Glasgow Rangers player factory

[GeneralBurk]

but it might be...a poor season and battling agaisnt relegation could be enough to tip them over, could easly end up doing something like leeds, so to dismiss it is a bit blindsighted

Rangers wouldnt be winning all the time, and rangers fans would start getting annoyed at that and turn on the players (i have been to ibrox enough times to see this happen befor) also the huge worldwide fan base would start drying up and fans stop bothering to suport of follow due to them no longer an easy win team, still would have a large fan base worldwide, but no as big as it is now

That's an awful lot of supposition in your statement. So after 2 bad seasons all the Rangers and Celtic fans would dump their team. Utter poppycock! Celtic fans have had to endure watching Rangers win the league 9 in a row; bad enough, but to compound this Celtic were having to draw first team players from the army and yet they still did not dump their team. The fact is at current standards there will always be at least 5 English teams finishing below them. In addition given a minimum annual £30m TV revenue from the premiership and the resulting increased advertising revenues both teams would soon be competing with teams in the top half and with momentum who knows?

The Premiership would be more welcoming than you might imagine given the increased revenues two giants would bring to the Premiership as opposed to the likes of Wigan or Fulham.

Fulham brought 56 away fans to Blackburn this season. Pitiful!

 

[Yid-ol]

That's an awful lot of supposition in your statement. So after 2 bad seasons all the Rangers and Celtic fans would dump their team. Utter poppycock! Celtic fans have had to endure watching Rangers win the league 9 in a row; bad enough, but to compound this Celtic were having to draw first team players from the army and yet they still did not dump their team. The fact is at current standards there will always be at least 5 English teams finishing below them. In addition given a minimum annual £30m TV revenue from the premiership and the resulting increased advertising revenues both teams would soon be competing with teams in the top half and with momentum who knows?

The Premiership would be more welcoming than you might imagine given the increased revenues two giants would bring to the Premiership as opposed to the likes of Wigan or Fulham.

Fulham brought 56 away fans to Blackburn this season. Pitiful!

And what your saying doesnt also have alot of supposition? at least i back up what i say with things from other clubs that have happend and only sujested this may also happen, just like when i said some of the fans would stop, you again go OTT and sujested i said all :duh:

ad as for the 9 in a row, where were celtic finishing in the league, and in the cups when these were going on? 2nd in the league i guess? wow horror, total disaster seasons finishing 2nd.... try 10th 15th in the league, see how fans react to not finishing so high, it will hit alot of fans after always being in the top teams.

Yes they woudl get more money from TV rights, but would lose out on money from CL and Uefa cup, while also having to pay mroe for players and wages! also Rangers and Celtic would strugle to pull in some of the players they normaly do pull in, as other clubs in the EPL would go for them, like they do now, but and they would no longer have to pick between the EPL and a league that they will walk it in

Also i would rather have wigan and reading in the league than rangers and celtic

 

[Kevealis]

Finishing 2nd in the SPL not worth talking about for an old firm fan mate. You say 2nd as if its a good thing. Its winner and loser, not 1st and 2nd.

 

[GeneralBurk]

ad as for the 9 in a row, where were celtic finishing in the league, and in the cups when these were going on? 2nd in the league i guess? wow horror, total disaster seasons finishing 2nd.... Try the highest being a distant 3rd and regularly being out pointed by Motherwell, Aberdeen and Hibs

try 10th 15th in the league, see how fans react to not finishing so high, it will hit alot of fans after always being in the top teams. Fans of both clubs would not be expecting immediate (relative) success while they adjusted to the league and made use of increased revenue i.e. European football

Yes they woudl get more money from TV rights, but would lose out on money from CL and Uefa cup, Relatively speaking the UEFA Cup pays a pittance to the winner and the most valuable one off fixture is play off final in the Championship because teams get at least 1 season in the Premiership £30m plus 2 years worth of Parachute payments while also having to pay mroe for players and wages! Wage structures are set up by teamsfor this very reason and are related to success of the team.

Rangers and Celtic would strugle to pull in some of the players they normaly do pull in, as other clubs in the EPL would go for them, Why would they struggle to attract players that they currently do by entering the EPL? The fact that they compete with the EPL for players at the moment despite the financial handicaps is impressive in it self? like they do now, but and they would no longer have to pick between the EPL and a league that they will walk it in By that logic Hearts and Hibs and Aberdeen would then be taking those players because they can guarentee European football - Players want Chapions League Football but not at any cost or they would be playing for teams like Steaua Bucharest and Dinamo Kiev
Also i would rather have wigan and reading in the league than rangers and celtic Chairmen will probably disagree due to the significant increase in match day revenue when these teams play

Put simply people should not underestimate the size and draw of teams like the Auld Firm they are finacially handicapped compared to EPL teams

 

[Blotto]

Good thing we had this (rather long) conversation on Spurs community, because when I come on Spurs community and go in Spurs Chat I really want to read posts about two SPL sides that I could simply not give a fuck less about...

And BTW, all the time I have lived in the States, which admittedly is not long, I have met:
--Zero Rangers fan, never met a single Yank Gers fan
--maybe two Celtic fans, that's using the term lightly; Celtic being a "second" team, etc
--so many Man United fans that I lost track at 2 or 3 thousand

So on the basis of that very scientific data, I would say that the two top "dawgs" (that's an American thing ) of the SPL, the kings of Scotland, the mighty conquerors of Fiorentina (worst game I've ever watched, seriously) and [who did Celtic conquer this year] have a bit of catching up to do.

Oh and: :beer::razz::beer::shake:

 

[batigol]

If you define it in terms of fan base size, Celtic would only be behind Man U globally, possibly just ahead of Liverpool or on a par. Rangers would probably be equivalent to Arsenal in terms of fan base, I'd estimate. There is also the issue of money generated from home games. Celtic get 60,000 at home and Rangers get around 47,000-50,000.

Well, you mentioned that bringing the teams I mentioned into the discussion was out of context but you were the one who mentioned GLOBAL here. You never said specifically but judging the bold words from your previous statement, you might as well have. If you mean to exclude the teams I mentioned from your term global above, then please indicate and I won't have bothered.

Last I recall, globally involves every country in the world so teams like Juve, Real Madrid or Barca definitely fits into your context. Bloody hell, Nou Camp can fit in 100,000 fans at one go. I just think the survey numbers got to your head and was telling you that if a proper survey included the whole of Asia then the results could have been a bit different so I hope you catch my drift this time. Funny how your Global argument revolves around SPL and EPL.

You mentioned that you have conceded that some teams bar Juve have bigger fan base but please point out where you state that Real, Barca or any of the teams other than Juve have bigger fan base in any of your posts. I only see Man U and Pool (barely).

As for your Japan thing, do you have any idea what percentage of their population are interested in football? They love baseball more than football over there my friend. And seriously, Japan is one small percentage of the football crazy population in Asia and I can tell that the other percentages don't very much care for Rangers or Celtic.

As for talking about facts, I think it always funny how a fact based on statistics can be so skewed when your area of study leaves out a big portion of the world. I guess it would have been true 10 years back but at present, I doubt so. Over here in Asia, besides a minority in Japan, not many care for Celtic and that is a fact. You can fly over and find out if you want.

Anyway, I think this is silly. You are talking from a European perspective and see what you see from around you in Europe. Definitely true over there. I am just giving a more Asian perspective because you talked about fanbase from around the world without talking about the most populated continent in the world. Btw, Japan is not Asia.:wink:

 

[Clydey]

Well, you mentioned that bringing the teams I mentioned into the discussion was out of context but you were the one who mentioned GLOBAL here. You never said specifically but judging the bold words from your previous statement, you might as well have. If you mean to exclude the teams I mentioned from your term global above, then please indicate and I won't have bothered.

Last I recall, globally involves every country in the world so teams like Juve, Real Madrid or Barca definitely fits into your context. Bloody hell, Nou Camp can fit in 100,000 fans at one go. I just think the survey numbers got to your head and was telling you that if a proper survey included the whole of Asia then the results could have been a bit different so I hope you catch my drift this time. Funny how your Global argument revolves around SPL and EPL.

You mentioned that you have conceded that some teams bar Juve have bigger fan base but please point out where you state that Real, Barca or any of the teams other than Juve have bigger fan base in any of your posts. I only see Man U and Pool (barely).

As for your Japan thing, do you have any idea what percentage of their population are interested in football? They love baseball more than football over there my friend. And seriously, Japan is one small percentage of the football crazy population in Asia and I can tell that the other percentages don't very much care for Rangers or Celtic.

As for talking about facts, I think it always funny how a fact based on statistics can be so skewed when your area of study leaves out a big portion of the world. I guess it would have been true 10 years back but at present, I doubt so. Over here in Asia, besides a minority in Japan, not many care for Celtic and that is a fact. You can fly over and find out if you want.

Anyway, I think this is silly. You are talking from a European perspective and see what you see from around you in Europe. Definitely true over there. I am just giving a more Asian perspective because you talked about fanbase from around the world without talking about the most populated continent in the world. Btw, Japan is not Asia.:wink:

I find it's generally better to not to take a definitive position until you're aware of some context. When I said that Celtic would only be behind Man U globally, I was referring to the global fan base of British teams, since our discussion was concentrated on the EPL.

I already stated that Real Madrid, Barca, and Milan have bigger fan bases. It's hardly my fault that you didn't consider the context.

http://www.spurscommunity.co.uk/for...886181&highlight=clydey+real+milan#post886181

"You're mental if you think Celtic are behind Man U, Arsenal, and Liverpool in Ireland. In fact, a study showed that Celtic had the 5th biggest fan base in the world. They were behind Man U (who were first), Barcelona, Real Madrid and (I think) AC Milan.

You have to remember that Celtic are considered the official Catholic team. It's stupid that religion should be at all applied to football (being an atheist, it actually pisses me off), but that's how it seems to be. And their fan base has gotten even bigger since Nakamura signed."

I'm so glad you're here to speak on behalf of Asia. What was your methodology? Did you ask family and friends? I'm sorry, but simply asserting "Over here in Asia, besides a minority in Japan, not many care for Celtic and that is a fact" does not actually make it a fact. Opinion does not constitute fact. If it did, many on here would have Eto'o on the back of their shirts already, based on the ITK threads.

I'm more inclined to side with an independent study or an unbiased report from UEFA. Were they lying when they said that Celtic had the biggest travelling support ever for a single game? Surely that counts for something. More Celtic fans travelled to see a UEFA Cup final than Liverpool and Man U fans did for a CL final.

 

[Clydey]

Good thing we had this (rather long) conversation on Spurs community, because when I come on Spurs community and go in Spurs Chat I really want to read posts about two SPL sides that I could simply not give a fuck less about...

And BTW, all the time I have lived in the States, which admittedly is not long, I have met:
--Zero Rangers fan, never met a single Yank Gers fan
--maybe two Celtic fans, that's using the term lightly; Celtic being a "second" team, etc
--so many Man United fans that I lost track at 2 or 3 thousand

So on the basis of that very scientific data, I would say that the two top "dawgs" (that's an American thing ) of the SPL, the kings of Scotland, the mighty conquerors of Fiorentina (worst game I've ever watched, seriously) and [who did Celtic conquer this year] have a bit of catching up to do.

Oh and: :beer::razz::beer::shake:

I'm glad you sarcastically referred to it as "very scientific data". It saves me the trouble of pointing out its irrelevance.

Also, I'd expect you to meet more Man U fans anyway. They are untouchable in terms of their fan base.

Who did Celtic conquer this year? AC Milan, Benfica and Shakhtar. Not as impressive as previous years, but you can only beat who is put in front of you.

Rangers also beat Lyon, Werder Bremen, Sporting Lisbon, and Stuttgart. I could list some more teams each have beaten in previous years, if you insist on belittling Celtic and Rangers achievements.

By the way, I have no problem with this being moved to general football. It has veered way off topic.

 

[Yid-ol]

its bliss only to see good things that could happen and not realisticly see the other points :lol:

 

[mkkid]

So you are trying to say that the likes of Fulham, West Ham and Chelsea have a bigger worldwide following than Celtic? And you're basing it on an American tour?

I like how you make your point by simply saying something with great conviction.

"Thse survey and polls are completed with a northern european basis!"

Do you think if you say it loudly and with conviction it would make it true? It was an independent survey. There was no bias.

What you still don't seem to get is that I'll be cheering on Rangers on Wednesday just as loudly as you. I'm not a bigot and I don't buy into the Old Firm rivalry. The only time I support Celtic over Rangers is in the SPL, and even then it's not with the passion I support both Celtic and Rangers in Europe.

I'm a Scotland supporter first and foremost. So yes, I'll be busy on Wednesday. I'll be celebrating if Rangers win. Try and get that through your head, eh? Just because you despise your old firm rivals it doesn't mean I do.

In one of your posts,you stated that Celtic have a massive fanbase in the us.That is quite simply not true becuase you have played in front of empty stadiums but when Real madrid played there they were full.Any european team will pull in about 20 thousand in the us.
Benfica have more fans then Celtic
Surveys are not truely indepent.
Toyo csc club 300 members,spurs singapore 150 members,hardly a massive difference.Is Celtic park full every week with Japanese tourist,Man utd seems to be.I see the odd one or 2 there.
When Numamuka leaves they will support someone else.
Just remember to record the Bill on Wednesday please

 

[Clydey]

In one of your posts,you stated that Celtic have a massive fanbase in the us.That is quite simply not true becuase you have played in front of empty stadiums but when Real madrid played there they were full.Any european team will pull in about 20 thousand in the us.
Benfica have more fans then Celtic
Surveys are not truely indepent.
Toyo csc club 300 members,spurs singapore 150 members,hardly a massive difference.Is Celtic park full every week with Japanese tourist,Man utd seems to be.I see the odd one or 2 there.
When Numamuka leaves they will support someone else.
Just remember to record the Bill on Wednesday please

So when you're watching Celtic and Man U play on tv, your eyes are glued to the stands looking for Japanese tourists? Basically, when Celtic play there are hardly any Japanese tourists there, but when Man U play the entire stadium is filled with them?

I'm sorry, mate, but you are blatantly biased. It's fine. I don't mind banter. It merely renders your opinion on Celtic pretty much worthless. Your hate for the club taints everything you say about them.

Anyway, I agree with the regs here. This is a Spurs forum, and we've veered off topic. Unless this gets moved to general football, we should really get back on topic.

 

[mkkid]

Never said the stadium was full of Japanese Tourists,but when united are home i get train back from Euston to Manchester and get off at Mk and there are quite a few Japanese people with united tops ,i also notice them in the cup game this year as well at Old Trafford in there superstore.
I hate West Ham and Arsenal,even more than Celtic but i have an opinion on all of them.
That whats being a fan all about,you dont like your rivals.

COYS

 

[batigol]

I find it's generally better to not to take a definitive position until you're aware of some context. When I said that Celtic would only be behind Man U globally, I was referring to the global fan base of British teams, since our discussion was concentrated on the EPL.

I already stated that Real Madrid, Barca, and Milan have bigger fan bases. It's hardly my fault that you didn't consider the context.

http://www.spurscommunity.co.uk/for...886181&highlight=clydey+real+milan#post886181

"You're mental if you think Celtic are behind Man U, Arsenal, and Liverpool in Ireland. In fact, a study showed that Celtic had the 5th biggest fan base in the world. They were behind Man U (who were first), Barcelona, Real Madrid and (I think) AC Milan.

You have to remember that Celtic are considered the official Catholic team. It's stupid that religion should be at all applied to football (being an atheist, it actually pisses me off), but that's how it seems to be. And their fan base has gotten even bigger since Nakamura signed."

I'm so glad you're here to speak on behalf of Asia. What was your methodology? Did you ask family and friends? I'm sorry, but simply asserting "Over here in Asia, besides a minority in Japan, not many care for Celtic and that is a fact" does not actually make it a fact. Opinion does not constitute fact. If it did, many on here would have Eto'o on the back of their shirts already, based on the ITK threads.

I'm more inclined to side with an independent study or an unbiased report from UEFA. Were they lying when they said that Celtic had the biggest travelling support ever for a single game? Surely that counts for something. More Celtic fans travelled to see a UEFA Cup final than Liverpool and Man U fans did for a CL final.

Funny how that quote you stated came from an entirely different thread. If you are so ready to state that my post is out of context in THIS thread then you should have been prepared to provide the entire context in THIS thread. And since you did not, then you should expect people to take a stand on whatever comments you posted in This Thread just like I did....and in no way are we being out of context because you did not state your context in the first place.

This is hilarious. You are so defensive about your statistics that it borders on ludicrous. All I am pointing out is that your study maybe skewed because it clearly ignores a big portion of Asia. I do not need a study to tell me that Celtic is not popular in most Asian countries because unlike you, I am Asian and have many friends from all over Asia. If you were to tell me that more Europeans were supporting Celtic then I would trust you more implicitly because as a European, you should know better than I do. Also, you should note Uefa is based in Europe so their study is surely more Europe-centric.

What did they say about statistics? Lies, lies and damn lies. So was Uefa lying? Well, maybe not from their perspective, which just goes to say that it may not be the whole truth.

Lastly, results of any studies does not indicate a fact but rather shows evidence to support a theory. Unless this evidence is unequivocally true in every scenario, then you can call it a fact. Otherwise it can always be disproved and if it can be disproved then it cannot be called a fact. I pointed out a scenario where the studies could be flawed and unless you can show evidence that Celtic support is strong in ALL OF ASIA, then there should be no way that you can state your claims as a fact.

 

[Clydey]

Funny how that quote you stated came from an entirely different thread. If you are so ready to state that my post is out of context in THIS thread then you should have been prepared to provide the entire context in THIS thread. And since you did not, then you should expect people to take a stand on whatever comments you posted in This Thread just like I did....and in no way are we being out of context because you did not state your context in the first place.

This is hilarious. You are so defensive about your statistics that it borders on ludicrous. All I am pointing out is that your study maybe skewed because it clearly ignores a big portion of Asia. I do not need a study to tell me that Celtic is not popular in most Asian countries because unlike you, I am Asian and have many friends from all over Asia. If you were to tell me that more Europeans were supporting Celtic then I would trust you more implicitly because as a European, you should know better than I do. Also, you should note Uefa is based in Europe so their study is surely more Europe-centric.

What did they say about statistics? Lies, lies and damn lies. So was Uefa lying? Well, maybe not from their perspective, which just goes to say that it may not be the whole truth.

Lastly, results of any studies does not indicate a fact but rather shows evidence to support a theory. Unless this evidence is unequivocally true in every scenario, then you can call it a fact. Otherwise it can always be disproved and if it can be disproved then it cannot be called a fact. I pointed out a scenario where the studies could be flawed and unless you can show evidence that Celtic support is strong in ALL OF ASIA, then there should be no way that you can state your claims as a fact.

If you had bothered to read others' posts you would have realised that we were talking about British teams. I didn't have to insert a disclaimer because those people who were part of the discussion knew the context. Instead of reading the thread and becoming familiar with the context, you isolated my post. It is not my fault that you did not read the thread.

What makes you think that the study ignores a big part of Asia? It didn't give specifics. And even if it did ignore a large part of Asia, surely that would only serve to underestimate the number of Celtic fans world wide. If they estimated 9 million fans while ignoring most of Asia, that means the number would be even bigger.

Also, I did not call the study a fact. Studies like that do not constitute facts. You're talking to someone who is empirically minded, who would never call quantitative research a fact. That said, it is considerably more reliable than your laughably weak evidence: "I know a few Asian people because I live in Asia and they say Celtic have hardly any fans."

Bravo, Batigol, bravo. And the study was not conducted by UEFA. UEFA did not conduct any study. What they did say is that Celtic hold the record for the largest travelling support for a single match ever. Now, that is a fact. Attendance records are kept. Unlike quantitative research, attendance records can be compared.

The fact that Celtic hold such a record indicates how vast their fan base is.

 

[mkkid]

Dont forgot hes using the Seville Calacutor!



I couldnt resist it clyded,Dj was talking about 3 million in Seville last week.

 

[batigol]

If you had bothered to read others' posts you would have realised that we were talking about British teams. I didn't have to insert a disclaimer because those people who were part of the discussion knew the context. Instead of reading the thread and becoming familiar with the context, you isolated my post. It is not my fault that you did not read the thread.

What makes you think that the study ignores a big part of Asia? It didn't give specifics. And even if it did ignore a large part of Asia, surely that would only serve to underestimate the number of Celtic fans world wide. If they estimated 9 million fans while ignoring most of Asia, that means the number would be even bigger.

Also, I did not call the study a fact. Studies like that do not constitute facts. You're talking to someone who is empirically minded, who would never call quantitative research a fact. That said, it is considerably more reliable than your laughably weak evidence: "I know a few Asian people because I live in Asia and they say Celtic have hardly any fans."

Bravo, Batigol, bravo. And the study was not conducted by UEFA. UEFA did not conduct any study. What they did say is that Celtic hold the record for the largest travelling support for a single match ever. Now, that is a fact. Attendance records are kept. Unlike quantitative research, attendance records can be compared.

The fact that Celtic hold such a record indicates how vast their fan base is.

I think perhaps you are too empirically minded to understand what I am trying to say. Should I paint it in numbers? Your previous post has shown clearly that you drew your argument context from a post in another thread. Nowhere in this thread did you talk about the teams I mentioned earlier but you went on to state that I was out of context without considering that, within this thread, you did not set out your context. You assumed that everyone has read your post in another thread and therefore knew the wherein of your arguments. Well, not everyone did so bravo indeed to you as that is surely arrogance to state a post as out of context without understanding that.

Funny how you talk about the study underestimating Celtic without stating that it obviously underestimates all other teams as well. The question then is how much the underestimation is. You don't have the answer and neither do I so saying there is an underestimation for Celtic does not prove anything at all.

I won't bother to go back and find your post where you used the results of your study to state your point as a FACT. If you read my post properly, then you would have understood that I described exactly how you used the results of the study: to prove a theory. But you stated in your post that the results shows that your theory is a FACT....which I explained distinctly that because your theory can be disproved, it cannot be termed as a fact. I am sure am empirical person like you should know better than me.