ARTICLE THREE OF EIGHT FROM NIALL J ON WHAT THE MINUTES FROM THE MONDAY NIGHT MEETING TELLS US AS CELTIC SUPPORTERS…
In our earlier articles, we looked at Celtic’s long-term football strategy and the club’s lack of accountability in transfer dealings. What emerged was a picture of a club content to audit itself, explain its shortcomings through “market dynamics,” and set its own bar for success.
The discussion around modernisation, and Celtic’s repeated failure to prepare for European competition, only reinforced that image. Beneath the corporate language of “progress” lies a structure that feels increasingly static, reactive, and opaque.
When asked how Celtic intend to modernise the club’s structure to genuinely compete in Europe, CEO Michael Nicholson’s immediate response was, “The Club does not accept the premise of the question.”
That was perhaps a telling moment, and one that said more about Celtic’s mindset than perhaps any carefully worded answer could. Supporters had posed a question in good faith, one grounded in years of frustration over the club’s repeated unpreparedness for European qualification. For the chief executive to dismiss the very basis of that question came across not as confidence, but as complacency. It suggested a leadership team unwilling, or perhaps unable, to engage meaningfully with criticism.
If communication is a key skill of leadership, and in football, where fans are both the lifeblood and the customer base, it absolutely is, then Celtic’s CEO continues to look uncomfortable in that space.
The seven questions submitted by supporters ahead of this meeting had already gone unanswered for weeks. There has been no proactive communication via the club’s own channels, not even a straightforward Q&A through Celtic TV. When the opportunity finally came to provide substance, the message instead was: “I don’t accept the premise.”
That is not leadership. It’s deflection. And it betrays a worrying disconnect between the executive office and the people who keep the lights on.
Nicholson did, however, point to some examples of progress. The appointment of Paul Tisdale as Head of Football Operations and Shaun Maloney as Professional Pathway Manager were cited as key steps in modernising Celtic’s football structure. On paper, both roles could be valuable.
A Head of Football Operations should, in theory, provide strategic oversight across recruitment, development, and performance. A Professional Pathway Manager could help bridge the long-criticised gap between the academy and the first team.
But these roles are only as effective as the structure around them, and that is where the doubts begin. Supporters are yet to see any coherent explanation of how these new positions fit into a broader plan. Are they part of a clearly defined model, or simply patches on a quilt? Were they created as part of a rigorous restructuring process, or as ad-hoc appointments in reaction to criticism? The lack of transparency fuels scepticism, and with good reason.
Fans at the meeting asked how Tisdale was appointed and whether an external recruitment process had been conducted. CFO Chris McKay confirmed that no consultancy was used and that the club had simply “spoken to several candidates.” Nicholson added there were no family or business connections between Tisdale and Celtic board members, though he admitted “individuals had crossed paths previously.”
That may well be innocent, football is a relatively small world, but when the club’s mantra is “world class in everything we do,” a process that sounds more like a friendly conversation than an exhaustive global search does little to inspire confidence.
Your looking at trying to change club policy, that has been built upon a strong playing trading model.
Of course there is going to be focus upon the amount of turnover of players in the lower end of the price bracket. Yet the profits generated from the lower end, more than cover the losses within the players who don’t succeed with ourselves.
Last season we finally became a bit more adventurous in our higher end purchases.
Remains a guessing game as to what that board approval figure actually is, would say around the 4M mark myself.
Even going above the 5M mark has bought ourselves mixed results.
There is nothing guaranteed within the transfer market, no matter how much is spent, isn’t Chelsea and Man united great examples of that at present?
For ourselves, we still aren’t getting in players to be making a big impact within our playing style in operation.
Certainly aren’t developing them either.
So when the review is carried out for the summer window, who’s actual fault is that for the overall current situation?
No shortage of squad players.
Our bigger players, who we still remain so dependent upon, hardly look totally focused upon the demands of the club imo.
We are hardly playing an attractive brand of football, to potentially sell to players, especially with Scottish football becoming a harder sell with each passing season at present.
Unfortunately, I don’t see a simple solution to cracking European football. We need a stronger more stable core group of players going forward.
Nowhere near the likes at present.
How many current players within our squad, possibly have there eyes on careers elsewhere now?
That already is an issue for the January window.
So, I don’t see a change of policy being introduced, where the members are going to vote to protect the greed within the PLC.
As for the footballing department, keeping Scottish dominance intact, seems to be the major achievement still.
European football is going to remain a hit and miss approach, especially within CL.
Any players showing quality at CL level, automatically outgrow our price bracket.
Yet we are expecting to bring in the same quality of a 20M player, for the one that’s sold.
We are in a vicious circle, without easy solutions.
All the while a manager is expected to work with an existing coaching staff in place, then fail to see if the desired results will ever get achieved imo.
Keeping the 2 year cycle of a change in manager protects, the overall coaching staff.
There will be big changes next season, but wouldn’t be expecting to many, if any, to the club policy in operation regarding incoming and outgoing players imo