Sign Moore and Curtis? To be fair, I want both. It isn't an either/or choice in my book. If we can bring Moore back and keep Curtis, that gives the manager real options up front without gutting the squad.


Two additions, more balance

Moore doesn't have to replace one of our existing forwards so much as shuffle the pecking order. You can see why people mention Gassama, Antman, Bajrami or Skov as the ones who might miss out — there just aren't endless minutes to go round if we pile in too many attackers. Bringing Moore in alongside Curtis increases competition for places and gives Danny different looks: a striker who can hold and another who bounces in behind, or whatever the boss wants to try. Competition breeds sharpness and that’s what we need when the big games come around.


Money talk — don't let it drown out the football

Yes, £15–20m sounds a lot at first glance. But the way I see it, transfer sums aren’t the only measurement. If we pay a fee that nets us a few seasons of a proper player, and we can recoup a similar amount later, then we've essentially had use of a good asset rather than blown money. You hear about sell-on clauses and percentages back to other clubs — that’s part of how modern deals work — but the main point is quality on the pitch. If we get a few seasons of someone who helps win trophies, that’s worth far more than theoretical profit margins on paper.


Squad implications and patience

Loan spells can do players the world of good. If Moore's loan has been beneficial, hopefully he returns sharper and ready to fight for a place. We couldn't realistically send half the squad out on loan, so keeping most of the group together is sensible. Losing out on a massive profit isn't the end of the world either; sometimes breaking even while improving the squad is the smarter move. For me, signing both players — if feasible — gives us genuine depth, keeps everyone honest, and leaves us stronger heading into the next campaign. That’s what matters at Ibrox.

Written by Kaisercaillaud: 15 May 2026