Every other top flight manager - top 2 with Celtic or Rangers?

[VincentGuerin]

16 hours ago, RandomGuy. said:

Celtic fans want "competitive" football until they realise what it actually entails.

Celtic fans have, literally, never had to worry about not being one of the best two clubs in the country for about 40 years. For most on here thats probably their entire lives. Its just impossible for them to understand what its actually like to finish in the bottom half of the table, and I suspect if/when they finally find a "super league" to play in, and the initial euphoria wears off, they'll finally understand how fans of every other club feel every season.

The irony when they're mewling about unfairness as they finish 16th every season in the "Super league" C division, with not a single chance of ever getting to the top table because they're miles behind those teams financially, would be off the scale. 

Those of us who remember the 90s can remember the consequences of Celtic not being a serious contender for anything.

The spell from 1990-1995 saw Celtic rack up a good number of crowds for league games that are lower than the likes of Hearts, Hibs, Aberdeen get today. Even though Celtic's performance in that era was what would basically be considered really good by any of those clubs' standards over five years.

They won a Scottish Cup, they lost another final, made a League Cup final, lost some semi-finals and finished 3rd - 4th in the league every season.

Yet we've got 14,000 for ta home game with Dunfermline, 17,000 for a home game with St Mirren, 12,000 for another game with Dunfermline, 16,000 v Falkirk with 18,000 v Airdrie the following week, 10,000 v Airdrie (1993), and loads and loads of others.

Obviously, the exact same thing can be shown at Rangers in the 80s (hello 9,500 at Ibrox to see Rangers v Morton and Dundee).

For all the sanctimonious pish we get from them about competition, Rangers and Celtic fans simply pack it in when their clubs aren't actual contenders for things. Regular spells of finishing 3rd - 5th in the next decade or so, with no prospect of improvement any time soon, would see exactly the same thing happen again. But in a virtuous cycle for them, the rewards for success in the modern game mean that simply won't happen. The system is basically rigged.

[Insaintee]

48 minutes ago, VincentGuerin said:

Those of us who remember the 90s can remember the consequences of Celtic not being a serious contender for anything.

The spell from 1990-1995 saw Celtic rack up a good number of crowds for league games that are lower than the likes of Hearts, Hibs, Aberdeen get today. Even though Celtic's performance in that era was what would basically be considered really good by any of those clubs' standards over five years.

They won a Scottish Cup, they lost another final, made a League Cup final, lost some semi-finals and finished 3rd - 4th in the league every season.

Yet we've got 14,000 for ta home game with Dunfermline, 17,000 for a home game with St Mirren, 12,000 for another game with Dunfermline, 16,000 v Falkirk with 18,000 v Airdrie the following week, 10,000 v Airdrie (1993), and loads and loads of others.

Obviously, the exact same thing can be shown at Rangers in the 80s (hello 9,500 at Ibrox to see Rangers v Morton and Dundee).

For all the sanctimonious pish we get from them about competition, Rangers and Celtic fans simply pack it in when their clubs aren't actual contenders for things. Regular spells of finishing 3rd - 5th in the next decade or so, with no prospect of improvement any time soon, would see exactly the same thing happen again. But in a virtuous cycle for them, the rewards for success in the modern game mean that simply won't happen. The system is basically rigged.

So what your saying is - The **** are basically fucked! They will never compete with Celtic on a regular basis financially and will be dependant on the odd off season. Will the **** still Follow Follow when they are only winning on League in say 4? I don't think so. 

[VincentGuerin]

5 minutes ago, Insaintee said:

So what your saying is - The **** are basically fucked! They will never compete with Celtic on a regular basis financially and will be dependant on the odd off season. Will the **** still Follow Follow when they are only winning on League in say 4? I don't think so. 

It's hard to see them even winning one in four unless there's a major change in circumstances.

Realistically, Rangers will need a new stadium (or a much-expanded Ibrox), which they can't afford.

[ahemps]

15 minutes ago, VincentGuerin said:

It's hard to see them even winning one in four unless there's a major change in circumstances.

Realistically, Rangers will need a new stadium (or a much-expanded Ibrox), which they can't afford.

I heard a European reporter comparing the Bundesliga to the SPFL in that basically it is Bayern's to lose and on the odd occasion the may slip up Dortmund might take the odd title. 

I didn't think it was fair as the Bundesliga has more teams with potential to challenge long term (at least challenge Dortmund's 2nd placed position) and also that one season for Rangers in the CL and Celtic not could see the dial swing in their favour where as Bayern are almost guaranteed a CL place even if they have a poor domestic season.

It was interesting to note that from a neutrals point of view though that they don't even see the SPFL as a 2 horse race anymore. 

[Jacksgranda]

18 hours ago, Monkey Tennis said:

Yes, Rangers are behind Celtic, but they're close enough for the derbies to get star billing and to keep meeting each other in the latter stages of Cups.  They give Celtic's trophies a sheen of achievement they'd otherwise lack.

As for the kick you apparently get from runs of trebles, fair enough - it's up to you.  It would hold literally no appeal for me, but we're all different.

I'm not so sure, we had a Hearts fan salivating over having seen his team finish with back to back third place finishes, a treble or two, successive or otherwise, would probably outmatch that.

[Jinky67]

1 hour ago, ahemps said:

I heard a European reporter comparing the Bundesliga to the SPFL in that basically it is Bayern's to lose and on the odd occasion the may slip up Dortmund might take the odd title. 

I didn't think it was fair as the Bundesliga has more teams with potential to challenge long term (at least challenge Dortmund's 2nd placed position) and also that one season for Rangers in the CL and Celtic not could see the dial swing in their favour where as Bayern are almost guaranteed a CL place even if they have a poor domestic season.

It was interesting to note that from a neutrals point of view though that they don't even see the SPFL as a 2 horse race anymore. 

The odd title? Bayern have won the Bundesliga 31 times and the closest to them being Dortmund and Monchengladbach on just 5 each. They are now likely given the recent manager change likely to win their 11th in a row. The only reason Dortmund and Union are close is due to how poor Bayern have been. The fact they are still top despite this shows just how far ahead they are, they could quite easily do what that are doing for another decade and not be touched

[Otis Blue]

On 14/04/2023 at 18:06, Greenlantern said:

I know you’d prefer our coefficient to suffer for the benefit of others clubs (non-arsecheeks) in the league. 

I don't give a toss about coefficients, perfection for me would be when the other 40 clubs decide to leave the SPFL and form their own new league, leaving the sisters to go cap in hand begging some other league daft enough to have them and all their bile that goes with them.

Don't tell me it won't happen cos I already know that. Depressing isn't it.

[Monkey Tennis]

On 14/04/2023 at 18:06, Greenlantern said:

I know you’d prefer our coefficient to suffer for the benefit of others clubs (non-arsecheeks) in the league. 

Yes, I actively want our coefficient to be poor.  I've not exactly made a secret of that now, have I?

The main reason for this is that the chief manifestation of it being in good shape, is that 2 clubs potentially get access to the CL.

For all the extremely obvious reasons, I see that as a really bad thing.

[Greenlantern]

47 minutes ago, Otis Blue said:

I don't give a toss about coefficients, perfection for me would be when the other 40 clubs decide to leave the SPFL and form their own new league, leaving the sisters to go cap in hand begging some other league daft enough to have them and all their bile that goes with them.

Don't tell me it won't happen cos I already know that. Depressing isn't it.

Nothing wrong with looking after your own interests.
I’d much prefer UK leagues, but I’m also not sure how beneficial that would be to the other scottish clubs. And when some of the larger followed English Championship or League 1 & 2 club fans come knocking on your doorstep then you’ll all look back fondly of your dear old sister arsecheeks.

[Otis Blue]

1 hour ago, Greenlantern said:

Nothing wrong with looking after your own interests.
I’d much prefer UK leagues, but I’m also not sure how beneficial that would be to the other scottish clubs. And when some of the larger followed English Championship or League 1 & 2 club fans come knocking on your doorstep then you’ll all look back fondly of your dear old sister arsecheeks.

I've absolutely no interest in UK leagues.  I want a Scottish league, but without the OF.  Simples.

The OF might wish for UK leagues but it won't happen - as you well know, the English teams (and their police) don't want/don't need the OF.

The new Scottish leagues would be much poorer funded, would be much lower (media) profile, would be much less likely to feature in the main stages of any UEFA competitions, but they'd be competitive, and it would be enjoyable to watch games at the high end of the league which aren't totally one-sided and without having to explain to your son/daughter what the "songs and flags" are all about.  Bring it on.

[pozbaird]

1 hour ago, Greenlantern said:

Nothing wrong with looking after your own interests.
I’d much prefer UK leagues, but I’m also not sure how beneficial that would be to the other scottish clubs. And when some of the larger followed English Championship or League 1 & 2 club fans come knocking on your doorstep then you’ll all look back fondly of your dear old sister arsecheeks.

I can assure you. There simply are no circumstances that would see me pining for the return of the ‘Old Firm’, should we be fortunate enough to see them fcuk off in the first place. None. Whatsoever. 

[Dons_1988]

UK leagues 

[wastecoatwilly]

20 hours ago, pozbaird said:

I have no idea what your ‘cherry’ patter is

I was just referring to having European football M8, If football is all about dosh winning the league is nothing,European football gives you the cherry on top. 

[Molotov]

I can never see England “welcoming” Celtic and Rangers into any league structure due to the vile and obnoxious behaviour of their sub-human supporters. 

Perhaps Northern Ireland might take them since they both sing songs about that country every week.

 

 

[pozbaird]

3 hours ago, wastecoatwilly said:

I was just referring to having European football M8, If football is all about dosh winning the league is nothing,European football gives you the cherry on top. 

Ah. I thought you meant the cherry for the ‘Old Firm’ was 1st & 2nd, and we should be happy chasing our own wee marachino of 3rd. My view is obviously, yes, 3rd is our cherry on the top of the badly baked cake that is our top flight - but I’m not happy about that fact. Just hope on Saturday St Mirren don’t ch, ch, ch, ch, ch, ch, ch, ch, cherry bomb.

One for the old musically interested farts right there.

[LIVIFOREVER]

Celtic fans on here trying to pretend the Premiership is competitive, by citing everything that is competitive from 3rd place down. Nonsense about the uncompetitive league | Celtic Quick News

 

Also like how they make some pishy aye but “Maybe those complaining would feel different if someone else was 12 points clear at the top” patter, like that would ever happen with the gulf in finances between them and the other 10 teams making it "competitive" from 3rd place down. Also glossing over the fact they're not just 12 pts clear, they're a massive 41pts clear of the best of the rest team in 3rd.

The usual comments from the Celtic fans replying too, teams should show more ambition, aye that would make up the 41 pts right enough, just being a bit more ambitious.

[Ewanandmoreagain]

On 18/04/2023 at 13:49, VincentGuerin said:

Those of us who remember the 90s can remember the consequences of Celtic not being a serious contender for anything.

The spell from 1990-1995 saw Celtic rack up a good number of crowds for league games that are lower than the likes of Hearts, Hibs, Aberdeen get today. Even though Celtic's performance in that era was what would basically be considered really good by any of those clubs' standards over five years.

They won a Scottish Cup, they lost another final, made a League Cup final, lost some semi-finals and finished 3rd - 4th in the league every season.

Yet we've got 14,000 for ta home game with Dunfermline, 17,000 for a home game with St Mirren, 12,000 for another game with Dunfermline, 16,000 v Falkirk with 18,000 v Airdrie the following week, 10,000 v Airdrie (1993), and loads and loads of others.

Obviously, the exact same thing can be shown at Rangers in the 80s (hello 9,500 at Ibrox to see Rangers v Morton and Dundee).

For all the sanctimonious pish we get from them about competition, Rangers and Celtic fans simply pack it in when their clubs aren't actual contenders for things. Regular spells of finishing 3rd - 5th in the next decade or so, with no prospect of improvement any time soon, would see exactly the same thing happen again. But in a virtuous cycle for them, the rewards for success in the modern game mean that simply won't happen. The system is basically rigged.

A very regular spell of finishing second could be interesting !

[Ewanandmoreagain]

On 19/04/2023 at 08:06, Molotov said:

I can never see England “welcoming” Celtic and Rangers into any league structure due to the vile and obnoxious behaviour of their sub-human supporters. 

Perhaps Northern Ireland might take them since they both sing songs about that country every week.

 

 

they are not needed either !

[Ewanandmoreagain]

On 19/04/2023 at 08:54, pozbaird said:

Ah. I thought you meant the cherry for the ‘Old Firm’ was 1st & 2nd, and we should be happy chasing our own wee marachino of 3rd. My view is obviously, yes, 3rd is our cherry on the top of the badly baked cake that is our top flight - but I’m not happy about that fact. Just hope on Saturday St Mirren don’t ch, ch, ch, ch, ch, ch, ch, ch, cherry bomb.

One for the old musically interested farts right there.

As I walk along I wonder what went wrong with our love.

( plural )

 

 

 

[Ewanandmoreagain]

Sorry , forgot multiquotes again