🚨 𝗔𝗜𝗗𝗘𝗡 𝗠𝗰𝗚𝗘𝗔𝗗𝗬 𝗤𝗨𝗘𝗦𝗧𝗜𝗢𝗡𝗦 𝗖𝗘𝗟𝗧𝗜𝗖 𝗥𝗘𝗖𝗥𝗨𝗜𝗧𝗠𝗘𝗡𝗧 & 𝗪𝗔𝗥𝗡𝗦 𝗢𝗩𝗘𝗥 𝗥𝗘𝗟𝗜𝗔𝗡𝗖𝗘 𝗢𝗡 𝗠𝗰𝗚𝗥𝗘𝗚𝗢𝗥 𝗔𝗡𝗗 𝗙𝗢𝗥𝗥𝗘𝗦𝗧

Aiden McGeady has raised fresh questions over Celtic’s recruitment structure after watching Martin O’Neill’s side suffer another damaging defeat to Rangers, with the former Hoops winger questioning who is ultimately accountable for the club’s transfer decisions.

Celtic’s recruitment has come under increasing scrutiny since the departure of head of football operations Paul Tisdale in January, with the club still operating without a clearly defined replacement for the role. McGeady believes the lack of an obvious figure in charge makes it difficult to determine who should answer when signings fail to improve the squad.

The issue has become even more significant following Celtic’s latest Old Firm setback.

 

Martin O’Neill’s team were beaten 1-0 by Rangers at Celtic Park on Sunday, completing a difficult run for the Hoops and leaving supporters with more questions about the direction of the squad.

For McGeady, however, the problems extend beyond one result.

He believes Celtic have created a situation where too many recruitment decisions can be attributed to a collective process, while the squad continues to depend heavily on players who have been at the club for years.

And two names in particular stood out to him: Callum McGregor and James Forrest.

 

‘WHO ANSWERS TO THAT?’

Speaking on the Open Goal podcast, McGeady questioned the absence of a head of recruitment or director of football following Tisdale’s departure.

“The thing for me is that because there’s no head of recruitment as such, there’s nobody really to answer to it,” McGeady said.

“So it’s almost like a collective, you’re stronger as a collective so that no one can really say that ‘he’s to blame for signing these players’. Because if there’s a head of recruitment in charge, he’s getting the flak, isn’t he?”

 

The comments go straight to one of the biggest structural questions surrounding Celtic.

Tisdale left the club at the beginning of January, alongside manager Wilfried Nancy, during a major period of upheaval. Celtic subsequently relied on figures within the club to help manage recruitment, while the long-term structure remained unclear.

 

That uncertainty has continued into the current campaign.

Celtic have recruitment personnel working behind the scenes, and Martin O’Neill has previously identified Mark Cooper as an important figure in the process. O’Neill has also said that recruitment recommendations eventually go through the coaching staff before decisions are made.

 

But that is precisely what McGeady is questioning.

He wants to know where the final responsibility sits.

“I don’t know why they don’t have one,” he continued. “There’s no director of football either. Tisdale left in January and there’s been no director of football, no head of performance.”

That does not necessarily mean Celtic have no recruitment process.

Instead, McGeady’s argument is about accountability.

If several people are involved in identifying, assessing and approving a player, who takes responsibility if that player does not improve the team?

That question becomes particularly relevant when the same squad weaknesses appear to remain from one transfer window to the next.

 

McGEADY’S BIGGER CONCERN — WHY ARE McGREGOR AND FORREST STILL UNTOUCHABLE?

For McGeady, the recruitment debate cannot be separated from what is happening on the pitch.

 

The former Celtic winger was struck by the fact that, despite years of squad-building and numerous attacking signings, two of Celtic’s most established players remain arguably the most trusted options in their positions.

Callum McGregor is now 33, while James Forrest is 35.

Yet McGeady believes Celtic have still failed to bring in players capable of seriously challenging them for starting places.

“I was thinking coming home from the game, people are still saying James Forrest is the best winger at the club, and Callum McGregor’s still the best number six,” he said.

 

“Where can you have another club where they don’t buy people to actually compete with them and replace them?”

That is perhaps the most uncomfortable part of his argument.

McGeady is not simply questioning the age of the two players.

 

He is questioning the development of competition within the squad.

For a club competing at Celtic’s level, recruitment is not only about filling positions when a player leaves. It is also about creating competition, succession and different tactical options.

McGeady believes Celtic have not done enough of that.

 

“Competition breeds winners, it breeds success,” he added.

And then came his most pointed criticism.

“Celtic have signed a lot of wingers, but then who answers to that for signing all these wingers that aren’t as good as James Forrest, who’s 35? And they’ll just do it again in January.”

 

That statement captures the frustration behind his argument.

Celtic have brought in attacking players, yet McGeady believes the overall effect has not been enough to change the hierarchy within the team.

 

If Forrest remains the player Celtic supporters and analysts consider their best winger despite being 35, then the question becomes whether recruitment has actually addressed the position.

 

TWELVE SIGNINGS — BUT ONLY TWO STARTED

 

McGeady also pointed to the composition of the team against Rangers.

 

His concern was not simply that Celtic lost.

 

It was that the side appeared to lack the qualities he expected to see after another significant recruitment campaign.

 

“I’m looking at that team on Sunday and going, ‘where’s the pace?’” he said.

 

“Twelve signings and two started. Half your pace is on the bench.”

 

That statistic, as presented by McGeady, formed the basis of his wider criticism.

 

The point he was making was that Celtic appeared to have added numbers without necessarily adding enough of the specific qualities the team needed.

 

And against Rangers, that became particularly visible.

 

The Old Firm game was not merely another Premiership fixture.

 

It was a match in which Celtic needed intensity, movement and attacking threat, yet McGeady felt the team lacked the pace required to consistently hurt their rivals.

 

Rangers ultimately left Celtic Park with a 1-0 victory, adding another defeat to a difficult period for O’Neill’s side. The result was discussed extensively on Open Goal, with McGeady returning to the programme to assess what has gone wrong.

 

McGEADY REJECTS THE FIXTURE CONGESTION EXCUSE

 

One potential explanation for Celtic’s recent performances is the demanding schedule.

The club had midweek fixtures in each of the final five weeks before the current international break.

But McGeady was not convinced.

 

“You’re looking for an excuse when you’re saying that,” he said.

“It’s just games of football. Everybody’s done it, played Wednesday-Saturday, Thursday-Sunday. It’s no different to previous campaigns.”

Instead, McGeady believes the issue is psychological.

 

“For me, it looks like nerves. I just think they’re nervous. It looks like players are playing well within themselves.”

That observation adds another layer to his criticism.

If Celtic are physically capable of handling the fixture schedule but are still producing cautious performances, then the problem may not simply be fatigue.

McGeady sees a team lacking confidence and playing below its potential.

And again, he connects that back to recruitment.

‘WHERE’S THE PACE?’

The question of pace has become one of the defining themes of McGeady’s assessment.

Modern football increasingly demands players capable of stretching defensive lines, attacking space and changing the speed of a game.

McGeady believes Celtic have plenty of players, but not necessarily enough players who can change the rhythm of matches.

That distinction is important.

Recruitment numbers alone do not guarantee squad improvement.

A team can sign several players and still have the same weaknesses if those additions do not provide qualities that were missing.

That appears to be McGeady’s central concern.

He looks at Celtic’s squad and sees a team that has recruited extensively but has not sufficiently challenged established players.

And if Forrest remains the standout winger while McGregor remains the preferred number six, he believes Celtic have to ask whether their recruitment strategy is actually working.

 

THE MALONEY QUESTION

There is also the question of Shaun Maloney.

Maloney has previously been heavily involved in Celtic’s recruitment process, particularly during the upheaval following Tisdale’s departure.

 

Earlier in the year, McGeady himself had praised Maloney’s work and said he had been heavily involved in recruitment while taking on several responsibilities at the club.

 

The situation subsequently evolved.

Martin O’Neill said during the summer that Maloney was no longer handling recruitment to the same extent and would instead concentrate on coaching, while Mark Cooper was highlighted as a key figure within the recruitment process.

 

That makes McGeady’s latest comments particularly interesting.

The criticism is not necessarily aimed at one individual.

Instead, it is directed at the structure around the recruitment process.

 

Who identifies the players?

Who decides which positions require strengthening?

Who determines whether a signing is good enough?

Who is responsible if several players arrive but do not improve the starting XI?

And, crucially, who makes sure the same problems are not simply carried into another transfer window?

Those are the questions McGeady wants Celtic to answer.

JANUARY COULD BRING THE ISSUE BACK INTO FOCUS

The January transfer window is likely to provide another test of Celtic’s recruitment strategy.

If the club believes the squad needs additional pace, creativity and competition for established players, then January represents an opportunity to address those issues.

But McGeady has already warned that simply signing more players will not necessarily solve the problem.

The challenge is identifying players capable of changing the level of competition within the squad.

That means Celtic need additions who can genuinely challenge established starters rather than simply increase squad numbers.

 

Forrest and McGregor may still have important roles to play, but McGeady’s question is whether Celtic are adequately preparing for the future while those players remain central.

 

THE BIGGER CELTIC QUESTION

Ultimately, McGeady’s criticism goes beyond the defeat to Rangers.

It goes beyond Forrest.

It goes beyond McGregor.

And it even goes beyond the current recruitment team.

His argument is about whether Celtic have a clearly defined football structure capable of identifying weaknesses, recruiting solutions and taking responsibility for the results.

The club has already experienced major changes in its football leadership during 2026. Tisdale departed in January, while Celtic have continued to operate through a broader recruitment structure rather than immediately appointing a replacement in the same role.

For McGeady, the danger is that this becomes a repeating cycle.

A weakness is identified.

Players are signed.

 

The players do not immediately displace the established starters.

The same weakness remains.

Another transfer window arrives.

And the process begins again.

 

His fear is that Celtic could simply “do it again in January.”

That is why his comments about Forrest and McGregor are so significant.

The issue is not whether either player still has something to offer. Their continued involvement demonstrates that Celtic still value what they bring.

The issue is whether the club is recruiting players capable of eventually taking their places or, at the very least, pushing them hard enough to make the starting XI genuinely competitive.

 

And after watching Celtic struggle for pace and creativity against Rangers, McGeady clearly believes that question can no longer be ignored.

For Celtic supporters, the next transfer window could therefore be about much more than another list of incoming names.

 

It could become a test of whether the club has finally established who is responsible for recruitment, what the team actually needs, and whether new signings are capable of changing the starting XI.

Because as McGeady’s comments make clear, the issue is no longer simply how many players Celtic sign.

It is whether those players are actually good enough to change the team.

And with the pressure building around Martin O’Neill’s side after another Old Firm defeat, that question is likely to follow Celtic all the way into January.