Rangers did not need the Bryan Reynolds twist to understand the weight sitting on their right side. They already knew it the moment Ross McCrorie walked back through the door, accepted the No.2 shirt and became the most symbolic signing of Derek McInnes’ first rebuild.
But the latest transfer noise has changed the feel of the position.
The Scottish Sun has reported that Rangers are set to miss out on Westerlo right-back Bryan Reynolds, with Rennes moving towards a deal worth around GBP3.9m. Earlier interest from Ibrox, according to that report, did not reach the Belgian club’s valuation.
That does not make Reynolds the defining story of Rangers’ summer. It makes him the latest reminder that this rebuild cannot be judged by volume alone.
McInnes has moved quickly. Lawrence Shankland, Ross McCrorie, Ben Godfrey, Ivor Pandur and Dan Neil have all altered the squad’s profile in a matter of days. Sky Sports framed Neil’s arrival as another sign of that acceleration, with the former Sunderland captain joining despite Southampton talks.
Yet right-back is different. It carries more emotional residue, more tactical consequence and a sharper test of judgement.
Bryan Reynolds to Rangers transfer latest as right back search escalates.
The Tavernier Shadow Still Shapes The Job
For more than a decade, James Tavernier made the position a central creative office rather than a defensive posting. At his best, Rangers built entire attacking patterns around his delivery, penalty-box timing and appetite for responsibility. At his worst, the same system became stretched, predictable and exposed.
That is the tension McCrorie inherits.
This is not just a shirt-number handover. McCrorie told RangersTV that he asked McInnes for the No.2 because it has become his number during the years since leaving Ibrox. He also spoke openly about his friendship with Tavernier and about returning as a different player and character, a theme ReadRangers has already flagged in the succession debate.
That matters because Rangers are not simply replacing output. They are replacing habits.
Tavernier’s final years forced a long-running debate about balance. How high should the right-back play? How much defensive cover should the midfield sacrifice to free him? Could Rangers carry a full-back whose attacking upside remained significant but whose defensive workload became more difficult to protect?
McCrorie gives McInnes a different answer. He is less likely to replicate Tavernier’s numbers, but he offers defensive aggression, recovery power, aerial security and the flexibility to slide inside when Rangers need a back three shape in possession.
That sounds tidy on paper. In practice, it places huge pressure on the rest of the side to replace what Tavernier used to create.
Reynolds Would Have Offered A Different Kind Of Insurance
Reynolds was attractive because he fitted a clean market profile: 25, international experience with the United States, resale potential and a more natural right-back rhythm. If Rennes complete the deal, Rangers have not just missed a player; they have lost a route towards positional variety.
That is the real sting.
McCrorie can absolutely start the season as the senior right-back. His return was confirmed by Rangers on a three-year contract with an option for a further year, and McInnes knows him better than almost any manager in the market could. The pair worked together at Aberdeen. The trust is built in.
But trust and depth are not the same thing.
Rangers have Europa League qualifying dates coming fast. The club’s own key dates guide lists the third qualifying round draw for July 20, with the competitive schedule tightening soon after the domestic opener at Dundee United. That calendar is not kind to experiments.
The right-back decision therefore becomes a three-part test:
- Can McCrorie play consecutive high-pressure games without Rangers losing attacking width?
- Can the midfield cover his inside movements without becoming too narrow?
- Can McInnes find a second option quickly if the market closes around preferred targets?
Reynolds would have softened those questions. His reported move to Rennes sharpens them.
McCrorie Brings Something Rangers Have Been Missing
The temptation is to define McCrorie by what he is not. He is not Tavernier. He is not a high-volume chance-creation full-back. He is not the glamorous new overseas target some supporters expected after a summer of boardroom promises and recruitment noise.
That framing is too narrow.
McCrorie brings a kind of cultural bluntness that Rangers badly needed. He knows the club, understands the impatience around it and has experienced enough football away from Ibrox to return without the academy-player softness that can follow a nostalgic signing.
In his official return interview, he described frustration as a supporter watching recent seasons and spoke about coming back to help Rangers win trophies. That is useful not because it is romantic, but because McInnes is building a dressing room that has to absorb pressure immediately.
Rangers have added leadership in different forms. Shankland brings Scottish Premiership certainty. Neil brings captaincy experience from Sunderland and a midfield edge. Godfrey brings Premier League-level athleticism. Pandur brings a succession plan in goal.
McCrorie brings familiarity with the demand.
That can become powerful if the tactical role is clear. It can become dangerous if Rangers ask him to be too many things at once.
The Attack Must Now Carry More Of The Creative Burden
If McCrorie is the preferred right-back, Rangers’ attacking design has to change. There is no point pretending otherwise.
The old Tavernier model pushed a large share of progression, crossing and set-piece pressure through one player. McInnes’ version should be more distributed. That means the right winger must hold width with conviction, the right-sided midfielder must offer cleaner third-man runs, and the centre-forward has to attack earlier deliveries rather than waiting for endless recycled crosses.
It also means the left side cannot become ornamental.
One of the quiet benefits of a more conservative right-back is that Rangers can stop overloading one flank and start asking opponents to defend the whole pitch. But that only works if the squad has enough pace and decision-making around McCrorie.
That is where the Reynolds miss loops back into the wider recruitment argument.
If Rangers do not add another specialist right-back, McInnes has to be comfortable with McCrorie as both first-choice defender and tactical reference point. If they do add one, the profile cannot simply be a squad filler. It has to be someone who changes the way Rangers can attack games.
The Verdict Is A Test Of Discipline, Not Ambition
Missing a target is not automatically a failure. Paying the wrong fee for the wrong stage of a rebuild can be worse.
There is a reasonable argument that Rangers were right not to chase Reynolds beyond their valuation, particularly after already committing resources across the spine of the team. The stronger clubs in modern recruitment are not the ones that win every race. They are the ones that know which races to leave.
But discipline only works if the alternative plan is strong.
For McInnes, the right-back question is now one of the clearest early audits of his Rangers era. McCrorie has the personality, background and manager relationship to make the role his own. He has the defensive qualities to give Rangers a firmer platform. He also carries a shirt number loaded with expectation.
That is why Reynolds matters even if he never gets close to Ibrox.
His likely move elsewhere does not define Rangers’ summer, but it exposes the pressure point. McCrorie is no longer just a clever homegrown return. He is the visible answer to a position that has shaped Rangers’ identity for years.
The answer does not need to look like Tavernier. It simply has to stand up quickly.
