Brendan Rodgers is coming back to Glasgow.
Not to manage Celtic. Not to stand on the touchline at Paradise again. Not to lift another trophy in front of the Celtic support.
This time, he is coming back to speak.
‘An Audience with Brendan Rodgers’ has been confirmed, and I have to admit that I am extremely interested in what he has to say.
Because I want to hear his side of the story.
And when it comes to his second departure from Celtic, I already know where I stand.
I believe Brendan Rodgers was right to walk away.
That does not mean I think he handled everything perfectly. It does not mean I have forgotten what happened when he left for Leicester in 2019. It does not mean I agree with every decision he made during either spell at Celtic.
But 2025 was different.
By then, the relationship between Rodgers and the people running Celtic had clearly broken down. He eventually resigned, and the club accepted that resignation immediately. Within minutes, Dermot Desmond responded with an extraordinary public attack, accusing Rodgers of being “divisive”, “misleading” and “self-serving”.
That reaction told me a great deal.
Because managers do not normally walk away from successful clubs for no reason.
And elite managers certainly do not walk away from jobs where they believe they still have the authority, support and structure required to succeed.
That is the part of this story Celtic still need to understand.
Rodgers was not simply a man who “left Celtic”.
As an English teacher, I could reduce it to a simple sentence.
Subject: Rodgers. Verb: left. Object: Celtic.
Finished.
But football is rarely that simple.
Why did he leave?
What had happened behind the scenes?
What authority did he believe he actually had?
What relationship existed between him and the people above him?
What did he ask Celtic to change?
And why did he apparently reach the point where he believed staying was no longer possible?
Those are the questions which matter.
Rodgers had reportedly tried to find a way forward. He wanted the people at the top of the club to work with him, to establish a common direction and make the relationship functional again. If that could not happen, then what was he supposed to do?
Stay and accept responsibility for a football operation he no longer believed he could properly influence?
Stay and become a pawn? Stay and take the blame for decisions he did not control?
No. I would have walked too.
That is the point some Celtic supporters still refuse to confront.
Brendan Rodgers is an experienced elite-level manager. He has managed Liverpool, Leicester and Celtic. He has worked in the Premier League, won major trophies and operated in environments where football structures matter enormously.
A manager like that is not going to happily accept being told how everything must work while still being held responsible for every result.
That is not management. That is scapegoating.
Responsibility without authority is one of the worst positions you can put anybody in.
If you are going to blame the manager when things go wrong, then the manager has to be given meaningful control over the football environment in which he is expected to succeed.
He has to have trust. He has to have input. He has to have clarity over recruitment.
He has to know who is making decisions and why.
And he has to believe that the people above him are working towards the same goal.
If Rodgers reached the conclusion that none of that was possible any longer, then I do not condemn him for leaving.
I think he was right.
And this is why Dermot Desmond’s response still bothers me.
Instead of asking why the relationship with one of the most successful managers in modern Celtic history had collapsed so badly, Desmond publicly attacked Rodgers.
That is not leadership to me.
And it raises a bigger question about Celtic.
How many times can the manager be blamed before somebody asks whether the environment itself is the problem?
Celtic cannot keep believing that every manager who leaves simply failed some test of loyalty. At some point, the club has to examine the structure around them.
What kind of football operation are Celtic actually offering an ambitious manager?
How much authority does he really have? How much control does he have over recruitment? How much influence does he have over long-term planning?
And what happens when he disagrees with the people above him?
Those questions matter far more than whether supporters personally like Brendan Rodgers.
I understand why some never forgave him for Leicester. I understand the anger.
But that first departure does not automatically invalidate everything that happened during the second. And it certainly does not mean Celtic should ignore the possibility that Rodgers eventually walked because he believed the working relationship had become impossible.
That is why I am looking forward to this event.
I want to hear him explain what happened.
I want to hear what he says about recruitment.
I want to hear what he says about the relationship with the board.
I want to hear what he says about authority.
I want to hear what finally convinced him that enough was enough.
Because Celtic supporters have already heard Dermot Desmond’s version.
Now I want to hear Rodgers’.
And perhaps some people will not like what he says.
Perhaps some supporters will still decide that he was wrong.
But Celtic themselves should listen very carefully.
Because this is bigger than Brendan Rodgers.
If Celtic want to attract managers of that calibre again, they need to understand why one of them walked away.
You cannot talk about ambition and then create a football structure in which an ambitious manager believes he cannot properly do his job.
You cannot demand results while limiting authority.
You cannot ask somebody to carry responsibility while treating him like another piece in somebody else’s machine.
And you cannot keep losing managers, blaming the manager and refusing to ask whether the structure around them is fundamentally wrong.
So yes, I believe Brendan Rodgers was right to walk away.
It was the logical decision.
That is why I will be listening when he speaks.
And if the people running this club are serious about fixing what is broken, they should be listening too.
Choose The CelticBlog as a ‘Preferred Source’ on Google News for quick access to the news you value.
When Brendan returned to Celtic the second time around, I was all for it, I was excited by it and was right behind him. I agree that he had a lot of obstacles placed in his path and he had a lot to deal with, but I still felt left down by him when he left the building. He had promised the Celtic support several times that he would see out his contract and he still broke that promise, no matter the circumstances.
As regards the so called smear campaign James quite rightly reported that Brendan called out the person or persons responsible as being cowards, but he failed to mention that soon after that, when the Celtic Collective had a meeting with the board along with Brendan, that the Collective broached that particular subject only to have Brendan pull the rug out from under them. He glossed over it and suggested there was no case to answer. I smell shite! Why did he do that? I firmly believe he was paid off, he didn’t walk and he knew about the Saudi interest well in advance. Why then did he not sue DD for slander for his very personal verbal attack, we may find out the full story some day but Brendan was no Saint during that whole escapade?
I think his proposed Q & A session will be carefully managed and tell us nothing we don’t know already.
I can’t help feeling we focus on individuals too much. Celtic have had a variety of managers including Rodgers and the football has been dire. Yes, even towards the end with Ange but if you look at Sevco they have had 9 in the last 8 years and the latest just beat Celtic twice in a week and one of them 3 nil. None of their fans will give a monkey’s about the previous 7 if it continues. The team is what matters even though it doesn’t really exist.
You are looking forward to a guy coming back basically to make trouble for the board which until they leave, represent the club.
The players were always there if the correct tactics and team selection had been used and even today, we have the players to win the SPL in a trot if we had an astute manager. Looking forward I can’t wait to see Jota, Duran, Hassan, Hogh and maybe Mheuka in a starting 11 which would be easily possible in the SPL and the opposition’s default “parking of the bus” but there is no way that will happen with the present lot.
I am no more interest in Rodgers’ rewriting of history as I am of Lennon’s or Kris Boyd for that matter.
Anti-matter, anti-Celtic matter.
Forgot about Yang who could slot into the midfield.
Rodgers would not have received an out of court settlement as he would have been a fool to not have forced DD’s statement to be publicly withdrawn as part of the deal. Rodgers was no angel and his biggest fan is himself. Cannot argue over the trophies he won, but the football was as dire on the eye as I have ever seen at Celtic Park. If football becomes only about winning with zero entertainment, we may as well stop it now
I didn’t want BR back nor Lennon for a second time. I certainly don’t want to see a third time. However, once these guys were in, they were managing our Celtic. They get the respect and loyalty that goes with the tittle. I don’t see any mileage in raking up the board’s obvious shortcomings. Much as I hate to stomach the thought, they aren’t going anywhere unless it fits their agenda.
I think protest and insightful writers like James can kept the pressure on but they don’t really care. Even their mismanagement of potential CL monies and this year’s loss will be tolerated. I think the only way to effect change is to stalk the Raj, to embarrass him in front of his cronies and in the media without aggression or intimidation. He appointed BR because he was embarrassed so maybe he can be pushed to act against the board if he thinks they are attracting too much heat.
We’ll buy the tickets for this Q&A and Rodgers will probably leave halfway through.