[cite]Posted By: Valley McMoist[/cite]I'd forgotten that we had McKenzie on our books
mmm perhaps we should have forgot to pay him. What do you reckon he's on? £3,000 a week? 26 weeks @ £3,000 = £78,000 which equates to an hourly rate of £25,000 if we just count League appearances.
[cite]Posted By: Addick Addict[/cite]Almost a whole season at the Club and yet to make a start for us. Anyone know whether he signed a one year contract because the way he's going he could become a bigger "legend" than Cory Gibbs.
Cory Gibbs is playing for the New England Revolution in Major League Soccer, and playing very well.
Nearly four years after being injured just prior to Germany '06 and signing a two-year deal with Charlton, he may force himself back into the US team's World Cup setup.
So before giving up on Leon ... or cue a new thread on Charlton's medical treatment ...
[cite]Posted By: Addick Addict[/cite]Almost a whole season at the Club and yet to make a start for us. Anyone know whether he signed a one year contract because the way he's going he could become a bigger "legend" than Cory Gibbs.
Cory Gibbs is playing for the New England Revolution in Major League Soccer, and playing very well.
Nearly four years after being injured just prior to Germany '06 and signing a two-year deal with Charlton, he may force himself back into the US team's World Cup setup.
So before giving up on Leon ... or cue a new thread on Charlton's medical treatment ...
I hear what you say A A but the situation is slightly different here. On the one hand McKenzie came to us with a history of injury problems (as evidenced by the fact that he started just 19 out of 92 League games in his last two seasons for Coventry) and on the other we can't afford to pay a player to sit in the stands. If he wants to play on a Non Contract basis (say £3K a game as opposed to the £25K a match he's reaped to date) then that's a different matter.
when people don't like a manager they can moan/ridicule about whatever decisions he makes - would have moaned if he'd played an unfit McKenzie and results had been the same or if he'd aggravated an injury again
[cite]Posted By: Addick Addict[/cite]Almost a whole season at the Club and yet to make a start for us. Anyone know whether he signed a one year contract because the way he's going he could become a bigger "legend" than Cory Gibbs.
Cory Gibbs is playing for the New England Revolution in Major League Soccer, and playing very well.
Nearly four years after being injured just prior to Germany '06 and signing a two-year deal with Charlton, he may force himself back into the US team's World Cup setup.
So before giving up on Leon ... or cue a new thread on Charlton's medical treatment ...
I hear what you say A A but the situation is slightly different here. On the one hand McKenzie came to us with a history of injury problems (as evidenced by the fact that he started just 19 out of 92 League games in his last two seasons for Coventry) and on the other we can't afford to pay a player to sit in the stands. If he wants to play on a Non Contract basis (say £3K a game as opposed to the £25K a match he's reaped to date) then that's a different matter.
None of this appears to be directly McKenzie's fault.
He came here with a recent history of serious injury, and was given a medical.
It was the club's decision to give him a contract.
Now, as often happens, a player picks up a different injury (often as a result of not being match fit - no reserve team, anybody?), eventually comes back to full training and general fitness, but because there's no opportunity to get match fit, he picks up yet another injury as soon as he starts playing again competitively.
And so the cycle continues.
Whether we can afford an injured player is subjective - after all, his contract has already been budgeted for.
Generally, that's no different to any employee getting an illness and unable to work for a period.
[cite]Posted By: Salad[/cite]when people don't like a manager they can moan/ridicule about whatever decisions he makes - would have moaned if he'd played an unfit McKenzie and results had been the same or if he'd aggravated an injury again
It's got nothing to do with "liking the Manager". It was just a poor decision to sign a crock in our financial position. What we should have said is "prove your fitness and we'll sign you." Does 19 starts and 5 goals in two seasons suggest it was worth taking the risk?
Hopefully this thread will come back and haunt me and Leon will prove out saviour in the Play offs. I'm not looking to go into hiding quite yet though.
"Generally, that's no different to any employee getting an illness and unable to work for a period."
But that's not the case here Oggy. We knew his history. It did not call for a subjective decision but an objective one. A Health Insurance Underwiter looking at a potential customer with a history of illness wouldn't take the risk so why, when we don't have hundreds of thousands of pounds to throw around, did we?
As I say I would love to be proved wrong, so much so that it would be a pleasure for this to be a "sticky" if and when it is!
No I was referring to the criticism of not rushing McKenzie back. You make a valid point, perhaps the manager/club knew he was a gamble but felt it was worthwhile because if it paid off then we would have an influential player above the standard of this league but being paid below the market rate.
[cite]Posted By: Addick Addict[/cite]"Generally, that's no different to any employee getting an illness and unable to work for a period."
But that's not the case here Oggy. We knew his history. It did not call for a subjective decision but an objective one. A Health Insurance Underwiter looking at a potential customer with a history of illness wouldn't take the risk so why, when we don't have hundreds of thousands of pounds to throw around, did we?
As I say I would love to be proved wrong, so much so that it would be a pleasure for this to be a "sticky" if and when it is!
But much of the blame for McKenzie not playing appears to be directed at the player himself.
Not only was it the club's decision to sign him, but the string of niggling injuries picked up this season points to a lack of opportunity to get himself properly match fit - after all he's an older player too, and older players usually require more recovery time compared to a player 5 or 10 years younger.
IMO a lack of a regular reserve team has been a false economy - and cost us dear in many ways this season.
But that's another subject in itself.
Incidentally, none of McKenzies' relatively routine injuries this season appear to link directly as a result of his serious injury history. He evidently passed his medical.
We all knew it was a gamble and with the strikers we had at the time we had to make some sort of risk. Maybe we should have taken a young Prem player on loan, maybe there were other free transfers available, maybe we could have kept Fleetwood here, or given Dickson/McLeod more games.
Those are pretty much the only choices we had, we needed a striker and all the options were gambles.
Looking back using Fleetwood, McLeod or Dickson wouldn't have been the answer either. I don't think any other free striker signed in August has done anything, can't even think of one. None of the top goalscorers in League One are on loan from other clubs either.
So while McKenzie coming in hasn't paid off, I can see why Parky took the risk. There weren't really many better options. Maybe we should have gone for Mooney or Akpo earlier, but we may well have done and they probably weren't available back in August. But barely anyone rates those two do they?
Dickson, McLeod and Fleetwood all get paid more than McKenzie, so the risk was worth taking as McKenzie up to his injury problems was a Good Championship Striker whereas the other 3 are League 2 strikers (McLeod League 1 at a push), sending the 3 out on loan has saved us a good percentage of their wages which allowed the signings of McKenzie, Sodje, Mooney and Forster.
I understand the sentiments expressed by most of here but there seems to be an attitude that it "was a risk worth taking". I thought we'd learnt from Messrs Christensen, Gibbs and Pouso (to name but three) and even those were taken on at a time when we supposedly had some money. We don't now and to suggest that farming out our other strikers compensated for his wages doesn't make sense to me.It actually prevented us from taking on a striker who was likely to be fit as opposed to one who had a history injuries.
A lot of Kieran Dyer's injuries weren't connected to his original injury but that didn't prevent him being a permanent absentee.
I haven't written Leon off yet , I said earlier in the thread that if we are definately out of automatic then the Oldham game may give us an opportunity to use squad players to gain more match fitness.
As well as Leon could we consider giving a game to Elliot or Warner , Solly , Spring , Fry , Llera and Shelvey.
If ( and I know that is a big word) he could last 30/45 minutes then he may make an impact.
So Leon never did start a game for us despite being with us for more than nine months. Rumours of him nearing full fitness and Parky's regular assertion that he was pushing for a place in the side now seem rather wide of the mark.
The big question is whether Parky will give him another contract or finally admit defeat. With Burton wanting away, Dicko and McLeod sent packing, Forster and Mooney presumably going back for the time being at least to Brighton and Reading respectivelyand Tuna clearly not ready that could leave us with just Akpo.
So it might be good to have Leon fit and ready to do the business for us especially as he owes us one. If he's fit of course and that is a big "if".
McLeod will still be in contract so we could see him again next season, Leon will need to cut his wage demands to stay with us, no more than £3k,which would be halving his current wage,but more like a pay as you play contract
giving McKenzie a new contract would be madness unless it was pay and play and bonus related. Otherwise we will end up in the same position when we gave Toddy an extra year and he never played.
As someone said 19 starts in two years is not a good omen. No way should we offer any sort of deal. We are financially strapped and we cannot take risks.
[cite]Posted By: LargeAddick[/cite]As someone said 19 starts in two years is not a good omen. No way should we offer any sort of deal. We are financially strapped and we cannot take risks.
Agree. We learnt that with Todorov. Even a fit McLeod would be a better option than an injury prone McKenzie.
[cite]Posted By: LargeAddick[/cite]As someone said 19 starts in two years is not a good omen. No way should we offer any sort of deal. We are financially strapped and we cannot take risks.
Indeed - 19 starts in three seasons now from a possible 138 opportunities.
While I'm not disagreeing with any of the sentiments expressed, fans' one-eyed views do make me chuckle. He's injured throw him on the scrap heap; fair enough, it's a tough business. But with regard to players we want to keep, many demand that they show loyalty and don't take better pay/longer contracts elsewhere.
Forster is out of contract I think, McLeod is on daft Pardew wages, so lets hope he don't come back. Don't see why Burton wouldn't sign up given his age.
Comments
mmm perhaps we should have forgot to pay him. What do you reckon he's on? £3,000 a week? 26 weeks @ £3,000 = £78,000 which equates to an hourly rate of £25,000 if we just count League appearances.
Nice work if you can get it.
Cory Gibbs is playing for the New England Revolution in Major League Soccer, and playing very well.
Nearly four years after being injured just prior to Germany '06 and signing a two-year deal with Charlton, he may force himself back into the US team's World Cup setup.
So before giving up on Leon ... or cue a new thread on Charlton's medical treatment ...
I hear what you say A A but the situation is slightly different here. On the one hand McKenzie came to us with a history of injury problems (as evidenced by the fact that he started just 19 out of 92 League games in his last two seasons for Coventry) and on the other we can't afford to pay a player to sit in the stands. If he wants to play on a Non Contract basis (say £3K a game as opposed to the £25K a match he's reaped to date) then that's a different matter.
None of this appears to be directly McKenzie's fault.
He came here with a recent history of serious injury, and was given a medical.
It was the club's decision to give him a contract.
Now, as often happens, a player picks up a different injury (often as a result of not being match fit - no reserve team, anybody?), eventually comes back to full training and general fitness, but because there's no opportunity to get match fit, he picks up yet another injury as soon as he starts playing again competitively.
And so the cycle continues.
Whether we can afford an injured player is subjective - after all, his contract has already been budgeted for.
Generally, that's no different to any employee getting an illness and unable to work for a period.
It's got nothing to do with "liking the Manager". It was just a poor decision to sign a crock in our financial position. What we should have said is "prove your fitness and we'll sign you." Does 19 starts and 5 goals in two seasons suggest it was worth taking the risk?
Hopefully this thread will come back and haunt me and Leon will prove out saviour in the Play offs. I'm not looking to go into hiding quite yet though.
But that's not the case here Oggy. We knew his history. It did not call for a subjective decision but an objective one. A Health Insurance Underwiter looking at a potential customer with a history of illness wouldn't take the risk so why, when we don't have hundreds of thousands of pounds to throw around, did we?
As I say I would love to be proved wrong, so much so that it would be a pleasure for this to be a "sticky" if and when it is!
But much of the blame for McKenzie not playing appears to be directed at the player himself.
Not only was it the club's decision to sign him, but the string of niggling injuries picked up this season points to a lack of opportunity to get himself properly match fit - after all he's an older player too, and older players usually require more recovery time compared to a player 5 or 10 years younger.
IMO a lack of a regular reserve team has been a false economy - and cost us dear in many ways this season.
But that's another subject in itself.
Incidentally, none of McKenzies' relatively routine injuries this season appear to link directly as a result of his serious injury history. He evidently passed his medical.
Those are pretty much the only choices we had, we needed a striker and all the options were gambles.
Looking back using Fleetwood, McLeod or Dickson wouldn't have been the answer either. I don't think any other free striker signed in August has done anything, can't even think of one. None of the top goalscorers in League One are on loan from other clubs either.
So while McKenzie coming in hasn't paid off, I can see why Parky took the risk. There weren't really many better options. Maybe we should have gone for Mooney or Akpo earlier, but we may well have done and they probably weren't available back in August. But barely anyone rates those two do they?
A lot of Kieran Dyer's injuries weren't connected to his original injury but that didn't prevent him being a permanent absentee.
As well as Leon could we consider giving a game to Elliot or Warner , Solly , Spring , Fry , Llera and Shelvey.
If ( and I know that is a big word) he could last 30/45 minutes then he may make an impact.
Nothing new there then. Just in time though to come off the bench in the final and net the winner.
The big question is whether Parky will give him another contract or finally admit defeat. With Burton wanting away, Dicko and McLeod sent packing, Forster and Mooney presumably going back for the time being at least to Brighton and Reading respectivelyand Tuna clearly not ready that could leave us with just Akpo.
So it might be good to have Leon fit and ready to do the business for us especially as he owes us one. If he's fit of course and that is a big "if".
Indeed - 19 starts in three seasons now from a possible 138 opportunities.