The Offical Glasgow Celtic thread

[SambaSaffron]

while Celtic wont refuse it, the money they get from spl tv revenue is pittance.
the loss of rangers and any loss in tv revenue wont affect them too much.

stokes not playing may be down to the rumours I have heard regarding couple of russian teams sniffing about for hooper- Celtic want to keep him in the shop window - the russian transfer window doesnt close for a few weeks yet I think.
I would have thought that getting bangura (then the polish guy recently a bangura got inj) was cover for hooper as Celtic expected to be selling him I believe.

Stokes was playing far better this past few weeks than Hoper so I was surprised to see him dropped.
unless of course if this russian sale is true.

even if they dont sell him, its good for Celtics run in for the league title!

I can't imagine Hooper to Russia is true. If he leaves it'll be to a Premiership team. The reason he starts ahead of Stokes is that he plays by himself, with Samaras off him, better than Stokes does. Stokes is much more effective with Hooper alongside him, but Lennon prefers the formation with Samaras and at the minute he is certainly being proven right.

It's unfortunate for Stokes as he hasn't done much wrong.

[lynchbhoy]

while Celtic wont refuse it, the money they get from spl tv revenue is pittance.
the loss of rangers and any loss in tv revenue wont affect them too much.

stokes not playing may be down to the rumours I have heard regarding couple of russian teams sniffing about for hooper- Celtic want to keep him in the shop window - the russian transfer window doesnt close for a few weeks yet I think.
I would have thought that getting bangura (then the polish guy recently a bangura got inj) was cover for hooper as Celtic expected to be selling him I believe.

Stokes was playing far better this past few weeks than Hoper so I was surprised to see him dropped.
unless of course if this russian sale is true.

even if they dont sell him, its good for Celtics run in for the league title!

I can't imagine Hooper to Russia is true. If he leaves it'll be to a Premiership team. The reason he starts ahead of Stokes is that he plays by himself, with Samaras off him, better than Stokes does. Stokes is much more effective with Hooper alongside him, but Lennon prefers the formation with Samaras and at the minute he is certainly being proven right.

It's unfortunate for Stokes as he hasn't done much wrong.

the russia thing is what I heard.

stokes unlucky ?
he is head and shoulders above all the other strikers at Celtic this past few months - I'd imagine the goals scored in the past couple of months should demonstrate how good Stokes has been. Hooper - in comparison to his great form last year isnt in top gear yet after his inj layoff.
thats lennons call though and imo all too often he benches stokes !

[borderfox]

10 years CL money would easily offset the SPL TV revenue. How ironic would it be if Celtic were asked to join the premiership whilst the huns languish in  the lower Scots leagues

[Main Street]

10 years CL money would easily offset the SPL TV revenue. How ironic would it be if Celtic were asked to join the premiership whilst the huns languish in  the lower Scots leagues

Reaching the  group stages of the CL gives a guaranteed minimum of €7m
Celtic earn just £3m p/a from SPL tv revenue

[lynchbhoy]

10 years CL money would easily offset the SPL TV revenue. How ironic would it be if Celtic were asked to join the premiership whilst the huns languish in  the lower Scots leagues

Reaching the  group stages of the CL gives a guaranteed minimum of €7m
Celtic earn just £3m p/a from SPL tv revenue

I thought it was only £1.5m

[SambaSaffron]

Anyone who thinks this is the start of a turn around for Celtic is ignoring Lennon's record as manager. Basically, he wins the games that don't matter and loses the big ones. Celtic could beat most of the teams in Scotland most of the time with Ronnie Corbett as manager. It's the European games and the matches against Rangers which sort the good managers from the duffers. So far, Lennon's a duffer.

Good man.

[SambaSaffron]

while Celtic wont refuse it, the money they get from spl tv revenue is pittance.
the loss of rangers and any loss in tv revenue wont affect them too much.

stokes not playing may be down to the rumours I have heard regarding couple of russian teams sniffing about for hooper- Celtic want to keep him in the shop window - the russian transfer window doesnt close for a few weeks yet I think.
I would have thought that getting bangura (then the polish guy recently a bangura got inj) was cover for hooper as Celtic expected to be selling him I believe.

Stokes was playing far better this past few weeks than Hoper so I was surprised to see him dropped.
unless of course if this russian sale is true.

even if they dont sell him, its good for Celtics run in for the league title!

I can't imagine Hooper to Russia is true. If he leaves it'll be to a Premiership team. The reason he starts ahead of Stokes is that he plays by himself, with Samaras off him, better than Stokes does. Stokes is much more effective with Hooper alongside him, but Lennon prefers the formation with Samaras and at the minute he is certainly being proven right.

It's unfortunate for Stokes as he hasn't done much wrong.

the russia thing is what I heard.

stokes unlucky ?
he is head and shoulders above all the other strikers at Celtic this past few months - I'd imagine the goals scored in the past couple of months should demonstrate how good Stokes has been. Hooper - in comparison to his great form last year isnt in top gear yet after his inj layoff.
thats lennons call though and imo all too often he benches stokes !

I'd wager a larger amount Hooper isn't going to Russia. Hooper has scored 33 in 50, not a bad record! He's also a much better link player and worker than Stokes, who is caught offside way too much. Of the 2 I'd have Hooper every time. Stokes without Hooper never seems to play well.  Lennon is persisting with Samaras, and though I've been a huge critic in the past he's doing well at the minute. For home games, I'd prefer to see Hooper and Stokes both, you can't argue with the selection at the minute though!

[illdecide]

Celtic a few seasons ago def only earned £1.5m from TV revenue, unless last season and this season it has went up (which i doubt) it remains...as far as I'm aware Celtic could earn between £7m and £10m between gate receipts and UEFA money for just in the group stages and if they were to reach the knockout stages then another £3-£4m is added to the £10m

[Main Street]

10 years CL money would easily offset the SPL TV revenue. How ironic would it be if Celtic were asked to join the premiership whilst the huns languish in  the lower Scots leagues

Reaching the  group stages of the CL gives a guaranteed minimum of €7m
Celtic earn just £3m p/a from SPL tv revenue

I thought it was only £1.5m

You could be right because now I see the figure of £3m was from 2007/8 when there was £18m tv to distribute. Celtic as winners got £3m and Rangers as runners up got £2.7.

But I won't believe you, until you present proof 

[Canalman]

Almost sure I can remember that Celtic nearly "went to the wall" some years ago but were "saved" at the 11th hour.

[Main Street]

Yeah but that was just part of a masonic conspiracy    by the Bank of Scotland  to crush Celtic, using the excuse that they exceeded their overdraft limit by a few pennies. At a period in time when Celtic was ineptly run and building a brand new stadium at the same time.
The actual foundation of celtic fc was solid and the situation was easily handled by the new astute chairman.
The result of which left Celtic in the ownership of Celtic minded shareholders and relatively debt free while Rangers spent millions, avoided taxes and hoarded debts, in order to keep ahead of them.

[LondonCamanachd]

You could be right because now I see the figure of £3m was from 2007/8 when there was £18m tv to distribute. Celtic as winners got £3m and Rangers as runners up got £2.7.

That right there is the problem with Scottish Football.

Why is the gap between 2nd and 3rd so much bigger than the gap between 1st and 2nd when it comes to prize money?  Why is 30% of the prize money in a 12 team league divided between only two teams?

[Main Street]

You could be right because now I see the figure of £3m was from 2007/8 when there was £18m tv to distribute. Celtic as winners got £3m and Rangers as runners up got £2.7.

That right there is the problem with Scottish Football.

Why is the gap between 2nd and 3rd so much bigger than the gap between 1st and 2nd when it comes to prize money?  Why is 30% of the prize money in a 12 team league divided between only two teams?

That's a normal enough standard distribution of the tv revenue.
Payments are based on the final position in the league.
The bottom club received £700.000 in that example from 2007/8

The revenue problem is not with the system of distribution but rather there's not enough to distribute.

[SambaSaffron]

You could be right because now I see the figure of £3m was from 2007/8 when there was £18m tv to distribute. Celtic as winners got £3m and Rangers as runners up got £2.7.

That right there is the problem with Scottish Football.

Why is the gap between 2nd and 3rd so much bigger than the gap between 1st and 2nd when it comes to prize money?  Why is 30% of the prize money in a 12 team league divided between only two teams?

Thats the way it is in all leagues. Do you want the bottom teams to receive the same as the top? Cath yourself on.

[LondonCamanachd]

You could be right because now I see the figure of £3m was from 2007/8 when there was £18m tv to distribute. Celtic as winners got £3m and Rangers as runners up got £2.7.

That right there is the problem with Scottish Football.

Why is the gap between 2nd and 3rd so much bigger than the gap between 1st and 2nd when it comes to prize money?  Why is 30% of the prize money in a 12 team league divided between only two teams?

That's a normal enough standard distribution of the tv revenue.
Payments are based on the final position in the league.
The bottom club received £700.000 in that example from 2007/8

The revenue problem is not with the system of distribution but rather there's not enough to distribute.

i don't have the numbers to hand, so excuse me for what is essentially hearsay, I'll try to dig it out later.  There is a serious disparity in the progression of shrinking prize money that results in the top two getting more than their fair share.

In reality, it makes little difference, as European football will always be the bigger income generator, but I still don't like the principle.

This isn't juist sour grapes because my team's not doing very out of the set-up by the way.  Aberdeen's troubles are almost all of our own making.