|
Strongest Squad in the Championship
|
11-11-2015, 20:53
Listening to BBC Sportsound just now and the discussion is about the strength of squads at Ibrox and Easter Road. The consensus is that Hibs have the better squad. I'd totally agree with that, but the pundits then say that Rangers are going to win the league......no logic or argument for why...just that they'll win it, with some kind of black magic in the January window.......WTF?
Sometimes right and sometimes wrong, but always certain
12-11-2015, 00:11
Didn't hear the program for obvious reasons but I suppose one argument is that they think Rangers have maybe the best starting 11 but Hibs squad depth is deeper. If thats the case then when the inevitable injuries and suspensions hit both teams, this in theory will hurt Rangers more than it will Hibs.
Strength of squad and success on the pitch don't have to go hand in hand. Chelsea have a better squad than all but one or two in the PL but look where they are at the moment. Same goes for Dortmund last season, and those are just particularly extreme examples while there are plenty of teams who don't do quite as well as their perceived squad strength suggests, as well as those that do better than expected.
I'd also go along the lines you suggest, SCO. We have practically no cover across our whole defence and we're light on goal scorers up front, but of the whole Hibs squad Cummings and maybe McGinn are the only 2 I'd see even being in contention for a spot in our starting XI if everyone's available. 
19-11-2015, 18:07
(This post was last modified: 19-11-2015, 18:07 by hibeejim21.)
Barring tavernier i can't think of one single rangers player i'd rather have in our team ahead of what we have. Never thought i'd see the day i'd be saying that,but it's a good measure of how far rangers have fallen in recent years.
19-11-2015, 19:12
(19-11-2015, 18:07)hibeejim21 Wrote: Barring tavernier i can't think of one single rangers player i'd rather have in our team ahead of what we have. Never thought i'd see the day i'd be saying that,but it's a good measure of how far rangers have fallen in recent years. I would imagine either team would be better if they had Waghorn and Cummings up top?? Unless of course you think they would not fit together.
19-11-2015, 19:47
(This post was last modified: 19-11-2015, 19:48 by hibeejim21.)
(19-11-2015, 19:12)St Charles Owl Wrote:(19-11-2015, 18:07)hibeejim21 Wrote: Barring tavernier i can't think of one single rangers player i'd rather have in our team ahead of what we have. Never thought i'd see the day i'd be saying that,but it's a good measure of how far rangers have fallen in recent years. I think keatings and cummings are both better than waghorn. There i said it. And potentially el-alagui is just as good if he gets his fitness back. So i don't think we need waghorn. (19-11-2015, 19:24)Fredstersafool Wrote: Lee Wallace Jim?? No thanks boss.
01-03-2016, 21:09
Of course we'd have wrapped up the league by now if we'd had Keatings instead of Waghorn.
|
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
