The new manager will be...

Sandman said:
Problem being, NJ, that so many moaned and greeted on about Lenny as he wasn't their pick, that PL has reacted and given them the different manager they craved; only, just not the one they wanted.

This might be the worst case ever of the moral, Be careful what you wish for.:mad:
Click to expand...
Sadly I think you are right, but for now I'll cling to the hope the Moyes rumour is out there deliberately so Lennon seems more palatable to those very fans when he's announced on Monday. You can but hope
 
All of these rumours are just conjecture being fueled by the media and betting firms to make money/garner website clicks. In my opinion it would be grossly negligent if Lawell hadn't made initial talks with a number of possible candidates for the managerial position. He should be sussing them all out to eliminate most and then weigh the pros and cons of those that are maybe available. After all this then I still expect Lennon to be given the job for next season - or given a major role in our footballing operations - but it should be entirely on merit as the best overall candidate. If this has happened then I'm actually glad it has mainly happened behind closed doors and out of the public eye, as should happen in any properly run professional business - but it is maybe frustrating for many of us punters with the lack of info in the public domain.
 
a wee Moyes anecdote
As a player with Cambridge United, Moyes received abuse from teammate Roy McDonough for his religious beliefs; Moyes is a practising Christian. McDonough felt that religion was distracting them from focusing on playing; speaking of Moyes, Alan Comfort and Graham Daniels, he said: "The three of them sat in the changing room with a little black book, discussing their faith, when they should have been getting psyched up for a relegation scrap."[6] Following a 3–3 draw with Wigan Athletic on 9 March 1985, McDonough, who was 26 years old at the time, states that he "battered" Moyes for not putting sufficient effort into the game.[6]
jist sayin......
 
TET said:
Andy its not a straw man argument., its reality.

You talk about bringing in quality pros from around Europe. That can be done but can you do it without paying over the odds, since if Celtic are interested you can bet your dollar championships clubs and maybe premiership clubs will be lurking to gazump the bid. If he his a finished article then he should be on the radar already, which suggest he is high risk since all the quality human capital is already at the subsidised leagues. Therefore you need to either be taking on projects or buying up guys who are already established with reputation and hence probably already on hefty wage, maybe even already on some foreign version of EBTs hidden by that economies tax/legal system.

EBts are now illegal here, butter they illegal say in Holland or Belgium or France. I would hope so but I Have absolutely no idea. And if Ajax can afford players who can almost reach champions league final I suspect they must be doing a similar dodge to the moonbeam economics of yesteryear. Who knows for sure.

But lets say we pick up a Barasic from Croatia, international looks pretty damn good at Osijek comes here, turns out he doesn't perform as well here. Was he a first team ready player or project. So if top team in Croatia best players aren't upgrade on our first team which teams have upgrade players at bargain prices that will make our team better.

How much would Tierney cost us if he played for Groningen? Or Levski Sofia. Would the dutch or Bulgarian equivalent of Tierney play well in Scotland. Would he get homesick? Its not a straw man argument.

Its the reality. So having manager who understand that market is essential to get an edge. Big name premier league managers don't do lower league risks very often. They want premier league ready players. Celtic make players ready for premier league under the concocted system. We are premier league feeder. To compete with premier league teams we need to buy players from lesser markets and add value to them or pick up high risk players, injury prone, or can't get game elsewhere, and really those high risks players are high risk for a reason. maybe they lose motivation after they settle or maybe they can't settle. Take Sinclair as example. Couldn't get game very often ENGLAND. But had performed well in spurts. Came here looked dynamite, but seems to have been found out. Was worth the initial outlay, but unless he gets back to higher standard he is a wage that aint returning value.

We need quality players who can play. We need experienced players. But these guys cost money so we need to get those experenced players. So we need to find a structure that finds value, which usually means making your own players through youth and upgrading them and then bringing in best quality from your own market. But that destroys the competition and makes our experienced players lax. So we have a problem. While the market is hyper inflated we need a manager who can read the lower markets and has talent at bring is value added young players who will develop with quality coaching. getting better players in is possible but you need a specialist manager fro this market. And no big name is gonna be able to handle the SCOTTISH level of market. Celtic are now a feeder club thanks to the billionaire playground and the tv subsidy. Cannot compete for Henrik Larsson or Suttons or even Hartsons with the current wage bubbles. so we need to make these guys but sadly when they are ready they likely move to PSG Lyons etc etc...

HH
Click to expand...

Definition of a Straw man argument - A straw man is a form of argument and an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument that was not presented by that opponent. One who engages in this fallacy is said to be "attacking a straw man."

Man 1 sets up a weak position and attributes it to Man 2, then attacks the weak position; like setting up and fighting a straw man, easily knocking it down. Then the opponent, Man 2 is drawn into defending himself against the misrepresentations and Man 1 doesn't have to talk about his opponents actual position.

With respect TET it IS a straw man argument and it gets used far too often to shut down this side of the debate. For one your arguing against points I'm not making therefore I either have to defend or argue the merits of something I haven't said and may not even agree with and by setting up the debate under the conditions where everything being discussed always has to be viewed from what you define as the 'reality' of the situation as you put it i.e. through the prism of EPL level spending, EPL level players and by invoking the spectre of us always having to compete with EPL level clubs at every turn etc. then you are forcing the debate to be discussed in a certain context. What you're portraying as 'reality' here is just your take on things, your personal opinion on the situation and opinion isn't the same as fact. Framing the discussion in a preconditioned way which makes it easy for you to dismiss and discredit any opposing argument (most of which aren't even being made by me in the first place) isn't a proper debate, that makes it a straw man argument.

I'm not saying you're doing it deliberately or knowingly mate but it's a bit hard to debate with you properly when you're arguing against points that I'm not even making and you're getting to frame the discussion on your terms from the off.

I've never called for colossal sums like £50m to be spent on players or called for 'big name' premier league type managers or coaches to be brought in, neither have I called for us to be competing with EPL clubs on wages, transfer fees or for EPL level players. Why? Because I don't expect us to be operating at the same levels of the market which clubs in the EPL and the other top leagues operate in and we shouldn't be trying to anyway. Yes there will be times where there's a crossover and player's we might be targeting are being monitored by these type of clubs but if it's happening all the time then that tells us that we're looking for players in a market where we can't realistically compete.

There's a whole other world of football that exists outside the inflated markets of the EPL, La Liga, Bundesliga etc. filled with experienced pros capable of coming in and improving us as a team. The clubs in the EPL and the other top leagues are not all-seeing and all-knowing so claiming that any decent experienced player out there worth their salt must already be on their radar is based on a throwaway assumption on your part and not on fact. Also there will be many players who may not play at a level that peaks the interest of the clubs in the big leagues but that doesn't mean they aren't capable of playing at a level where they could do a job for Celtic.

You talk about the Barasic example for instance -

''But lets say we pick up a Barasic from Croatia, international looks pretty damn good at Osijek comes here, turns out he doesn't perform as well here. Was he a first team ready player or project. So if top team in Croatia best players aren't upgrade on our first team which teams have upgrade players at bargain prices that will make our team better.''

Well how he performs doesn't determine what category he falls into, the amount of time he's spent on the pitch playing first team football before you sign him determines that. If he was a young guy with little to no first team experience then he's a 'project' player if however he was let's say 24+ with 3 to 4 years of playing regular first team football then he's a 'first team ready' player. Also whether that player performs well here or not it certainly shouldn't determine the whole transfer strategy of a club or mean they should abandon all hope for other players in similar leagues. That would be an irrational overreaction that makes little sense!

As for players not working out, failing to adapt to the culture, weather, getting homesick etc. well that risk is there with ANY player a club signs, good scouting and doing your homework on a player can minimise those risks but you can't eliminate them completely so unless we stick to signing Scottish players then it's always going to be a risk we have to take. Incidentally getting homesick is far more likely to be a problem for young foreign 'project' type players, which seem to be our preferred type of signing, than older experienced ones but again that risk doesn't mean we should call time on signing talented young players from abroad.

I'm not saying you don't make some excellent and valid points TET or it's an easy task to source the kind of players I'm talking about what I'm saying is that it's not as futile as you portray it to be, these things are achievable and I mean no disrespect but to argue otherwise just sounds defeatist and a little like excuse making for the board's lack of vision and flexibility. As I said there is a middle ground and failing to recognise or explore it means we are limiting not just our options but our potential too.

HH TET (y)
 
kelly said:
Some folk fretting over moyes or Lenny

if thats all thats on offer then i would go for Lenny

good job it aint
Click to expand...

Out of the 2 Lenny would be my choice as well. Saying that, it doesn't mean we shouldn't test the water to see what else is out there.

That's been my only argument all along, if there's no one better than Lenny willing to take the job then I'm happy to go with Lenny.
 
Ferris Bueller said:
Apologies for the length of this post in advance. I started and then got carried away. Much respect and appreciation to anyone that ploughs on to the end!

With some of the speculation reaching almost Clinton Baptiste levels of clairvoyance (impeccable sources claiming that “the manager will be revealed on Monday” and not denying that “the circulated list of candidates may have been interviewed” are the equivalent of Sally Buxton asking if the name “Mason” rings a bell with anyone in a room full of Scottish referees) I wanted to explore the probabilities of what we (sort of) know to try and work out what is most likely to happen. This is all pure conjecture and I’d be happy to be corrected by anyone with an informed position. Up to two weeks ago I would have sworn that it would have been Lennon but I think the board will be aware of the build-up of opinion against this now and will be much more wary.

Budget: based on previous seasons, particularly those where a new manager is appointed I would guess that the budget for player additions will be in the region of £10m to £15m plus whatever can be generated from sales. The football operations budget is unlikely to extend beyond £2.5m per annum for the salary of a new manager and I doubt we’d pay more than £1m to £2m in compensation to secure a manager already in a post.

That probably rules out Mourinho, Villas Boas, Howe and Benitez. All of these “big names” will have multiple job offers and don’t need to take a post at Celtic on reduced wages and a restricted player transfer budget to prove anything. I appreciate that Brendan Rodgers would have been one of these names three years ago, but it’s difficult to say whether he arrived because of a connection to the club or because he saw it as an easy rehabilitation back to the EPL. I doubt any of the current crop would see it this way now, possibly Villas Boas at a pinch if he is harbouring a desire to return to the EPL.

The remaining pool of candidates could, for argument’s sake, be divided into the following three categories:

• Rising Stars: managers in roles with small to medium league sides who have achieved moderate success playing a relatively attractive style of football. Within this category I’d put Preudhomme, Cocu and van dem Brom.

• Rejects: former big names who have crashed and burned too badly to be allowed an easy route back to an elite club. This category would include Moyes, Garcia, Pulis, Pardew, Bilic and Martin O’Neill (sorry Martin, you are still a legend, nevertheless).

• Reconnects: managers on manageable wages that have a connection to the club, however tenuous, including Lennon, Michael O’Neill, Ross and Clarke.

In order to try and whittle down the larger pool, I’ve tried to guess the factors that might influence the decision making process of Celtic’s plc board.

Self-Preservation: I think it’s unlikely that anyone at Celtic wants to see the football operation fail simply to achieve one season’s worth of bonuses. Whilst Peter Lawwell could undoubtedly walk into a number of other highly paid senior corporate roles, his position at Celtic is one of almost unique privilege and glamour in Scotland and it would be surprising if he wanted to risk losing it. To extrapolate, if he takes what is seen as a cheap (Lennon or Clarke, before he became Scotland manager) or leftfield (Ronnie Deila) option and ended up losing the league next season, the effect on season ticket sales could be absolutely disastrous, with no 10 in a row to go for and a prevailing sense of negativity about the direction of the club. Given his general lack of popularity, there would certainly be a question over whether he could survive such a fallout. So I would expect that he is under severe personal pressure to get it right. As a result, I don’t think we’ll see anything other than a known quantity, which can only mean Lennon, Ross, Michael O’Neill, or one of the Rejects getting the position, unless there is a realistic suggestion for a Rising Star that I am unaware of at present - those already connected (by the bookies and bloggers) have very recent failures on their hands, otherwise they’d be on their way to La Liga, the Bundesliga, Serie A or the EPL.

Style: by appointing first Deila and then Rodgers it would seem that the general direction of travel that the Celtic plc board is in favour of is a high pressing (and therefore high fitness) and expansive passing game. Assuming that they don’t want to regress to practical, physical football (which would of course require a number of player sales and additions to balance our existing squad of lightweights) we need a manager who would play to that style. On the face of it, that would rule out Moyes, Pulis, Pardew (sort of), Martin O’Neill and, if we’re honest, Lennon.

That leaves Garcia and Bilic, who would both still represent a risk, Jack Ross, who’s probably going to require significant compensation to prise away from Sunderland, and… Michael O’Neill. He stated his commitment to Northern Ireland’s international team just a few days ago, so who better to continue Brendan Rodgers’ legacy of deceit and become the next full time manager of the world’s greatest football club.

The next Celtic manager will be Michael O’Neill. The spirits told me so.
Click to expand...
Wrong! David Moyes is already in post!
 
  • Like
Reactions: TET
Andybhoy88 said:
Definition of a Straw man argument - A straw man is a form of argument and an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument that was not presented by that opponent. One who engages in this fallacy is said to be "attacking a straw man."

Man 1 sets up a weak position and attributes it to Man 2, then attacks the weak position; like setting up and fighting a straw man, easily knocking it down. Then the opponent, Man 2 is drawn into defending himself against the misrepresentations and Man 1 doesn't have to talk about his opponents actual position.

With respect TET it IS a straw man argument and it gets used far too often to shut down this side of the debate. For one your arguing against points I'm not making therefore I either have to defend or argue the merits of something I haven't said and may not even agree with and by setting up the debate under the conditions where everything being discussed always has to be viewed from what you define as the 'reality' of the situation as you put it i.e. through the prism of EPL level spending, EPL level players and by invoking the spectre of us always having to compete with EPL level clubs at every turn etc. then you are forcing the debate to be discussed in a certain context. What you're portraying as 'reality' here is just your take on things, your personal opinion on the situation and opinion isn't the same as fact. Framing the discussion in a preconditioned way which makes it easy for you to dismiss and discredit any opposing argument (most of which aren't even being made by me in the first place) isn't a proper debate, that makes it a straw man argument.

I'm not saying you're doing it deliberately or knowingly mate but it's a bit hard to debate with you properly when you're arguing against points that I'm not even making and you're getting to frame the discussion on your terms from the off.

I've never called for colossal sums like £50m to be spent on players or called for 'big name' premier league type managers or coaches to be brought in, neither have I called for us to be competing with EPL clubs on wages, transfer fees or for EPL level players. Why? Because I don't expect us to be operating at the same levels of the market which clubs in the EPL and the other top leagues operate in and we shouldn't be trying to anyway. Yes there will be times where there's a crossover and player's we might be targeting are being monitored by these type of clubs but if it's happening all the time then that tells us that we're looking for players in a market where we can't realistically compete.

There's a whole other world of football that exists outside the inflated markets of the EPL, La Liga, Bundesliga etc. filled with experienced pros capable of coming in and improving us as a team. The clubs in the EPL and the other top leagues are not all-seeing and all-knowing so claiming that any decent experienced player out there worth their salt must already be on their radar is based on a throwaway assumption on your part and not on fact. Also there will be many players who may not play at a level that peaks the interest of the clubs in the big leagues but that doesn't mean they aren't capable of playing at a level where they could do a job for Celtic.

You talk about the Barasic example for instance -

''But lets say we pick up a Barasic from Croatia, international looks pretty damn good at Osijek comes here, turns out he doesn't perform as well here. Was he a first team ready player or project. So if top team in Croatia best players aren't upgrade on our first team which teams have upgrade players at bargain prices that will make our team better.''

Well how he performs doesn't determine what category he falls into, the amount of time he's spent on the pitch playing first team football before you sign him determines that. If he was a young guy with little to no first team experience then he's a 'project' player if however he was let's say 24+ with 3 to 4 years of playing regular first team football then he's a 'first team ready' player. Also whether that player performs well here or not it certainly shouldn't determine the whole transfer strategy of a club or mean they should abandon all hope for other players in similar leagues. That would be an irrational overreaction that makes little sense!

As for players not working out, failing to adapt to the culture, weather, getting homesick etc. well that risk is there with ANY player a club signs, good scouting and doing your homework on a player can minimise those risks but you can't eliminate them completely so unless we stick to signing Scottish players then it's always going to be a risk we have to take. Incidentally getting homesick is far more likely to be a problem for young foreign 'project' type players, which seem to be our preferred type of signing, than older experienced ones but again that risk doesn't mean we should call time on signing talented young players from abroad.

I'm not saying you don't make some excellent and valid points TET or it's an easy task to source the kind of players I'm talking about what I'm saying is that it's not as futile as you portray it to be, these things are achievable and I mean no disrespect but to argue otherwise just sounds defeatist and a little like excuse making for the board's lack of vision and flexibility. As I said there is a middle ground and failing to recognise or explore it means we are limiting not just our options but our potential too.

HH TET (y)
Click to expand...
Aw man......I'm not sure if I feel more stupid or more intelligent when you two have these philosophical debates.

I'm away to play with my crayons and eat some playdough to unharsh my brain.

Great debate boys........well done both!
 
Spherical Planet said:
Aw man......I'm not sure if I feel more stupid or more intelligent when you two have these philosophical debates.

I'm away to play with my crayons and eat some playdough to unharsh my brain.

Great debate boys........well done both!
Click to expand...

:ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:

Save some playdough for me SP I think I short-circuited my last brain cell writing that, if TET comes back with a counter argument to it then I'm fucked :LOL:

brain.jpg
 
Andybhoy88 said:
Definition of a Straw man argument - A straw man is a form of argument and an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument that was not presented by that opponent. One who engages in this fallacy is said to be "attacking a straw man."



HH TET (y)
Click to expand...

Andy I don't dream up stuff that's irrelevant to your proposal, imo.

The 50 Million I made mention of should be the cash ready for investment from club without debt requirement.

Its you who suggested I say that should be done every season. Not me.

My figure is based on the annual accounts plus the money in from Dembele and Rodgers.
And the reduction in the operation expenses.

You make mention of untightening the purse strings and bringing experienced professionals from across Europe. I agree with that concept, but the flaw in it is the same as the argument you claim is straw man.

If there are available professionals looking to move abroad they either want big wage rises or most often they are quite settled and happy at their current country region culture. That leaves us to draw from the UK Market which is hyper inflated south of the border. These are the traditional type guys we would add value to our team.

That channel is out.

Also we need to add value on the pitch. players who add value to our pitch need to be champions league strength players, who are very rarely cheap from EU teams since football is so globalised that scouts can just sit watching tv screens after tv screens and anybody who fits your description get bought up by the EPL teams with excess money and then loan farmed till they are either ready or they can recoup their money.

So the players like the equivalent to Scott Brown or Lustig or any of our other experienced pros either come with massive wages or they really don't fancy abroad generally or Scotland particularly. The reason they aren't in the big leagues with their experience is they must have some kind of bond for a Club or a culture. The British cultural players Scotland used to supplement their team with are now in a different category even at low levels. When Rooney can get more money at very low level in England than he can get at Aberdeen then something is wrong. And is Johnny Hayes or Rooney the kind of higher quality available from these other markets.

Im not defeatist its the way the market has been skewed by the money fixers. So Celtic are most often better to bring young guys who can learn an grow with potential than old high risk players with no real value.

The only time any player should ever be bought ever is if he adds value on the pitch. The art lies I getting best value off the pitch to keep operations running sustainably.

You don't want Lennon.

But who do you want if im straw man arguing in your eyes. Im arguing points I think you are proposing. But what are you actually proposing. You say first team ready. But you don't mention should they be same strength less strength or better strength than our players.

Now if your arguing less strength that would be madness.

Now if your arguing same strength then that doesn't take team forward.

So I assume you want stronger players, who come cheap but add value on the pitch.

And im arguing all the best players that are better than our players don't want to come here without massive wage hikes which we can't afford or they already play in the massive leagues.

You may not be arguing these points but they are inseparable through reason.

Add value on pitch means better players than we have which makes them champions league strength. These players cost massive amounts and the Scottish market doesn't add value to players with the poor overall standard. Celtic add value through their risk strategy taking high risk players making them champions then punting them to the monster leagues where they usually make money on players they buy from here.

I fully agree with your philosophy that we should be buying experienced players

My argument is the known good players are on any radars and they clearly quite happy with their life and culture

the ones who would come here are mercenaries therefore as soon as they can get wage upgrade they are off.

And the traditional market we would pick up good players is now excessively hyper inflated to point where we can't buy from that market without massive risks and the second we appear on radar of that club they open the bidding knowing if celtic are interested then other clubs will want to take closer look.

The alternative is we build a team from cultures that may not fit the Scottish culture or its football which means they are very very high risk.

Therefore imo Lennon who has been working that market for years with success is a good option.

Im not trying to convince you Andy Im trying to be as explicit with my argument to show why I back that man.

Lubo pops up with Wenger and I think you know what his knowledge of French market and the his superior experience and high standards might just work,

But I am not sure who you would like as the manger or why.

I know you want the board to open the purse strings which I do too, but hopefully with added value which im arguing is very very difficult with the skewed markets and the subsidisations.

You may claim these aren't what you argue but they are part of reality of what we face therefore its not straw man argument. Its all related.

If anything you appear to be trying the old lets not take the reality factors into account, what arguing is I want these things and im not really interested in reality, I just expect it to be done to my satisfaction and well it can be done but im not going to explain how, and any problems you see with my argument are irrelevant since I didn't make them?

Andy Im on your side.

I want better more experienced players.

I can't see the players you think are there, they may be there, im hoping they are there, but I suspect it will take a guy with great eye for talent, and I think that mn is lennon.

I may well be wrong.

Other than Wenger I can't see any of the other options being good fit at celtic.

But I didn't think win Janssen or doctor jo or Strachan were good choices but they had their merits in the long run.

Im on your team im not straw arguing mystery stuff, every single thing I argue I feel is relevant. if ihavent made clear why I feel its relevant then feel free to ask me for more explicit reasoning on specific things. It may well be that I have made many errors. in fact I would be shocked if I haven't made massive fatal errors in my arguments.

But for me straw man argument is where a politician type tries to evade something, not where he goes into extra detail as to why the other option doesn't fit quite so well as may be proposed.

Anyway HH mate
 
Ferris Bueller said:
Apologies for the length of this post in advance. I started and then got carried away. Much respect and appreciation to anyone that ploughs on to the end!

With some of the speculation reaching almost Clinton Baptiste levels of clairvoyance (impeccable sources claiming that “the manager will be revealed on Monday” and not denying that “the circulated list of candidates may have been interviewed” are the equivalent of Sally Buxton asking if the name “Mason” rings a bell with anyone in a room full of Scottish referees) I wanted to explore the probabilities of what we (sort of) know to try and work out what is most likely to happen. This is all pure conjecture and I’d be happy to be corrected by anyone with an informed position. Up to two weeks ago I would have sworn that it would have been Lennon but I think the board will be aware of the build-up of opinion against this now and will be much more wary.

Budget: based on previous seasons, particularly those where a new manager is appointed I would guess that the budget for player additions will be in the region of £10m to £15m plus whatever can be generated from sales. The football operations budget is unlikely to extend beyond £2.5m per annum for the salary of a new manager and I doubt we’d pay more than £1m to £2m in compensation to secure a manager already in a post.

That probably rules out Mourinho, Villas Boas, Howe and Benitez. All of these “big names” will have multiple job offers and don’t need to take a post at Celtic on reduced wages and a restricted player transfer budget to prove anything. I appreciate that Brendan Rodgers would have been one of these names three years ago, but it’s difficult to say whether he arrived because of a connection to the club or because he saw it as an easy rehabilitation back to the EPL. I doubt any of the current crop would see it this way now, possibly Villas Boas at a pinch if he is harbouring a desire to return to the EPL.

The remaining pool of candidates could, for argument’s sake, be divided into the following three categories:

• Rising Stars: managers in roles with small to medium league sides who have achieved moderate success playing a relatively attractive style of football. Within this category I’d put Preudhomme, Cocu and van dem Brom.

• Rejects: former big names who have crashed and burned too badly to be allowed an easy route back to an elite club. This category would include Moyes, Garcia, Pulis, Pardew, Bilic and Martin O’Neill (sorry Martin, you are still a legend, nevertheless).

• Reconnects: managers on manageable wages that have a connection to the club, however tenuous, including Lennon, Michael O’Neill, Ross and Clarke.

In order to try and whittle down the larger pool, I’ve tried to guess the factors that might influence the decision making process of Celtic’s plc board.

Self-Preservation: I think it’s unlikely that anyone at Celtic wants to see the football operation fail simply to achieve one season’s worth of bonuses. Whilst Peter Lawwell could undoubtedly walk into a number of other highly paid senior corporate roles, his position at Celtic is one of almost unique privilege and glamour in Scotland and it would be surprising if he wanted to risk losing it. To extrapolate, if he takes what is seen as a cheap (Lennon or Clarke, before he became Scotland manager) or leftfield (Ronnie Deila) option and ended up losing the league next season, the effect on season ticket sales could be absolutely disastrous, with no 10 in a row to go for and a prevailing sense of negativity about the direction of the club. Given his general lack of popularity, there would certainly be a question over whether he could survive such a fallout. So I would expect that he is under severe personal pressure to get it right. As a result, I don’t think we’ll see anything other than a known quantity, which can only mean Lennon, Ross, Michael O’Neill, or one of the Rejects getting the position, unless there is a realistic suggestion for a Rising Star that I am unaware of at present - those already connected (by the bookies and bloggers) have very recent failures on their hands, otherwise they’d be on their way to La Liga, the Bundesliga, Serie A or the EPL.

Style: by appointing first Deila and then Rodgers it would seem that the general direction of travel that the Celtic plc board is in favour of is a high pressing (and therefore high fitness) and expansive passing game. Assuming that they don’t want to regress to practical, physical football (which would of course require a number of player sales and additions to balance our existing squad of lightweights) we need a manager who would play to that style. On the face of it, that would rule out Moyes, Pulis, Pardew (sort of), Martin O’Neill and, if we’re honest, Lennon.

That leaves Garcia and Bilic, who would both still represent a risk, Jack Ross, who’s probably going to require significant compensation to prise away from Sunderland, and… Michael O’Neill. He stated his commitment to Northern Ireland’s international team just a few days ago, so who better to continue Brendan Rodgers’ legacy of deceit and become the next full time manager of the world’s greatest football club.

The next Celtic manager will be Michael O’Neill. The spirits told me so.
Click to expand...

What happened next?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

Total: 313 (members: 8, guests: 305)

Latest posts

Share this page

Back
Top