Well lady’s & Gentlemen I hope I am proved wrong, but I am getting the feeling we will end up with someone far worse the JJ was and more has been crap players on free transfers or loans. so far what has TS actually achieved apart from buy the Club? And he wants premier League football 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣👎👎👎👎
Let me guess you are a glass half empty sort of person.
No actually I own 5 companies and have supported CAFC since 1968. 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Only since 1968?
Just another Johnny-come-lately. *shakes head in despair*
Surely any manager with an ounce of sense won't agree to performance-related clauses when they have no control over recruitment.
Especially when they already have a job. The only type of manager you’re attracting with a contract like that is another Slade or Adkins. I.e, washed up and out of work.
Thomas initially said it could take up to
preseason to find a suitable replacement. Saying yesterday that they
were still searching within the same time frame is consistent with
that, but two journalists leaked last week that Ben Garner had been
offered a deal subject to final terms being agreed. It probably had, but don’t know who their sources were and Thomas probably didn’t
want it made public then unless he was using Ben as a stalking horse
to gauge public reaction. If so, he can’t think that highly of him.
Whatever the reason, social media went into meltdown with an
outpouring of WTF’ery.
He
knew that when asked about the reports, replying that nothing had
been decided and that they were still interviewing, lots of good
candidates etc. If that initial fan response did sway his thinking,
then as the deal hadn’t been finalised, and with Ben not having
agreed to contract performance related milestones, Thomas kept his options open. I guess he’s just being cautious and didn’t
have the confidence to offer a contract without a performance related
element based on what happened with Nigel the 1st. We
now know of another candidate who was subsequently given permission
to talk to him, let’s call him Nigel the 2nd!
Thomas
can’t control how any of this gets reported by the external media,
hence what we see appears to be mixed messaging, which he seems to
address by answering direct questions put to him using ‘linked in?’
knowing it will end up broadcast more widely.
The
irony is that since Ben Garner was ‘not’ announced, opinions
towards him appear to have softened. I hope Thomas takes that into
account when making a final decision, but whatever happens now, and
assuming Ben doesn’t tell him where to go, from the outside it
appears to be an awful mess and what should be a good news story for
us is rapidly turning into a farce because of, dare I say it,
dithering and delay.
I’m
just offering one possible explanation that seems to fit what I think
I know.
Aren’t all managers jobs performance related, squad or no squad, control or no control? I don’t believe TS had anybody lined up to replace Jacko, but I still believe Jacko lost his job because of the shameful performance at Ipswich, as that event made up Sandgaard’s mind for him. A manager at, say, Oldham can still get sacked with poor performances even with no resources. Yet there will be plenty who would apply even for the job at Oldham. If a manager doesn’t want a performance related contract they can surely look elsewhere.
Aren’t all managers jobs performance related, squad or no squad, control or no control? I don’t believe TS had anybody lined up to replace Jacko, but I still believe Jacko lost his job because of the shameful performance at Ipswich, as that event made up Sandgaard’s mind for him. A manager at, say, Oldham can still get sacked with poor performances even with no resources. Yet there will be plenty who would apply even for the job at Oldham. If a manager doesn’t want a performance related contract they can surely look elsewhere.
Compensation related - you can be sacked at any time but TS wants minimal payoff.
Being in America for many years i suspect that TS does not fully grasp the irony of supporting a football club like ours. We are not blinded by the star studded snake oiled fantasma of tippy tappy breathless media orgasmistic now now now stellar football. It's the local team my grandad and uncles agonised over, they no doubt suffered the same long periods of mediocre interspersed with short green uplands of promise culminating in the fleeting phantom of success soon to be whisked away in front of their eyes. That's what my forbears left me, a grinding gnawing hope that one day just one day...
Surely any manager with an ounce of sense won't agree to performance-related clauses when they have no control over recruitment.
Which is why, imo, we still don’t have one.
No manager, half a squad and the season starts earlier than ever before, but better not suggest other clubs are ahead of us.
Ben Garner took over Swindon with about 7 players and after Bristol Rovers didn't work out he didn't have many options of getting a manager's job in the EFL. Charlton would be a step up despite the implosion of the last decade or so at Cafc.
Just a gut instinct but ever since JJ left I have been convinced that the decision would be made on the 31/5 or 1/6.
I believe Cawley contacts have given him the correct information and unless Thomas Sandgaard has done a U-turn because of the initial negativity when RC did the scoop then Ben Garner will be the next person in the hot seat.
Just wondered if we were still paying Adkins salary , and whether thats come out of this season budget, how much would we have had to pay to fire him?
It doesnt really matter what budget it comes out of because its all out of Thomas's pocket. My guess is coincidentally about the same as the fee we agreed for Kirk, that Blackpool didn't exercise.
I don't think that in its self will influence the summer. We paid relatively big money for Aneke and Fraser after Adkins was sacked.
As with early Roland it isn't how much has been spent, it's how it's been spent is the problem.
Aren’t all managers jobs performance related, squad or no squad, control or no control? I don’t believe TS had anybody lined up to replace Jacko, but I still believe Jacko lost his job because of the shameful performance at Ipswich, as that event made up Sandgaard’s mind for him. A manager at, say, Oldham can still get sacked with poor performances even with no resources. Yet there will be plenty who would apply even for the job at Oldham. If a manager doesn’t want a performance related contract they can surely look elsewhere.
Why would a manager except a performance related contract if he doesn't have a say on players. You can't say to a manager that you have to finish shall we say top six without having a big say on who we sign. The only manager who would take the job under these conditions would be an out of work manager desperate for a job.
Aren’t all managers jobs performance related, squad or no squad, control or no control? I don’t believe TS had anybody lined up to replace Jacko, but I still believe Jacko lost his job because of the shameful performance at Ipswich, as that event made up Sandgaard’s mind for him. A manager at, say, Oldham can still get sacked with poor performances even with no resources. Yet there will be plenty who would apply even for the job at Oldham. If a manager doesn’t want a performance related contract they can surely look elsewhere.
Why would a manager except a performance related contract if he doesn't have a say on players. You can't say to a manager that you have to finish shall we say top six without having a big say on who we sign. The only manager who would take the job under these conditions would be an out of work manager desperate for a job.
All managers have an ego, some bigger than others, the "I could be the one that....." really appeals to a lot of them. That's why players like Tony Watt keep getting signed.
Surely any manager with an ounce of sense won't agree to performance-related clauses when they have no control over recruitment.
A good agent will try and negotiate better terms or write in mitigation clauses. They would also look for bonus clauses, playing budget increase, etc. The list is endless but they should eventually lead to an agreement, but that is what takes the time. Performance targets are not the worst thing in the world as long as the starting point is acceptable and the step up for achieving them worthwhile. It could be argued that they are better than rolling contracts. All in the detail.
’No’ is often the start of negotiations, ask any parent of teenagers. If they are still talking then at least it would appear to be something both sides want.
IMO the leaking of the deal was pressure put on by the agent and the ‘we are still interviewing’ the response. All part of the game. I suspect the ‘hopefully by mid June’ and the ‘a lot of good candidates’ are as well.
Well lady’s & Gentlemen I hope I am proved wrong, but I am getting the feeling we will end up with someone far worse the JJ was and more has been crap players on free transfers or loans. so far what has TS actually achieved apart from buy the Club? And he wants premier League football 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣👎👎👎👎
Let me guess you are a glass half empty sort of person.
No actually I own 5 companies and have supported CAFC since 1968. 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Welp, that's my non-sequitur of the week.
None-Sequitur a noun is not the correct word but a sense of humour might help 🤣🤣🤣
None of us know what's going on behind the scenes, or if they do, they are quite rightly not telling.
Of course, we all believe that we should have had a manager appointed already or asap. But much of the meltdown and anxt of the past week has been triggered because the Ben Garner situation was leaked.
New manager won’t be Michael Beale, he’s been given permission by Villa to speak to QPR.
Big miss IMO but unlikely to have happened given our League 1 status
Plus his salary … was way out of league one
His salary at Villa was less than Adkins was on here and very similar to what Bowyer was on.
Sure i read somewhere (which of course doesn't mean it's true) that Beale is on around 600k a year at Villa. I'd find it hard to believe that Adkins who'd been out of work for 2 years was on more than that.
We know that Michael Beale applied the first time around and had an interview according to Thomas Sandgaard. Thomas then used Michael Beale as a yardstick that we wanted a more ambitious appointment.
So unless Sandgaard tried to head hunt this time why would Beale apply again when his stock is high and he can get a job in the Championship ?
Aren’t all managers jobs performance related, squad or no squad, control or no control? I don’t believe TS had anybody lined up to replace Jacko, but I still believe Jacko lost his job because of the shameful performance at Ipswich, as that event made up Sandgaard’s mind for him. A manager at, say, Oldham can still get sacked with poor performances even with no resources. Yet there will be plenty who would apply even for the job at Oldham. If a manager doesn’t want a performance related contract they can surely look elsewhere.
I agree
Finishing 13th made it cheaper for TS to remove Jacko, but if we had finished the season well, playing good football and showing real signs that we were building something, I'm sure Jacko would still be with us.
New manager won’t be Michael Beale, he’s been given permission by Villa to speak to QPR.
Big miss IMO but unlikely to have happened given our League 1 status
Plus his salary … was way out of league one
His salary at Villa was less than Adkins was on here and very similar to what Bowyer was on.
Sure i read somewhere (which of course doesn't mean it's true) that Beale is on around 600k a year at Villa. I'd find it hard to believe that Adkins who'd been out of work for 2 years was on more than that.
I believe it was reported at the time Bowyer signed his new contract, Roland was paying him £400k pa.
New manager won’t be Michael Beale, he’s been given permission by Villa to speak to QPR.
Big miss IMO but unlikely to have happened given our League 1 status
Plus his salary … was way out of league one
His salary at Villa was less than Adkins was on here and very similar to what Bowyer was on.
Sure i read somewhere (which of course doesn't mean it's true) that Beale is on around 600k a year at Villa. I'd find it hard to believe that Adkins who'd been out of work for 2 years was on more than that.
Remember Adkins doesn't have to work and was alleged to have turned down championship clubs, and recommended Crosby in his place, between Hull and us.
He also left Hull when he could have stayed. Like Warburton now he wasn't a jobbing manager desperate for the next job to pay the bills.
Aren’t all managers jobs performance related, squad or no squad, control or no control?
Yes. But failure isn't explicitly written into manager's contracts as a standard in this industry, creating a much smaller pay-off, something TS is trying to do.
If a manager doesn’t want a performance related contract they can surely look elsewhere.
And I think that's what they'll do.
At best this policy protects the club from paying a large fee to a failing manager, and at worst it limits our choice of managers to the small pool that would accept its terms!
Aren’t all managers jobs performance related, squad or no squad, control or no control? I don’t believe TS had anybody lined up to replace Jacko, but I still believe Jacko lost his job because of the shameful performance at Ipswich, as that event made up Sandgaard’s mind for him. A manager at, say, Oldham can still get sacked with poor performances even with no resources. Yet there will be plenty who would apply even for the job at Oldham. If a manager doesn’t want a performance related contract they can surely look elsewhere.
I agree
Finishing 13th made it cheaper for TS to remove Jacko, but if we had finished the season well, playing good football and showing real signs that we were building something, I'm sure Jacko would still be with us.
Did I read at the time of Jacko's sacking, Thomas mentioned something about unattractive football and that he wanted to see the team play in a more appealing way? Something like that.
Comments
Just another Johnny-come-lately. *shakes head in despair*
Thomas initially said it could take up to preseason to find a suitable replacement. Saying yesterday that they were still searching within the same time frame is consistent with that, but two journalists leaked last week that Ben Garner had been offered a deal subject to final terms being agreed. It probably had, but don’t know who their sources were and Thomas probably didn’t want it made public then unless he was using Ben as a stalking horse to gauge public reaction. If so, he can’t think that highly of him. Whatever the reason, social media went into meltdown with an outpouring of WTF’ery.
He knew that when asked about the reports, replying that nothing had been decided and that they were still interviewing, lots of good candidates etc. If that initial fan response did sway his thinking, then as the deal hadn’t been finalised, and with Ben not having agreed to contract performance related milestones, Thomas kept his options open. I guess he’s just being cautious and didn’t have the confidence to offer a contract without a performance related element based on what happened with Nigel the 1st. We now know of another candidate who was subsequently given permission to talk to him, let’s call him Nigel the 2nd!
Thomas can’t control how any of this gets reported by the external media, hence what we see appears to be mixed messaging, which he seems to address by answering direct questions put to him using ‘linked in?’ knowing it will end up broadcast more widely.
The irony is that since Ben Garner was ‘not’ announced, opinions towards him appear to have softened. I hope Thomas takes that into account when making a final decision, but whatever happens now, and assuming Ben doesn’t tell him where to go, from the outside it appears to be an awful mess and what should be a good news story for us is rapidly turning into a farce because of, dare I say it, dithering and delay.
I’m just offering one possible explanation that seems to fit what I think I know.
I don’t believe TS had anybody lined up to replace Jacko, but I still believe Jacko lost his job because of the shameful performance at Ipswich, as that event made up Sandgaard’s mind for him.
A manager at, say, Oldham can still get sacked with poor performances even with no resources. Yet there will be plenty who would apply even for the job at Oldham.
If a manager doesn’t want a performance related contract they can surely look elsewhere.
TS is beginning to right royally cheese me off.
Ben Garner took over Swindon with about 7 players and after Bristol Rovers didn't work out he didn't have many options of getting a manager's job in the EFL. Charlton would be a step up despite the implosion of the last decade or so at Cafc.
Just a gut instinct but ever since JJ left I have been convinced that the decision would be made on the 31/5 or 1/6.
I believe Cawley contacts have given him the correct information and unless Thomas Sandgaard has done a U-turn because of the initial negativity when RC did the scoop then Ben Garner will be the next person in the hot seat.
I don't think that in its self will influence the summer. We paid relatively big money for Aneke and Fraser after Adkins was sacked.
As with early Roland it isn't how much has been spent, it's how it's been spent is the problem.
You can't say to a manager that you have to finish shall we say top six without having a big say on who we sign.
The only manager who would take the job under these conditions would be an out of work manager desperate for a job.
’No’ is often the start of negotiations, ask any parent of teenagers. If they are still talking then at least it would appear to be something both sides want.
IMO the leaking of the deal was pressure put on by the agent and the ‘we are still interviewing’ the response. All part of the game. I suspect the ‘hopefully by mid June’ and the ‘a lot of good candidates’ are as well.
Of course, we all believe that we should have had a manager appointed already or asap.
But much of the meltdown and anxt of the past week has been triggered because the Ben Garner situation was leaked.
We know that Michael Beale applied the first time around and had an interview according to Thomas Sandgaard. Thomas then used Michael Beale as a yardstick that we wanted a more ambitious appointment.
So unless Sandgaard tried to head hunt this time why would Beale apply again when his stock is high and he can get a job in the Championship ?
Finishing 13th made it cheaper for TS to remove Jacko, but if we had finished the season well, playing good football and showing real signs that we were building something, I'm sure Jacko would still be with us.
He also left Hull when he could have stayed. Like Warburton now he wasn't a jobbing manager desperate for the next job to pay the bills.
seth plum said: And I think that's what they'll do.
At best this policy protects the club from paying a large fee to a failing manager, and at worst it limits our choice of managers to the small pool that would accept its terms!