I agree that the league is poorer without the competition and the fanfare over the Old Firm games. But I'm not going to wish for them to come back or pine for the old days. Rangers (The club & the fans) have learned **** all from the experience of liquidation and ruination. They still want a sugar daddy, still spend more than they earn and still see Catholic conspiracies around every corner. I say, **** them. If an, even, ****tier, league and the potential for no competition is the price we as Celtic fans have to pay then it's one I'll take on the chin.
If it continues longer we will become a smaller club unless we get out of the Scottish League. This is fine by me, I wouldn't mind if we became a smaller club similar to the Aberdeen Hearts and Hibs, it would make for a very exciting league but I don't think many agree.
This Tam The size of the club will always be relative to the market we are playing in. I'd also rather the club downsized, if necessary, rather than pander to the Huns in order to keep the status quo in terms of the size of the club.
All sport needs competition, without it it's pointless. Every Celtic league game has been pointless since the Huns went tits up. Same with Their league games.
I remember reading once of the fall of Carthage Carthage was a super power rival of Rome. Before Rome destroyed Carthage members of the Roman senate argued against its annihilation, not for pity, but they believed an unchallenged Rome could be a bad thing for Rome in the long run I can therefore see Puds point of view, however, there is one vital difference: Roman senators weren't talking about Huns
What's the difference between us in the champions league now or smaller? We are there to make up the numbers regardless.
Do Celtic have a right to be competing in the Champions League? None whatsoever, it is the responsibility of the club to develop itself within the confines of the market we occupy. If the market dictates that Celtic (Or any other club for that matter) do not have the financial clout to compete in the Group Stage or even qualify then tough titties.
Personally, after Rangers' liquidation, I'd have preferred Spartans to get the place in the league. That would have been fairer. Rangers could then have concentrated on getting the basics right and behaving like every other club in trying to live within their means. As far as the league goes, the duopoly of Celtic & Rangers stifled the Scottish game more than anything else. The smaller clubs were always under the cosh and they couldn't do much about it - and certainly not through the 11-1 voting system. It will take time for the league to re-adjust; it is not going to happen overnight. But for me, one thing is very, very clear - we don't need Rangers to make it a competitive league. We are doing alright because of the financial wherewithal and decent players, but there are other clubs who are catching up due to their players & managers getting their teams fired up and playing good footie. Those teams are run prudently and they are a much more realistic & consistent prospect of competition than a ragged-arsed company/ club in financial distress that is lurching from one crisis to another.
Scottish football is dire. Rangers getting back into the SPPFFLLL wont change that. Sure, there will be the buzz of excitement four times a season when the matches come around but that's short-lived and I look to these matches with as much dread as excitement if I'm being totally honest. The whole game needs redeveloped. Rangers going bust should have been the catalyst for this to happen but instead the SFA and SPL were more concerned in making sure Rangers survived and did everything they could to propel them up the leagues as quickly as possible. Thankfully they failed in this quest due to some rebellious lower league Chairmen. I actually believe that Celtic should share more of the money we earn with other clubs, especially SPFL clubs. It would be good for the Scottish game and good also for Celtic. Clubs would be able to sign decent quality players and be able to hold on to their good players, at least for a season or two longer than they do now. It means more competition and ultimately that's what will drag the supporters back to the game.
To be honest I think there is a better chance Celtic can get out of Scotland and into a more competitive league without Rangers. So **** them. Hope th ey die again. I may be wrong on this issue, and may never happen either way, but a lot of complaint about us moving is the potential for trouble it would bring. No rangers means that is not an issue
[h=1]Celtic Diary Wednesday April 16[/h]April 16, 2014 · by Ralph Malph · in Diary, Latest I caught a glimpse of that BBC series ” Who do You Think You Are ” the other day. Celebrities are encouraged to dip into their ancestry, and often discover a few surprises. For some reason, Prince Harry has declined an invitation to appear. There were no surprises yesterday when Anthony Stokes took his turn to answer a few questions in front of the press. The obligatory “what about the Rangers ? ” was thrown in, and the Irishman duly toed the line with his response; “Some fans may disagree but it will be good for the whole of Scottish football,” he said. “It can only benefit the game when they do get back up. But, for the time being, it’s a good chance for the other teams to try and compete. We want as much competition as possible. We want to push ourselves to improve; if that means other teams improving or Rangers coming back into the league, so be it.” Some fans ? Very few want them back in any shape or form. And anyway, watching the new club over the last couple of weeks the only competition they will bring to the top league is at the bottom end. Is it too much to ask for our players to ignore questions about that lot ? Or just give a blank stare ? Stokes fell into the trap of talking about them positively, as there is very little to be positive about over at Ibrox, so the papers need these sort of headlines to try to stall their plummeting figures, which they blame on a lack of Rangers, when its simply a lack of professional, honest journalism that has caused the fall. Stokes, though, according to the Herald, managed to find other stuff to talk about, with the nominations for the Player of the Year Awards due to be announced;"We [Celtic players] are going to be biased but, seeing how well we have done domestically this season, I’d be very surprised if we didn’t get a couple in [this year's shortlist]. You saw last season, though, that you just never know.” It was suggested that, a year ago, Celtic had a number of candidates but no individual above all the others, which may have led to votes for their players being shared around to the detriment of all of them. “I don’t know if I’d buy that suggestion or not,” said Stokes. “If it’s true, it’s true. If it isn’t, it isn’t. I don’t have a clue, so I’m not going to comment. “Players work hard through a season and it is nice to get the recognition from your peers in the league. It’s not vital. At the end of the day it’s about us winning trophies, but it’s a nice touch and something a lot of players would hope to be involved in. Virgil has been outstanding this year but I’d probably give it to Kris, just for his goals and influence in games.” The POTY award is very prestigious. It can enhance a players career and and further his standing within the game, leading to fame, riches and success. Last years winner, Michael Higdon, is now with NEC Nijmegan. While Anthony Stokes has been getting a bit of flak from the Celtic support for toeing the line about the new club, its worth noting that Celtic themselves have also made a bit of a PR faux pas. I’d blame the PR man, but I’m fecked if I know who he is .
