Follow Follow Rangers. Season 2024/25

[RandomGuy.]

Gerrard has turned Rangers into what he was as a player.

Good enough to win one off games against the best, and challenge for cup competitions due to that, but ultimately unable to consistently perform over a complete league season.

[Dons_1988]

There was someone on the radio recently saying Gerrard had 'won everything, multiple times' as a player. And no one picked them up on it. Can't remember who now but made me laugh.

Anyway, he's doing a fairly steady job. They were (even more of) a laughing stock prior to his arrival and they aren't that now. He has improved them but not sure he knows how to take them that extra step. His performance in Europe is undoubtedly impressive.

[AJF]

9 hours ago, Jinky67 said:

His win % in competitive games is 60%. Murty for the season he had in charge was 62%. Granted Gerrard has played more European football so that dilutes it a little however they aren’t winning that many more games under Gerrard especially when it matters and considering the financial backing he has had compared to Murty before him.

6 attempts at winning a trophy and none taken, I can’t really remember a time when that was acceptable for a manager of the Old Firm.

 

 

I’ve seen that stat rolled out before but it doesn’t exactly paint a full picture, for example:

Pre Gerrard:

16/17: 67 points (1.76 PPG)

17/18: 70 points (1.84 PPG)

Since Gerrard:

18/19: 78 points (2.05 PPG)

19/20*: 67 points (2.31 PPG)

So, there has been a marked improvement in our performance since Gerrard came in. How much of that can be attributed to increased funding or his ability you can’t say, but undoubtedly, we have improved.

If we take the PPG from 16/17 (1.76) and compare it to the most recent season 19/20 (2.31), the difference works out to be over 20 points. That’s pretty massive. (I know, that is assuming the PPG stayed similar had the 19/20 season been played to a finish).

Edited August 6, 2020 by AJF

[Jinky67]

1 hour ago, AJF said:

I’ve seen that stat rolled out before but it doesn’t exactly paint a full picture, for example:

Pre Gerrard:

16/17: 67 points (1.76 PPG)

17/18: 70 points (1.84 PPG)

Since Gerrard:

18/19: 78 points (2.05 PPG)

19/20*: 67 points (2.31 PPG)

So, there has been a marked improvement in our performance since Gerrard came in. How much of that can be attributed to increased funding or his ability you can’t say, but undoubtedly, we have improved.

If we take the PPG from 16/17 (1.76) and compare it to the most recent season 19/20 (2.31), the difference works out to be over 20 points. That’s pretty massive. (I know, that is assuming the PPG stayed similar had the 19/20 season been played to a finish).

I would have assumed showing win % across all competitive matches would paint a fuller picture than just looking at league performances and ppg? Especially when the point I was making was the fact no trophy has been won across all domestic competitions in 6 attempts yet he is being afforded more time to address it then any other OF manager in the past 30 years.

i take your point about league improvement in terms or incremental points increases season per season but is it enough? He seems to be improving the ppg by roughly 10 to 11% season per season but here is where it gets interesting (to me at least however I am an analyst by trade so forgive me).

Everyone assumes Gerrard is closing the gap but is he if you look at the ppg? Celtic went from 2.28 ppg to 2.67 ppg which is a 15% improvement on the season before so is the gap actually increasing and is Gerrard being allowed to continue because the risk of changing manager now is too great? It’s the risk Celtic took when sacking TB and bringing in Jansen despite TB improving Celtic to get within 3-5 points of Rangers during his tenure.

 

 

 

[AJF]

3 minutes ago, Jinky67 said:

I would have assumed showing win % across all competitive matches would paint a fuller picture than just looking at league performances and ppg? Especially when the point I was making was the fact no trophy has been won across all domestic competitions in 6 attempts yet he is being afforded more time to address it then any other OF manager in the past 30 years.

i take your point about league improvement in terms or incremental points increases season per season but is it enough? He seems to be improving the ppg by roughly 10 to 11% season per season but here is where it gets interesting (to me at least however I am an analyst by trade so forgive me).

Everyone assumes Gerrard is closing the gap but is he if you look at the ppg? Celtic went from 2.28 ppg to 2.67 ppg which is a 15% improvement on the season before so is the gap actually increasing and is Gerrard being allowed to continue because the risk of changing manager now is too great? It’s the risk Celtic took when sacking TB and bringing in Jansen despite TB improving Celtic to get within 3-5 points of Rangers during his tenure.

 

 

 

Potentially, but there are also flaws in looking solely at win % as it doesn’t take into account how many games we lost under previous managers compared to draws now. Additionally, as you highlight, Gerrard’s relative success in Europe will also skew his win % in comparison to previous managers.

Whether the gradual improvement under Gerrard will be enough to topple Celtic, I’m not sure, but I just get defensive when he is compared to the likes of Murty and Caixinha when I believe it’s clear there has been quite a drastic improvement it’s a touchy subject given what we’ve been put through haha.

[velo army]

I think maybe the board know that to compete with Celtic they need to pump the kind of money into the squad that would see them quickly in grave financial difficulty, so will perhaps accept no trophies so long as there is evidence of closing the gap.  Gerrard has undoubtedly improved them. After the OF* game in late December they looked to have the edge on Celtic and were understandably being talked about as title winners. Obviously the wheels came off a bit in the new year, but they always gave the impression of being a player or two away from being contenders.

[Jinky67]

9 minutes ago, velo army said:

I think maybe the board know that to compete with Celtic they need to pump the kind of money into the squad that would see them quickly in grave financial difficulty, so will perhaps accept no trophies so long as there is evidence of closing the gap.  Gerrard has undoubtedly improved them. After the OF* game in late December they looked to have the edge on Celtic and were understandably being talked about as title winners. Obviously the wheels came off a bit in the new year, but they always gave the impression of being a player or two away from being contenders.

I always find it difficult to measure improvement or gaps closing based on OF performances alone. They effectively become one off games where form can go out of the window.

The closet comparison I could draw is the Tommy Burns years at Celtic where we looked to have the edge and if not for Andy Goram in some of those games who knows. We played some amazing football made big improvements, brought in significantly better players in Pierre, Cadete and Di Canio but still ended up with just a Scottish Cup win over his 3 years.

Rangers just had a win at all costs mentality 

[Jinky67]

29 minutes ago, AJF said:

Potentially, but there are also flaws in looking solely at win % as it doesn’t take into account how many games we lost under previous managers compared to draws now. Additionally, as you highlight, Gerrard’s relative success in Europe will also skew his win % in comparison to previous managers.

Whether the gradual improvement under Gerrard will be enough to topple Celtic, I’m not sure, but I just get defensive when he is compared to the likes of Murty and Caixinha when I believe it’s clear there has been quite a drastic improvement it’s a touchy subject given what we’ve been put through haha.

Which is fair enough, I’m not trying to suggest he be sacked just generally curious as to why fan sentiment seems to be affording him time previous OF managers didn’t get.

 

Edited August 6, 2020 by Jinky67

[Dons_1988]

3 minutes ago, Jinky67 said:

Rangers just had a win at all costs mentality 

The cost usually being opposition players legs

[8MileBU]

9 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said:

The cost usually being opposition players legs

Such as? Don’t remember that Rangers side being a particularly full of hatchet men. I do remember Peter Grant’s numerous failed efforts to be one though.

[Jinky67]

3 minutes ago, 8MileBU said:

Such as? Don’t remember that Rangers side being a particularly full of hatchet men. I do remember Peter Grant’s numerous failed efforts to be one though.

Iain Ferguson, John Brown?

[8MileBU]

2 minutes ago, Jinky67 said:

Iain Ferguson, John Brown?

Iain Ferguson

Come on now.

[Ranaldo Bairn]

Think he means Ian Ferguson.

You can add Hurlock, Roberts and Souness himself to that.

[Golden Gordon]

1 minute ago, Ranaldo Bairn said:

Think he means Ian Ferguson.

You can add Hurlock, Roberts and Souness himself to that.

Honourable? mention for Mark Hateley too.

[Snifter Pee Rot]

10 minutes ago, 8MileBU said:

Such as? Don’t remember that Rangers side being a particularly full of hatchet men. I do remember Peter Grant’s numerous failed efforts to be one though.

Did you miss the English boy on Sportsound this week relay that ex Rangers and Millwall midfielder Kevin Muscat was the dirtiest player he ever played against. Exact same background as the alleged footballer Hurlock that paraded his 'skills' at Mordor.  Btw Ian Ferguson was way dirtier than Grant. According to fitbastats anyway.

[8MileBU]

16 minutes ago, Snifter Pee Rot said:

Did you miss the English boy on Sportsound this week relay that ex Rangers and Millwall midfielder Kevin Muscat was the dirtiest player he ever played against. Exact same background as the alleged footballer Hurlock that paraded his 'skills' at Mordor.  Btw Ian Ferguson was way dirtier than Grant. According to fitbastats anyway.

Totally forgot Kevin Muscat was even a thing to be honest, although I think his dirty player reputation preceded his time at Rangers. Hurlock was much the same.

[wastecoatwilly]

1 hour ago, AJF said:

Whether the gradual improvement under Gerrard will be enough to topple Celtic, I’m not sure, but I just get defensive when he is compared to the likes of Murty and Caixinha when I believe it’s clear there has been quite a drastic improvement it’s a touchy subject given what we’ve been put through haha.

Slippy G has signed about 40 players in 3 years it's interesting posting about win ratio's and PPG but play station pish isn't real life.
If any manager had signed 40 players you would expect some improvement FFS.
The problem with sevco over the last 3 years is the short term outlook buying experience with no sell on value.
The over 30's may increase the PPG but don't have the legs for the full season plus are more injury prone.
Caxinha bought Morelos the best sell-able asset Slippy G hasn't matched that yet,relying on the European dosh  can only get you so far.
Balogun and Defoe are on one year deals Davis and McGregor have maybe one year left rebuilding the squad every year gives the impression there is improvement but winning nothing proves there isn't.
Heard a lot of rangers fans and fans on here saying Lennon was sevco best signing we may slip up in a cup in a one off game but over 38 games Celtic still set the bar. 
 

[Derry Alli]

1 hour ago, wastecoatwilly said:

If any manager had signed 40 players you would expect some improvement FFS.

Has it not been pointed out, quite a few times, that there has been improvement year on year already? 

I could have sworn I seen it once or twice on every one of the last five or so pages. 

[AJF]

1 hour ago, wastecoatwilly said:

Slippy G has signed about 40 players in 3 years it's interesting posting about win ratio's and PPG but play station pish isn't real life.
If any manager had signed 40 players you would expect some improvement FFS.
The problem with sevco over the last 3 years is the short term outlook buying experience with no sell on value.
The over 30's may increase the PPG but don't have the legs for the full season plus are more injury prone.
Caxinha bought Morelos the best sell-able asset Slippy G hasn't matched that yet,relying on the European dosh  can only get you so far.
Balogun and Defoe are on one year deals Davis and McGregor have maybe one year left rebuilding the squad every year gives the impression there is improvement but winning nothing proves there isn't.
Heard a lot of rangers fans and fans on here saying Lennon was sevco best signing we may slip up in a cup in a one off game but over 38 games Celtic still set the bar. 
 

The number of signings under Murty and Caixinha was probably comparable in numbers to Gerrard though, at least, it wouldn't be far off anyway.

I think Gerrard has tried to get a balance of potential vs. experience. For example the players you've quoted in Balogun, Defoe, Davis and McGregor are also balanced with signings like Kamara (24), Barisic (27), Aribo (24) who are all yet to hit their prime but are internationalists with their countries and have good immediate sell on potential.

Then you have slightly younger players like Kent, Hagi and now Itten who they will be hoping to develop and eventually sell on at a profit as well.

I think he has had to bring in more experienced players, certainly in the early days of his Rangers career, to try and get consistency.

Edited August 6, 2020 by AJF

[wastecoatwilly]

1 hour ago, AJF said:

The number of signings under Murty and Caixinha was probably comparable in numbers to Gerrard though, at least, it wouldn't be far off anyway.

I think Gerrard has tried to get a balance of potential vs. experience. For example the players you've quoted in Balogun, Defoe, Davis and McGregor are also balanced with signings like Kamara (24), Barisic (27), Aribo (24) who are all yet to hit their prime but are internationalists with their countries and have good immediate sell on potential.

Then you have slightly younger players like Kent, Hagi and now Itten who they will be hoping to develop and eventually sell on at a profit as well.

I think he has had to bring in more experienced players, certainly in the early days of his Rangers career, to try and get consistency.

So you see it as a successful period even thou he has not won anything plus no young talent has broken into the first team from the youth?