Earlier I wrote about the press release Celtic put out today; this is a clarification on that article.
Celtic fans, by and large, have reasonable expectations from our club.
We’re not, as some appear determined to suggest, a bunch of lunatics moving from one emotional high to the next. We know where this club plays football, and that limits what we can realistically do in terms of attracting a big name, giving him a budget and expecting him to achieve.
No argument there, yet some of us are constantly accused of over-reach, of living in fantasy land, of not understanding how the game works.
That attitude is prevalent inside Celtic Park too, as Lawwell pointed out last week with his dissing of the bloggers and others. These people think that anyone who disagrees with the strategy simply doesn’t understand it, or at least that’s the impression they want people to have of us.
It’s cobblers.
My argument with the strategy always comes back to the way we’re presented with it as if it was imposed on us rather than a consequence of choices.
We made certain decisions and took a certain path.
We got here because of that.
If we’re going to change course that means the strategy itself has to change.
Few, if any, Celtic fans have unrealistic opinions on how it should be done.
Earlier in the month I wrote an article about how Celtic had to meet us “halfway” with changes.
No-one rational is advocating spending £30 million and never has been.
But this idea that we can get by taking no risks at all, that net spend zero is a good way forward, is unworkable nonsense in a game heading more and more and more in the other direction. No-one’s suggesting we try and keep up with the impossible (and unsustainable) demands of English football … but nor should we simply accept “life in the slow lane” when there are other options available to us.
The appointment of a new manager is one of the important decisions a football club can take.
It is the most public signal of ambition and intent, which is why the Deila unveiling was so widely derided and mocked by some people from the very start.
I thought it was a brave, revolutionary move at a time when that was required.
Others said it was the cheap option and expressed real fears about it.
My own came to the surface almost at once when at his very first press conference he was told who his first signing was and that his assistant manager had been picked for him.
In retrospect, that appointment said so much about our level of ambition 24 months ago.
We saw nothing during that time to suggest that those who said he was the cheap, easy to control, option were even slightly wrong; indeed all evidence points to that appointment having been made on exactly that basis.
And it went wrong. As many predicted that it would.
It was a disastrous appointment in many ways, inflicting long-term reputational damage on our club and its standing that will take years to undo.
So much of what we’ve done in the last two years has helped to do that, such as our decision to become effectively a feeder club for Manchester City. Has it brought benefits? Jason Denayer and Patrick Roberts proves that it has, but I would suggest that the image of Celtic as a club which exists to sell players to England and develop those of “bigger clubs” has reduced our European status more than any Champions League knockouts ever could.
Our club sends us too many mixed messages.
On the one hand it talks about our ambitions, but then saddles us with second raters and a low-road signing policy.
Club PR people talk to us about how “special” we are, and we watch as our best players are sold to clubs that don’t have anything like our history or support.
The club tells us about how it has ambitions beyond these shores, but it tells new signings we can be a “stepping stone” to better things.
Which of these is true?
If our club is settling for being just another provincial club, on the fringes of the big game, they ought to trust us with that information and let us know. We’re not going to burn down the stadium because we’re told that we can no longer compete and won’t try to.
Likewise, if they are happy getting by with a no-frills appointment they should give it to us straight instead of spinning from the rooftops.
If someone like Rodgers is out of our reach, give us a chance to evaluate that fact, process it, and come to terms with that reality.
We understand that the emotional pull of Celtic is the best way we get guys like Rodgers and Moyes in a room; such is the damage that’s been done to our status, we’re now relying on the fact that the Celtic legend is still known and respected by those folk.
If that legend isn’t enough to entice one of the top names then so be it, but the club shouldn’t waste its time or ours with a naff press release saying they are no “preferred candidates” when everyone knows that in a perfect world Rodgers or Moyes would be fitting his nameplate right now.
We don’t expect these people to be given a blank cheque. We’ll understand if the money we can offer isn’t right or the idea of coming to work in Scotland doesn’t appeal. I’d personally question the desire and hunger of a manager who preferred a fat contract and mid-table annonymity in England to the chance to make history here.
The club won’t be blamed for trying and failing.
The club will be blamed for failing to try, and whether they know it or not we will be able to judge just how hard they tried when the appointment is made. If this is some experiment, some project, after the failure of Deila, instead of someone with experience and knowledge then it will be fair to conclude that for all the marketing speak our board sees us as a second tier club at best and has adjusted the vision accordingly.
And if we’ve been led to expect something more, that will be the final act of betrayal.
Celtic needs to start trusting the supporters again, by opening real lines of communication with us on the issues facing our club, and how we view ourselves. We’ve had nothing from them since Deila left save for Lawwell’s ridiculous defence, last week, of the strategy that’s destroying us. No-one’s outlined a long term set of goals. No-one’s got a plan beyond this plodding along.
The marketing department tries to sell one image, but the reality of who we appoint, who we try to sign, what we’re reaching for, where we aspire to be, it tells a very different story.
That’s why there’s a lot of mistrust out there.
Dermot Desmond spoke in Ireland today about the coming appointment, and he said he expects an announcement within the next “four or five days.” Does this contradict the “official statement” from Celtic earlier? No, but the tone is different. Five days doesn’t sound like we’re still in the process of vetting. It sounds like all the really important discussions have already been had. He says we’ve interviewed a half dozen candidates, all “worthy of the Celtic job.”
I daresay that’s the crucial phrase here.
I’ve often thought Dermot Desmond has a different idea about what that means to some of those who work, day in day out at Celtic Park. I suspect that he’s made up his mind, and after his talks with Rodgers I think the former Liverpool boss is the guy the majority shareholder wants.
He, at least, still believes.
It’s the difference between being an entrepreneur and being an average bean counter.
The bean counter knows what we are.
The entrepreneur still thinks about what we could be.