a two horse race because your club is best placed to become a runner.  You should not however, say that it's of benefit to the whole game, because as you've so clearly demonstrated, it's not a claim that you can begin to provide evidence for.

I see where I've gone wrong. I tried to have a reasoned conversation with a Socialist. If diddy clubs cant use a percentage of their income from transfers, to buy new players, then I suggest they look inwards. Good day to you, sir.

[bennett]

2 minutes ago, Ken Fitlike said:

With all this money at the top of the tree, why did Old Rangers go bust and New Rangers need a loan from Close Brothers?
Oh right... It's in their DNA.

You really have to ask why Sevco probably have a shite credit rating.....

Ffs Kenneth.

[bennett]

Just now, WeWereThePeople said:

I see where I've gone wrong. I tried to have a reasoned conversation with a Socialist. If diddy clubs cant use a percentage of their income from transfers, to buy new players, then I suggest they look inwards. Good day to you, sir.

Monkey will repeat the same post over and over and over ...... again, until you want to bounce your head off the wall.

[WeWereThePeople]

4 minutes ago, Ken Fitlike said:

With all this money at the top of the tree, why did Old Rangers go bust and New Rangers need a loan from Close Brothers?
Oh right... It's in their DNA.

Why don't you worry about taking at least a point off  a team from Glasgow, that doesn't have Thistle in ther name. You had your chance to challenge, but it's over now.

[Ken Fitlike]

You really have to ask why Sevco probably have a shite credit rating.....
Ffs Kenneth.

Fairly Financially Savvy Kenneth to you..

[Ken Fitlike]

Why don't you worry about taking at least a point off  a team from Glasgow, that doesn't have Thistle in ther name. You had your chance to challenge, but it's over now.

No answer then...

[BawWatchin]

11 minutes ago, WeWereThePeople said:

I see where I've gone wrong. I tried to have a reasoned conversation with a Socialist. If diddy clubs cant use a percentage of their income from transfers, to buy new players, then I suggest they look inwards. Good day to you, sir.

Perhaps you can explain how the two horse race has benefited the other clubs in Scottish Football in the past? Can't say this one horse race has really had any impact on the overall quality of the game. It was pish before and it's equally as pish now.

[bennett]

8 minutes ago, BawWatchin said:

Perhaps you can explain how the two horse race has benefited the other clubs in Scottish Football in the past? Can't say this one horse race has really had any impact on the overall quality of the game. It was pish before and it's equally as pish now.

Three horse race right now, surely.....

[Monkey Tennis]

20 minutes ago, WeWereThePeople said:

I see where I've gone wrong. I tried to have a reasoned conversation with a Socialist. If diddy clubs cant use a percentage of their income from transfers, to buy new players, then I suggest they look inwards. Good day to you, sir.

Eh?

Your trickle down theory clearly, demonstrably, doesn't operate in Scottish football in the way you claim.  That's not my problem - it's yours, because it's you making the claim.

 

[WeWereThePeople]

23 minutes ago, BawWatchin said:

Perhaps you can explain how the two horse race has benefited the other clubs in Scottish Football in the past? Can't say this one horse race has really had any impact on the overall quality of the game. It was pish before and it's equally as pish now.

For one, we still have more than a dozen professional teams. Would this be the case  if this monopoly continued for say another 10 years or so. I have my doubts. I'm all for finding a system that makes more clubs involved in the title race. Short of sharing attendance income, I'm not sure it can ever happen. I don't buy this 'Scottish football is pish' mantra. The entertainment value is reasonably high in my opinion, even if the quality is relatively poor.

 

Edited March 3, 2018 by WeWereThePeople

[BawWatchin]

2 minutes ago, WeWereThePeople said:

For one, we still have more than a dozen professional teams. Would this be the case  if this monopoly continued for say another 10 years or so.

Yes

[Monkey Tennis]

2 minutes ago, WeWereThePeople said:

For one, we still have more than a dozen professional teams. Would this be the case  if this monopoly continued for say another 10 years or so. I have my doubts. I'm all for finding a system that makes more clubs involved in the title race. Short of sharing attendance income, I'm not sure it can ever happen. I don't buy this 'Scottish football is pish' mantra. The entertainment value is reasonably high in my opinion, even if the quality is relatively poor.

 

There are loads of "professional" clubs in Scotland.

You don't have a clue what you're on about.

[WeWereThePeople]

15 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

Eh?

Your trickle down theory clearly, demonstrably, doesn't operate in Scottish football in the way you claim.  That's not my problem - it's yours, because it's you making the claim.

 

The trickle down theory has nothing to do with me. It's a model used in most 'successful' countries. The alternative is everyone is equally poor. I'm not sure if that's your dream footballing scenario. I'm not saying it's perfect, I'm just saying it's the reality.