Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Kerrydale Street. We hope you enjoy your visit.

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use.

If you decide to register, please be aware that we don't accept email addresses from free web accounts like gmail, Hotmail, live.co.uk etc. Sorry, but almost all of the abuse and spam that we get is from free web accounts. The software on the forum will automatically block any requests using a free email account.

Upon Registration, you will be given access to all our varied Forums, and you will be expected to comply with our fairly stringent Rules and Regulations. Meantime, enjoy your visit

If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
The Board - general discussion (including Res 12); notes from the AGM
Topic Started: 15 Jul 2014, 12:03 AM (1,414,653 Views)
carryondoc
Everyone's Fantasy Football first pick
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Benjamin7
11 May 2016, 01:55 PM
idyllwild
11 May 2016, 01:51 PM
Benjamin7
11 May 2016, 01:44 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deepJames Forrest / Celtic Blog

Lawwell To The Celtic Fans: Eat A Bag Of Dirt
No.
You sure about that are you?

What parameters do you think his job are measured by since you disagree?
Managerial appointments / quality of squad / success on the pitch - these things not have any bearing..?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Antoninho
Member Avatar
Turd Ferguson
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
What a tit.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Wanyerma
Member Avatar
Considering retirement
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Benjamin7
11 May 2016, 01:44 PM
Wanyerma
11 May 2016, 01:25 PM
Benjamin7
11 May 2016, 01:20 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deepJames Forrest / Celtic Blog

Lawwell To The Celtic Fans: Eat A Bag Of Dirt
No, they're not. The CEO is incentivised to buy players to sell on for profit. No coincidence then that he's been filling the team with projects in the hope he can do another Wanyama.

His remuneration package is in conflict with our primary purpose, to build a team.
The financial performance of the club will always be how anyone in his positions performance will be measured. No?
For running a football club?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Wanyerma
Member Avatar
Considering retirement
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
carryondoc
11 May 2016, 02:50 PM
Benjamin7
11 May 2016, 01:55 PM
idyllwild
11 May 2016, 01:51 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deepJames Forrest / Celtic Blog

Lawwell To The Celtic Fans: Eat A Bag Of Dirt
You sure about that are you?

What parameters do you think his job are measured by since you disagree?
Managerial appointments / quality of squad / success on the pitch - these things not have any bearing..?
The purpose of a football club is to win as many trophies as it can.

No way, no how is our current strategy designed to do that.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
georgiesleftpeg
Everyone's Fantasy Football first pick
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Anyone see that vertically challenged pornographer, David Gold (W.Ham chairman) on sky last night?
Other than looking like he was doing an impersonation of Tyrion from G.O.T. :) he did say one telling thing.

Asked about Payet (sp?), he said that while most clubs saw the signing of players as a business, West Ham saw it as the business of building a football team.
Most teams wont sign players under 25 years old, he said, we're not in a position to do that, we need to sign players that'll come in and improve the first eleven.

For a fannybaws, he actually talked a little sense.
Unlike SPLOB, who's just a fannybaws :nono:
Edited by georgiesleftpeg, 11 May 2016, 03:15 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
stibhan
Member Avatar
Viva la Quinta Brigada
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
A decent interviewer would ask him to explain where the 'blue chip' signings went. Being generous, we made about three of them in the Lawwell era (Gravesen being one) but that phrase was continuously thrown in front of us as if it was always a possibility. Now the rhetoric has shifted to talk about spending £10m when even a cursory glance at the balance sheet shows that we've spent eff all comparative to what we've got in.

If we're spending £10m a year then we would have effectively operated on a loss without getting rid of players (Wanyama, Forster, Hooper, VVD, etc). In that sense Lawwell hasn't even lived up to his own effing promise.
Edited by stibhan, 11 May 2016, 03:20 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Kingslim
69 and counting
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
idyllwild
11 May 2016, 02:05 PM
Benjamin7
11 May 2016, 01:55 PM
idyllwild
11 May 2016, 01:51 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deepJames Forrest / Celtic Blog

Lawwell To The Celtic Fans: Eat A Bag Of Dirt
You sure about that are you?

What parameters do you think his job are measured by since you disagree?
Absolutely sure about that, aye.

A CEO will have responsibility for operational targets, health & safety targets, employee targets, customer ST targets, loads of things. And there'll be different measures applicable in dealing with different groups of (sorry) stakeholders.
You admit there are numerous responsibilities of a CEO, yet you think he's a goner due to DD interfering in one aspect of his role?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Midfield Maestro
Member Avatar
Retired and now a BT Sports pundit
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Benjamin7
11 May 2016, 01:20 PM
shugmc
11 May 2016, 01:06 PM
James Forrest / Celtic Blog

Lawwell To The Celtic Fans: Eat A Bag Of Dirt
What is the viable financial alternative to the current business strategy?

Celtic are downsizing not through political desire to do so but a reflection of the financial contraints that we operate within.

Does Peter get paid a lot? Yes. Does he do a perfect job? No.

These are different issues from whether the current business model sustainable and sensible going forward.
I think there are two separate questions here:

(1) Is the current strategy - broadly - of living within our means (i.e. not relying on bank finance) and developing players to sell the right strategy for a club in our financial and geographic circumstances? In my view, it is. There will of course be times when we see value in signing an older player with no re-sale value or times when we decide that a player who it might make economic sense to sell is too important to the team etc etc. But I think that is the right strategy in broad terms.

(2) Is that strategy being implemented well? This is probably the more important question. In my view, the success of our current strategy stands and falls almost entirely on the quality of our scouting and player recruitment. The simple fact is that since Lennon's second season, our recruitment has been largely awful. No one thinks we could or should spend £40-£50 million. I doubt anyone even thinks we should have a net spend in excess of £10 million. But we certainly shouldn't be spending £1-£2 million a pop on a succession of players like Pukki, Scepovic, Ciftci etc.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Shallow_man
Member Avatar
First name on the team-sheet
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Wouldn't consider giving them another penny when clowns like him remain at the helm.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
murphio
Member Avatar
Could start a row in an empty room
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
As I have said on here many, many times - Lawwell's bonus does not appear to be linked to any performance indicator that I can see. Turnover down, full bonus. Debt up, full bonus. Profit down, full bonus. Drop in share price, full bonus. No Champions League, full bonus. No league title, full bonus. Not only that but on two occasions I can recall he was rewarded with even more money by the remuneration committee including a significant payment for 'positive transfer outcomes' which totally blew away any supposed impartiality he had when it came to selling players.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
idyllwild


Kingslim
11 May 2016, 03:22 PM
idyllwild
11 May 2016, 02:05 PM
Benjamin7
11 May 2016, 01:55 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deepJames Forrest / Celtic Blog

Lawwell To The Celtic Fans: Eat A Bag Of Dirt
Absolutely sure about that, aye.

A CEO will have responsibility for operational targets, health & safety targets, employee targets, customer ST targets, loads of things. And there'll be different measures applicable in dealing with different groups of (sorry) stakeholders.
You admit there are numerous responsibilities of a CEO, yet you think he's a goner due to DD interfering in one aspect of his role?
I'm not sure how the two are related.

He has a multitude of things for which he is responsible - financial and otherwise. That's self-evident, it comes with the job title.

The other thing was just my reading of a single post on here by Mikey, and which he has since been expanded upon and probably makes my reading of it less valid.

But yes, if he'd actually been completely removed from the process to get a new manager, then I'd assume he was leaving.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Locky255
Occasional Substitute
[ *  *  *  * ]
The PL article read to me these two things.

1 - He's under considerable pressure, so done the interview to win back some support from fans (though f*cked it).

2 - Unfortunately, the considerable pressure he's under is not yet enough to leave his position.

A few more banner displays directed at him should be in good order, I think.


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
idyllwild


Midfield Maestro
11 May 2016, 03:30 PM
Benjamin7
11 May 2016, 01:20 PM
shugmc
11 May 2016, 01:06 PM
James Forrest / Celtic Blog

Lawwell To The Celtic Fans: Eat A Bag Of Dirt
What is the viable financial alternative to the current business strategy?

Celtic are downsizing not through political desire to do so but a reflection of the financial contraints that we operate within.

Does Peter get paid a lot? Yes. Does he do a perfect job? No.

These are different issues from whether the current business model sustainable and sensible going forward.
I think there are two separate questions here:

(1) Is the current strategy - broadly - of living within our means (i.e. not relying on bank finance) and developing players to sell the right strategy for a club in our financial and geographic circumstances? In my view, it is. There will of course be times when we see value in signing an older player with no re-sale value or times when we decide that a player who it might make economic sense to sell is too important to the team etc etc. But I think that is the right strategy in broad terms.

(2) Is that strategy being implemented well? This is probably the more important question. In my view, the success of our current strategy stands and falls almost entirely on the quality of our scouting and player recruitment. The simple fact is that since Lennon's second season, our recruitment has been largely awful. No one thinks we could or should spend £40-£50 million. I doubt anyone even thinks we should have a net spend in excess of £10 million. But we certainly shouldn't be spending £1-£2 million a pop on a succession of players like Pukki, Scepovic, Ciftci etc.
Absolutely spot on. :thumbsup:

Our strategy is generally fine. It's the operation of it by the people in situ - Deila, Lawwell, and Park - which is the problem (to various degrees).

We shouldn't need, or want, DD to bankroll us. We should just be a lot better at what we currently do.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
murphio
Member Avatar
Could start a row in an empty room
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I think it's also worth remembering that even though Desmond picked Strachan, 2005 was around the time when Lawwell's role became much more hands on when it came to building a scouting network and signing players. It was he who sidelined Ray Clarke in favour of John Park. It was he who had final say on players and their worth - turning down Jimmy Floyd Hasselbaink and selling Kenny Miller, a player Strachan wanted to keep. It was clear then he had assumed a de facto Director of Football role and his salary began to reflect it (including the payment for the aforementioned 'positive transfer outcomes)'. Deila was Lawwell's boy - and I think the fact the decision has now been completely taken out of hands tells me (hopefully) that we are seeing the beginning of the end of Bullet Proof Pete.
Edited by murphio, 11 May 2016, 03:55 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Belgrano
Member Avatar
-
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
The only defence of Lawwell left seems to be the same defence that was weakly trod out by the last remaining defenders of Ronny a few months ago, "Aye, but if he goes - who will we get in? It'll just be somebody the same or even worse!"

Eventually - like Ronny - you just have to decide to pull the cord, and get rid of the waste. Lawwell's time is up. And all the Murray-esque PR exercise tabloid pieces won't save him now.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Wanyerma
Member Avatar
Considering retirement
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
idyllwild
11 May 2016, 03:51 PM
Midfield Maestro
11 May 2016, 03:30 PM
Benjamin7
11 May 2016, 01:20 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deepJames Forrest / Celtic Blog

Lawwell To The Celtic Fans: Eat A Bag Of Dirt
I think there are two separate questions here:

(1) Is the current strategy - broadly - of living within our means (i.e. not relying on bank finance) and developing players to sell the right strategy for a club in our financial and geographic circumstances? In my view, it is. There will of course be times when we see value in signing an older player with no re-sale value or times when we decide that a player who it might make economic sense to sell is too important to the team etc etc. But I think that is the right strategy in broad terms.

(2) Is that strategy being implemented well? This is probably the more important question. In my view, the success of our current strategy stands and falls almost entirely on the quality of our scouting and player recruitment. The simple fact is that since Lennon's second season, our recruitment has been largely awful. No one thinks we could or should spend £40-£50 million. I doubt anyone even thinks we should have a net spend in excess of £10 million. But we certainly shouldn't be spending £1-£2 million a pop on a succession of players like Pukki, Scepovic, Ciftci etc.
Absolutely spot on. :thumbsup:

Our strategy is generally fine. It's the operation of it by the people in situ - Deila, Lawwell, and Park - which is the problem (to various degrees).

We shouldn't need, or want, DD to bankroll us. We should just be a lot better at what we currently do.
It is fine to an extent.

PL has basically admitted we are no longer a big player. Fair enough, but then why do we still have the infrastructure of one? Our squad is too big, for one. His remuneration is a disgrace for a club of our size too.

Lawwell wants his cake and wants to eat it too.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
georgiesleftpeg
Everyone's Fantasy Football first pick
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Let him eat mars bars. :ph43r:

Preferably hurled t'wards his greasy fat pus, at a fair ould velocity :boxer:

:lol:
Edited by georgiesleftpeg, 11 May 2016, 03:59 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
LoveCeltic
First name on the team-sheet
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
murphio
11 May 2016, 03:39 PM
As I have said on here many, many times - Lawwell's bonus does not appear to be linked to any performance indicator that I can see. Turnover down, full bonus. Debt up, full bonus. Profit down, full bonus. Drop in share price, full bonus. No Champions League, full bonus. No league title, full bonus. Not only that but on two occasions I can recall he was rewarded with even more money by the remuneration committee including a significant payment for 'positive transfer outcomes' which totally blew away any supposed impartiality he had when it came to selling players.
Is our turnover (before Europe) up or down on when he started?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quiet Assasin
Member Avatar
..for the maintenance of dinner tables for the children and the unemployed
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
LoveCeltic
11 May 2016, 04:07 PM
murphio
11 May 2016, 03:39 PM
As I have said on here many, many times - Lawwell's bonus does not appear to be linked to any performance indicator that I can see. Turnover down, full bonus. Debt up, full bonus. Profit down, full bonus. Drop in share price, full bonus. No Champions League, full bonus. No league title, full bonus. Not only that but on two occasions I can recall he was rewarded with even more money by the remuneration committee including a significant payment for 'positive transfer outcomes' which totally blew away any supposed impartiality he had when it came to selling players.
Is our turnover (before Europe) up or down on when he started?
Why does 'turnover (before Europe)'? The total performance of the club is not what it could or should be
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
LoveCeltic
First name on the team-sheet
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Wanyerma
11 May 2016, 03:56 PM
idyllwild
11 May 2016, 03:51 PM
Midfield Maestro
11 May 2016, 03:30 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deepJames Forrest / Celtic Blog

Lawwell To The Celtic Fans: Eat A Bag Of Dirt
Absolutely spot on. :thumbsup:

Our strategy is generally fine. It's the operation of it by the people in situ - Deila, Lawwell, and Park - which is the problem (to various degrees).

We shouldn't need, or want, DD to bankroll us. We should just be a lot better at what we currently do.
It is fine to an extent.

PL has basically admitted we are no longer a big player. Fair enough, but then why do we still have the infrastructure of one? Our squad is too big, for one. His remuneration is a disgrace for a club of our size too.

Lawwell wants his cake and wants to eat it too.
If you took our CEOs wage as a percentage of the players wage budget I bet ours would be ridiculously high in comparison. Even to EPL clubs.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
DealsFor.me - The best sales, coupons, and discounts for you
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Celtic Football Club Discussion Forum · Next Topic »
Add Reply