There’s a logic to keeping an experienced, homegrown international around when you’re about to rip the squad up and start again. Danny Rohl has talked about him as a leader and, to be fair, you can see why the club would want someone who knows Rangers from the inside during a big transition.

Why the leadership matters

Fans moan about contracts and wages, but leadership in the dressing room matters more than we often give it credit for. When you’re bringing in new faces, shuffling the defence and trying to install a new shape or tempo, having one or two senior pros who understand the demands — on and off the pitch — steadies the ship. It isn’t glamorous, but it buys time for the rebuild to be carried out properly.

Short-term sense, medium-term plan

Keeping him until 2027 effectively gives Rangers a safety net. You avoid the frantic scramble and the transfer fee for an immediate replacement, which means more cash can be directed at other problem positions. That’s sensible squad management: accept a known quantity for now and use the transfer budget where it genuinely strengthens the team.

Why wages split the support

The wage rise — apparently to bring him in line with other regular starters — will annoy some supporters, and I don’t blame them. Most of us will never see those numbers in our lives. But it’s not the player’s fault; it’s the market. You can argue about fairness, but asking a Scotland international to take a pay cut simply to placate fans isn’t realistic. As we’ve noted on Rangers News Views, the trade-off is clear: a steadying influence in exchange for a bit more on the wage bill.

Truth is, I’d rather have experience on the pitch and funds available to fix glaring weaknesses elsewhere. You might not love every contract, but when the club’s rebuilding, sensible compromises win more often than they lose.

Written by Angus1812: 22 April 2026

Tags: transfers tactics