Where would Celtic finish in the EPL?

BERBA

18th - 20th ( Relagated)

PARKHEAD67 wrote: »

Hooper is a much better footballer than Carroll. Id have him in my team before Caroll any day.

jut wrong , wrong i tell ya

partyndbs

why? hooper is just a jermaine beckford type striker, excels against rubbish teams but put him up against even the worst of top level football defences and he would struggle.

PARKHEAD67

10-14th (Mid Table safety)

applehunter wrote: »

Carroll's all-round game is much better and his physique is a huge asset.

Hooper is small, not super quick but is a finisher. Plenty of Hoopers around, not that many Carrolls.

Hooper is actually very speedy. Carroll could be described as a Niall Quinn type player. Not very good in other words.Certainly not 35 million quid good.

PARKHEAD67

10-14th (Mid Table safety)

partyndbs wrote: »

why? hooper is just a jermaine beckford type striker, excels against rubbish teams but put him up against even the worst of top level football defences and he would struggle.

Beckford????? what?

Het-Field

Dempsey wrote: »

Is Beckham a bench player at Galaxy??

oh wait indeed!!:rolleyes:

Beckham is hardly a Galaxy Player at all.

During his early seasons there he was an absent nuisance. Then for two season he moved to Milan on loan. He has played 20 games less duing two loan spells at Milan, then he has in four full years in LA.

PARKHEAD67

10-14th (Mid Table safety)

BERBA wrote: »

jut wrong , wrong i tell ya

Hooper outscored Carroll in the Championship,playing for a much lesser club last season.He also played less games than Super dooper Carroll I tell ya. Care to explain the reason for this? Carroll scores a couple of goals in the Mega-superhero league and now hes worth 35MILLION POUNDS STERLING. I despair.:rolleyes:

PARKHEAD67

10-14th (Mid Table safety)

Het-Field wrote: »

Beckham is hardly a Galaxy Player at all.

During his early seasons there he was an absent nuisance. Then for two season he moved to Milan on loan. He has played 20 games less duing two loan spells at Milan, then he has in four full years in LA.

Who cares about that yoke?

Dempsey

5th -10th (Europa League/Upper mid Table)

Het-Field wrote: »

Beckham is hardly a Galaxy Player at all.

During his early seasons there he was an absent nuisance. Then for two season he moved to Milan on loan. He has played 20 games less duing two loan spells at Milan, then he has in four full years in LA.

Where ever Beckham is at, he playing unless he's injured though.

Ljungberg was given a contract until the end of the season and he hasnt started a league game and only started a cup match against Berwick. Thats 2 appearances out of a possible 11 so far. Calling him a marquee player shows your ignorance about Celtic

OhNoYouDidn't

10-14th (Mid Table safety)

Het-Field wrote: »

Beckham is hardly a Galaxy Player at all.

During his early seasons there he was an absent nuisance. Then for two season he moved to Milan on loan. He has played 20 games less duing two loan spells at Milan, then he has in four full years in LA.

You are wrong. Simple as that. Ljungburg has been brought in as cover, and more importantly to finish his badges and pass on his wisdom to young players like Forrest and Feruz. He hasn't, and is unlikely to get near the first team.

major bill

PARKHEAD67 wrote: »

Hooper outscored Carroll in the Championship,playing for a much lesser club last season.He also played less games than Super dooper Carroll I tell ya. Care to explain the reason for this? Carroll scores a couple of goals in the Mega-superhero league and now hes worth 35MILLION POUNDS STERLING. I despair.:rolleyes:

while the 35 million was a ridiculous price and was more a desperate buy..there are reasons why the hoopers of this world are not getting moves to big clubs like the andy carrolls!!!

ricero

14th - 17th( Relegation Survivors)

gary hooper lol

PARKHEAD67

10-14th (Mid Table safety)

major bill wrote: »

while the 35 million was a ridiculous price and was more a desperate buy..there are reasons why the hoopers of this world are not getting moves to big clubs like the andy carrolls!!!

Oh right. So Hooper moved to Glasgow Celtic.Theyre not a big club at all sure.Jesus is weeping:rolleyes:

ricero

14th - 17th( Relegation Survivors)

PARKHEAD67 wrote: »

Oh right. So Hooper moved to Glasgow Celtic.Theyre not a big club at all sure.Jesus is weeping:rolleyes:

not as big as liverpool mate

NWPat

Sorry to butt in so late, but just read this thread. I love it, but you might as well ask if your aunty would be your uncle, if she had ballcocks. It isn't going to happen. For the sake of argument, I think they would be relegated with the present squad.

Het-Field

Dempsey wrote: »

Where ever Beckham is at, he playing unless he's injured though.

Ljungberg was given a contract until the end of the season and he hasnt started a league game and only started a cup match against Berwick. Thats 2 appearances out of a possible 11 so far. Calling him a marquee player shows your ignorance about Celtic

Dont let facts interfere with your logic. Beckham has played less then 50 games in 4 years in LA. His last major injury was sustained at Milan.

Celtic fans will have their preferred players. But that does not make them marquee players. Ljungberg is a far bigger name then any of his club-mates. The fact that he doesnt play doesnt negate his "marquee" standard.

Tell me, is there a bigger name at Glasgow Celtic ? This is regardless of his current status in management plans.

PARKHEAD67

10-14th (Mid Table safety)

ricero wrote: »

gary hooper lol

If he played in the lollipop league like Carroll hed be worth 35 MIL I suppose. :rolleyes:

PARKHEAD67

10-14th (Mid Table safety)

ricero wrote: »

not as big as liverpool mate

You might think so.I dont

major bill

PARKHEAD67 wrote: »

Oh right. So Hooper moved to Glasgow Celtic.Theyre not a big club at all sure.Jesus is weeping:rolleyes:

you really are biased towards your club......celtic have done nothing major to claim the big club tag since their sevilla days. Liverpool are a bigger club than celtic.!!

ricero

14th - 17th( Relegation Survivors)

PARKHEAD67 wrote: »

You might think so.I dont

god even knows this

Het-Field

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

You are wrong. Simple as that. Ljungburg has been brought in as cover, and more importantly to finish his badges and pass on his wisdom to young players like Forrest and Feruz. He hasn't, and is unlikely to get near the first team.

I am wrong that he is a marquee player by American definition ?

He fits the bill as a marquee player. Simply because he is not a certain starter, it doesnt negate the definition.

PARKHEAD67

10-14th (Mid Table safety)

Tell me, is there a bigger name at Glasgow Celtic ? This is regardless of his current status in management plans.[/QUOTE]
Paddy Mcourt-The Derry Pele:D

th3 s1aught3r

flahavaj wrote: »

Interesting argument on the Celtic/Rangers Match Thread.

How would the current Celtic squad fare in the EPL?

I don't think they'd get relegated but I think they'd do very very well to achieve midtable mediocrity.

With their current squad they would struggle a lot
But they could generate good income and certainly spend on players

PARKHEAD67

10-14th (Mid Table safety)

major bill wrote: »

you really are biased towards your club......celtic have done nothing major to claim the big club tag since their sevilla days. Liverpool are a bigger club than celtic.!!

Sure they are.They play in England after all. :rolleyes:

Dempsey

5th -10th (Europa League/Upper mid Table)

Het-Field wrote: »

Dont let facts interfere with your logic. Beckham has played less then 50 games in 4 years in LA. His last major injury was sustained at Milan.

Celtic fans will have their preferred players. But that does not make them marquee players. Ljungberg is a far bigger name then any of his club-mates. The fact that he doesnt play doesnt negate his "marquee" standard.

Tell me, is there a bigger name at Glasgow Celtic ? This is regardless of his current status in management plans.

Efrain Juarez has far more marketing potential than Ljungberg. Celtic are also setting up an affiliation with Santos Laguna to market the club in that region of the world.

Ki is another with more marketing potential than Ljungberg, there is a reason why Celtic paid €3m for him.

The Floyd p

18th - 20th ( Relagated)

PARKHEAD67 wrote: »

Sure they are.They play in England after all. :rolleyes:

But seriously, they are.

A Dub in Glasgo

10-14th (Mid Table safety)

Het-Field wrote: »

Tell me, is there a bigger name at Glasgow Celtic ?

Spot the difference?

Het-Field

Dempsey wrote: »

Efrain Juarez has far more marketing potential than Ljungberg. Celtic are also setting up an affiliation with Santos Laguna to market the club in that region of the world.

Ki is another with more marketing potential than Ljungberg, there is a reason, besides his footballing ability why Celtic paid €3m for him.

Juarez was a long way behind the likes of Giovanni, Hernandez, Franco, Salcido, and Barrera in terms of marketability. In fact, save for his World Cup salvo, were you honestly aware of his presence before ?

major bill

PARKHEAD67 wrote: »

Sure they are.They play in England after all. :rolleyes:

celtic - 1 european cup

Liverpool - 5 european cups, 3 uefa cups

Dempsey

5th -10th (Europa League/Upper mid Table)

Het-Field wrote: »

Juarez was a long way behind the likes of Giovanni, Hernandez, Franco, Salcido, and Barrera in terms of marketability. In fact, save for his World Cup salvo, were you honestly aware of his presence before ?

No, but that doesnt change the fact that he has more marketing potential for Celtic than Ljungberg

Celtic setting up a formal partnership with Santos Laguna proves it.

Het-Field

Dempsey wrote: »

No, but that doesnt change the fact that he has more marketing potential for Celtic than Ljungberg

Celtic setting up a formal partnership with Santos Laguna proves it.

Honestly, I dont understand how this link-up is in any-way probative of Juarez's purported "marquee" status.

PARKHEAD67

10-14th (Mid Table safety)

major bill wrote: »

celtic - 1 european cup

Liverpool - 5 european cups, 3 uefa cups

Doesnt make them a bigger team.Just means they have more European trophies.40,000 stadium compared to Celtics 60,000.Celtic have a much bigger worldwide following too.

PARKHEAD67

10-14th (Mid Table safety)

The Floyd p wrote: »

But seriously, they are.

Naw.Theyre not.

Dempsey

5th -10th (Europa League/Upper mid Table)

Het-Field wrote: »

Honestly, I dont understand how this link-up is in any-way probative of Juarez's purported "marquee" status.

So its just a coincidence that the club was trying to increase its exposure in Mexico and Central America around the time they were signing a Mexican World Cup player :rolleyes:

OhNoYouDidn't

10-14th (Mid Table safety)

Het-Field wrote: »

I am wrong that he is a marquee player by American definition ?

Yes.

Het-Field wrote: »

He fits the bill as a marquee player. Simply because he is not a certain starter, it doesnt negate the definition.

Yes it does.

Just because he is one of the Celtic players YOU have heard of does not mean he is the biggest star, wheeled out for press conferences, the marketing stuff etc.

ricero

14th - 17th( Relegation Survivors)

PARKHEAD67 wrote: »

Doesnt make them a bigger team.Just means they have more European trophies.40,000 stadium compared to Celtics 60,000.Celtic have a much bigger worldwide following too.

lol bigger stadium yes.
more supported no.
dalglish left celtic to join a big club

PARKHEAD67

10-14th (Mid Table safety)

ricero wrote: »

lol bigger stadium yes.
more supported no.
dalglish left celtic to join a big club

Yes we have more supporters worldwide.Dalglish was a Rangers supporter growing up so I wouldnt read too much into that one.

Pauleta

PARKHEAD67 wrote: »

Doesnt make them a bigger team.Just means they have more European trophies.40,000 stadium compared to Celtics 60,000.Celtic have a much bigger worldwide following too.

That has to be the most deluded thing ive ever read in the history of internet forums.

Helix

18th - 20th ( Relagated)

partyndbs wrote: »

yeah could just imagine barca struggling for points down at the foot of the table

Over a 38 game, plus cup, season barca wouldnt qualify for europe in england. Not coz theyre not good enough, but because the change in approach, pacing and brand new opposition. After a couple of years theyd have adjusted. Anyone who would presume to argue with that is codding themselves if they think theyve a clue imo

ricero

14th - 17th( Relegation Survivors)

PARKHEAD67 wrote: »

Yes we have more supporters worldwide.Dalglish was a Rangers supporter growing up so I wouldnt read too much into that one.

WRONG !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

OhNoYouDidn't

10-14th (Mid Table safety)

Helix wrote: »

Over a 38 game, plus cup, season barca wouldnt qualify for europe in england. Not coz theyre not good enough, but because the change in approach, pacing and brand new opposition. After a couple of years theyd have adjusted. Anyone who would presume to argue with that is codding themselves if they think theyve a clue imo

My god. I have read it all now.

I'm sticking to the LoI threads. There are far two many consumers of random english club x on here who seriously need to get off their barstools and look at the world of football out tehre.

A Dub in Glasgo

10-14th (Mid Table safety)

Pauleta wrote: »

That has to be the most deluded thing ive ever read in the history of internet forums.

You are a minute too early with that

Paully D

18th - 20th ( Relagated)

Helix wrote: »

Over a 38 game, plus cup, season barca wouldnt qualify for europe in england. Not coz theyre not good enough, but because the change in approach, pacing and brand new opposition. After a couple of years theyd have adjusted. Anyone who would presume to argue with that is codding themselves if they think theyve a clue imo

The above is testament to Andy Gray's Sky Sports legacy.

Barcelona would be challenging for everything and would finish 2nd at worst in the Premier League.

PARKHEAD67

14th - 17th( Relegation Survivors)

PARKHEAD67 wrote: »

Doesnt make them a bigger team.Just means they have more European trophies.40,000 stadium compared to Celtics 60,000.Celtic have a much bigger worldwide following too.

One for the archive.

shano_88

14th - 17th( Relegation Survivors)

Helix wrote: »

Over a 38 game, plus cup, season barca wouldnt qualify for europe in england. Not coz theyre not good enough, but because the change in approach, pacing and brand new opposition. After a couple of years theyd have adjusted. Anyone who would presume to argue with that is codding themselves if they think theyve a clue imo

I think you've outdone yourself here Helix.

karma_

10-14th (Mid Table safety)

Helix wrote: »

Over a 38 game, plus cup, season barca wouldnt qualify for europe in england. Not coz theyre not good enough, but because the change in approach, pacing and brand new opposition. After a couple of years theyd have adjusted. Anyone who would presume to argue with that is codding themselves if they think theyve a clue imo

Thankfully, I had finished my tea by the time I read this.

major bill

helix has just taken the heat of parkhead67 with that post

Het-Field

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

Yes. .

Wow. I see you have decided to stop playing the sophist, and simply resorting to taking debating tips from your 5 year old brother. Do you want to back that bald statement up. You probably cant

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

Yes it does.

Just because he is one of the Celtic players YOU have heard of does not mean he is the biggest star, wheeled out for press conferences, the marketing stuff etc.

So Celtic bought him just for press conferences and marketing ? If that is the case then it would appear that he is a marquee player (It is well noted that Pele and Beckenbauer were only brought to the US to heighten an interest in the game. Their ability on the pitch mattered little as they were at the end of their careers. Teams in the US simply bought them for their selling power). The same would apply to Beckham.

If you want to tell yourself that the likes of Scotty Brown, Kris Commons, and Anthony Stokes are the "Marquee" players, then I suggest you consider whether you have any knowledge about the game at all.

Melion

PARKHEAD67 wrote: »

Doesnt make them a bigger team.Just means they have more European trophies.40,000 stadium compared to Celtics 60,000.Celtic have a much bigger worldwide following too.

Can we close the thread now? Its reached a fúcking ridiculous level now. Ive seen some funny shít on this forum but that comment right there tops the whole lot

Warper

18th - 20th ( Relagated)

Helix wrote: »

Over a 38 game, plus cup, season barca wouldnt qualify for europe in england. Not coz theyre not good enough, but because the change in approach, pacing and brand new opposition. After a couple of years theyd have adjusted. Anyone who would presume to argue with that is codding themselves if they think theyve a clue imo

As Andy Gray said (ill say it again) "How would they fare at the Brittania on a cold Monday night"

Chucky the tree

10-14th (Mid Table safety)

Think Helix is being a bit OTT saying it would take a few years or wouldn't qualify for Europe but he's not far wrong. They still be excellent at home but when you look at their away record in europe I don't think they win the league or even challenge for it in their first season. In their last 10 awa matches in the CL they've W2 Drawn 6 L 2. Wins againt Kiev and Panathinikos, draws against Rubin(x2) Copenhagen, Arsenal, Stuggart, Inter and lost to Arsenal and Inter.