It seems that opinion is quite divided about whether a move to Celtic is one Rodgers should take/could benefit from or not. On a quick skim of the thread the ratio of reasonably discernible opinions breaks down to about 29 positive to 16 negative so far. I think I'm in the positive camp, so 30 to 16 at the time of writing... I've taken ages to hit the post button but I'm not gonna count again.
A number of people have pointed to Neil Lennon moving from managing Celtic to managing Bolton as evidence of Celtic being a bad move for BR, but like Alonsoisared said, you can distinguish the circumstances. Celtic was Lennon's first job in management and he was a Celtic old boy whose success might have been seen as a result of his particular fit at that club that might not translate elsewhere. Rodgers' career to date already involves considerable experience in the English league system with the main thing missing being silverware.
I think an exit stage-left to Celtic could do him well so that he can seize some trophies, gain some more European experience without tremendous pressure and have a good chance at recasting himself as a promising young manager who has accumulated valuable experience rather than a young manager who got a big chance too early. As long as BR aspires to big jobs in future there's also something to be said for taking the 'different' option and being successful rather than getting pulled into a grind and becoming known as another safe mid-table guy or a relegation scrapper, those kind of labels are hard to get rid of.
Some have mentioned the risk of failing to win at Celtic given the limited competition, but a manager can fail to meet expectations anywhere. A manager who would decline the Celtic job purely based on fear of failing to win titles might as well retire.
