Scottish Football 2024/25

Rangers poor today but job done. According to a few of their fans on their forums, the atmosphere at half time today was, and I quote, "poisonous" and "toxic"

Hard to see how Clement would survive if they lost today.

Looking forward to the cup final. Celtic to win in a tight enough game ( assuming both teams are at or near full strength )

Tough for us on Tuesday night, Leipzig at home. Very good test but I feel we can get a point.
 
Strachan8 said:
Rangers are in significant trouble off the pitch. Not just the magnitude of last year’s losses but the absence of any meaningful European income this fiscal year, even with a lower wage bill, will again likely mean vast operating losses. Their wage bill was 5.5x that of Aberdeen. The incompetence in player recruitment and granting of generous player contracts is quite shocking ie despite the revenue gap in Celtic’s favour until this year there wasn’t much difference in their personnel costs. Clement’s contract extension to 2028 before securing European qualification is another shocking decision.

Aberdeen last had a chance to win the League when Ronny was managing Celtic. They ran out of steam as they didn’t augment the squad in January. This time round they should be able to get in loans etc in January whereas, at the very same time, Rangers need to further reduce their wage bill.
Click to expand...
Agree with pretty much all of this. I do think Aberdeen ( if injuries are kind to them ) could finish second. Rangers are in huge financial difficulty.
 
Irish Bhoy said:
Agree with pretty much all of this. I do think Aberdeen ( if injuries are kind to them ) could finish second. Rangers are in huge financial difficulty.
Click to expand...

What's this about? Ongoing issues caused by the insolvency disaster?
 
Irish Bhoy said:
Rangers poor today but job done. According to a few of their fans on their forums, the atmosphere at half time today was, and I quote, "poisonous" and "toxic"

Hard to see how Clement would survive if they lost today.

Looking forward to the cup final. Celtic to win in a tight enough game ( assuming both teams are at or near full strength )

Tough for us on Tuesday night, Leipzig at home. Very good test but I feel we can get a point.
Click to expand...
I actually thought Rangers played well and got better as the game went on and the poorer performers (Dessers, Tavernier and Lawrence) were subbed off for more athletic and agile players (Danilo, Sterling and Diomande). Problem is there's so much negativity about the club where Motherwell scoring from their only attack in the first half, or Dessers missing an open goal and other easy chances - all of that is seen as the manager's fault right now. We had almost double the XG that Celtic had the day before against Aberdeen, which I think shows the gap in finishing quality between the sides. For Clement the narrative is set and it's unlikely to change without some big results going our way.
 
Melbourne Red said:
What's this about? Ongoing issues caused by the insolvency disaster?
Click to expand...
£17m loss last fiscal year (30/6/24) and no Europeam football this fiscal year implies a further £15m+ loss this fiscal year. Celtic made £18m operating last year from memory and have huge cash reserves.
 
Strachan8 said:
£17m loss last fiscal year (30/6/24) and no Europeam football this fiscal year implies a further £15m+ loss this fiscal year. Celtic made £18m operating last year from memory and have huge cash reserves.
Click to expand...

Why is there no European football this year?
 
GoonerBear said:
Why is there no European football this year?
Click to expand...
They were eliminated by Kiev in qualifiers and not eligible for Europa. Huge loss of revenue versus last few seasons. Will be interesting to see what adjustment was built into players’ contracts to mitigate this risk. At the very same time Celtic are guaranteed to play more Champions League matches this season than last given change in the tournament format.
 
Strachan8 said:
They were eliminated by Kiev in qualifiers and not eligible for Europa. Huge loss of revenue versus last few seasons. Will be interesting to see what adjustment was built into players’ contracts to mitigate this risk. At the very same time Celtic are guaranteed to play more Champions League matches this season than last given change in the tournament format.
Click to expand...

But Rangers are in the Europa League? They play Olympiakos on Thursday, having already played Malmö, Lyon and Bucharest winning 2 and losing 1.

Matchday 6 and 7 they play Spurs and Man Utd.
 
Strachan8 said:
They were eliminated by Kiev in qualifiers and not eligible for Europa. Huge loss of revenue versus last few seasons. Will be interesting to see what adjustment was built into players’ contracts to mitigate this risk. At the very same time Celtic are guaranteed to play more Champions League matches this season than last given change in the tournament format.
Click to expand...
Eh? We play Rangers in the Europa this season.
 
Strachan8 said:
My mistake. Celtic are liekly qualifying for last 16 for first time in over a decade after last night. Relative gap gets much wider.
Click to expand...

Not the last 16 in the traditional sense of course, likely the play off round to get to the last 16.
 
Gio said:
I actually thought Rangers played well and got better as the game went on and the poorer performers (Dessers, Tavernier and Lawrence) were subbed off for more athletic and agile players (Danilo, Sterling and Diomande). Problem is there's so much negativity about the club where Motherwell scoring from their only attack in the first half, or Dessers missing an open goal and other easy chances - all of that is seen as the manager's fault right now. We had almost double the XG that Celtic had the day before against Aberdeen, which I think shows the gap in finishing quality between the sides. For Clement the narrative is set and it's unlikely to change without some big results going our way.
Click to expand...
I disagree, I thought yee were poor v M'well in 1st half. Lack of tempo, lack of guile. Yee were better second half.

No disrespect, you are too obsessed with stats. ( Xg etc ) Stats don't always tell the whole story.
Celtic battered Aberdeen, particularly in second half, Celtic toyed with them when we had possession, they were a broken team, psychologically.

In fairness, you say the narrative is set re Clement, only way he can change that is by beating Celtic. If he doesn't win at least one of the next 2 games ( only 17 days apart between each game ) then majority of your fans will demand he get sacked.
 
11 home wins out of 11 home fixtures in all competitions for Aberdeen this season. Big result after the gubbing versus Celtic in the league cup. Clear that team is a different proposition when not playing in mid week: we played Rangers in mid week before the Celtic game.

Now played one third of all the league games pre-split. Thelin’s ability to consistently elevate the contribution of attacking squad players, many of whom had been discarded by previous managers and previously wanted to leave the club, from the bench marks him out as a special manager.
 
Last edited:
Strachan8 said:
11 home wins out of 11 home fixtures in all competitions for Aberdeen this season. Big result are the gubbing versus Celtic in the league cup. Clear that team is a different proposition when not playing in mid week: we played Rangers in mid week before the Celtic game.

Now played one third of all the league games pre-split. Thelin’s ability to consistently elevate the contribution of attacking squad players, many of whom had been discarded by previous managers and previously wanted to leave the club, from the bench marks him out as a special manager.
Click to expand...
If he still has Aberdeen in a title race by end of Jan, an EPL club might come calling for him, or a big championship club who are under performing. He would increase his wages anything between 5 to 15 times what he currently on if he went to a top EFL club or a lower EPL club. Nobody is turning down that size of an increase in wages. Great to see though Aberdeen going so well.
 
Very gracious although always easier to be so just after a brilliant result v RBL and hammering us.

I think he stays until the summer unless a big job (BVB, Everton, Roma or WHU) is offered to him. Southampton and Wolves are the obvious vacancies to come but neither ‘project’ looks appealing.

Will be interesting to see if Celtic drop points v Kilmarnock today given plastic pitch and highs of mid week resulting in complacency. Rangers must also be tired after their efforts on Thursday night in Piraeus.

Hopefully AFC are generously sharing the additional revenues versus budget with JT and the players via bonuses rather than higher base salaries.
 
Strachan8 said:
Very gracious although always easier to be so just after a brilliant result v RBL and hammering us.

I think he stays until the summer unless a big job (BVB, Everton, Roma or WHU) is offered to him. Southampton and Wolves are the obvious vacancies to come but neither ‘project’ looks appealing.

Will be interesting to see if Celtic drop points v Kilmarnock today given plastic pitch and highs of mid week resulting in complacency. Rangers must also be tired after their efforts on Thursday night in Piraeus.

Hopefully AFC are generously sharing the additional revenues versus budget with JT and the players via bonuses rather than higher base salaries.
Click to expand...
It's highly unlikely he will win the league, so if he gets offered a job with a substantial wage increase, he has to take it. Aberdeen could be a one season wonder ( I sincerely hope not ) and his stock could drop next year. The expression "strike while the Iron is hot" I suspect, will come in to play if he gets offered a job with huge salary increase and the possibility to manage an EPL club or top EFL club.

He ain't getting BVB, absolutely no chance.

He will get offered a Southampton / Wolves or a big EFL club that is struggling but a club with big potential.
 
Melbourne Red said:
What's this about? Ongoing issues caused by the insolvency disaster?
Click to expand...
No, combination of many things, Dave King - a major Investor, who was described by a South Arican judge as a glib and shameless liar ( guy is basically a career criminal in a business sense and a compulsive liar - I could be here all night talking about how much of a gangster - in the business sense, he is ) engaged in at least 3, and possibly 4 or 5 litigation battles which Rangers lost all of them, ( basically disregarding legally binding contracts - all driven by Dave King ) costing the clubs millions upon millions, upon millions.

They also spent big money on player wages - Conor Goldson who recently left was on circa 35k per week for little return. Madness! Their spend on wages was slightly higher than Celtic despite Celtics turnover year on year generally being many, many millions higher. The club has been mismanaged, their player trading model has been non existent until basically this season. They could have gotten decent money for Morelos and Kent at one point ( guts of 20 million for both if u believe the papers ) but both left on free transfers. Club has basically made numerous really poor decisions over a protracted period. Really, really poor decisions.

They have posted many multiple millions of losses year on year, every year since re - forming in 2012 bar maybe 1 season. Their board are basically keeping the club alive by covering the losses through loans, after loans after loans. That information is literally in their accounts, it's not an opinion, its a fact.

Club is a dysfunctional mess in a business sense.

Celtic have 80 million in the bank, Rangers, as stated, continually make really poor decisions in a business sense. They may never catch Celtic, ( financially ), they'll probably win the odd league but it will likely be 1 in every 5 leagues at best - unless of course Celtic take their eye off the ball ( which obviously could happen ) but I have heard from an impeccable source - this guy is close to a person on Celtics board, that there is a determination to bury Rangers in a footballing and business sense from the Celtic board. Whether that happens or not remains to be seen, but what cannot be argued is, at present, Celtic are a billion miles ahead, financially, and in a business sense.
 
https://www.heraldscotland.com/spor...ing-failed-plan-play-premiership-game-abroad/

DUNDEE managing director John Nelms has admitted the Dens Park club would be open to playing a William Hill Premiership match overseas in future nine years after their plan to take on Celtic in the United States was scuppered.

Spanish giants Barcelona and Atletico Madrid are currently in talks about staging their La Liga fixture on December 22 at the Hard Rock Stadium in Miami and are optimistic that FIFA, UEFA and the Spanish FA will all give the proposal the go-ahead.

The Catalan giants, who are currently playing at the Olympic Stadium while their Nou Camp home is being redeveloped, took on Real Madrid in a friendly in front of 82,500 fans in the MetLife Stadium in New Jersey last summer.
Click to expand...
 
Irish Bhoy said:
Celtic have 80 million in the bank, Rangers, as stated, continually make really poor decisions in a business sense. They may never catch Celtic, ( financially ), they'll probably win the odd league but it will likely be 1 in every 5 leagues at best - unless of course Celtic take their eye off the ball ( which obviously could happen ) but I have heard from an impeccable source - this guy is close to a person on Celtics board, that there is a determination to bury Rangers in a footballing and business sense from the Celtic board. Whether that happens or not remains to be seen, but what cannot be argued is, at present, Celtic are a billion miles ahead, financially, and in a business sense.
Click to expand...
The Board would love Celtic fans to have that impression. But in reality they know that interest in the club, in the league, and from their fans waned during the 2010s when Rangers were in the lower leagues. As soon as Rangers came back into the top division, an extra 10,000 fans appeared back through the turnstiles. They know fine well that the rivalry motivates their fans and makes them money. They give it big licks to the fans that they don't need Rangers, while at the same time renewing the Old Firm trademark on the sly.

https://www.fitbastats.com/celtic/club_records_league_attendance.php
 
Gio said:
The Board would love Celtic fans to have that impression. But in reality they know that interest in the club, in the league, and from their fans waned during the 2010s when Rangers were in the lower leagues. As soon as Rangers came back into the top division, an extra 10,000 fans appeared back through the turnstiles. They know fine well that the rivalry motivates their fans and makes them money. They give it big licks to the fans that they don't need Rangers, while at the same time renewing the Old Firm trademark on the sly.

https://www.fitbastats.com/celtic/club_records_league_attendance.php
Click to expand...
When I say bury Rangers, I don't mean board want them to be out of the league. Celtic board absolutely want Rangers in league. You're post is spot on, generally, board need Rangers and want them in league. Bury, in the context I was meaning, is to win league year in, year out, and get so far ahead on every level, not just on the pitch, ( on the pitch dominance is a byproduct of getting things right off the pitch ) that there is little to no chance of Rangers every dominating again. Of course, they may win the odd league, but the ambition is for them to never, ever dominate again because the gulf on every level is so wide, it would be impossible for them to dominate.

Apart from the 90's when the club was financially doped up to the hilt, they haven't dominated Scottish football since 1940's / 50's.
 
Irish Bhoy said:
When I say bury Rangers, I don't mean board want them to be out of the league. Celtic board absolutely want Rangers in league. You're post is spot on, generally, board need Rangers and want them in league. Bury, in the context I was meaning, is to win league year in, year out, and get so far ahead on every level, not just on the pitch, ( on the pitch dominance is a byproduct of getting things right off the pitch ) that there is little to no chance of Rangers every dominating again. Of course, they may win the odd league, but the ambition is for them to never, ever dominate again because the gulf on every level is so wide, it would be impossible for them to dominate.

Apart from the 90's when the club was financially doped up to the hilt, they haven't dominated Scottish football since 1940's / 50's.
Click to expand...
"Espanyolification" is the word you're looking for, opposed to bury.

https://www.thecelticwiki.com/about-celtic/celtic-slang/espanyolification/
 
Irish Bhoy said:
When I say bury Rangers, I don't mean board want them to be out of the league. Celtic board absolutely want Rangers in league. You're post is spot on, generally, board need Rangers and want them in league. Bury, in the context I was meaning, is to win league year in, year out, and get so far ahead on every level, not just on the pitch, ( on the pitch dominance is a byproduct of getting things right off the pitch ) that there is little to no chance of Rangers every dominating again. Of course, they may win the odd league, but the ambition is for them to never, ever dominate again because the gulf on every level is so wide, it would be impossible for them to dominate.

Apart from the 90's when the club was financially doped up to the hilt, they haven't dominated Scottish football since 1940's / 50's.
Click to expand...

Its defo true, Rangers are a mess off the park just now as well as on the park. The board took the eye of the ball massively after the title they did win. Celtic were a mess on the park, the team basically had to be rebuilt from scratch, perhaps the Rangers board got too arrogant thinking that the power shift would remain and Celtic had gambled massively on a manger from Australia. They didn't back Gerrard enough and let Celtic and Ange overtake them again and they've been trying to play catch up ever since.

It's looks a long way back for Rangers currently, but history shows that things can swing quite quick between the Old Firm if a club can get the right structure in.
 
Irish Bhoy said:
When I say bury Rangers, I don't mean board want them to be out of the league. Celtic board absolutely want Rangers in league. You're post is spot on, generally, board need Rangers and want them in league. Bury, in the context I was meaning, is to win league year in, year out, and get so far ahead on every level, not just on the pitch, ( on the pitch dominance is a byproduct of getting things right off the pitch ) that there is little to no chance of Rangers every dominating again. Of course, they may win the odd league, but the ambition is for them to never, ever dominate again because the gulf on every level is so wide, it would be impossible for them to dominate.

Apart from the 90's when the club was financially doped up to the hilt, they haven't dominated Scottish football since 1940's / 50's.
Click to expand...
The cyclical nature of the old firm rivalry and other football rivalries suggests that’s fanciful thinking. In much the same way that it would have been unrealistic for Rangers to assume the same in the late-80s and 90s. Competitive advantages get eroded in markets and in football two similarly sized clubs are unlikely to be separated for long. Just three years ago many in the Celtic side were deeply concerned that Rangers had moved miles ahead on and off the park. One smart appointment allied to piss-poor player trading on the other side and the situation reverses again. It’s happened multiple times over the years.
 
GoonerBear said:
Its defo true, Rangers are a mess off the park just now as well as on the park. The board took the eye of the ball massively after the title they did win. Celtic were a mess on the park, the team basically had to be rebuilt from scratch, perhaps the Rangers board got too arrogant thinking that the power shift would remain and Celtic had gambled massively on a manger from Australia. They didn't back Gerrard enough and let Celtic and Ange overtake them again and they've been trying to play catch up ever since.

It's looks a long way back for Rangers currently, but history shows that things can swing quite quick between the Old Firm if a club can get the right structure in.
Click to expand...
A couple of things, Cetic had the financial resources to back their new manager and Celtic did their homework re Ange. Like any appointment it is a risk however, He was well thought of in City group and Mark Lawwell, who is son Celtic chairman was part of the City group. It was less risky than many thought ( including most Celtic fans )

Rangers didn't have the resources to build on winning league especially after exiting CL qualifiers hence why Gerrard left. It wasnt complacency. They front loaded investment over a couple of years when Gerrard was there, there was no money to significantly strengthen. That's not my opinion, go on to Rangers fans forums ( and also look at their accounts at the time ) and many on their forums said this.
 
Irish Bhoy said:
A couple of things, Cetic had the financial resources to back their new manager and Celtic did their homework re Ange. Like any appointment it is a risk however, He was well thought of in City group and Mark Lawwell, who is son Celtic chairman was part of the City group. It was less risky than many thought ( including most Celtic fans )

Rangers didn't have the resources to build on winning league especially after exiting CL qualifiers hence why Gerrard left. It wasnt complacency. They front loaded investment over a couple of years when Gerrard was there, there was no money to significantly strengthen. That's not my opinion, go on to Rangers fans forums ( and also look at their accounts at the time ) and many on their forums said this.
Click to expand...
Mate, I'm a Scottish Rangers fan, and frequent Rangers forums.

My point about Rangers is more that the board have been willing to spend their own money, have a fairly big net transfer spend and sustain losses trying to play catch up to Celtic before and after the title win, when one could argue the summer that could have paid most dividend to gamble a bit was the summer they had won the league, as they were a couple of games away from the money spinning Champions League, and had a chance to try and put their foot throat on Celtic and win back to back titles.

Like was pointed out earlier, they had assets in Ryan Kent, Morelos and Glen Kamara that they could have sold at the right time if the gamble didn't pay off. Instead they didn't gamble, but at the same time fecked up the sales of those 3 so lost most of that money anyway. We were lucky in that the sales of Patterson and then Bassey helped, but that money was spent poorly as well.
 
Last edited:
Gio said:
The cyclical nature of the old firm rivalry and other football rivalries suggests that’s fanciful thinking. In much the same way that it would have been unrealistic for Rangers to assume the same in the late-80s and 90s. Competitive advantages get eroded in markets and in football two similarly sized clubs are unlikely to be separated for long. Just three years ago many in the Celtic side were deeply concerned that Rangers had moved miles ahead on and off the park. One smart appointment allied to piss-poor player trading on the other side and the situation reverses again. It’s happened multiple times over the years.
Click to expand...
I am not arguing that a power shift can happen, it absolutely can, and as you correctly point out, has happened many times before, but currently, financially, we are a billion miles ahead of Rangers and with FSR, Rangers can't go out ( even if a Billionaire took them over tomorrow ) and spend obscene money. The FSR regulations is not good news for Rangers when they are posting 17 million losses. They can't go out and spend 30 million (even if the board were prepared to sanction it ) in a Summer because of FSR.

My own view is, Rangers will win the odd league over next 10 years ( and possibly more if Celtic get complacent ) but if Celtic at the very top level ( board room ) show the hunger to stay as top dog and be ambitious re making progress in Europe ( thus generating big money by qualifying for CL and winning some matches ) then I feel a lot will have to go very, very wrong in terms of decision making on our side, and a lot will have to go very, very right on your side to shift balance of power for a sustained period. I don't see it but yes, it's possible. It can happen but its unlikely ( if, as I say, we retain hunger at the top of the club, which as previously stated, I am told the hunger is absolutely there to always be top dog )

I am in the minority ( probably ) of Celtic fans, I feel we need a strong(ish) Rangers for many reasons - not least Season Tckt sales and also sponsorship, and also to avoid complacency. I am delighted Aberdeen are doing so well, it forces us to keep striving for improvement.

Purely out of curiosity, are you a season tckt holder at Ibrox?

Do you go to or have you been to Celtic Park before for Derby games?

I am a regular at Ibrox when we visit even with the pathetic small allocation in recent years. Hopefully for March game, there will 3k of your fans at Celtic Park and 3k of ours at Ibrox in late April / early May.
 
GoonerBear said:
Mate, I'm a Scottish Rangers fan, and frequent Rangers forums.

My point about Rangers is more that the board have been willing to spend their own money, have a fairly big net transfer spend and sustain losses trying to play catch up to Celtic before and after the title win, when one could argue the summer that could have paid most dividend to gamble a bit was the summer they had won the league, as they were a couple of games away from the money spinning Champions League, and had a chance to try and put their foot throat on Celtic and win back to back titles.

Like was pointed out earlier, they had assets in Ryan Kent, Morelos and Glen Kamara that they could have sold at the right time if the gamble didn't pay off. Instead they didn't gamble, but at the same time fecked up the sales of those 3 so lost most of that money anyway. We were lucky in that the sales of Patterson and then Bassey helped, but that money was spent poorly as well.
Click to expand...
They didn't gamble after winning the though, maybe they didn't have the resources as alluded to by ( some ) Rangers fans on followfollow. Do you remember Jon Dahl Tommassons comment when asked by journalist about winning the Euro tie yee eventually lost, he smiled and said I think 1 team needs the money. It was then, common knowledge, and is now, that they were / are skint. You can't keep posting losses year on year. I think I am right in saying Rangers literally were not allowed spend big that Summer, they were under Uefa supervision re their continued losses. I think a couple of fans on followfollow said that. What is absolutely certain is that they were indeed under Uefa supervision, what's slightly in doubt is whether it was that Summer - Summer they won league, or following Summer.

FSR is a game changer as per my previous post, its not good news for Rangers, the problem Rangers as a club have is fans demand league title at start of every season ( understandably ) every season but when u are financially severely hamstrung relative to your main rival for the title, its extremely difficult to meet fan expectations. Most fans want Clement out, not saying they are wrong but it shows the pressure associated with Rangers. Yee don't currently a CEO and a couple of other positions are currently vacant. For me, if I was a Rangers fan, I would want to grow season on season, organically, for a few seasons, close the gap at every level to Celtic and then try to position yourselves in a position to win titles semi regularly. The fans expectations as well as the current financial situation of both clubs is not doing Rangers any favours. Yee need to start living within your means and hope Celtic get signings spectacularly wrong. Celtic is a brilliantly run club, self sustaining and people in positions of influence making good strategic decisions. When Fergus MCCann re built Celtic Park to a 60k all seater stadium, straight away we had an inherent financial advantage of 10k extra seats. Say its 600 pounds per seat, that's 6 million straight away.

Are you a season tckt holder? Just purely out of curiosity.

Do you believe Rangers can win league this season?

Do you want Clement to go or be given a chance to turn it around? For what it's worth, I think Clement is a decent manager, and a good bloke but Rodgers is better and Celtic have far more resources so it's difficult for him.

I think League Cup final will be tight, just my opinion. Are you going to the game?

Why Arsenal as your ( I am assuming ) second team? Genuinely curious.

I have always liked Spurs since a kid, always thought they played attractive football. Love Celtic but more than a soft spot for Spurs. I can get 2 tckts for Spurs v Rangers at Ibrox, I have a good mate who is also a huge Celtic fan and Spurs is, and like me, very much his English, he has a brilliant contact at Spurs but work is crazy busy for me so we ain't going. Also, he was told actually picking up the tckts will be challenging, we'd have to make our way to Ibrox and get to away end and meet person there. With an Irish accent and with Ange factor, its probably not advisable to go. Any time I go to Ibrox, its always on a supporters bus, its safer.

Last time I was there was 2 - 2 game when Kyogo scored with 3 mins to go, we had to be at ground for 10am for 12.30pm kick. We were there at 9.40am. Absolute shambles! Need to get allocation back to something decent which, thankfully, looks like it will happen for March game at Celtic Park.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.