My article on Fortune's decision to join Celtic seems to have rattled a few tartan cages. The article was not actually about Celtic but the hornet's nest seems to have been stirred by the following:
"Fortune, it seems, prefers the idea of playing in the Scottish Prem. It doesn't seem to worry him that the quality of football is only marginally above what you would find with jumpers chucked down to indicate goal posts, cash strapped Celtic are preferable to West Ham."
Now jumpy Jocks have read that as a comparison between West Ham and Celtic, which of course it is not. Lots of irate comments have, quite rightly, pointed out that Celtic are a far bigger club than we are and have flaunted Champions League participation as proof that the Hoops are cocks of the estate. I am not denying that and never have. Celtic are a much bigger and much more successful club than West Ham, but that has nothing to do with whether Fortune made the right or wrong decision to opt for Scottish huff and puff over the Hammers. Celtic are a bigger club because if you allow two boys to have free run of a sweet shop, they will inevitably grow very fat. And they are in the Champions League (which qualifying round this year?) because they are in a two horse race every season, and both horses qualify for a shot at the Champions League. Celtic's big boast this year is, "We finished last in the two horse race!" Big deal!
However, some of the replies have made some valid and interesting points. How would English clubs of the stature of West Ham, Tottenham, Villa and Everton fare in other European leagues? The performance of English clubs in the UEFA Cup seem to suggest that our sides might struggle in the German, Spanish, Italian or Ukrainian leagues but that, I would argue, is down to two factors:
1) Unlike the representatives of the other leagues, our top 4 always progress in the Champions League and so our fifth, sixth and seventh best clubs are pitched against the second, third or fourth best clubs from other leagues in the UEFA Cup. That's why we find Portsmouth playing A C Milan! And
2) Our clubs treat the UEFA Cup with what borders on complete disdain - Tottenham, Villa, Bolton and Everton have fielded near reserve teams for key games in the last two seasons.
I do not know enough about European Club football to say how West Ham might cope in other leagues but when I watched Inter play Roma and Fiorentina play Brecia a few seasons back, I was none too impressed by what I saw. True Fiorentina and Brescia were at the wrong end of the table, but the ground was a shabby concrete bowl and the football was not much better. On the evidence of my own eyes, I would back West Ham to finish in the top ten in Italy and therefore in the top half in Spain and Germany too. As for the SPL, we would definitely qualify for Europe!
And what would happen if Celtic, Rangers and Hearts transferred to the Prem? Well, as Newcastle showed, a big fan base and a team packed with highly paid foreigners does not guarantee success in the Prem. Yes, Celtic and Rangers can raise their games for contests with each other and a few home games in the Champions League, but could that intensity be maintained for a whole season? I very much doubt it. They would be no threat to our big four, that's for sure, and I think they would struggle to head the group of clubs aspiring to finish in the Europa League qualifying places.
Over time, of course, that situation could change as the Glasgow giants fed upon the cash cow of the Prem, but would that offset the loss of Champions League revenue? Probably not - and that is why, I suspect, that they are happy being the bullies in the SPL playground. And that is why Fortune has opted for Celtic over the Premiership. Playing against SPL defences, he can't help but fill his boots can he?
48 comments:
Paul if you use the F word, I can't publish your comment. Try not to conform to the southern stereotype of Scots eh?
Jumpy Jocks? Racist.
Does this guy write crap for a living, the parachute payment into the championship is more than most clubs get out of any deal in any league, if you put any decent club be they Scottish, French, Swedish etc and paid them the insane amount of money that is chucked about in the english premiership they would have a good chance of ending up in the top half of the league, you guys are so far up your own arses its unbelievable, how many european trophies were won by english teams last season....oh yeah bugger all
1557, Is it? Can we not call Scots Jocks? Has it gone that far? Surely not!
I think Celtic and Rangers would definitely be relegation fodder. The SPL standard is no better than the Championship!
1601, the problem is, wage demands expand to devour that cash. The overall quality doesn't improve that much, good players simply earn what great players earn elsewhere. Neill, Ljungberg, Dyer, Parker, Upson and Ashton are all fine examples of that at our club. How much are Celtic paying Fortune? More than he would earn in Italy, France, Germany or Spain I suspect.
congrats
an article that does not focus on spurs
too many holes in your comments to mention. champs league money obtained by Celtic and/or Rangers would pale in comparison to the guranteed tv money received by the epl clubs each and every year - this is without having to lift a finger (or boot?) to get it, relegation not withstanding. Give the same windfall to Celtic and Rangers each year and ye can bet yer bottom they would be challenging the top 4 given some seasons to adjust scouting, transfers etc to the new money market. Although a fan of The Tic, I can guaranty you that both sides of the Glasgow divide have a far greater supporter base and marketing appeal than more than half the teams in the Holier-Than-Though Engerlish "Prem"
Even the bottom teams get at least 30m just from TV rights every year in the EPL compared to the 10m from champions league group stages. The Old Firm would be at least 50m a season better off from playing in the EPL once you take into account increased merchandising, sponsorship, tv money and bonuses. The OF would consistently finish in at least the top 8. Glasgow is the 5th biggest city in the UK and the OF have a massive worldwide fan base. Both teams also have top training facilities and youth academies
1614, I did include a picture showing Cockyfools!
My first point is this, Celtic fc are a much larger club than Rangers with supporters in every corner of the globe so please do not make the mistake of comparing like with like and I believe that if Celtic were to enter the premiership they would probably be able to survive the first few seasons and as you say yourself, with all the tv revenue they would get, I believe they would be competing for a top five position.
You cite Newcastle as an example of how the tv money and large support does not ensure success, that is true but there is one major differenc, Celtic are a well run club and they would never be allowed to get into that situation.
Given the increased coverage Celtic would receive world wide through increased tv exposure in the EPL their merchandise etc would rocket and they could become one of the more wealthy clubs in the EPL within a very short space of time.
The SPL may only be a two horse race but the epl is hardly much better what with 3 r 4 teams with a realistic chance of success.
It's all about money and if Celtic were to get into the epl they would in my opinion join the three or four clubs capable of winning the title within a period of years.just my opinion.
The often-cited example of Newcastle as a comparison with Rangers and Celtic is as ill-founded as it is over-used. Newcastle is a club from a small city who draw almost all of their support from within a 20 mile radius. Rangers and Celtic are global brands with huge amounts of European experience. The English always underestimate us. Look at how ill-prepared Manchester was last year when in excess of 200000 Rangers fans turned up. Before anyone starts talking about rioting, check to see how many "fans" have been prosecuted. When you take it as a percentage it must be among the best behaved supports of all time!
Youth academies Stumbler? What happens to the players then? Where are all the Scottish footballers these days? I remember Hansen, Dalglish, Bremner, the Greys, Jordan, McQueen, Gemmill etc. Where are the equivalents now?
I agree with shug, im a Rangers fan but he is spot on, Outwith Man U, Arsenal, Chelsea and Liverpool the Old firm are much bigger clubs than the rest of the EPL in overall terms of history, prestige, worldwide fanbase, Stadium, Training Facilities. The only differemce is we are not getting the money and we are playing in a small pond with small fish. If we had the cash we could compete no problem. Its also easier to attract top players to EPL
Quick question to the Scots looking in: is it racist to call you guys Jocks?
Because all the young players end up playing in our crap league so they don't become as good as they would if they faced better opposition. We also play in a country that only has 5m people. Social aspects also play a part. If you look at Murray Park and Lennoxtown, they are as good facilities as anyone has in the EPL. put us in the EPL and there would be no shortage of young players desperate to sign for us
Is it racist to call us Jocks? Depends on the context. If an English mate down tghe pub called me a Jock, I'd be none offended, but coming from some cretinous attention seeking West Ham fan, trying to demean Celtic, Rangers and the Scottish game in general, I'd say it probably is.
Stumbler get your facts right epl teams do NOT get 30m every season it was a one off payment from the new sky deal at the beginning of last season, im an everton fan if we got 30m a season do you not think we would be spending 30m a season on players as against the usual freebies and loans
most euro clubs would struggle to play week in week out in the EPL Celtio and rangers may stay up for a season or two but would vanish up their own kilts after that Hearts would not last that long played 38 lost 38
As a Rangers fan, loosing out on Champions League football by being in the EPL would easily be compenstated by being given the silly money that EPL clubs are given. I do agree however that to begin with neither would be any threat to the big four and in fact I'd be aiming for a mid table finish to be happy. I do think, however, that once the Old Firm clubs got the money and were able to offer the same incentives as the other clubs we would be able to compete at a very high level.
Let's not forget, an Old Firm club in the EPL would a very attractive club to invest in.
Jocks? It depends in which context you're using it...the same as with any other cultural reference I suppose. If used in a derogatory context, intended as a slight or taken as an offensive remark then it IS an offensive remark.
I don't personally like it much, but it doesn't really bother me when others use it. But for the record, we're Scots...not Jocks.
As for your article, the only thing I have to say is that the success of a club isn't directly connected with its fanbase unless you're considering those who actually attend games. They're the people who generate the main bulk of the revenue. And that's what it's really about - the money.
Put simply, there's infinitely more money in English football and not all of it is down to the larger fan bases that English clubs tend to have. Much of it can be attributed to TV cash. It's not a level playing field in many ways.
Would Hearts, Celtic and Rangers survive? Nope. For both financial and geographical reasons.
Few comments here for the racist Hammer.
Take into consideration each of the glasgow clubs fanbase and also the merchandise sales which we currently have outweigh the majority of EPL teams I'd say after a settling in time both Glasgow teams could easily live with the vastly over rated, over priced EPL teams and players.
You make the comment about academies and how the " this days " likes of Dalgliesh, McQueen etc are no where to be found but is that not a similar situation for young English players for the vast majority of EPL teams?
Is it not a growing concern down south with the number of overseas players arriving on English shores that it will hinder the progress of yer national team?
Why do clubs down south prefer to go overseas for players?
Too costly at home and talent just ain't up to scratch really is it?
I don't understand why any Celtic/Rangers fans bother getting into an arguement on here when it is inhabited by cretins that come out with comments like
"Celtic and rangers may stay up for a season or two but would vanish up their own kilts after that Hearts would not last that long played 38 lost 38"
Why bother guys, you are not going to change this type of neanderthal's mind, it's a moot point anyway as it is unlikely to ever happen.
Just sit back and warm your hands on the huge implosion that is coming when the money runs dry (and be thankful that Celtic/Rangers never got involved).
Hammersfan said:
On the evidence of my own eyes, I would back West Ham to finish in the top ten in Italy and therefore in the top half in Spain and Germany too. As for the SPL, we would definitely qualify for Europe!
If West Ham were to play in the SPL for the 09/10 season they would'nt qualify for europe as the club would most likely be in liquidation before Christmas.
How would you expect to keep any of your players on contracts over £10k a week when the £30-£40M TV income that you have become reliant upon is replaced with a cheque for around £350k??? Not possible. Also, all your current sponsorship deals would either be terminated or re-negotiated to a fraction of the level of income they provide.
Your main source of income in the short term would be the offloading of 90%+ of your first team players at knockdown prices just to stop haemorraging the excessive wages they are currently on. Next would be season ticket sales, merchandise & matchday sales which might not be as profitable as days gone by considering you will be hosting Falkirk, St Mirren & Kilmarnock.
All incoming money would be prioritised towards your debt, which your bank would be most concerned about. Your playing budget would thus be a pittance, most likely restricting you to a youth team.
These are the fundementals which morons like pjvilla are ingnorant of when spounting nonsense like Celtic would be relegation fodder. They assess (without any basic knowledge) the squad as it is today, and are completely ignorant of the impact that the economic implications that moving to a different league would have upon the club in question.
why would we even want the inferiors in the english elite? leave them to watch and envy
wht would we even want the inferiors to join the elite? leave them to watch and learn
To describe Celtic supporters as jocks is somewhat off the mark. The club was founded by Irish religious to help support Irish emigrants after the devistating famine caused by you know who. Celtic has a huge Irish support at home and in America. Remember Seville the stadium was awash with Irish tricolours
There is a paranoia in the EPL regarding the future participation of Celts and Gers in the Premiership as undoubtedly both clubs would pose a big threat to the establishment.
Blooboy said:
Stumbler get your facts right epl teams do NOT get 30m every season it was a one off payment from the new sky deal at the beginning of last season, im an everton fan if we got 30m a season do you not think we would be spending 30m a season on players as against the usual freebies and loans
Okay, how about we check this out? if you go to the everton website, Specifically here to the clubs annual accounts for 2007 and go to page 19, you will see that Everton took in £27.5M in broadcasting money. Thats not far off from £30M. Additionally, that was under the old contract, the re-negotiated rights are significantly more profitable, so in Everton's case you should expect to bring in more than £30M a season under the new contract.
As for why you're not spending £30M on players every season, i'll pass on the opportunity of a smartar5ed reply, have a look in the books and you might find the answer.
Back in the 1960's and 70's, Celtic and Rangers reached 5 European Finals within a 5 year time-scale. They also reached the semi's of the European Cup etc during that time. Celtic won the European Cup in 1967, rangers won the Cup-Winners-Cup in 1972. At that time England had many big well-supported clubs, but the two Glasgow giants more than held their own, and outpassed any English records at that time in Europe. This was because, Celtic and Rangers were playing on a much more level playing field alongside any English club with regards to revenue. Celtic and Rangers over recent years, have found it difficult to play top European opposition in mid-week, and then raise their game against crap teams in the SPL on a Saturday. If my team Celtic played against better opposition on a more regular basis, ie the EPL, and profited from the money avaible, Celtic would right up there, challenging the top four every season...no problem for the Hoops !
Rangers (and celtic), given time and the money EPL teams get, would be fighting for european qualification in the EPL every year... We already have the stadium, history, fans, facilities, just not the cash... How did everton fair the year they were in the champions league? Every other year Rangers or Celtic have been excelling in Europe. The only reason they havent been invited into the EPL is because they are scared of their buying power... because lets face it, Rangers and Celtic WOULD be fighting for Europe every year unlike some clubs who are fighting for Europe one year and fighting relegation the next...
Just a few additional comments from some other members of our forum.
" You know what bugs me about the EPL apart from the fact its English, the fact that they are a four horse race and even then its only Man UTD who are constantly the champions with Chelski, Arsenal and Liverpool occasionally getting sniff.
Gies peace ya eejits, you boast the fantastic league but I can guarantee the top six will always look the same and the rest just sit around waiting for the occasional scrap to be chucked at you. "
" The EPL is mostly boring games. Out of the amount of games they play over the course of a season you are lucky to get 10 top quality games. Not bad for a country who spends silly money ontransfer fees and wages every season "
" Tell them I cannae wait till their money dries up and that league implodes "
ANOTHER FORUM COMMENT
There is a lot of truth in the article and he is not far wrong but I would argue that if we were in the EPL unlike Newcastle we would attract class players and in time we would be up there with the best.
Scott and I'm a Rangers fan and i can see some views from most English fans that we'd be like mid prem teams but it's really really not the case. You underestimate how much Rangers and Celtic fans are about their team winning, they're born to support and expect nothing bar trophies.
We are from a Country of 5 million now what if scotland had say 20 million population, we'd have bigger cities equaling bigger support, bigger stadiums. The teams would get better revenue and tv deals to make offers for better players.
Times have changed and i seen someone talk about where is the Daglish, Law, Hanson (and the Bob Malcolms) :p well for me it's simple with technology being thrusted in our faces kids have options like me loved football but then when i turned 16 i just played online gaming, now with this and our youth having no real talent to play with or play against it's hard for us to bring up really good lads who can learn from legends.
Now i know Arsenal and Chelsea are big players these days but in all honesty there are only two English teams that are on par with the Old firm and that's Man Utd and Liverpool, why? History and the expectations of winning something every season.
And to anyone that questions my more populated the better the league etc is pish well the way i see it as.
You can say, Mexico, Paraguay, Chile etc their main sport is football and they have high population well yes they do but they don't have the sufficiant economy that can take their game to the big level basically they can't pay mega bucks like the Europeans.
And Celtic are only a bigger club due to having Catholicism on their side and when they buy a player say from Poland those cunts go straight over for a tour the next pre season and rip the arse out of they do have better business set up like take advantage of those areas, I wish we fucking done that lol.
Still the most successful team though. ;p
what is true about this article the standard of the SPL is poor. However the pressure on professional footballers does not diminish. In many way's the pressure increases ten fold compared to a mid table EPL side. Ultimately footballers are professional and thrive on pressure. With all due respect to West Ham and clubs like yours, in the EPL you don't have to win every week. Of course you want to win every week but at Celtic you can't afford not to win every week.
Watched many F.A. cup shocks over the years. When many many premiership sides struggle to cope with lesser sides tactics.
Imagine playing 40 cup ties a season, against teams who shut up shop and try to kill the game. With the reality being you have to break these sides down week in week out. Knowing if you don't win 90+% of your games you will more than likely not beat your rivals to the league.
Don't kid yourselves the SPL is no cake walk. It can frustrate, it is most definitely not glamorous but it should not be easily dismissed as man in England do.
In relation to Celtic and Rangers in the EPL. Well I think that day will come. Money talks and Sky hold all the aces. The EPL product will inevitably stagnate. In fact I think their is evidence to suggest with real Madrid buying up all the top talent. That this is the beginning of the EPL being knocked off it's perch as the number 1 league.
The day will come for restructure and that will likely involve Celtic and Rangers. Most English fans are ignorant of our size. To give an example Celtic sold the most shirts out of any British club side last year. With 60,000 fans every 2nd week to watch a poor SPL. Could you imagine what would turn up to see them in the EPL?
No doubt about it within 5 seasons Celtic would win the EPL. Man Utd are the only EPL side that would be similar in size. Clubs like Man City and Chelsea would compete solely on a financial basis due to billionaire owners. However the rest of the EPL would have their noses pushed further down the league. Definitely by one place (Celtic) and most probably by two(Rangers).
JUMPERS BE CAREFULL HOW YOU JUDGE OTHERS AS YOU MIGHT JUST BE THOUGHT OF IN A SIMILAR LIGHT IN THE NOT TOO DISTANT FUTURE.
This coment mirrors much of the ignorant atitude from English supporters towards the SPL.
Are most just that ignorant or is the consistent negative remarks born out of fear?
They would probably win the Championship and/or finish 11th/14th in the EPL
The beauty of the EPL is competitive games each week, not 4 times a year.
Let's not use "Jocks" but the Cockney "Sweaties" from "Sweaty Socks"
EPL is one of the strongest in the world. Man City have shown that even all the oil in UAE can't guarantee success
Celtic and Rangers have a very duopoly, let's not kid ourselves they are any better than they are. City, Everton, Villa , Spurs and the Hammers would have nothing to fear by playing them
16:44 - I am a cretin. Yes, I am stuck here for most days in front of my computer because of my disability. Unlike you, I haven't been blessed with good health as you probably have been. I didn't ask to be encumbered with this. You speak of being offended. How do you think I feel when you seek to deride someone by comparing him with someone afflicted with the malady that I have been? I would ask you to look up (google up) 'cretinism' and then think about choosing your words more carefully next time. For your info, I am deeply offended by your comments.
You too Soz. Read my comments to 16:44
0257, if this is genuine I apologise on behalf of 1644, but I am sure you understand that it was not meant in that way. I would use the term cretin myself without understanding that it might refer to a medical condition. I certainly would not use it with the intention of causing offence to anybody with a medical condition. It spun out of my question about whether the term Jocks was offensive. I thought that was fine, I must admit, but some appear to find it offensive so I will try to avoid it in future. It is a minefield isn't it?
So, Hammersfan.
Do you still think West Ham would qualify for europe if they were to play in the SPL?
If so, perhaps you could enlighten us with your reasoning?
i see you're bringing joy to the masses again with your shite blog.
1709, first season, definitely yes. Reasoning? We would wipe the floor with every team except Celtic and Rangers, and I would fancy us to turn over both of the Old Firm sides at Upton Park. That should be enough to qualify for the Europa League surely?
Hammersfan 00:05,
Obviously you missed my post from 17:28 yesterday. I've re-posted it below;
------
Hammersfan said:
On the evidence of my own eyes, I would back West Ham to finish in the top ten in Italy and therefore in the top half in Spain and Germany too. As for the SPL, we would definitely qualify for Europe!
If West Ham were to play in the SPL for the 09/10 season they would'nt qualify for europe as the club would most likely be in liquidation before Christmas.
How would you expect to keep any of your players on contracts over £10k a week when the £30-£40M TV income that you have become reliant upon is replaced with a cheque for around £350k??? Not possible. Also, all your current sponsorship deals would either be terminated or re-negotiated to a fraction of the level of income they provide.
Your main source of income in the short term would be the offloading of 90%+ of your first team players at knockdown prices just to stop haemorraging the excessive wages they are currently on. Next would be season ticket sales, merchandise & matchday sales which might not be as profitable as days gone by considering you will be hosting Falkirk, St Mirren & Kilmarnock.
All incoming money would be prioritised towards your debt, which your bank would be most concerned about. Your playing budget would thus be a pittance, most likely restricting you to a youth team.
These are the fundementals which morons like pjvilla are ingnorant of when spounting nonsense like Celtic would be relegation fodder. They assess (without any basic knowledge) the squad as it is today, and are completely ignorant of the impact that the economic implications that moving to a different league would have upon the club in question.
------
So, still think you'd cut it in the SPL? If so, where would the money come from?
1734, I see you still cannot resist the lure of the site!
I didn't, I accept your point. That's why I said FIRST SEASON.
As you've been a sport, I'll try to get this through to you again. Considering your club almost entered into administration last month, do you think that the investor who stepped in to save your club from extinction would have seen West Ham as a viable proposition if you were playing in the SPL next season? Without them, the situation was so dire that you may not have qualified for a license to take part in the Europa league had you made relevant league position.
Even if the said investors were stupid enough to still go ahead with the takeover, for you to able to "wipe the floor" with the rest of the SPL, and overturn Celtic & Rangers at Upton Park", one has to think you would need to keep your best players like Ashton, Upson, Parker, Dyer among others. Is that a fair suggestion?
Do you seriously think that you could afford to keep any of your first XI in wages for even three months without the £30M-£40M paid to you for broadcasting rights? How would you do this? pay in IOU's???
The reality is, without the BPL T.V. rights package, your club (and to be fair, most of the others in your league) would be in administration within a week (as it nearly was last month), and extinct within months. At best, you would be looking at becoming the next MK Dons.
Celtic are a huge club already with worldwide support even though they play in Scotland. If they were to join the EPL with the extra coverage and TV money this support would get bigger, you would have the real fans and the tag alongs that all successful EPL teams get throughout the world.
This would ensure that Celtic would become even bigger and rival Real madrid and Man Utd for support.
Bubbles_Burst, I see and accept your point, but that is the problem you face in Scotland, you cannot sustain a professional league. That's why Rangers & Celtic will end up in the Prem eventually but, for that to happen, Scotland will have to give up as a National team. Hang on, that's already happened to all intents and purposes hasn't it?
Post a Comment