How would Celtic and Rangers do in the Prem?

First topic message reminder :

This debate has been going around for ages. But whats your thoughts on this?
Will they challenge for the title or a European slot, or will they struggle?
Over to you people........

For me both old firms teams would hold their own in the EPL. Even with the squads they have now i see them surviving. More importantly though as time goes on the revenue made by the old firm in sponsership would increase their statue in the EPL. Let us not kid ourselves the Old firm is a massive product and sold correctly i am sure some oil rich chaps would snap them up. The home games would be sell out even the away games would boost the attendances in the EPL. And how Murdoch would love that. For me if the old firm was allowed into the EPL it would only make the EPL greater. And maybe help the Scottish League to giving the smaller Scottish teams a greater chance of winning things.

I honestly can't see how either of them could stay up. Both of their squads now are poor and not better than any Prem teams, aside form maybe Wigan. They would be good championship teams at best.

Would take time for the them to reach the level they would want to be at, at the moment hard to imagine them troubling the top half of the table, their best players become bit part players in the lower premiership teams.

As i said they would not win the EPL nor get top 10. They would however survive in the EPL and therfore improve their squad, with the potential of greater investment from sponsership.
Remember Glasgow Celtic did win the Champions League with a squad full of Glasgow men. Respect should be given to this club.

I would take time but over a number of years they would end up challenging the big boys. The big clubs in general are at the top. The current squads mind you would struggle to stay up.

nissan wrote:As i said they would not win the EPL nor get top 10. They would however survive in the EPL and therfore improve their squad, with the potential of greater investment from sponsership.
Remember Glasgow Celtic did win the Champions League with a squad full of Glasgow men. Respect should be given to this club.

That was 40 odd years ago now, football has changed a lot since then.

SugarRayRussell (PBK) wrote:I would take time but over a number of years they would end up challenging the big boys. The big clubs in general are at the top. The current squads mind you would struggle to stay up.

Don't think they ever start challenging the top teams in the premier league without major investment from outside.

Not really sure why they should be allowed to walk straight into the top flight in England anyway. The size of the league isn't going to be increased so it would be at two other teams expense. It can't happen.

As a Celtic fan I'd not want to see it happen, I do think it's a possibility if Rangers are liquidated which is a distinct possibility that SKY will move Heaven and Earth to get Celtic into the Premiership, I'm not a big fan of the league though to be honest, it's a souless league and far to many clubs have sold their souls to get ahead

I'm more interested in trying to get the Scottish league re-vamped or an Atlantic League started

With the squad Celtic have got right now, I'd be confident Celtic could finish no lower than 12th which is no ambition at all, with the money we'd get from SKY, Sponsorship and everything else though I'd be more than confident we'd be capable of genuinely competing for the title within 5 years, that being said, I've got absolutely no desire to see blood sucking gold diggers earn £150,000 per week playing for Celtic

The most we've ever paid anyone is Henrik Larsson who in his last year earned £48,000 per week, he was worth every single penny, players on double that amount these days aren't even half the player he was

We'll never earn the cash made in England unless we can find a way of broadcasting our own matches worldwide like Barca, Real, Milan and Inter ect do, but what we need is a business model to follow step by step and allow us to make the game far more attractive from a visual and sponsorship prespective

Can't agree with much of that to be honest.

1. The premier league has a lot of soul and can't really think of any teams who have sold their souls to get ahead, even the big spending teams like Man City and Chelsea have a solid foundation built on english players.

2. The money Celtic would receive is no different to what the likes of Everton or any team would be getting and they don't challenge for the title, there is a lot of english clubs richer than Celtic so it's fairly inconceivable to see it happen.

3. Larsson was a very good player but he wouldn't have been a stand out player in the premier league, the difference in overall quality is huge.

The Old Firm teams would definitely struggle at first given their current finances and players but on terms of size of clubs and stadia, and once the Premier League money started rolling in, I don't see why they shouldn't be able to compete with the likes of Tottenham, Newcastle and Liverpool. I think competing with Man United and Arsenal would be just too much for them at this stage.

.

Well, Rangers might not be doing all that well even in the Scottish league as they've just announced they intend to go into administration !

On this basis they'd start the season 10-20 points down therefore I'm fairly confident they'd get relegated!!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-17015966

Doubt it, most of the money in the big teams does not come from TV/Gate receipts but from mega rich Billionaire owners like Man City and Chelsea.

Sorry but the OF in their current ownership would be no better than the smaller teams like Fulham and Everton.
Can you really see them being more succesful than Arsenal, Liverpool or Spurs?

It's all academic, because no one wants their poisonous like in their leagues.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Can't agree with much of that to be honest.

1. The premier league has a lot of soul and can't really think of any teams who have sold their souls to get ahead, even the big spending teams like Man City and Chelsea have a solid foundation built on english players.

2. The money Celtic would receive is no different to what the likes of Everton or any team would be getting and they don't challenge for the title, there is a lot of english clubs richer than Celtic so it's fairly inconceivable to see it happen.

3. Larsson was a very good player but he wouldn't have been a stand out player in the premier league, the difference in overall quality is huge.

Just because teams like City and Chelsea boght a core of English players doesn't mean they didn't sell their souls, the fact that you even associate having a few English players in a side to selling their soul tells me you don't understand what I'm talking about, the Premiership for me isn't anywhere near as good or as entertaining as it was in the 90s or when it was the First Division in the 80s and the blood sucking nature of it has taken it in that direction, it's ab organisation driven by pure greed that is designed to obliterate ambition in an organic way!

As for your comment on Henrik Larsson, the fact you even made that comment shows that you either don't have enough clue about the guy to make an accurate judgement or your just ignorant to him, he was truly World Class and that's why Barcelona signed him on a Free Contract at the age of 34, he scored in 3 World Cups, 3 European Championships, and he is the top Goalscorer for a British club in European Competition and he was the subject of a £15m bid from Manchester United in 1999 when Utd had Cole, Yorke, Solskjaar and Teddy Sheringham (I can't quite recall but I'm positive £15m was the British record at the time)

He didn't just score goals in Scotland, he did it in every competition consistrntly, also, just to add more factual evidence to his ability, Alex Ferguson went and loaned him at the age of 36, he had such a positive effect that Alex Ferguson requested the FA give special dispensation to get Larsson an original Premier League winners medal, and just for good measure, take a look at what Thierry Henry said in the post match interview after a Larsson inspired Barcelona made a late comeback to beat Arsenal in the 2006 Champions League final

As for Celtic being on a financial par with Everton, again, that's just utter nonsense and again I'd prefer people who really don't have a clue what they're talking about don't just post crap for the sake of it because it makes that person look silly and it makes the other person (me) feel like having any kind of factual discussion with that type of poster would be a waste of time

Not to mention that Celtic have 52,000 season ticket holders who if you take out the executive boxes are paying on average £600 a season ticket you are miles ahead of clubs like Everton and a good 80% of the rest of the EPL in terms of revenue in for ticket money alone.

sirfredperry wrote:Well, Rangers might not be doing all that well even in the Scottish league as they've just announced they intend to go into administration !

It's been on the cards for ages

(I can't quite recall but I'm positive £15m was the British record at the time)

I think Shearer had gone for £15 million in '96.

Yes he did, I'm not sure if it was bettered though before the Larsson bid in 99

I honestly never thought it cost that much to buy the SPL season after season!!

All this talk about being to big for their league and they are worthy if the premier league? well now it turns out they may not be in any league next year.

How Celtic must be howling at Rangers. They will now be the dominant force in to SPL until Elgin City begin their era if domination!

Will Rangers be missed?

I for one won't miss the old firm derby match and the rubbish that is packaged with it. I hope Celtic are in as much trouble as Rangers. It would make my day as a Monza FC supporter!

Alessandro Ciambella wrote:I honestly never thought it cost that much to buy the SPL season after season!!

All this talk about being to big for their league and they are worthy if the premier league? well now it turns out they may not be in any league next year.

How Celtic must be howling at Rangers. They will now be the dominant force in to SPL until Elgin City begin their era if domination!

Will Rangers be missed?

I for one won't miss the old firm derby match and the rubbish that is packaged with it. I hope Celtic are in as much trouble as Rangers. It would make my day as a Monza FC supporter!

That was a few years ago now that was talked about.

the-gaffer wrote:

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Can't agree with much of that to be honest.

1. The premier league has a lot of soul and can't really think of any teams who have sold their souls to get ahead, even the big spending teams like Man City and Chelsea have a solid foundation built on english players.

2. The money Celtic would receive is no different to what the likes of Everton or any team would be getting and they don't challenge for the title, there is a lot of english clubs richer than Celtic so it's fairly inconceivable to see it happen.

3. Larsson was a very good player but he wouldn't have been a stand out player in the premier league, the difference in overall quality is huge.

Just because teams like City and Chelsea boght a core of English players doesn't mean they didn't sell their souls, the fact that you even associate having a few English players in a side to selling their soul tells me you don't understand what I'm talking about, the Premiership for me isn't anywhere near as good or as entertaining as it was in the 90s or when it was the First Division in the 80s and the blood sucking nature of it has taken it in that direction, it's ab organisation driven by pure greed that is designed to obliterate ambition in an organic way!

As for your comment on Henrik Larsson, the fact you even made that comment shows that you either don't have enough clue about the guy to make an accurate judgement or your just ignorant to him, he was truly World Class and that's why Barcelona signed him on a Free Contract at the age of 34, he scored in 3 World Cups, 3 European Championships, and he is the top Goalscorer for a British club in European Competition and he was the subject of a £15m bid from Manchester United in 1999 when Utd had Cole, Yorke, Solskjaar and Teddy Sheringham (I can't quite recall but I'm positive £15m was the British record at the time)

He didn't just score goals in Scotland, he did it in every competition consistrntly, also, just to add more factual evidence to his ability, Alex Ferguson went and loaned him at the age of 36, he had such a positive effect that Alex Ferguson requested the FA give special dispensation to get Larsson an original Premier League winners medal, and just for good measure, take a look at what Thierry Henry said in the post match interview after a Larsson inspired Barcelona made a late comeback to beat Arsenal in the 2006 Champions League final

As for Celtic being on a financial par with Everton, again, that's just utter nonsense and again I'd prefer people who really don't have a clue what they're talking about don't just post crap for the sake of it because it makes that person look silly and it makes the other person (me) feel like having any kind of factual discussion with that type of poster would be a waste of time

Not to mention that Celtic have 52,000 season ticket holders who if you take out the executive boxes are paying on average £600 a season ticket you are miles ahead of clubs like Everton and a good 80% of the rest of the EPL in terms of revenue in for ticket money alone.

Lets look at things very very simply for you.

Manchester City have one of the best youth academies in the country and have nurtured there core not bought it as you suggest, before you accuse others of not having a clue it's best to get your own facts in order first.

Larsson being a bit part player at Barcelona and briefly at United doesn't mean he was more than a good player, he did very well in a sub par Scottish league but would not have been a stand out in the premier league.

Im fairly confident that Celtic are a poorer team than the majority of the premier league, what is there transfer record? A mere £6mil for Chris Sutton many many years ago, compare this to Everton who despite having financial difficulties have a multi million pound squad. The best players in the old firm teams are usually snapped up by lesser premier league teams, just look at Jelavic, Petrov and Cuellar because they cannot afford to keep them, it really is that simple.

You can try and overplay Celtic for instance but they cannot financially compete against the premier league and without a rich owner never will.

Alessandro Ciambella wrote:I honestly never thought it cost that much to buy the SPL season after season!!

All this talk about being to big for their league and they are worthy if the premier league? well now it turns out they may not be in any league next year.

How Celtic must be howling at Rangers. They will now be the dominant force in to SPL until Elgin City begin their era if domination!

Will Rangers be missed?

I for one won't miss the old firm derby match and the rubbish that is packaged with it. I hope Celtic are in as much trouble as Rangers. It would make my day as a Monza FC supporter!

I shouldn't really reply to such an uneducated buffoon but I will, Celtic are in fantastic financial health as they manage to live within their means even if it means not always being as ambitious as we'd love to be, what I can't stand though is moronic posters like you who wish fans to lose their clubs, fans, like the rest of us, whether we like that team or not or what it stands for is irrelevant, ordinary punters losing their football clubs is not something to be rejoiced and making buffoon like comments only highlights your idocy, which results in you going in the blanked list!

Blanked list? Better than the Black list Rangers are going into!

The SPL will become a one league team now if only Celtic remain. Sponsorship will dry up and it will become even harder to survive in this league. IF Rangers go, Celtic will follow. Of course if other teams step up and challenge for the title and make the league interesting then more lucrative sponsorship deals would come in.

The Old Firm have ruined the SPL and maybe, just maybe, this is the wake up call Rangers need to get a grip on not buying the league. They have to accept that football is business and that you can't be successful all of the time.

Football club longevity comes before league titles.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:

the-gaffer wrote:

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Can't agree with much of that to be honest.

1. The premier league has a lot of soul and can't really think of any teams who have sold their souls to get ahead, even the big spending teams like Man City and Chelsea have a solid foundation built on english players.

2. The money Celtic would receive is no different to what the likes of Everton or any team would be getting and they don't challenge for the title, there is a lot of english clubs richer than Celtic so it's fairly inconceivable to see it happen.

3. Larsson was a very good player but he wouldn't have been a stand out player in the premier league, the difference in overall quality is huge.

Just because teams like City and Chelsea boght a core of English players doesn't mean they didn't sell their souls, the fact that you even associate having a few English players in a side to selling their soul tells me you don't understand what I'm talking about, the Premiership for me isn't anywhere near as good or as entertaining as it was in the 90s or when it was the First Division in the 80s and the blood sucking nature of it has taken it in that direction, it's ab organisation driven by pure greed that is designed to obliterate ambition in an organic way!

As for your comment on Henrik Larsson, the fact you even made that comment shows that you either don't have enough clue about the guy to make an accurate judgement or your just ignorant to him, he was truly World Class and that's why Barcelona signed him on a Free Contract at the age of 34, he scored in 3 World Cups, 3 European Championships, and he is the top Goalscorer for a British club in European Competition and he was the subject of a £15m bid from Manchester United in 1999 when Utd had Cole, Yorke, Solskjaar and Teddy Sheringham (I can't quite recall but I'm positive £15m was the British record at the time)

He didn't just score goals in Scotland, he did it in every competition consistrntly, also, just to add more factual evidence to his ability, Alex Ferguson went and loaned him at the age of 36, he had such a positive effect that Alex Ferguson requested the FA give special dispensation to get Larsson an original Premier League winners medal, and just for good measure, take a look at what Thierry Henry said in the post match interview after a Larsson inspired Barcelona made a late comeback to beat Arsenal in the 2006 Champions League final

As for Celtic being on a financial par with Everton, again, that's just utter nonsense and again I'd prefer people who really don't have a clue what they're talking about don't just post crap for the sake of it because it makes that person look silly and it makes the other person (me) feel like having any kind of factual discussion with that type of poster would be a waste of time

Not to mention that Celtic have 52,000 season ticket holders who if you take out the executive boxes are paying on average £600 a season ticket you are miles ahead of clubs like Everton and a good 80% of the rest of the EPL in terms of revenue in for ticket money alone.

Lets look at things very very simply for you.

Manchester City have one of the best youth academies in the country and have nurtured there core not bought it as you suggest, before you accuse others of not having a clue it's best to get your own facts in order first.

Larsson being a bit part player at Barcelona and briefly at United doesn't mean he was more than a good player, he did very well in a sub par Scottish league but would not have been a stand out in the premier league.

Im fairly confident that Celtic are a poorer team than the majority of the premier league, what is there transfer record? A mere £6mil for Chris Sutton many many years ago, compare this to Everton who despite having financial difficulties have a multi million pound squad. The best players in the old firm teams are usually snapped up by lesser premier league teams, just look at Jelavic, Petrov and Cuellar because they cannot afford to keep them, it really is that simple.

You can try and overplay Celtic for instance but they cannot financially compete against the premier league and without a rich owner never will.

I don't usually bother about defending Celtic players but the way you speak of Larsson sounds like you think he is the level of the likes of a prime James Beattie. Larsson was a fantastic player, he won a golden boot, scored in world cups,European Championship. 40 odd goals in Europe? for a decent if not great team. Even in his mid 30's Barcelona and Man United signed him. Not only way he a great player, he was a leader and more important to Sweden than the world's second most expensive player Ibrahimovic. Considering his longetivity playing at a high level for club and country and would say there are very few in the PL who could claim to have been better or more accomplished.

Alessandro Ciambella wrote:Blanked list? Better than the Black list Rangers are going into!

The SPL will become a one league team now if only Celtic remain. Sponsorship will dry up and it will become even harder to survive in this league. IF Rangers go, Celtic will follow. Of course if other teams step up and challenge for the title and make the league interesting then more lucrative sponsorship deals would come in.

The Old Firm have ruined the SPL and maybe, just maybe, this is the wake up call Rangers need to get a grip on not buying the league. They have to accept that football is business and that you can't be successful all of the time.

Football club longevity comes before league titles.

I would rather win 50 plus league titles than be some boring dude financially sound team which wins nothing. Rangers will have to go through a few years of pain but they will be back.

Larsson was a very good player but playing in Scotland its hard to judge how good he really was, only when he got older did he really step up to a big team but as is to be expected considering his age he didn't set the world alight. Far better than Beattie but don't think he's at the standard of Shearer, Bergkamp, Henry and a few other leading premiership forwards of the early 00's.

Lets look at things very very simply for you.

Manchester City have one of the best youth academies in the country and have nurtured there core not bought it as you suggest, before you accuse others of not having a clue it's best to get your own facts in order first.

Larsson being a bit part player at Barcelona and briefly at United doesn't mean he was more than a good player, he did very well in a sub par Scottish league but would not have been a stand out in the premier league.

Im fairly confident that Celtic are a poorer team than the majority of the premier league, what is there transfer record? A mere £6mil for Chris Sutton many many years ago, compare this to Everton who despite having financial difficulties have a multi million pound squad. The best players in the old firm teams are usually snapped up by lesser premier league teams, just look at Jelavic, Petrov and Cuellar because they cannot afford to keep them, it really is that simple.

You can try and overplay Celtic for instance but they cannot financially compete against the premier league and without a rich owner never will.

What has a youth accadamy got to do with being souless? Particularly when very little will actually break into the first team, who have Man City nurtured and brought through the ranks that have improved the team in the last 3 years?

As for Henrik Larsson, again, even debating his quality seems mornic, to claim he wouldn't be as successful in the Premiership is also pretty stupid because it's impossible to tell, all we can do is look at the facts and that was he was a huge success at every level he played at and the best club in England at the time trued to sign him in 1999 when they already had the best strikeforce in England, seven and a half years later at the age of 36 they went back in for him again, for a 3rd time, I believe he's the only player Alex Ferguson has tried to sign on three seperate occassions

Now onto Celtic being a poor team, and this is what amuses me most, Premiership fans, not all but a lot and seemingly growing have become so detached from reality, poor? Well if you consider the winners of the SPL get £3.4m from SKY compared to the £30m or so the bottom team in the EPL get not including any parachute payments that maybe required, however, today the debt stands at under £7m which I'd bet is a damn site lot healthier than most of the clubs in the UK

Again you use Everton for having a 'multi-million pound squad' but Everton despite their difficulties are a top 8 club and their payment from the league will reflect that, it's not rocket science, thet receive millions upon millions a year from SKY to finance these multi-million pound squad

As for the Old Firm not being able to afford to keep a hold of their talent, that's just a nonsense and again shows your ignorance with regards to Celtic's finances, Celtic in August knocked back an £8m bid for Ki Sung-Yeung, a player that isn't considered to be a part of our strongest 11, again in January Aston Villa were linked with him and he knocked it on the head, with the backing of Celtic, Gary Hooper, a player who out scored and in many peoples opinion out performed Andy Carroll in the Championship in 2009/10 had three bids from Southampton, the last ending on a £6m bid knocked back and rumours of a Russian bid knocked back too proves that Celtic CAN afford to hold onto their better players, however like almost every other club in World Football, if a bid comes in for one of our players that is too good to refuse then it should and has to be accepted, with the little TV money coming in to the club then you'd obviously have to look at getting money into the club, the bottom line is though that Celtic can afford to keep there better players and their signing policy has seen the club outlay modest sums which look like getting the club big big finances if and when the club decide the time is right to sell these players

As for Stan Petrov, Celtic didn't lose him because they couldn't afford him, he like many didn't like Gordon Strachan and after seven years at Celtic decided the time was right to try something new, again though, a player bought for £2m who we got the best of and then sold on for £7.5m

John Hartson was the clubs record signing for £6.5m 10 and a half years ago, after the whole 'football's coming home' fiasco that swept the UK in the mid 90s the banks went into overdraft over-drive and clubs didn't live within their means, Celtic were one of them, and it was adressed so the club wouldn't fall into the same trap as Leeds or Rangers, why that's an issue I have no idea, Celtic still managed to compete and qualify from the Champions League beating clubs like Manchester United along the way with players you'd consider cheap, I've no idea how much a. Record signing costs has anything to do with actual talent, players to and from the Premiership are vastly over-inflated in terms of value

Not ignorance at all, you're severely overplaying the standing that Celtic would have in the premier league, the fact that a team currently 15th in the league (Aston Villa) has far higher revenue than Celtic tells the whole story, they simply would not compete and would be battling relegation or mid lower table.

Being a long time United fan I will admit I know nothing of them trying to sign Larsson back in 99 so would question the validity of your statement, he was good, very good but not as good as you're making out.

The fact that you seem to degrade every opinion you disagree with as being moronic says everything I need to know.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Larsson was a very good player but playing in Scotland its hard to judge how good he really was, only when he got older did he really step up to a big team but as is to be expected considering his age he didn't set the world alight. Far better than Beattie but don't think he's at the standard of Shearer, Bergkamp, Henry and a few other leading premiership forwards of the early 00's.

Alan Shearer was for me the best striker I'd seen, I thought he was brilliant, Chris Sutton, the guy who partnerd both and still holidays with Alan Shearer every single year in the Carabbean says that Henrik Larsson is the best player he's ever played with, for me he is probably the best judge as he spent two highly successful spells with both these guys

Playing in Scotland didn't hinder Larsson at all, he still regularly scored in World Cups, Euro's, Champions League and the Uefa Cup, he stayed because he and his family were happy, the same reason Shearer went to Newcastle instead of United and Gerrard stayed at Liverpool in 05

I would read Ronaldinho's comments on Larsson before he left Baca. He urged him to stay,there is simply no debate that he was a World Class player, I also believe that vetween 1999 and 2002 Celtic and Rangers had as good a team as anyone in England

Celtics team in 99 as good as United, Arsenal or Chelsea, I think not sorry but that is a 'moronic' statement.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Not ignorance at all, you're severely overplaying the standing that Celtic would have in the premier league, the fact that a team currently 15th in the league (Aston Villa) has far higher revenue than Celtic tells the whole story, they simply would not compete and would be battling relegation or mid lower table.

Being a long time United fan I will admit I know nothing of them trying to sign Larsson back in 99 so would question the validity of your statement, he was good, very good but not as good as you're making out.

The fact that you seem to degrade every opinion you disagree with as being moronic says everything I need to know.

when someone attempts to talk about something they know nothing about and base opinions from that without any logical reasoning then irt is moronic, that goes without saying, that's just 'bumping yer gums' for the sake of it

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Celtics team in 99 as good as United, Arsenal or Chelsea, I think not sorry but that is a 'moronic' statement.

I think Manchester United's team in 99 was excellent but I don't think any other side in England would have been much better than Rangers side between 98/99 season and cc/-2000, Dick Advocaat spent a lot of money and they had some real quality footballers

Celtic is hard to say, Marc Reiper got the injury that ended his career in 99 and Larsson broke his leg but with him Viduka, Berkovic and Moravcik I could have easily seen Celtic ith a better manager doing great things

I know british football very well but im not blinded into thinking my team is something it's not, Celtic do well in the scottish league but dont have the team or money to compete in the premier league. They are a Aston Villa level team or worse.

The arsenal team of 1999 put the old firm to shame

A defence consisting of Seaman, Dixon, Winterburn, Adams and Keown. Ljungberg, Vieira, Petit and Parlour in midfield with Bergkamp and Overmars up front, from that point they only got stronger with the signings of Henry, Pires, Wiltourd and Anelka only round the corner.

But if they move to the premier league which is what the discussion is about they get premier league money, an instant 40 million (minimum) a year.

Comparing Villas finances currently with the Sky money they receive against Celtics and rangers SPL clearly is never gonna work.

It really isn't that difficult a point to understand is it?

With that extra money they still aren't going to be big players in the league, Villa are a significantly richer club and look where they are currently?

Imperial Ghosty wrote:I know british football very well but im not blinded into thinking my team is something it's not, Celtic do well in the scottish league but dont have the team or money to compete in the premier league. They are a Aston Villa level team or worse.

Using money is a fruitless argument, Celtic get on average £3m per year TV money, what do Villa get?

Currently, the team Celtic have equired I believe would easily make 12th place, a youngt vibrant pacy aggressive side, Udinese could testify to that, they where top of Seria A when Celtic played them and played Arsenal off the park at times in the CL qualifier yet Celtic went there and played a blinder, a performance that matured a lot of the young men in the team, with money the Premiership brings, along with all the sponsorship money that comes along with it there is absolutely no doubt that Celtic's potential for earning would eclipse the majority of clubs currently in the top division down south, not even a doubt about it

Ok then we add on the 60K fans that turn up,

The fact the season ticket/ normal ticket prices increase due to better quality matches. Celtic (as do rangers fan) have a mass of fans around the world already, give Celtic the over exposure EPL teams get and these all increase and these all add up.

Once again you base your view on current revenues

Imperial Ghosty wrote:With that extra money they still aren't going to be big players in the league, Villa are a significantly richer club and look where they are currently?

Again you seem to just say things without anything to back up your opinion, on average Celtic Season Tickets without including executive season tickets are £600, 52,000 of them, I'd have no doubt that those would increasre by about £100, what's Villas average ST cost and how many do they have? Also, Celtic's majority shareholder is Dermot Desmond who is a Billionaire and in the past has expressed his desire to really finance the club if they could get out of Scotland (not what I want)

Celtic also have one of the largest followings in North America and a huge massive following in Japan and recent indecations have been that they are truly building the brand in South Korea, what has Villa got?

Imperial Ghosty wrote:The arsenal team of 1999 put the old firm to shame

A defence consisting of Seaman, Dixon, Winterburn, Adams and Keown. Ljungberg, Vieira, Petit and Parlour in midfield with Bergkamp and Overmars up front, from that point they only got stronger with the signings of Henry, Pires, Wiltourd and Anelka only round the corner.

It was a good side no doubt but it wasn't infalible, while I'm not saying it's nnot as good as Rangers side in 98 and 99, I'd say that Rangers team at that point wouldn't have been worse than it, it was filled with top talent, Lorenzo Amoruso, Artur Numan, Stefan Klos, Michael Mols, Jorge Albertz, Giovannie Van Bronckhurst, Andre Kanchelskis, Rod Wallace, Sergio Porrini, Gabby Amato, as much as that side hurt me you can't help but notice it's obvious class

Imperial Ghosty wrote:With that extra money they still aren't going to be big players in the league, Villa are a significantly richer club and look where they are currently?

It's not just about the £40m or whatever per year from sky, it's about exposure on a worldwide scale, every club who plays PL football will get at least as many new part time fans around the world as those who fill their grounds, these are the people who make English clubs so rich, the extra 10s of thousands of shirt sales around Asia, the extra sponsorship deals from countries most local fans would struggle to find on a map, the kids in Africa, Asia, Europe or the Americas who get to watch their club on tv on a regular basis.
Add those things to the fact that just about anyone can pass the FAs fit and proper person test and anyone can buy English clubs and launder their money and it's no surprise that mega-rich people are using the PL as a toy, if Rngers or Celtic were allowed their part in this insane play, they'd soon be making as much as the really big English clubs and would probably have their pick of billionaire owners.

the-gaffer wrote:

Imperial Ghosty wrote:The arsenal team of 1999 put the old firm to shame

A defence consisting of Seaman, Dixon, Winterburn, Adams and Keown. Ljungberg, Vieira, Petit and Parlour in midfield with Bergkamp and Overmars up front, from that point they only got stronger with the signings of Henry, Pires, Wiltourd and Anelka only round the corner.

It was a good side no doubt but it wasn't infalible, while I'm not saying it's nnot as good as Rangers side in 98 and 99, I'd say that Rangers team at that point wouldn't have been worse than it, it was filled with top talent, Lorenzo Amoruso, Artur Numan, Stefan Klos, Michael Mols, Jorge Albertz, Giovannie Van Bronckhurst, Andre Kanchelskis, Rod Wallace, Sergio Porrini, Gabby Amato, as much as that side hurt me you can't help but notice it's obvious class

It's a significantly worse team im sorry, that was a world class Arsenal side.

the-gaffer wrote:

Imperial Ghosty wrote:With that extra money they still aren't going to be big players in the league, Villa are a significantly richer club and look where they are currently?

Again you seem to just say things without anything to back up your opinion, on average Celtic Season Tickets without including executive season tickets are £600, 52,000 of them, I'd have no doubt that those would increasre by about £100, what's Villas average ST cost and how many do they have? Also, Celtic's majority shareholder is Dermot Desmond who is a Billionaire and in the past has expressed his desire to really finance the club if they could get out of Scotland (not what I want)

Celtic also have one of the largest followings in North America and a huge massive following in Japan and recent indecations have been that they are truly building the brand in South Korea, what has Villa got?

Nonsense.

For me they are around the WBA level. Pretty average players in a dross league.

And as for Larson being better than Shearer, dear me.

That's a reason I never want it to happen, I don't want some middle easter Billionaire to come over here and rip the heart and soul out of the club and fill the place with £100' per week prima donna's who have no real desire to play for the club, only the highest bidder

ReallyReal wrote:

Imperial Ghosty wrote:With that extra money they still aren't going to be big players in the league, Villa are a significantly richer club and look where they are currently?

It's not just about the £40m or whatever per year from sky, it's about exposure on a worldwide scale, every club who plays PL football will get at least as many new part time fans around the world as those who fill their grounds, these are the people who make English clubs so rich, the extra 10s of thousands of shirt sales around Asia, the extra sponsorship deals from countries most local fans would struggle to find on a map, the kids in Africa, Asia, Europe or the Americas who get to watch their club on tv on a regular basis.
Add those things to the fact that just about anyone can pass the FAs fit and proper person test and anyone can buy English clubs and launder their money and it's no surprise that mega-rich people are using the PL as a toy, if Rngers or Celtic were allowed their part in this insane play, they'd soon be making as much as the really big English clubs and would probably have their pick of billionaire owners.

That equates to Man United, Liverpool and Arsenal, the rest of the league don't benefit from overseas revenue anywhere near as much. Chelsea and City have the benefit of rich owners but the foundations of there teams was already there, they didn't just come out of nowhere.

the-gaffer wrote:That's a reason I never want it to happen, I don't want some middle easter Billionaire to come over here and rip the heart and soul out of the club and fill the place with £100' per week prima donna's who have no real desire to play for the club, only the highest bidder

Lets not pretend this does not happen at all levels already. Players and Celtic (and indeed any other club) only play for them because they are paid large sums of money.

johnson2 wrote:

the-gaffer wrote:

Imperial Ghosty wrote:With that extra money they still aren't going to be big players in the league, Villa are a significantly richer club and look where they are currently?

Again you seem to just say things without anything to back up your opinion, on average Celtic Season Tickets without including executive season tickets are £600, 52,000 of them, I'd have no doubt that those would increasre by about £100, what's Villas average ST cost and how many do they have? Also, Celtic's majority shareholder is Dermot Desmond who is a Billionaire and in the past has expressed his desire to really finance the club if they could get out of Scotland (not what I want)

Celtic also have one of the largest followings in North America and a huge massive following in Japan and recent indecations have been that they are truly building the brand in South Korea, what has Villa got?

Nonsense.

For me they are around the WBA level. Pretty average players in a dross league.

And as for Larson being better than Shearer, dear me.

Great reply, you must have been sitting for hours thinking of that teply, anyone who starts a sentence with Nonsense then hits out with crap like that shows themselves up

Is Larsson better than Shearer? That's open for debate, the guy who would have the best idea though (Chris Sutton) believes it's Larsson, this is despite still being very friendly with Shearer, I'd say his opinion weighs a bit more tha n yours on that subject

As for your WBA comment, I doubt the most hardcore WBA fan would even say that, ignorant in the extreme or simply an uneducated opinion from someone who is possibly to swamped in the pit of the EPL to know any better

I would agree that Celtic currently are around the WBA level, they just aren't that good.