There has been yet more fawning coverage of Peter Lawwell's stewardship of Celtic in recent days - all of it pretty richly deserved, you have to say.
Make no mistake, while Rangers flounder, Lawwell revels in all this milk and honey stuff at Celtic. He is a courteous man, and diplomatic to a tee about his Glasgow rivals, but Lawwell still has a keen sense of Old Firm one-upmanship about him. He is in heaven right now.
Celtic's newly published audited accounts make highly impressive reading. To have generated income of £76 million in this crisis-age in Scottish football is about as close to booming as you can get.
Celtic are financially sound, are back in the Champions League, and have a guaranteed £20 million slewing its way into next year's figures following the sales of Gary Hooper, Victor Wanyama and Kelvin Wilson. In Lawwell's case, what's not to be smug about?
As he has made clear, Lawwell also prizes Neil Lennon, and at every turn openly urges the Celtic manager to stay at the club. This bit, though, is complicated.
For Lennon to leave - which he plans to do at some point - there needs to be a surge of suitors calling him. To date, no such queue exists, despite Lennon aimlessly being linked with just about every job in England that comes up.
Lennon himself remains diplomatic in front of microphones, forever stating that he adores his job at Celtic. This, frankly, is a necessary sop.
Of course he finds Celtic satisfying, but it is a plain fact, and should go without saying, that Lennon would enjoy a crack at the Barclays Premier League. The opportunity, though, has to present itself.
Lawwell and Lennon are quite a marital pair. They are different characters, and not without their behind-the-scenes tensions, but they appear to be very good in tandem for Celtic. Certainly, Lennon in two years has shown an adeptness in European football which has buffed up his credentials.
Lawwell also has Rangers in his sights, in another, more calculating way.
The Celtic CEO is aware that, due to the incredible calamity at Ibrox, his club has been handed a huge advantage in all sorts of ways. Lawwell's aim is to preserve that advantage long-term, to vouchsafe it as a constant so that, when Rangers do eventually return, Celtic are able to ascend in gears and keep ahead.
The Lawwell plan is this: he aims to store up Celtic's fiscal health and cash-reserve so that, when normality eventually returns to football in the city of Glasgow, Celtic can maintain their ascendancy.
Who knows how this plan will work out? The fates of football are thoroughly erratic. Will Celtic, or Rangers, be the top dog in Scottish football in five years' time? I know where my bet would go, but football can still produce its own random chaos. It remains an unknown.
Lawwell and Celtic have one other goal on the horizon - which is to somehow escape the confines of Scottish football and "release" the club's truer value on a greater stage elsewhere.
The Celtic CEO has looked on in fascination as Uefa have been bombarded with pleas from various European quarters for cross-border leagues, such as the mooted Russia-Ukraine model.
Lawwell knows all about Alexei Miller, the CEO of the Gazprom giant, and a Zenit St Petersburg fanatic, who is pushing all the way towards a Russia-Ukraine league. Miller enjoys a very powerful influence, though thus far Uefa have resisted him.
Celtic (and a revived Rangers for that matter) would find fabulous wealth beyond Scotland's shores. The club could play to 80,000 crowds were the likes of Manchester United, Arsenal and Liverpool showing up at Parkhead, instead of St Johnsone, St Mirren and Caley Thistle.
This is to put it pretty bluntly - and even disparagingly - but it is the truth.
It is something Lawell remains acutely aware of. He keeps up to speed on everything that is happening in regard to the evolution of European club football.
In the meantime, back in the old country, Lawwell and Celtic are doing not bad, not bad at all.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article