Good enough or not good enough? That is the Rangers question | OneFootball

With Rangers fans arguing over the merits of James Tavernier, not to mention a few disagreements over the qualities of plenty other members of the Ibrox squad, it harks back to the disconnect between Rangers now and Rangers prior to 2012.

That is, that many Rangers supporters will accept ‘second best’-level players, modest players, in other words, but big that player up in their mind as better than they are.

The obvious example is of course the captain.

Prior to James Tavernier, Rangers’ pre-2012 RBs were the likes of Steven Whittaker, Alan Hutton and going back further, Gary Stevens.

Not all were as good as these, but every one of those mentioned was an international for either Scotland and England and all of them shone in Europe at both UEFA Cup level and Champions League level.

This is the level that was normal, that was standard, that was the norm.

If we look at the last Walter squad before 2012’s ‘changes’, we see McGregor, Whittaker, Weir, Cuellar, Papac, Ferguson, Thomson, Davis, Edu, Boyd, Miller, Naismith, Jelavic.

Every single one an international (or ex) aside Cuellar, every single one a champion.

And then that summer, with Ally taking over, we brought in some relatively decent stuff in Boca, Goian, Wallace but a bunch of the Celiks, Bedoyas, Alukos and McKays. It wasn’t a great window, quite honestly, and while Ally started out strong, following Steven Naismith’s fateful injury it all fell apart.

Then 2012 happened and pretty much everyone left aside a few select players.

There was a contrast in what Walter had, and could attract, and what Ally could, and it got even worse in 2012 when we were papped down to Division 3.

And since then, instead of Rangers fans just agreeing Alan Hutton is a top class RB, or that Cuellar is outstanding, these days it’s division over whether or not Goldson was good enough, or Tavernier is.

In simple terms, fans who used to expect the best, now settle for midrange and do their utmost to defend it as good enough for a club who used to be winners.

Tavernier, bless him, is just the ultimate symbol of this.

We have nothing against the lad, but compared with ex-captains like Weir and Ferguson, he’s got nothing.

Compared with ex-RBs like Hutton and Stevens and even Whittaker, he falls well short.

Nowadays it’s a cult-culture of ‘I’m a better fan than you because I back our players’, even when that player is Fraser Aird and was so painfully below Rangers standard it wasn’t even funny. Sorry Fraser, you’re just one of many honest souls who had the blessed fortune to play for a club as big as Rangers during a bizarre time.

And today it goes on – we frequently big up players who are notably below what Rangers should typically have in our squad – this is a club who had John Greig and Sandy Jardine for heaven’s sake, and some fans try to defend and justify Tavernier?

Of course they do.

They would defend any crap we sign, because that’s what some fans do.

They just back the team even if utter mince is in the dugout and in the XI because that’s what they believe is the best thing.

Even if we’re drawing or losing it’s ‘back the team and manager ffs’.

It’s changed days from when drawing or losing really was the end of the world – that was the Walter Rangers, when fans had literal meltdowns when we didn’t win every single match.

As Walter put it:

At least, it used to be.