Scottish football changed drastically in the summer of 2012 when Rangers, amid financial chaos, were denied entry to the Scottish Premier League and ultimately placed in the Third Division of the Scottish Football League.
The journey back to the top flight became a four-year odyssey, defined by trips to lower-league grounds, packed away ends, and the painstaking rebuilding of pride and identity.
But what if history had taken a different path? What if, instead of starting in the bottom tier, Rangers had been placed in the First Division – one rung below the top league – as many within the game originally proposed but was ultimately voted against by SFL members?
This alternate history raises fascinating questions about competitive balance, financial recovery, and Scottish football’s wider landscape. Would Rangers have returned to the summit of the Premiership sooner? Would the SPFL restructuring have looked the same? And how might Celtic’s domestic dominance, European representation, and the financial health of both Old Firm clubs have shifted in the years that followed?
Background
When Rangers entered administration in February 2012, the resulting turmoil threatened the club’s very existence. The liquidation of the old company in June forced a “newco” Rangers to apply for membership of the SFA and SFL.
While the SPL clubs rejected their application for immediate re-entry to the top tier, discussions centred on where the club should restart.
The SFL initially leaned towards placing Rangers in the First Division, arguing this would preserve TV deals, commercial revenue, and a degree of sporting integrity. Yet, amid fan protests and pressure from other clubs, the compromise collapsed, and Charles Green’s Rangers were voted into the Third Division.
The decision had seismic consequences: attendances at small grounds boomed, lower-league clubs benefited financially, and Rangers faced a slow, turbulent climb back to the top.
Had the First Division route been taken, the story, for Rangers, their rivals, and Scottish football as a whole, could have looked very different.
A Faster Return to the Premiership?
The first place to start would be the squad. Almost all first-team players refused to transfer their contracts and play in the Third Division, many seeing three years out of the top flight as too damaging to their careers.
But what if, like Juventus in Serie B in the mid-2000s, it had simply been a year to get back? Who else would have stayed besides the loyal Lee Wallace, Lee McCulloch, and Neil Alexander?
Those who initially stayed for the opening matches of the 2012/13 season, such as Kirk Broadfoot, Maurice Edu, and the central defensive duo of Carlos Bocanegra and Dorin Goian, both of whom spent the Third Division season out on loan, might have remained beyond the end of August.
Rangers-supporting members of the squad like Allan McGregor, Steven Davis, and Kyle Lafferty, who all later returned to Ibrox, may also have stayed, although potential transfer offers under the uncertain Green ownership would have influenced their decisions. Sasa Papac would likely have retired regardless, but imagining more stability at full back under him is a tantalising thought.
The situation of Steven Whittaker would probably have remained the same: a contract transfer almost certainly rejected, but without the infamous press conference in which he stated, “We owe no loyalty to the new club. There is no history there for us.”
As for Steven Naismith, a supposed boyhood Rangers supporter and Whittaker’s cohort at that press conference, his decision is harder to predict. Would a one-year First Division stint have changed his mind and saved his reputation among the Ibrox faithful? In later years, he admitted:
“Looking back on [the press conference], 100%. It was wrong … In hindsight, every one of those people who went into that club thought ‘this is a great chance to make a fortune.’
“It got to the point where so many things had happened, I really can’t trust these people.”
Whether that was influenced by events that followed or reflected his true thoughts at the time is a question only Naismith can answer.
Other players like Rhys McCabe and Jamie Ness might have remained with a stronger chance of first-team action and a rapid return to the top league. John Fleck, never fancied under Ally McCoist, would likely have departed anyway to forge his own path. Juan Manuel Ortiz, Sone Aluko, and Alejandro Bedoya would probably have been sold or departed regardless.
A core squad of McGregor; Broadfoot, Goian, Bocanegra, Wallace; Ness, McCabe, Davis; Lafferty and McCulloch alongside youngsters like Lewis MacLeod, Barrie McKay, Ross Perry, Fraser Aird, and Kyle Hutton could plausibly have been capable of promotion on their own.
Signings from Scotland, such as Dean Shiels, David Templeton, Francisco Sandaza, and unfortunately Ian Black, would likely still have arrived, while the desperation moves for players like Kevin Kyle and foreign imports Emilson Cribari, Sebastian Faure, Francisco Stella and Anestis Argyriou could have been avoided, saving wages and streamlining the squad and allowed us to recruit smarter, higher level recruits.
Even without pre-season, this team could have won the First Division, competed for the Challenge Cup, and perhaps even reached Europe via the Scottish Cup, putting Rangers back in the SPL within a year and challenging Celtic sooner, at only two-in-a-row.
Impact on Celtic’s Dominance – Would their Nine-in-a-Row Era Look the Same?
Had Rangers been placed in the First Division in 2012, the narrative of Celtic’s nine-in-a-row could have looked very different.
In reality, Celtic capitalised on Rangers absence from the top flight, cruising to domestic titles and building a squad with growing confidence in European competition.
A one-year absence for Rangers could have preserved more of the old squad’s core, limiting Celtic’s ability to dominate unchallenged. Key players like McGregor, Davis, and Lafferty might have been in place to immediately contest the top spots, forcing Celtic to defend their supremacy rather than march unopposed.
Yet the impact of Charles Green’s controversial and often described as “treacherous” ownership would have severely limited Rangers financial reach, even in the First Division scenario.
While a faster return to the Premiership could have helped preserve some revenue streams, Green’s mismanagement and questionable dealings would likely have restricted the club’s ability to make significant transfers or retain top players long-term, specifically his merchandise dealings with Mike Ashley’s Sports Direct.
This would have curtailed Rangers capacity to challenge Celtic immediately, both on and off the pitch, despite the advantages of starting just one tier below the top flight.
Financially, Celtic may still have maintained a competitive edge. The SPL’s revenue structure, coupled with Rangers constrained budget under Green, would have allowed Celtic to continue investing in squad depth and infrastructure, ensuring a level of domestic dominance, and continued qualification for the UEFA Champions League.
Smaller SPL clubs would have experienced less of a windfall than in the Third Division scenario, reshaping the broader economic landscape of Scottish football.
European ambitions would have been affected as well. Rangers returning sooner could have improved Scotland’s UEFA coefficient points more quickly, but Green’s financial mismanagement and inability to invest meaningfully in the squad would have likely limited their continental impact.
Celtic’s European runs may have faced stiffer domestic competition, but Rangers under Green would have been poorly positioned to capitalize fully, reinforcing Celtic’s edge both domestically and continentally.
Ultimately, the First Division scenario presents a “sliding doors” moment: a tighter, more contested domestic league, a faster return to top-flight prestige for Rangers, but one still hampered by poor ownership and financial limitations. Celtic’s dominance may have been slightly checked, but Green’s mismanagement would have prevented Rangers from mounting a serious, immediate challenge for supremacy.
In the end, the ‘Three Bears’ would still be required to retake ownership to fully restore Rangers to power, but could this have happened sooner without the limitations placed on a lower league club?
There is also the question of McCoist’s managerial ability, would he, in a normal situation, have grown into the role as he looked as if he would in the early days of 2011/12, or would his pitfalls still limit him in this scenario? It would likely be the latter, and King and co would have the job of removing the legend from his position to get a coach in who could get the Gers back on top.
The Fans’ Perspective – Would the Emotional “Journey Back” Have Resonated the Same?
One of the defining aspects of Rangers fall to the Third Division was the shared experience between the club and its supporters. Fans crammed into lower-league grounds, cheered every goal in unfamiliar surroundings, and endured wet, windswept days on the old-school terraces around the country from Elgin to Annan, all for the sake of seeing the club rise again.
That journey forged a sense of identity, resilience and wariness that still echoes to this day.
Had Rangers been placed in the First Division instead, much of that narrative would have been lost. The “journey” would have been shorter, the challenges less extreme, and the romance of a four-year climb from the bottom tier would have been replaced by a more conventional promotion campaign.
While supporters would have welcomed an earlier return to the Premiership, the emotional highs and lows that now define this period of modern Rangers history might have been less pronounced.
Would fans appreciate where the club is now as much? Possibly, but in a different way. The hardship of the lower league years instilled patience, loyalty, and a renewed sense of ownership over the club’s fortunes.
A one-year climb might have felt like a speed bump rather than a prison sentance, reducing the emotional bond that came from collectively enduring adversity.
Would we be as wary of new owners? Likely not to the same extent. The Green era highlighted the risks of poor stewardship and the importance of credible, transparent leadership, but would we have avoided the spivs of Easdale and co?
A First Division restart, combined with a shorter climb back, might have shielded fans from the worst of Green’s mismanagement, but it also might have dulled the lessons learned.
The cautious optimism that greeted the eventual Three Bears takeover, King, Park, and Gilligan, may have been replaced by complacency, with supporters assuming that quick fixes were sufficient and that the club’s return to the top was inevitable rather than hard earnt.
In short, while a faster return to the top flight might have been desirable in terms of footballing success, it may have come at the cost of the emotional journey that has become a core part of modern Rangers identity. Fans may have gained success faster, but lost some of the enduring resilience, patience and togetherness that define the club today.
Scottish Football’s Sliding Doors Moment – What was gained, and what was lost.
Rangers demotion in 2012 was, in many ways, a defining “sliding doors” moment for Scottish football, a juncture where history could have gone a number of very different ways.
Restarting in the Third Division shaped not only Rangers trajectory, but the domestic game, European prospects, and fan culture in profound ways.
Had Rangers been placed in the First Division, several gains might have been realised. The club would likely have returned to the Premiership faster, retaining more of its first-team core, preserving revenue streams, and limiting the destabilising effects of Green-era mismanagement.
The eventual takeover by the Three Bears, would still have provided much-needed stability, but their task might have been less urgent and more focused on long-term strategy rather than crisis management and court cases.
Financially, the club would have been in a stronger position sooner, able to pursue targeted recruitment and develop academy talent within a controlled environment. Celtic’s dominance may have been checked earlier, creating a more competitive league, and Scotland’s UEFA coefficient points might have improved as Rangers returned to Europe faster and avoided the Progres Niederkorn fiasco.
Yet, much was lost in the process. The emotional journey of the fans, the long slog through the lower leagues, the camaraderie, the sense of collective resilience, would have been lost.
The narrative of survival, perseverance, and eventual triumph that was 55 is now a defining part of modern Rangers identity, one that would have been diluted by a quicker, easier return.
Lessons learned about ownership, vigilance, and fan oversight of the club’s financial affairs might have been less starkly impressed upon supporters.
Scottish football might have been less dramatically reshaped. Smaller clubs benefitted financially from Rangers descent, attendances soared in lower divisions, and the competitive landscape was temporarily broadened.
These unintended consequences helped redistribute attention and revenue across the league, creating a ripple effect that would not have occurred with a First Division restart.
In short, the sliding doors moment of 2012 highlights a tension between efficiency and experience, success and sacrifice.