Poll on Lennon to be the next full time Manager

Should Lennon get gig full time?

  • Total voters
    58
  • Poll closed .
TET said:
I fully agree that Celtic should have been favourites in that match.

But on the other hand they jumped straight into competition at that stage we at least had few games behind us.

So with no real match speed/fitness they played basic counter football and beat us. Even though greek league is crippled financially they must have higher overall cooefficient since Celtic started in round 1 they entered at round 3.

Was always a triickky tie to naviagate. But with better practical tactics and a manager who wasnt playing funny bugger behind the scenes we could mand maybe should have beaten them.

Didnt and put whole operation risks into jeopardy. Seems they managed to overcome the risks with decent europa run but with lotta luck, and to be honest even a dismal underperfoming with the costs to run our years operations.

IMO rodgers was not value added.
He did get doubletrble and invincible run but he did it by having trully excessive operation costs that were thankfully covered by CL entry.

He neded to reach CL to match those costs he burdened club with.

Yet most people see the club as being biscuit tin and not risk aware. I dont buy that theory until i see more detailed sustainble growth budgets for these new levels of ambition.

But still the Not Ambitioius enough proponents never seem to lay out the better ambitious budgets and how they can be sustained with growth.
Click to expand...


Look i understand most of your arguments although i dont agree with them. But laying the AEK game down to strategy is garbage. They lost that tie because the center backs they played were not fit for purpose. Because Lawwell was playing silly buggers with Rodgers over the Compper situation. We never should have been caught in that position. Down to Lawwell and Rodgers for that game....but it was Lawwell that wouldnt act...so far we havent seen Lenny go to Compper despite his reserve playing time so the jury is out as to whether he was adequate anyway.

And the decent Europa run didnt come close to the revenue we forfeited for losing the AEK tie and missing the CL groups. The prizes for europa group qualification are 15 per cent of the same for the CL and the tv revenue is also 5x as great. We are talking 10mm [generous] vs 50mm [conservative]

And i showed you what Lawwell needed to do specifically on at least two posts. Acquire at least one center back that could play European football for say 7mm, then agree to sell boyata to fulham for L10 or better [9 was on offer] and use the funds to buy another. Net net 5mm additional expenditure. we had L37mm in the bank at the end of six months. netting out 5mm for the europa progress to that point leaves L32 that could have been forseen to be in the kitty.....if we acquire 2 center backs we likely dont bring back izaguirre for 2mm. Assuming the other cb cost 7mm that results in net expenditure of L2-4mm.....there were very good backs on offer for that money. As it turns out, we lost the entire 10mm from the fulham bid, get zero for boyata and will have to buy center backs to replace boyata and others anyway this spring.. and will have to spend L5mm there for 2 even if we are cheap. That would net out as a 15mm negative change in cash on hand vs a 2-4mm loss in cash on hand going the "daring" route...so dont say again we dont give you specifics. i have. and they are reasonable......

We arent talking orders of magnitude here. We are just talking instead of buying a washed up compper for 1mm and paying him his high bundesliga level wage buy younger and spend more upfront for better younger and healthier players..penny wise pound foolish....

finally, we have saved lots of money by bringing in loans that have helped us to win prizes and keep us deep enough to dream of trebles.....a lot of that is because young euro players bought the sleekit one's pitch that he could make them better and guarantee them cl exposure to further their careers. Lenny has nowhere near the pedigree or the reputation outside scotland to bewitch a young frenchman, dutchman or croatian etc to give two or three years of his life like BR could. Fact. So keeping Lenny will mean we will be paying more for less because we will have to buy more top people than we have been doing in order just to tread water.

Your plan is not ambitious enough to keep what we have now. And remember Lenny did not win cups...at all really. Just because he is one of ours doesn't mean he is the answer longer term.

the game has changed since 1994. because of the astronomical prizes, pinching pennies and missing pots will allow competitors to elbow you aside sooner or later. there will always be a glaswegian billionaire living somewhere in the world to bail sevco out. if they didnt die last time this time will be no different. we either keep them from the prizes entirely or they will beat us to death with the money we lost by being poky...

remember we are not talking 20-30mm annually here..if ajax can do it on 50 we can do it on 60-70mm in wages. we are talking about not leaving us bareassed st the back end and unable to compete in the qualifiers for 5mm extra.
 
Last edited:
TET said:
Cashflow is not the profit.
Cashflow is the monies as they are actually paid or received.

16 million profit doesnt automatically translate to 16 million cashflow.

Lawell is doing the job he paid to do. And he is more than fit for purpose. In fact he excels in his role. But the MSM have turned him into ahatefigure based on faulty anaysis around imaginary ecomonics.

The share price at CP is solid and the team are winning desp[ite the managers failure to add value.

How anyone can say he is not fit for purpose in fiance is beyond me.
He is too silent on big issues but he does his job very well other than that.

The msm hate him and huns hate him

Which should make you wonder if the mud slung at himis justified.

What exactly are the things you fell Lawell has failed in his duty of care?
Click to expand...

no tet cashflow is earnings before non cash items. it is net of all cash expenses going out. revenue is money brought in before any expenses are deducted. but most expenses are paid anyway whether you win the prizes or not. bonuses for reaching targets rarely go north of 5pct of wages earned. with all due respect you arent a financial professional and the above post is not factually correct. I am.

All companies use depreciation on assets such as players to reduce tax paid. Their statements also are not designed to inform the casual individual as well. Football teams well run are cash spinners because there is a big difference between operating cash flow as defined in the above sentence and earnings The easiest thing to watch re this because you cant get to the bottom of expenses as declared is changes in cash in the bank over the interval being studied. at the end of last fiscal year it was 20mm now its 37. That means we salted away 16mm in cash in six months despite missing out on the big prize.. 5mm net was the europa league....maybe much less depending on whether we got our tv revenue checks, which take a while to calculate and might not even have been payed out as of today.. So we had 32mm plus to work with.....most of that should indeed be retained but under those circumstances, spending 5mm additional to get two backs and sell boyata wouldn't have upset any apple carts even if we lost to aek anyway.....

with regards to Lawwell, he is an extremely capable financial person and should definitely be in charge of the overall financial profile of celtic. but his understanding of when and how we need to spend on players is suboptimal.. We need either a manager of BR's stature or a DOF as an intermediary between Lawwell and the manager to make the decision on football expenditures and be responsible for negotiations for player transfers. his performance in the cb situation and in the mcginn negotiation was embarrassingly bad......regardless of whether you were a mcginn fan or not it was flat out unprofessional...

Bottom line: Lenny and Lawwell running this team without a third party as DOF would be a disaster sooner or later. Likely sooner. that is the argument of many on this thread.

If we run this business properly we should be spinning cash flow every year, which would be down to Lawwell to invest. Which is his strong point. Setting the overall financial parameters and allowing others with less offensive negotiating style to bring the players in and close deals.

BTW on the huns hating Lawwell, they hated Rodgers too. So did the MSM. Lawwell gets better press than Rodgers did.
 
Last edited:
manhattan tim said:
Look i understand most of your arguments although i dont agree with them. But laying the AEK game down to strategy is garbage. They lost that tie because the center backs they played were not fit for purpose. Because Lawwell was playing silly buggers with Rodgers over the Compper situation. We never should have been caught in that position. Down to Lawwell and Rodgers for that game....but it was Lawwell that wouldnt act...so far we havent seen Lenny go to Compper despite his reserve playing time so the jury is out as to whether he was adequate anyway.

And the decent Europa run didnt come close to the revenue we forfeited for losing the AEK tie and missing the CL groups. The prizes for europa group qualification are 15 per cent of the same for the CL and the tv revenue is also 5x as great. We are talking 10mm [generous] vs 50mm [conservative]

And i showed you what Lawwell needed to do specifically on at least two posts. Acquire at least one center back that could play European football for say 7mm, then agree to sell boyata to fulham for L10 or better [9 was on offer] and use the funds to buy another. Net net 5mm additional expenditure. we had L37mm in the bank at the end of six months. netting out 5mm for the europa progress to that point leaves L32 that could have been forseen to be in the kitty.....if we acquire 2 center backs we likely dont bring back izaguirre for 2mm. Assuming the other cb cost 7mm that results in net expenditure of L2-4mm.....there were very good backs on offer for that money. As it turns out, we lost the entire 10mm from the fulham bid, get zero for boyata and will have to buy center backs to replace boyata and others anyway this spring.. and will have to spend L5mm there for 2 even if we are cheap. That would net out as a 15mm negative change in cash on hand vs a 2-4mm loss in cash on hand going the "daring" route...so dont say again we dont give you specifics. i have. and they are reasonable......

We arent talking orders of magnitude here. We are just talking instead of buying a washed up compper for 1mm and paying him his high bundesliga level wage buy younger and spend more upfront for better younger and healthier players..penny wise pound foolish....

finally, we have saved lots of money by bringing in loans that have helped us to win prizes and keep us deep enough to dream of trebles.....a lot of that is because young euro players bought the sleekit one's pitch that he could make them better and guarantee them cl exposure to further their careers. Lenny has nowhere near the pedigree or the reputation outside scotland to bewitch a young frenchman, dutchman or croatian etc to give two or three years of his life like BR could. Fact. So keeping Lenny will mean we will be paying more for less because we will have to buy more top people than we have been doing in order just to tread water.

Your plan is not ambitious enough to keep what we have now. And remember Lenny did not win cups...at all really. Just because he is one of ours doesn't mean he is the answer longer term.

the game has changed since 1994. because of the astronomical prizes, pinching pennies and missing pots will allow competitors to elbow you aside sooner or later. there will always be a glaswegian billionaire living somewhere in the world to bail sevco out. if they didnt die last time this time will be no different. we either keep them from the prizes entirely or they will beat us to death with the money we lost by being poky...

remember we are not talking 20-30mm annually here..if ajax can do it on 50 we can do it on 60-70mm in wages. we are talking about not leaving us bareassed st the back end and unable to compete in the qualifiers for 5mm extra.
Click to expand...
love your enthusiasm manhattan,but peter lawell does what peter lawwell does,he sussed the snake oil salesman out and pulled the plug on transfers,
because he knew the bastard was off,our club is one of the best run clubs in europe,PL is using his influence and gaining allies in europe, to take on the closed shop that is the champion's league,slowly ,slowly catchee monkee!!!! HH Manhatten.
 
michael duffy said:
love your enthusiasm manhattan,but peter lawell does what peter lawwell does,he sussed the snake oil salesman out and pulled the plug on transfers,
because he knew the bastard was off,our club is one of the best run clubs in europe,PL is using his influence and gaining allies in europe, to take on the closed shop that is the champion's league,slowly ,slowly catchee monkee!!!! HH Manhatten.
Click to expand...
so we lost 40mm pounds in prizes so Lawwell could get rid of the sleekit one? Why not fire him and pay 2mm severance but get the players in that qualify us for the CL. or even better give him what he wants and let him leave for nothing because he was going to do that anyway by your admission. If he had left at the end of the year we still would have got the payout, It was in the contract which had another two years to run...

anyway you slice it he cut off celtic's nose to spite BR's face

Any way you cut it or excuse it I dont call that good business........
 
Last edited:
Winter said:
Aye that's not what I said. I made no analogy of the Europa league I said the squad had done well to get to the last 32 in Europe (being European competition) which they have and against the odds at that. The backs at Celtic is a repeat problem every window everyone knows. Should have/could have sold boyata bought 2 defenders we didn't. We do have international defenders at present but whilst it might be doable to replace them doesn't mean it wasn't attempted. The defenders we were after we didn't get for various reasons. We might yet though who knows? HH
Click to expand...

pixel.gif



various reasons? we werent willing to pay the freight. that was the reason. When that stretches over three or four windows there is no excuse for it.........

and making europe was no feat when you consider the same team had made the CL the two previous seasons. The CL qualifiers are what matter and making the groups is the essential goal. everyting after that in europe is gravy. So my point stands......

The repeated failure to replace the backs is down to us getting nosebleeds at the prices....... i bet the difference between what we wanted to pay for two or three backs and what was on offer wouldnt add up to the L10mm we lost by keeping Boyata a year too long. Penny wise pound foolish once again.

No excuses possible.
 
Last edited:
the problem with "slowly slowly catchee monkey" is that there is a time limit to how much we get from the CL TV pool in the UK. Right now we split it equally with the 4 english clubs that make the groups. if we dont make it they get our share. so they will doubtless be putting pressure on the structure for payout percentages to change, particularly if scotland goes independent in the next few years, which is looking more likely by the day. You KNOW they are anxious to grab that cash from us. Right now its distributed by country and we are the only country that has two leagues in it. They would prefer to be paid as the epl. Dont bet against them changing that before too long...they have the clout and sweeping all revenues to the big leagues is the big focus in european football these days. They think its theirs by right anyway. The dutch, for example dont get near as much as we do in tv revenues [nor do any other small countries], which for us is nearly twice as much as the prize for making the groups is [16MM EUROS THIS YEAR]...likely nearly 30mm euros..this is the only time we share revenues with the EPL....we have about 4 to 5 years before this situation is "rectified"....we need to make every effort to make the CL groups while the pot is at its max..we can bank 30mm plus a year by doing so...we arent..no backs bought in june says it all.........

If the huns get there once they will spend it all trying to get back, but in doing so they will catch us from a player talent view by doing so. That is the. danger

Slowly slowly catchee monkey wont work in this particular case. Its actually a riskier strategy than making sure you are fit for purpose. Making that money and driving the bastards into the ground is the only tactic, That is what they would do......and already tried twice.....................
 
Last edited:
TET said:
I like steve but can he play attacking fitba. even the special one played anti football mostly. was very good for titles but not great to watch at times
Click to expand...
Defensive football is just as important as attacking football, the away games against Barcelona and both games against Paris St Germaine tell you that.
 
commodore64 said:
he is baking a cake with someone elses ingredients , give him a chance
Click to expand...
i would agree with that. i voted to wait till the end of the season. having said that its a pretty high quality cake judging by the form this year and before....i didnt say he was incompetent just that the results to date really dont show enough to be more than we shall see
 
Well I have thoroughly enjoyed this debate so far and there is value to be taken from all points of view.

For what it's worth and like all of you I'm sure, I'm a Neil Lennon fan. He made mistakes first time round and a couple of those mistakes cost us a title we should have sewn up in his first full season.

I'm not a big advocate of folk coming back and replicating past glories. I believe that you get one crack at it with Celtic and you make of it what you will.

There are exceptions to that rule. We'll never forget Big Billy coming back and leading us to The Double in the Centenary Year; however - I'm not sure that it's always a recipe for success.

I voted 'yes' and that Neil Lennon should be offered the permanent post, but I'll admit that my vote might be clouded by sentiment.

I believe that with the proper infrastructure and support, that he can do an excellent job and punch above his weight.

I have a rather romantic ideal about football, particularly regarding the financial pollution of the game, but I'm a realist too and understand that finance is the shifting sand that the whole game's built upon.

If my back's against the wall, I'd want Lenny by my side. The Man is no apologist and is unrepentant in his pride. I'd have him in the dug-out every single day of the week, but sentiment can blind me sometimes and can also cloud my judgement.
 
manhattan tim said:
Look i understand most of your arguments although i dont agree with them.
Click to expand...

1. But laying the AEK game down to strategy is garbage. They lost that tie because the center backs they played were not fit for purpose. Because Lawwell was playing silly buggers with Rodgers over the Compper situation. We never should have been caught in that position. Down to Lawwell and Rodgers for that game....but it was Lawwell that wouldnt act...so far we havent seen Lenny go to Compper despite his reserve playing time so the jury is out as to whether he was adequate anyway.

-Your telling me that Celtic couldnt have won that game with those players? It was much more tactics than personel that lost that game. AEK players were not better players overall, our game plan sucked. Simple. A much more experienced Centre Back would have perhaps made a difference, but guarantees nothing with that weak defensive system coupled with the lack of regular high level attacking from Scottish teams means that no matter how good our defenders they arent tested often enough to be sharp enough at higher levels therefore in one off games gainst tightly knit, well oiled, counter attacking team, we may well have lost same goals. Our defenders were exposed by the system and even if we had a VVD in that system it would have been very vulrnerable to AEK system. So your analysis is badly wrong and fraught with your personal bias and finger pointing.

2. And the decent Europa run didnt come close to the revenue we forfeited for losing the AEK tie and missing the CL groups. The prizes for europa group qualification are 15 per cent of the same for the CL and the tv revenue is also 5x as great. We are talking 10mm [generous] vs 50mm [conservative]

-Again you love to talk in hindsight. The weakness in defence is Rodgers inability to find value for money. He bought these two inadequate players. What makes you think he would ever find better defenders? For a financial professional you cant do budgets?????? And use the old Hindsight after it goes pearshaped excuse in every post (it seems). You also avoid direct simple questions. What risk level should club be setting Operation costs to acquire 105Million???

3. And i showed you what Lawwell needed to do specifically on at least two posts. Acquire at least one center back that could play European football for say 7mm, then agree to sell boyata to fulham for L10 or better [9 was on offer] and use the funds to buy another. Net net 5mm additional expenditure. we had L37mm in the bank at the end of six months. netting out 5mm for the europa progress to that point leaves L32 that could have been forseen to be in the kitty.....if we acquire 2 center backs we likely dont bring back izaguirre for 2mm. Assuming the other cb cost 7mm that results in net expenditure of L2-4mm.....there were very good backs on offer for that money. As it turns out, we lost the entire 10mm from the fulham bid, get zero for boyata and will have to buy center backs to replace boyata and others anyway this spring.. and will have to spend L5mm there for 2 even if we are cheap. That would net out as a 15mm negative change in cash on hand vs a 2-4mm loss in cash on hand going the "daring" route...so dont say again we dont give you specifics. i have. and they are reasonable......

- This is just hogwash. fraught with absolute whatabouttery. So we would have beaten AEK just by buying a Centre back better than Hendry? How do you know he would have been better on the night? Again for a so called financial professional your madcap ludicrous udertsandoing of finance is just that. Buy better player than Boyata for 7 million then look into the future and see a 10 million bid for Boyata. What wages is this better player getting? Why not buy a better striker than Eddy for say 5 million while we are at it and save 5 million on Eddy and have better player, playing on cheaper wages. Therefore, Lawell is evil. Gash. Pure speculation and you call it exactly what would have solved the issue. Good one.

4. We arent talking orders of magnitude here. We are just talking instead of buying a washed up compper for 1mm and paying him his high bundesliga level wage buy younger and spend more upfront for better younger and healthier players..penny wise pound foolish....

-Lawell backed your Rodgers and got in your words washed up hogwash. I agree, but sadly that nullifies your entire argument. Your really saying Lawell done his job Rodgers didnt. Compper was Rodgers special high quality diet man.

5. Finally, we have saved lots of money by bringing in loans that have helped us to win prizes and keep us deep enough to dream of trebles.....a lot of that is because young euro players bought the sleekit one's pitch that he could make them better and guarantee them cl exposure to further their careers. Lenny has nowhere near the pedigree or the reputation outside scotland to bewitch a young frenchman, dutchman or croatian etc to give two or three years of his life like BR could. Fact. So keeping Lenny will mean we will be paying more for less because we will have to buy more top people than we have been doing in order just to tread water.

- This is hogwash on every level. Lennon cant get same calibre of player as Rodgers???? Which superstar players did Rodgers bring in that would not have come under Lennon? I suspect Lennon would have saved club millions of millions by buying even better players who didnt cost half the amount Rodgers paid. You also make lots of ridiculous fantastical claims. I cant even be bothered countering this non relevant speculation, if you cant see how stupid your claims in 5 then we bother correcting it.

6. Your plan is not ambitious enough to keep what we have now. And remember Lenny did not win cups...at all really. Just because he is one of ours doesn't mean he is the answer longer term.

- My plan is what exactly? You still haven't defined your understanding of ambition. Throwing money down the drain when you are over your budget is not ambition its wealth destruction. Im pretty confident Lennon team before he left is capable of beating Rodgers if we had a time machine. Rodgers couldnt often beat Lennon with a far inferior Hibs team. Lennon record in europe is much better. And perhaps the fact Lennon had to play against much stronger Scottish teams means he had harder time winning cups, and he won them on fraction of Rodgers budget when he did.

7. the game has changed since 1994. because of the astronomical prizes, pinching pennies and missing pots will allow competitors to elbow you aside sooner or later. there will always be a glaswegian billionaire living somewhere in the world to bail sevco out. if they didnt die last time this time will be no different. we either keep them from the prizes entirely or they will beat us to death with the money we lost by being poky...

-The boggyman is coming so we must overspend to stay ahead. Did i summarise your plan correctly?


Comnclusion

For a guy who claims to be a professional in finace world, your understanding of value added, bottom line, cash flow, profits is full of spin and plainly worrying.

Your inability to lay out a budget speaks volumes. remember that whole book you wrote was on simple question. What is the correct risk level when you are aiming to earn 105 million income.

YOUR EGO TRIP IS JUST THAT.

You arbitrarily blame Lawell for Rodgers failures?
You claim he didnt back his man, but contradict that when you point out all the dross Rodgers brought in and overbloated the squad with medicority at way over their value.

You falsely define cashflow.
Cashflow tells you how healthy the business is paying bills on time and helps to create working capital budgets.
Cashflow statements reconcile actual cashflow with profits
And can help see business liquidity.

Rather than go on for hours use your finance skills to build a small budget for your level of ambition .
eg goal 105 revenue
cost of revenue is ????
etc etc

lets see your ambitious plan
 
Last edited:
Johnnybhoy said:
Defensive football is just as important as attacking football, the away games against Barcelona and both games against Paris St Germaine tell you that.
Click to expand...

I never once said we should not be able to play defensive football. But Can steve clarke force a win against a tam who gonna sit back and counter him?

Rodgers cant defend. I like clarke i rate him highly but can he play attacking football doesnt mean lets get someone who only does attcking football.
 
TET said:
I never once said we should not be able to play defensive football. But Can steve clarke force a win against a tam who gonna sit back and counter him?

Rodgers cant defend. I like clarke i rate him highly but can he play attacking football doesnt mean lets get someone who only does attcking football.
Click to expand...

Interesting points about Clarke TET, as he has never been in charge of a team that are expected to dominate, none of us can really answer this question.
He did spend a long time next to Jose, he may have learned things from him that might not be easy on the eyes of Celtic supporters, again, we may never know.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

Total: 366 (members: 6, guests: 360)

Latest posts

Share this page

Back
Top