Tyrese Campbell informs Celtic he won't join them

Disappointed at how this has turned out. Heard last week that the agent was playing games with the old firm interest knowing the publicity it would receive and it’s clear they’ve got what they really wanted in the end which was a new deal at Stoke.
Shame because I think he could have been a good player for us but we move on to someone else.
 
Never seen him play but another option up front would be helpful if it's the right stature of player. By that I mean someone that will be willing to come in with limited game time initially with the view to featuring more next season, much like Edmunson. Don't want to unbalance the squad or take away what Morelos and Defoe have offered this season. However in the event of injuries we do need someone capable of making an impact, if not the finished product. A third striker could play for 20 minutes between now and the end of the season, or they could play 5-10 games depending on circumstances. They need to be accept this and know their time may be limited, but will be able to develop and feature when time is right.
 
Is it official he’s signed a new stoke deal?

We move on, his loss if he doesn’t want to come here.
 
He’s not near the end of his career, and he wasn’t signed as potential, though.

neither was Greg Stewart or Matt Polster - maybe not the top of their game though :D

As I said, we can sign folk who are unproven at a higher level (ie from other Scottish clubs or ‘lesser’ leagues). And Flanagan was very much signed as potential - a player that Liverpool has once had high hopes for but who had lost his way. We certainly weren’t signing him as a proven first team regular!
 
As I said, we can sign folk who are unproven at a higher level (ie from other Scottish clubs or ‘lesser’ leagues). And Flanagan was very much signed as potential - a player that Liverpool has once had high hopes for but who had lost his way. We certainly weren’t signing him as a proven first team regular!
Potential? He’s older than Helander and was Liverpools starting fullback for a season. We very much knew what we were getting.
 
You do know that older folk can have potential as well?

Are you claiming that we snatched him as Liverpool’s established left back???
I’m claiming we signed an England international from Liverpool. We didn’t sign to develop, we signed because he was the best available to us at that time. He has been given 6 month contracts, if he was signed for potential he would be given 3 years.
Lets not kid ourselves :)
 
I’m claiming we signed an England international from Liverpool. We didn’t sign to develop, we signed because he was the best available to us at that time. He has been given 6 month contracts, if he was signed for potential he would be given 3 years.
Lets not kid ourselves :)

Afraid I still disagree. I think the only kidding ourselves is the concept that Flanagan was ‘an England international’ when we signed him. He wasn’t. We signed him in the hope that he could regain that form. He had 6 month contracts in case he turned out to be useless. If he was an established England international, we’d have been giving him a 3 year contract. We signed him for the potential of him rediscovering the form that he once had.

To be honest, it’s pretty ridiculous to claim that we are signing an established Liverpool and English first team regular.
 
Afraid I still disagree. I think the only kidding ourselves is the concept that Flanagan was ‘an England international’ when we signed him. He wasn’t. We signed him in the hope that he could regain that form. He had 6 month contracts in case he turned out to be useless. If he was an established England international, we’d have been giving him a 3 year contract. We signed him for the potential of him rediscovering the form that he once had.

To be honest, it’s pretty ridiculous to claim that we are signing an established Liverpool and English first team regular.
I never claimed any of your last paragraph. You are putting words there. He does however have A cap, and he was liverpools first choice for a spell... he was on loan to Bolton when we got him, so it would be hard for him to have been Liverpools first choice when we signed him.
He was signed because we were a “basket case” at that point. He fit the bill at the time. He wasn’t going to develop into a world beater, we knew exactly what we were getting. You don’t sign a 26 year old with a dodgy reputation down south In hope that you can make money on him.

He’s a completely different type of signing to that of Katic, Kent, Aribo etc... he was not signed for potential.
 
I never claimed any of your last paragraph. You are putting words there. He does however have A cap, and he was liverpools first choice for a spell... he was on loan to Bolton when we got him, so it would be hard for him to have been Liverpools first choice when we signed him.
He was signed because we were a “basket case” at that point. He fit the bill at the time. He wasn’t going to develop into a world beater, we knew exactly what we were getting. You don’t sign a 26 year old with a dodgy reputation down south In hope that you can make money on him.

He’s a completely different type of signing to that of Katic, Kent, Aribo etc... he was not signed for potential.

I think that we are talking different meanings of ‘potential.’ He made 9 appearances for Bolton and had made 10 appearances for Burnley the year before. He was no-one’s first choice anything at that point.

You talk of potential as something only possessed by youth whose ceiling is unknown and might take years to develop. I talk of it as just being short of the best you can be and having the chance of reaching it, or reaching it again in some cases.

My original reply was saying that we will not be buying established regular proven players at a high level. Flanagan was none of these things when we bought him. He was a player who had fallen from playing at a high level and we hoped that he would get back to it. That is potential in my mind.

As I say, my point was that we are not buying established proven regulars. If you are using Flanagan to argue with me on that, you are claiming that he was those things. You would be wrong. If you are just debating the definition of ‘potential’ then we can agree to differ. But that would imply that you didn’t think Tavernier had potential when we signed him at nearly 24
 
I think that we are talking different meanings of ‘potential.’ He made 9 appearances for Bolton and had made 10 appearances for Burnley the year before. He was no-one’s first choice anything at that point.

You talk of potential as something only possessed by youth whose ceiling is unknown and might take years to develop. I talk of it as just being short of the best you can be and having the chance of reaching it, or reaching it again in some cases.

My original reply was saying that we will not be buying established regular proven players at a high level. Flanagan was none of these things when we bought him. He was a player who had fallen from playing at a high level and we hoped that he would get back to it. That is potential in my mind.

As I say, my point was that we are not buying established proven regulars. If you are using Flanagan to argue with me on that, you are claiming that he was those things. You would be wrong. If you are just debating the definition of ‘potential’ then we can agree to differ. But that would imply that you didn’t think Tavernier had potential when we signed him at nearly 24
I’m debating your reason for signing him.

We did not sign Flannigan because of any potential he might have. He’s not at the end of his career, he has played for his nation, he will not get much better than he currently is, if at all. He was signed, again, as he was probably the best available to us at that time and within our budget. He was continuously given short contracts. Not the mark of someone we expect to shift for money, he goes against our model.

Not really sure on your point with Tav because he has 0 England caps, he was signed young and inexperienced, the definition of potential... I’m not sure how you have come to the conclusion that I thought he was the finished article? Based on me saying Flannigan is his own finished article.
 
Understandably, the SPL isn't viewed with much respect south of the border, so in a way I can grasp why Campbell might have reservations about plying his trade there. But, is his decision to remain at Stoke really going to enhance his career more that playing for Rangers would have done? I doubt it.

Stoke are barely managing to hang on in the Championship, in fact a negative run of results could well see them relegated. Given this, especially when compared to the prospect of playing and showcasing his skills in Europe with Rangers would surely have enhanced his marketability to a far greater extent. After all, it hasn't done Morelos' career much harm.
 
Disappointing that he wants to stay down south. But i'm sure Ross Wilson will have other players targeted.
 
Good stuff,only want players here that appreciate and fully understand the privilege they have been offered to play for Rangers,the rest can stay away
 
He chose to stay at Stoke rather than sign for us. That will be his regret for the rest of his career.
 
Back
Top