Originally Posted by ayrshireman1:
“Firstly, The Rangers is the Plc. The club is Rangers Football Club. But I know Celtic fans will never accept that argument, as they are convinced the club died in 2012.
Secondly, how is what I said arrogant?. EVERYONE knows that Rangers will rebuild and rebound, just as Hearts did and Hibs will. Rangers are too big not to be able to restore themselves over time (and sooner rather than later) at the top of Scottish football. Be it top 5 or eventually champs. I fail to see how what I said is hubris. Hate it if you must, but Rangers will be back. Just as Celtic came out of their dire period 20 years ago. As everyone knew they eventually would.
That's what I love about Celtic fans: selective history, As if 1990-95 and the shambles that was Celtic Football Club of that time never happened.”
Is there really a comparison between early 90's celtic the club you call Rangers today?
One was financially mismanaged but never had the embarrassment of being liquidated and reformed as a new club. Celtic were never in the bottom tier of Scottish football while having the 2nd largest wage bill in Scottish Football.
Celtic were mismanaged and the fans wanted those at the top gone. Rangers were mismanaged spending well beyond their means for years and the fans loved it.
Celtic after McCann took over actually had a plan to ensure the club is never is such a financial mess again.
'Rangers' were liquidated and then reformed and still the financial mess was apparent. Share issues, emergency loans just to cover the costs of running the club, dodgy directors and so forth.
The wage bill 'Rangers' have means they should of reached the SPL by now. In fact they should of walked it but even after being liquidated they still don't learn. They again handed out crazy contracts for average players as well as paying a Manager in the lower tiers of Scottish football an absurd wage.
There isn't that many similarities between the two clubs.