Jump to content
IGNORED

Is It Really Just A 12 Month Contract?


Tomo

Recommended Posts

Doesn't that really tell the story?

I think I heard GT saying that?

When was the last time a Full Time Manager was given such a short term contract? 

Just sums it up...

This proves that the board have no real trust in appointing the 'rookie'

Feel for fans, feel for Dean.

Wrong Decision!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Tomo said:

Doesn't that really tell the story?

I think I heard GT saying that?

When was the last time a Full Time Manager was given such a short term contract? 

Just sums it up...

This proves that the board have no real trust in appointing the 'rookie'

Feel for fans, feel for Dean.

Wrong Decision!

 

No. 12 month ROLLING contract. Still pretty cheap to fire, but some security for Dean. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 20/07/2020 at 19:55, ChippenhamRed said:

Not a very convincing article...and it’s the Mail...but even so....

 

On 24/07/2020 at 13:16, Taunton_BCFC said:

We will never get another chance to get a manager like CH in! And we’re going to **** it up 

 

Just now, Southport Red said:

No. 12 month ROLLING contract. Still pretty cheap to fire, but some security for Dean. 

Still an admittance that even the board are 'not sure' of this appointment - what did LJ have? 4 year deal?

It really is comical!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It kinda had to be 1 year, 2 years max given his inexperience. You don’t want to be paying him off in 12 months time. This does raise the concern though....what players will want to sign for us and play under Holden when his contract is so short?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Chappers said:

Jeez, in current economic circumstances it makes perfect sense for both parties. It’s like moaning for the hell of it tonight.

But not exactly backing the new manager after such a rigorous selection process though, is it? 

If the club wanted to make a statement about backing their man, a three year deal with a termination clause specifying the maximum pay out would have given a much greater sign of intent. 

The termination clause would obviously be between Holden and the Club, all we would see is a manager firmly backed with a strong deal. 

One year rolling suggests "we'll see how it goes" which is totally at odds with the statement about being convinced he's the man to take us forward. 

It's all of these contradictions (see the Ashton Out thread for many more) that add up to this omnishambles of a recruitment process. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Said elsewhere, it's quite smart.

It means that if it goes wrong we can dispose of Holden relatively cheaply.

Alternatively if football finances rebuild within the next 12 months and he keeps us ticking over in midtable, then we can replace him with a bigger name in summer 2021 with a mutually acceptable parting of the ways.

Wonder what the contractual terms/length of Downing and Simpson are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The issue isn’t dean Holden getting a 12 month rolling contract, it was giving LJ a 4 year deal.  I guess if @ExiledAjaxis right, LJ has 2 years left unless there has been a mutual termination or clauses in the termination.  If not, likelihood is we will continue to pay him until he finds another job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

The issue isn’t dean Holden getting a 12 month rolling contract, it was giving LJ a 4 year deal.  I guess if @ExiledAjaxis right, LJ has 2 years left unless there has been a mutual termination or clauses in the termination.  If not, likelihood is we will continue to pay him until he finds another job.

Scandalously I was wrong. He was given the 4 years at the end of last season. May 2019.

So we're paying off three years.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/48382887

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Devereux said:

It kinda had to be 1 year, 2 years max given his inexperience. You don’t want to be paying him off in 12 months time. This does raise the concern though....what players will want to sign for us and play under Holden when his contract is so short?

I give it 3 months max

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Midlands Robin said:

But not exactly backing the new manager after such a rigorous selection process though, is it? 

If the club wanted to make a statement about backing their man, a three year deal with a termination clause specifying the maximum pay out would have given a much greater sign of intent. 

The termination clause would obviously be between Holden and the Club, all we would see is a manager firmly backed with a strong deal. 

One year rolling suggests "we'll see how it goes" which is totally at odds with the statement about being convinced he's the man to take us forward. 

It's all of these contradictions (see the Ashton Out thread for many more) that add up to this omnishambles of a recruitment process. 

I get what you're saying along with the wider point that you're making but is that really all that much different to the current rolling 12mth deal.  A 3 year deal with a termination clause which presumably wouldn't be more than 12mths anyway is essentially the same thing isn't it? (Assuming the rolling 12mths doesn't have a reduced term termination clause of some kind in it) You could of course also argue that a rolling 12mth deal has the potential to far exceed a standalone 3yr deal. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, agree that in essence the two would be the same but a three year deal to my mind sends out a stronger message. 

It's how we perceive what we see rather than what's actually written in ink which would only be between Holden and the club

"He's our man, we've given him a three year deal, we expect to be challenging for promotion and we think Dean Holden is the man to get us there." sounds like a strong backing. 

"He's our man, we've given him a 12 month rolling contract, we're not going to set targets but we want to be challenging for promotion and we think Dean Holden is the man to get us there" doesn't sound  quite so strong 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Midlands Robin said:

Yeah, agree that in essence the two would be the same but a three year deal to my mind sends out a stronger message. 

It's how we perceive what we see rather than what's actually written in ink which would only be between Holden and the club

"He's our man, we've given him a three year deal, we expect to be challenging for promotion and we think Dean Holden is the man to get us there." sounds like a strong backing. 

"He's our man, we've given him a 12 month rolling contract, we're not going to set targets but we want to be challenging for promotion and we think Dean Holden is the man to get us there" doesn't sound  quite so strong 

And..... as he’s such a great appointment why on earth are we risking losing him with only a years compensation due.... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

? I always like much how it confuses people when someone's on a rolling contract.

In fairness this does make sense.  Yes, it's a cheaper way to go about it, but it's far more sensible than giving an unproven guy a set 3 or 4 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...