stop this ungrateful snipping at WGS

But £34 mil is not an insugnificant amount of money to spend in our league also wgs always said the money was their for him to spend so he had access to more funds.Amazing how the only season they spend more than us under wgs they win the league thank * it was only last season.

 

I'd like to add a couple of other reasons the figures are skewed - while Martin O'Neil signed fewer players of higher value to supplement and already impressive inherited squad, Strachan was tasked with ousting the dead wood while bringing in SPL and CL standard players. Basically quantity over quality (through no fault of his own).

Even if he wanted to sign a smaller quantity, the fact is that the external environment had changed. We no longer had the wage power to compete with our next door neighbours in England and * leagues abroad. For example Hutzi choosing Russia over us. Tamas as well.

So not only was it simply impossible to sign players of £6m like Sutton or Hartson (perhaps as Danni points out by todays standards that could be the equivalant of £10m or so), we couldn't even attract cheaper players on higher wages. Perhaps Juninho would be a good example of someone we wouldn't be able to attract now due to wages.

So to summarise, there was the major squad overhaul needed, the demise of money in the SPL and finally the emergence of silly money in England.

 

Hoops88, I've already stated that 34million is a lot of money for transfers but when it's not backed up with the wages that means its not real financial backing as the manager is still being limited in the type of player he could attract.

You've yet to convince me how comparing the 34m spent by WGS with the 36m spent by MON is a fair comparison.

I've gave my reasons why I don't think it's a fair comparison, mikey added another few valid reasons as well, can you now explain why you think it's justifiable to make that comparison?

 

This is all becoming more than tedious people.

There will always be people in the pro and against WGS camps, it's a fact of life we can't get away from. Fast forward a few seasons and we'll be having Mowbray vs WGS debates much like this one.

My own thoughts on WGS as a person and how the team performed under him are pretty well documented on here so I won't drag them up again, what's the point? The man has left and is no longer connected with the club.

If Mowbray can get more out of a player than Strachan then fair play to him. Man management has many facets to it and people react to authority figures in different ways. It's possible we'll see that Strachan got more out of player X or Y than Mowbray does, we just don't know yet. Mowbray can't be judged on pre-season kickabouts so as I done with Strachan his first season, I'll reserve any judgement till Xmas at least.

 

if you think spending £34 million is not financial backing then i give up.These players he has signed(and their has been a lot of them)all take good wages from the club,not as much as mon's players but wgs has still had plenty money to build a better team than he did.I,am also glad he never used the money he said was their if he needed it to make any big name signings because the more he spent the less we got for our money.

 

It doesn't matter what you say or how many times you say it, some people will never let go of their grudges. Strachan did an outstanding job at the club... 3/4 and 2 years through the CL group stages. Success like that is no mistake.
Just let the *-talkers puff up and blow smoke all they want - anyone with half a mind can see the truth for what it is.

 

But they spent their money in entirely different financial climates did'nt they? When MO'N spent the biggest chunk of his money in his first season, our financial strength and wage bill was on a par with the top 5 in England, we were in the Deloitte & Touche rich list's top 10 clubs around the world. Therefore we were operating at a much more even level with other european clubs of the day in terms of finances. Fast forward five years and we had fallen out of the top 20 rich list and were struggling to compete with the relegation end of the EPL in terms of finances.

The whole MO'N vs WGS situation is one that has so many varibles, the most overlooked being the changes in the footballing landscape between their two reins.

 

Of course 34m is financial backing but it's not the same level of financial backing (due to the other circumstances mentioned) that MON got which is why I'm saying the comparison of the 34m WGS spent with the 36m MON spent is an unfair comparison.

I've also stated that it was time for WGS to go, last season was a disaster, we threw the league away and I'm not WGS biggest fan, however, the failure to recognise his achievements by a sizeable number of the Celtic faithful is utterly astounding.

I'm looking forward to the Mowbray era, and I'm genuinely excited for the forthcoming season but that doesn't stop me from recognising the fantastic record that WGS had.

Did his style of football (particularly last season) please me - no
Did I like his attitude in post match interviews - no, I found them infuriating on occasions
Am I glad we have a new man in charge - yes
Do I think WGS did a great job with a difficult remit - yes

Despite the disaster that was last season he still has a terrific record and has left Mowbray with a good nucleus of a young squad which means Mowbray doesn't have to start from scratch.

 

If we're going to compare how much they got to spend, then how much they generated from sales of player should also come into it.

 

havent made much from sale of anyone that mon or wgs signed to be fair

 

£8M for Petrov and £3M for Miller made up a good part of Strachan's budget. I think if someone did do a net spend for each Strachan's would be significantly less than Mons. I would but I don't care about it anymore either way, we've got a new manager and I just want to support the team tomorrow.

 

Probably, but I bet you we never have a MON vs. Mowbray debate. And we probably won't have any about Mowbray vs Mowbrays' successor debates either -- unless his successor is another who is perceived as being outside the Celtic family.

Let's be serious, that's what the entire WGS debate boils down to. If anything, WGS exceeded expectations... and the more expectations he exceeded, the more ire he inspired in the loudest minority.
WGS was hardly the best manager ever and he certainly had his faults, but he was still a * good manager and the facts speak for themselves.
For WGS' faults, I'm looking forward to Mowbray. Just as I looked forward to WGS some years ago. And just as I'll eventually look forward to the manager after Mowbray.

WGS got profit on a lot of sales, not only the big ones. Just look at the Sno situation for example. We paid what? Somewhere around 80k? and sold him for around 1m?
A lot of that came down to Lawwell too of course.

 

WGS has left us with a good squad but that doesn't relate to how much he was able to get out of the players. MON was able to get a lot out of players and he gave them self belief. Strachan isn't renowned for that but lets not forget that he improved players such as Caldwell, McManus, Brown, McGeady and McDonald. McManus was rotting away in the reserves when Strachan came. A lot of people dislike McManus, but he did become a first team player and captain under Strachan which is testament to his ability to be a good coach. It's also well known that Strachan was on the training pitch every day (It's been reported that he never missed training) coaching players. MON was far more removed from training and while that's not a criticism of MON, I prefer that the manager is hands on.
The year we won 3IAR was also the same year that a very solid Rangers team won a cup double and made it to a European final. It's been said countless times that the football was ugly but it worked. WGS deserves credit for being able to get the team to win the final 7 matches of that season against a Rangers team that was very difficult to break down.
The season that has just passed, there are a number of reasons as to why we threw the league away. Strachan made mistakes and we suffered for them but it's not purely his fault. I do think to throw away a 7 point lead twice is ridiculous but it's such a fine line between 1st and 2nd. If we had scored 1 goal in each of our last two games V Hibs and Hearts then we would be champions. The form of Samaras and JVOH for most of the season was awful and both struggled to find a consistent run of good form once they had returned from their injuries. The fact that two of our 1st team strikers weren't performing well will have contributed to the lack of goals that cost us the league. We also had such a high amount of injuries last season so that will have disrupted the rhythm of the team.
In regards to zonal marking, I wasn't a fan of it. The game where Aberdeen beat us 4-2 at Pittodrie was a painful one to be at. That is a mistake that Strachan made in my opinion and our away form for the second half of last season was rubbish.

I agree, MON's team was a joy to watch and it was great going into a season with a confidence that we were going to win most matches. MON brought me 5 fantastic years as a Celtic fan and Strachan brought me 4. Both made mistakes but the point remains that MON automatically gets more recognition of his work than Strachan has ever had. This is partly due to the fact that before MON, Rangers were dominant for the decade beforehand. MON moulding us into the dominant Scottish team was like a breath of fresh air and success was exciting and felt new. Under Strachan, we were already the dominant force and success was expected. We have no given right just to turn up and win the league. It takes getting results over 38 matches and Strachan did that 3 seasons in a row and came incredibly close to doing it for a 4th time.
People have already stated that comparing their transfer spends is an unfair comparison and I think Danni and mmmikey cover it well. The change in the financial climate of football has shifted dramatically in the time between MON and WGS. The best example of it would be that when MON was manager, we were able to compete financially with the top 6 clubs in England and were in the list of the world's 10 richest clubs. When WGS was manager, we were struggling to compete financially with EPL relegation clubs and Championship clubs. The figures are also skewed due to inflation and as Danni said, MON had a higher wage budget.
The league points totals are obviously going to become lower because we were making cut backs and the quality of the SPL and level of competition was increasing. Teams are now far more tactically aware than in years gone by, therefore making matches more difficult for us. Having watched dvds of games from MON's time in charge and having watched lot of clips of goals, I was surprised to see how shockingly bad some of the defending in the SPL used to be. It still can be really bad, but it's definitely of a better standard than it used to be.

In answer to your question of what Strachan did acheive in his other two seasons in Europe, the answer is very little. In his 1st season, Artmedia shocked us and there were a number of reasons as to why that was. If you read Strachan's auto-biography, he gives some very valid reasons as to why this was. For example, new signings were needing time to settle in. Bobo Balde had the distraction of being in the middle of looking for a new club around the time of the game due to a clause in his contract. Strachan put Maloney on from the bench in order to try and pull goals back instead of shutting up shop. We came within 1 goal of taking them to extra time in the second leg but ultimately, it was a disaster.

Last season, we got off to a bad start V Aalborg and we wrongly had a goal chopped offside along with Robson hitting a * penalty. Man U outclassed us away from home and I feel that Boruc should have done better with the Ronaldo shot that led to Giggs equalising against us at home. We beat Villareal at home and were already out by then so fair enough. Away to Villareal, I thought we played well and that Strachan chose his tactics well that night. We were unfortunate to concede a goal and we were also unfortunate not to score as I remember we did create chances that night in Spain. Aalborg away, we were 1-0 up and should have/could have been further in front had Samaras taken his chances (similar to in Villareal). They got two flukey goals and our players didn't have the bottle on the night to hold onto our lead.

 

i said "*" of the highest order

* * *

 

Reading this thread it's clear to see how passionate both sets of people are about this subject. I'm actually hard pushed to think of any individual who has split the Celtic support so much as Gordon Strachan did.

Perhaps that in itself means it is a good thing that he has gone.

 

I think it was definitely his time to move on but it certainly shows that he made one * of an impact at Celtic.

 

That's unbelievable, calling Strachan a "* of the highest order".

That kind of accolade only befits the likes of Moses McNeil, Davie Cooper, Graham Roberts, Barry Ferguson, Ian Ferguson, Derek Johnstone, Mo Johnston, John Greig, David Edgar, Martin Bain, Andy Goram.

You might hate Strachan the man, but you're out of order there. I'm sure you don't need reminding of his achievments, you'll have heard it a thousand times, but your comments make you sound like a *.

Hail Hail

 

Was disgusted with the comment myself

 

That's for sure Minty!

 

dont take it too seriously mate - this is a discussion forum and we are having a DISCUSSION, i know its the 200th version of this thread but still quite enjoying it. Strachan is a *,.