Stephen McGowan has revealed that Paul Tisdale privately promoted Wilfried Nancy as a stronger fit for Celtic than Brendan Rodgers, before both he and Nancy were removed from their roles.
At the time, Celtic were searching for direction after a difficult summer and a breakdown in trust between the board and supporters. The appointment of Nancy was presented as a bold move that aligned with a wider strategy being shaped behind the scenes.
Tisdale had been brought in to modernise football operations and improve recruitment. Instead, his early months coincided with confusion, frustration, and growing concern among supporters about the club’s direction.
McGowan’s report places a key moment under the spotlight, showing how internal messaging differed sharply from what supporters were seeing on the pitch. It also highlights how quickly confidence in senior figures collapsed once results and performances failed to improve.
He said: (The Herald), “The morning after they lost the Premier Sports Cup to St Mirren Celtic’s head of football operations Paul Tisdale addressed a group of influential supporters.
“Like Nancy the Englishman was a curious appointment. Despite reinventing himself as a consultant spells at Exeter City, MK Dons, Bristol City and Stevenage offered no hint of a technical director in waiting.
“Tisdale had already overseen a dysfunctional summer window and failed to modernise or improve a recruitment system not fit for purpose. Data, bought and paid for, went unused as subjective judgements were reached on targets.
“After recommending Nancy for the job Tisdale told the audience of well-heeled supporters that the Frenchman bought into the club’s strategy in a way Brendan Rodgers never did.”
The comments give rare insight into how Rodgers was viewed internally toward the end of his second spell. Despite his success, there was clearly a belief in some quarters that his approach no longer matched the club’s long-term plans.
That belief proved costly. Nancy’s short time in charge quickly unravelled, and the idea that he was a better strategic fit failed to translate into results or stability.
Tisdale’s role also came under intense scrutiny as the season drifted. Questions around recruitment, planning, and the use of data became louder with each passing week.
The fact that both men are now gone underlines how badly the gamble failed. What was presented as a clear strategic vision collapsed under pressure from poor performances and supporter unrest.
McGowan’s reporting shows that the issues ran deeper than one bad run of games. They were rooted in how decisions were justified and communicated at senior level.
For many supporters, the revelation confirms long-held suspicions about disconnects inside the club. Trust was damaged not just by results, but by the sense that lessons from the past were being ignored.
However, the episode leaves lasting questions about governance and judgement. It serves as a warning about forcing ideology over experience at a club where pressure is constant.
McGowan’s account pulls back the curtain on a critical moment. It shows how quickly confidence can turn to disbelief when strategy and reality drift too far apart.
