[St Charles Owl]

If Brentford had wanted him to stay they would have accommodated him within the structure, especially given the success he had brought to the club. The fact they chose to pull the rug from under his feet appears to me (at least) that they thought they could do better without him

To a point I agree with you, they do feel they can achieve what they want to without him, but their chairman has very fixed views on structure and the way the club will operate and he does not appear to be someone who will bend on that.

Besides, if I was Warburton after the run he had there his stock was as high as it was likely to be, so he was able to stand to his principles in the knowledge that there would likely be a better job for him after he left.  The fact he continued for half a season after the announcement shows that this was a difference of future philosophy rather than him being firmly pushed out the door.

[El Car]

Warburton left because Matthew Benham sees Brentford's future lying with the 'interchangeable coach' model where everything the club does is set in stone and run by a Sporting Director, with first team coaches who can come and go without disrupting things. Much like Levein makes all the development and signing decisions at Hearts, just as the Romanovs did before him, while Neilson is a dispensable coach who just happens to be the man in the role at the moment. Warburton has too much self respect to be a puppet coach, but he also has a strong belief that the man in charge of the team should be the man with the final say in shaping and developing it, which is exactly the remit he's been given at Rangers.

[Maroon 1]

Warburton left because Matthew Benham sees Brentford's future lying with the 'interchangeable coach' model where everything the club does is set in stone and run by a Sporting Director, with first team coaches who can come and go without disrupting things. Much like Levein makes all the development and signing decisions at Hearts, just as the Romanovs did before him, while Neilson is a dispensable coach who just happens to be the man in the role at the moment. Warburton has too much self respect to be a puppet coach, but he also has a strong belief that the man in charge of the team should be the man with the final say in shaping and developing it, which is exactly the remit he's been given at Rangers.

Agree with the fact that Neilson is a dispensable coach, but he's also potentially an attractive proposition to another club (depending on results) Totally disagree with your vision of Leveins role at Tynecastle but happy to concede that's how you want to view it. Also totally understand yours and other Rangers fans enthusiasm with Warburton and the way he is conducting his business on the playing side of things at Ibrox. Don't share it.....but totally understand it