John Kennedy

So because Kennedy is a "greeting faced *" you want to get rid of him? Come off it.

 

Utter nonsense.

No way 4 managers would keep him? Lets track it then. Deila came in on his todd. The club built his backroom staff for him. Hence Collins and Kennedy. BR came in on his iwn as well. With Chris Davies poached at BRs insistence a month odd later, again, kennedy already in place ( and left behind). Lennon comes in , Mjallby knocks back a return, Thompson in the bad books, literally no one * else. Ange comes in with no one, when asked why, asserts that he has always worked with in house staff already in place... Now hes appointing his own choices. There ya go.
I also like how to conveniently side stepped why Howe knocked the job back over the prerequisites of not being allowed the staff he wanted.

As for those 'reports", id like to see a link, quoting BR asserting he wanted to take kennedy. In fact, the only quote i can find is Kennedy responding to a question from the bbc, “I had a great relationship with Brendan, spoke to him about a number of things and what the future might hold, but ultimately I was there preparing the team”.
Thats it. Rodgers NEVER mentioned taking him, never even alluded to it.

Claiming that his tenure as caretaker has no relation to his "current role" is just plain silly. Hes coached and managed alot of these players. How they respond to his methods and leadership qualities are part and parcel with his "role". It didnt appear to be working when he was defensive coach under Deila, nor caretaker manager. And it now appears Ange has his number.

You then claimed that Kewell has been brought in to add, not replace... Then why the * did you support your argument with asserting McManus, not kennedy had been dropped to make room for Kewell?

As per your last point, i think im more comfortable attributing those titles to deila, rodgers and Lennon, rather than asserting Kennedy has been the common denominator that delivered such unparalleled success. Quite a feat for a defensive coach, then first team coach and an assistant for ONE of those titles.

But you do you.

 

But surely someone's who's main attribute and selling point is supposed to be that they are loved by all...the players would still react and improve regardless?

I know that lennon done away with any professionalism but if they all respect and rate so much, surely they'd play for him whether coaching or managing is a different role.

So much is said about the success of Rodgers and he gets all the credit for that...yet it seems impossible to credit him for any of the failures.

 

Won't lie. Felt we should have had a backroom staff clear out last Summer to freshen things up a bit but Ange seems to rate him. He's alluded to such.

 

Weird how some people still refer to him as “defensive coach”.

 

I don't recall anyone saying he was loved by all. My claim was that those who have worked with him (and spoken about him) seem to rate him as a coach.

Sure, he shoulders some blame when things go wrong, just as the players and manager do. But at the point he took over as interim manager that season, I think the players were just going through the motions. Personally I think it's clutching at straws to hold that short stint against him, especially when his day to day job at the club is as a coach.

 

There is literally no arguing with that.

 

There's a reason why most * on here probably can't be arsed reading through all your long winded pish.

 

It is a professional standard that we should be seeing a reaction, an improvement once Lennon was gone and then the coach that the players all respect and rate is taking over.

Mowbray got binned and even Lennon could get a reaction out of players and show clear immediate improvement.

Again...I'm not one who can properly explain everything as I'm not the most articulate person.

But I also can't think of a time where managers and coaches who have worked with each other for an extended period of time have ever once publicly come out and called out the other as not being very good.

Ronnie brought success and was viewed as a good guy but didn't last long in the job...I feel like Kennedy is talked about in the same vein because every defence seems to be founded on how much he is/was liked by people. Literally nothing else quantifiable is mentioned.

I get I'm being overly harsh and perhaps I'm also tired still of seeing the club dole jobs for the boys which again is unfair to put at Kennedy's feet...but I do feel like Celtic and Kennedy need to part ways and have needed to for a while now.

 

Do you not know our fans know better than Ange who works with him day in, day out with what they’ve surmised from our armchairs?

And all those comments that people who have worked with him praising him? Paid for by Lawwell.

 

Why people fight against all the comments from previous managers and players that unoquivically state that he is a great coach and one who is a massive help towards players progress and push forth what can only be described as pure personal bias against the guy with nothing to back it up.
We all have pet likes and dislikes and the best 2 recent examples is Tony Ralston and Greg Taylor, this time last year we were all rightfully saying they weren't good enough but both have turned it around but you still some folk giving thinly veiled appreciation even though they have proven themselves capable but with Kennedy there seems to be a genuine real hatred towards him that isn't diminishing regardless of what he does or how much success he achieves at the club, I don't understand it.

* goes wrong = Kennedy's fault
* goes well = Nothing to do with Kennedy

 

Bottom line is mate, if he was that * he wouldn't be here. 4 managers, who see what he does on a daily basis, kept him on and clearly thought he had something to offer. That's good enough for me.

 

Aye, we’ll I’m telling you I know first hand from somebody who actually works within Celtic in a prominent role for the first team that Ange is a massive fan of Kennedy’s.

 

I actually think it’s the other way round.

IF he wants to manage Celtic, his best bets would be being promoted from within.

 

I was genuinely gonna post something similar instead of what I did, but I thought what's the * point?

 

Okay first off Lennon said himself how huge it was to have Kennedy when he came back in after the rat scurried off and finished off the treble treble. That continuity was huge.

Rodgers wanted to take Kennedy him and he told him no, been confirmed by many sources now, really think Rodgers will come out and admit he tried to all the coaches and leave us with * all?

Howe stalled and then declined because his former backroom staff didn’t want to join him in moving up here so he shat it.

Lastly Kennedy is not a defensive coach, he is a coach. Every manager he has worked under has talked highly of his understanding of the game and coaching ability.

 

Part in bold, what else do we have to go on?

I’ll say again, being a coach is different from being a manager. That interim stint is clutching at straws.

 

Cant believe I actually read this pile of *.. * sake