Scottish player transfers

[0Neils40yarder]

1 hour ago, Squirrelhumper said:

Yet rarely let Scotland down. 

Patterson is a better player than SOD, there is no denying that but i find how dismissive some folk are of his contribution in a Scotland shirt a bit sad. 

I couldn't care less how he plays in the SPFL, he always put in a shift for scotland. If we are judging players on club appearances then Patterson would be nowhere near the squad as he spent most the season sitting on his arse but there is more to it than that. 

He's shite mate...totally shite

[ceudmilefailte]

47 minutes ago, 0Neils40yarder said:

He's shite mate...totally shite

It's a strange one. We certainly weren't playing with 10 men against Denmark, were he put in a decent shift.

There's always been players who look better at international level, maybe playing with better than usual team mates helps. 

[Caledonian Craig]

19 hours ago, vanderark14 said:

Rangers Just hosed the league last season. This was with home grown talent as nothing more than back up. 

 

Their stab in the dark gamble on foreign players worked, its worked for them since as long as I can remember. I don't anticipate this will change anytime soon.

I agree it has worked as to getting them success on the pitch but it is not successful as far as their bank balance is concerned - far from it. I wonder, who, of all their players sold have made them the most money? I'd hazard a guess the Scots they have sold have gained them more money than the foreigners they bought in for big money and more often than not sold on at a loss.

[Diamond Scot]

2 minutes ago, ceudmilefailte said:

It's a strange one. We certainly weren't playing with 10 men against Denmark, were he put in a decent shift.

There's always been players who look better at international level, maybe playing with better than usual team mates helps. 

I think people forget that you dont need 11 superstars to have a good international team. The vast majority of games you are playing teams of similar or lesser quality. Very few international teams have a top quality player in every position.

When Odonnell plays for Scotland he benefits from having Robertson and Tierney on the left. 2 genuine top class players. That means we carry a threat down the left wing so all he needs to do is keep things tight and provide average quality going foward. He has done both very well in most of his caps.

What we have seen with Patterson is that on his day he may be able to perform at a similar level to Robertson and thus vastly improving the attacking threat of the team. Especially when we have good players like Gilmour and McGinn linking up on that side.

Having an Odonnell standard player on the left when he plays on the right would make him look worse and cause us problems but given we have both Robertson and Tierney this is unlikely to happen. Patterson and others will gradually move him out the picture and thats a good thing but lets not overlook the good job he has done for us. (And this is coming from somebody who doesnt particuarly rate him)

[Diamond Scot]

4 minutes ago, Caledonian Craig said:

I agree it has worked as to getting them success on the pitch but it is not successful as far as their bank balance is concerned - far from it. I wonder, who, of all their players sold have made them the most money? I'd hazard a guess the Scots they have sold have gained them more money than the foreigners they bought in for big money and more often than not sold on at a loss.

Over the years Rangers have sold a good few foreign players for decent money. Boumsong / Jelavic / Reyna / GVB spring to mind.

I can only think of Hutton and Ferguson that went for decent money who are Scottish.

You are 100% correct though that the better business model is promoting the youth, giving them exposure and selling at a high price with sell on clause. The issue that the Old Firm seem to have is that they need to win every game and therefore are reluctent to give youth a chance and they tend to be inconsistent and make errors. The thinking being that a more experienced player wont do these things as often.

I can understand that thinking but what annoys me is when they are 3 nil up at home and they bring on somebody like Defoe rather than a youngster.

 

[Caledonian Craig]

10 minutes ago, Diamond Scot said:

Over the years Rangers have sold a good few foreign players for decent money. Boumsong / Jelavic / Reyna / GVB spring to mind.

 

 

But I would bet a lot on the amount of foreigners they have lost money on far outweighs those they have made a profit on. Whereas homegrown talent sold on gives a 100% profit. I look to a club like Manchester United who grew into a dominating force in the EPL with homegrown players making up a large number of the squad. They have gone away from that model for success and they have not prospered from it - quite the opposite.

[Caledonian Craig]

22 minutes ago, Diamond Scot said:

I think people forget that you dont need 11 superstars to have a good international team. The vast majority of games you are playing teams of similar or lesser quality. Very few international teams have a top quality player in every position.

When Odonnell plays for Scotland he benefits from having Robertson and Tierney on the left. 2 genuine top class players. That means we carry a threat down the left wing so all he needs to do is keep things tight and provide average quality going foward. He has done both very well in most of his caps.

What we have seen with Patterson is that on his day he may be able to perform at a similar level to Robertson and thus vastly improving the attacking threat of the team. Especially when we have good players like Gilmour and McGinn linking up on that side.

Having an Odonnell standard player on the left when he plays on the right would make him look worse and cause us problems but given we have both Robertson and Tierney this is unlikely to happen. Patterson and others will gradually move him out the picture and thats a good thing but lets not overlook the good job he has done for us. (And this is coming from somebody who doesnt particuarly rate him)

Look to our most important wins where we needed a win or a result from it against high quality opposition in the last year or so and O'Donnell has been in those sides - fans seem to readily forget that. To call such a player shite is totally wrong. He played V Serbia, V Austria, V England and V Denmark and we kept clean sheets in three of those four matches.

[mcguffin]

2 hours ago, Barney Rubble said:

Fully agree with this,

The double standards displayed around the Patterson/O'Donnell and Patterson/Tavernier questions are illuminating.

I've got my favourites for the right-back starting slot, like anyone, but personally I'd be happy for Steve Clarke to pick either Patterson or O'Donnell. I think both have them have played well for Scotland.

[Tartan blood]

16 minutes ago, Caledonian Craig said:

But I would bet a lot on the amount of foreigners they have lost money on far outweighs those they have made a profit on. Whereas homegrown talent sold on gives a 100% profit. I look to a club like Manchester United who grew into a dominating force in the EPL with homegrown players making up a large number of the squad. They have gone away from that model for success and they have not prospered from it - quite the opposite.

Exactly this. Youth players cost practically nothing. Even if it was 1 player in 30 sold for a million they'd be making a profit. The money made on Patterson probably covers the last 10 years of expenses on youth development. (This is a wild guess, I've no idea how much it costs).

I used to admire Man Utd, under Fergie. They promoted youth, and very often when they spent big it was on youngish players like Rooney, Ronaldo, Nani, Ferdinand etc. Guys that they'd make a profit on or at least get good service from over a long period. Rangers should be doing this. Celtic have been for the past decade and it's been pretty successful, from a business point of view, at least.

[Diamond Scot]

55 minutes ago, Caledonian Craig said:

Look to our most important wins where we needed a win or a result from it against high quality opposition in the last year or so and O'Donnell has been in those sides - fans seem to readily forget that. To call such a player shite is totally wrong. He played V Serbia, V Austria, V England and V Denmark and we kept clean sheets in three of those four matches.

I totally agree. Thats what I was trying to highlight in my post. That he is a limited player in terms of ability but because of the players we have on the left that he doesnt need to be the best and has done a good job for us.

[0Neils40yarder]

4 hours ago, Caledonian Craig said:

Look to our most important wins where we needed a win or a result from it against high quality opposition in the last year or so and O'Donnell has been in those sides - fans seem to readily forget that. To call such a player shite is totally wrong. He played V Serbia, V Austria, V England and V Denmark and we kept clean sheets in three of those four matches.

I watch him every week, he is shite...I concede that he has been involved in some good results for Scotland but he is by some distance the worst player in contention for a starting Jersey...he is slow and technically very poor 

[Caledonian Craig]

7 minutes ago, 0Neils40yarder said:

I watch him every week, he is shite...I concede that he has been involved in some good results for Scotland but he is by some distance the worst player in contention for a starting Jersey...he is slow and technically very poor 

Sorry but shite players do not even make it to non-league level, let alone SPL-level and go on to represent their country on the back of being shite. I get that you rate him as shite but I'd sooner take the view of Steve Clarke - a highly-qualified coach who clearly sees him as being far above a 'shite' player.

[0Neils40yarder]

6 minutes ago, Caledonian Craig said:

Sorry but shite players do not even make it to non-league level, let alone SPL-level and go on to represent their country on the back of being shite. I get that you rate him as shite but I'd sooner take the view of Steve Clarke - a highly-qualified coach who clearly sees him as being far above a 'shite' player.

Their are levels...of course there are...in comparison to me, SOD isn't shite...however, compared to most international players in Europe, he is shite

[Caledonian Craig]

5 minutes ago, 0Neils40yarder said:

Their are levels...of course there are...in comparison to me, SOD isn't shite...however, compared to most international players in Europe, he is shite

Sorry that still does not tally up. You say he is shite at international level - okay lets look at facts. Take a look at the key games he has featured in for us against top quality sides and I find it a stretch beyond the wildest imagination not one of teams of the ilk of Serbia, Austria, England and Denmark could not expose such a shite player. Sorry just no. Weak links get exposed at international level as the coaches and players at that level will find you out.

[0Neils40yarder]

7 minutes ago, Caledonian Craig said:

Sorry that still does not tally up. You say he is shite at international level - okay lets look at facts. Take a look at the key games he has featured in for us against top quality sides and I find it a stretch beyond the wildest imagination not one of teams of the ilk of Serbia, Austria, England and Denmark could not expose such a shite player. Sorry just no. Weak links get exposed at international level as the coaches and players at that level will find you out.

If you don't believe that SOD is the weak link in this scotland team, you're not watching closely enough. His timing is poor, his positional sense is poor, he has no pace...he's shite and the team will be even better when he is eventually replaced

[Caledonian Craig]

14 minutes ago, 0Neils40yarder said:

If you don't believe that SOD is the weak link in this scotland team, you're not watching closely enough. 

Hmm well neither are notable international coaches of Austria, Serbia, England and Denmark then as they evidently did not identify him as shite and the weakest link or else he'd have been exposed for what you claim he is.

[aaid]

On 1/4/2022 at 6:50 PM, GHfaeGTA said:

It’s even very unusual for an English player to move for that sort of money having played less than 40 senior games. Even Rooney had played over 60 games for Everton. English players do move for silly money but most have at least played quite a number of senior games. Saying that it is also very unusual for a player to be a pretty much first choice internationalist without being a regular at club level. 

Jude Bellingham went from Birmingham City in the Chamoionship to Dortmund aged 17 for £25 million having played 41 games.  Jadon Sancho went from Man City’s youth team to Dortmund for £8 million at the same age, he’d never played a senior game.   Bayern Munich tried to buy Callum Hudson Odoi from Chelsea when he’d made less that 10 first team appearances.  
 

it’s not that uncommon for young players with high potential.

[aaid]

8 hours ago, Third Lanark said:

I may be wrong but I think transfer fees are to some degree influenced by the salary a player is on?

I think you’re wrong in the main with two caveats.

If a player is on high wages and have expectations for similar then the buying club may want to drive the transfer value down because of the overall cost and the selling club may be prepared to get a high wage earner off the books and so may accept a lower transfer fee.

Conversely, and this may apply to Patterson.  A player coming in on relatively low wages in terms of the buying clubs squad particularly a young player might attract a higher transfer fee particularly if it puts off other clubs and makes the transfer more acceptable to the selling club. 

It’s not a case though that high wages means a high transfer fee, low wages means a low transfer fee.  Generally speaking players who are on high wages and attract a high transfer fee are very good and those that are on low wages and attract a low fee aren’t very good  

The other is when a player under 24 moves and is subject to a development fee, if the clubs can’t agree that then a tribunal will decide and that’s one of criteria they will use to set the fee. 

[aaid]

5 hours ago, Caledonian Craig said:

But I would bet a lot on the amount of foreigners they have lost money on far outweighs those they have made a profit on. Whereas homegrown talent sold on gives a 100% profit. I look to a club like Manchester United who grew into a dominating force in the EPL with homegrown players making up a large number of the squad. They have gone away from that model for success and they have not prospered from it - quite the opposite.

If you look at Man Utd since Ferguson went there, then their youth development program is generally no better than most clubs in the EPL. What they did have was one freakishly good set of players - the so-called class of 92 - that all came through at the same time. Outwith that group you’d struggle to name more than a handful of players that came through and became long term established first teamers.   They’ve always bought and always been amongst the biggest spenders in the league. 

[ceudmilefailte]

1 hour ago, aaid said:

Jude Bellingham went from Birmingham City in the Chamoionship to Dortmund aged 17 for £25 million having played 41 games.  Jadon Sancho went from Man City’s youth team to Dortmund for £8 million at the same age, he’d never played a senior game.   Bayern Munich tried to buy Callum Hudson Odoi from Chelsea when he’d made less that 10 first team appearances.  
 

it’s not that uncommon for young players with high potential.

Don't suppose you know how many players have gone for that sort of money at a young age and flopped.

Oliver Burke fits the profile.

[0Neils40yarder]

3 hours ago, Caledonian Craig said:

Hmm well neither are notable international coaches of Austria, Serbia, England and Denmark then as they evidently did not identify him as shite and the weakest link or else he'd have been exposed for what you claim he is.

Well aye...if they can't see what any half decent SPFL manager can see then ultimately they failed in that respect. 

'Hmmm, what wing should we attack Scotland on...the one with Tierney and Robertson, or the one with the failed Luton full back that struggled to get a club after he left Killie?'

[aaid]

1 hour ago, ceudmilefailte said:

Don't suppose you know how many players have gone for that sort of money at a young age and flopped.

Oliver Burke fits the profile.

Probably more flops than successes.  

Anthony Martial £60million from Monaco to Man Utd., aged 19, played 52 games for Monaco and Lille surely must be up there. 

[Malcolm]

Rangers and Celtic are both selling clubs.  They need to grow or buy talent from wherever and then sell them to bigger clubs like Everton or Leicester.  They in turn need to consider selling to even bigger clubs like Chelsea or Barcelona.  There is a pecking order and the old firm are somewhere near the top of the championship in that regard.  Hence why Souttar is apparently considering Blackburn, Forrest and Sheffield united alongside rangers.

[Tartan blood]

31 minutes ago, 0Neils40yarder said:

Well aye...if they can't see what any half decent SPFL manager can see then ultimately they failed in that respect. 

'Hmmm, what wing should we attack Scotland on...the one with Tierney and Robertson, or the one with the failed Luton full back that struggled to get a club after he left Killie?'

It actually can work both ways. Most teams will double up on defending on their right because of the threat of Robertson and Tierney. Which I firmly believe is the reason Robertson always seemed a bit subdued for us in the past. Now that we have talent all over the pitch, it's giving Robertson a tad more freedom and has allowed him to really demonstrate his abilities the last 20 or so caps.

So, whether it's Patterson, SOD, Ralston or Ramsay, the right wing back is going to have a far easier time attacking down that side. If any of them turn out anything close to Robertson or Tierney, we're going to frighten the life out of every team we play.

[0Neils40yarder]

5 minutes ago, Tartan blood said:

It actually can work both ways. Most teams will double up on defending on their right because of the threat of Robertson and Tierney. Which I firmly believe is the reason Robertson always seemed a bit subdued for us in the past. Now that we have talent all over the pitch, it's giving Robertson a tad more freedom and has allowed him to really demonstrate his abilities the last 20 or so caps.

So, whether it's Patterson, SOD, Ralston or Ramsay, the right wing back is going to have a far easier time attacking down that side. If any of them turn out anything close to Robertson or Tierney, we're going to frighten the life out of every team we play.

You're 100% correct