Pointless fact, but Matt Taylor (Exeter Manager) was born in Chorley (not inside of Ben Chorley). Maybe it’s a sign - Ben Chorley DOF and Ben Garner and Matt Taylor joint managers.
Latest snippet. Garner deal on the brink of collapse. Very close on money and not insurmountable (possible bonuses etc) but various performance clauses are a huge sticking point. Garner not budging and refusing to accept them.
Again, only what I have been told. No idea if it's old news or even accurate, but the person sharing is very close to the deal.
Have asked if Chorley is involved, but told "no idea".
- TS interviewed Garner and agreed compo with Swindon - Another manager potentially higher up on his list is now interested (maybe Beale) - TS wants to take his time to see if he can get someone better than Garner - Swindon want to force the issue and leak it to the press (Cawley)
We may very well still get Garner who I don't think would be a bad choice.
My take on it is that we have already got Garner (and Richard Cawley is correct), but TS is playing silly buggers and wants to announce it when in the UK and have a few photo opportunities for his social media. Of course, as soon as he announces it is Garner, TS is going to look like a right tit having denied it more times than Judas.
Beale was never a realistic prospect - too expensive and would never drop to the third division.
Why would Beale not drop down to this league when it's rumoured that he was interviews pre adkins and then again pre Jackson?
Pre-Adkins and then when he was sacked, Beale was still at Rangers. He's now in the premier league and no doubt on a lot more money, so the temptation to drop into league one might be a bit less appealing. On top of that we just finished 13th so we hardly look an appealing option to a guy who has championship interest.
Latest snippet. Garner deal on the brink of collapse. Very close on money and not insurmountable (possible bonuses etc) but various performance clauses are a huge sticking point. Garner not budging and refusing to accept them.
Again, only what I have been told. No idea if it's old news or even accurate, but the person sharing is very close to the deal.
Have asked of Chorley is involved, but told "no idea".
At this stage that would be a real kick in the nuts.
Latest snippet. Garner deal on the brink of collapse. Very close on money and not insurmountable (possible bonuses etc) but various performance clauses are a huge sticking point. Garner not budging and refusing to accept them.
Again, only what I have been told. No idea if it's old news or even accurate, but the person sharing is very close to the deal.
Have asked of Chorley is involved, but told "no idea".
I look forward to 200+ posts from people who didn't want Garner, moaning that we didn't get Garner.
FWIW though if true, then if money is a sticking point for a manager from Swindon (who are pretty potless and can't be paying much), and he doesn't accept the job then i'd hate to see who we do end up with.
Latest snippet. Garner deal on the brink of collapse. Very close on money and not insurmountable (possible bonuses etc) but various performance clauses are a huge sticking point. Garner not budging and refusing to accept them.
Again, only what I have been told. No idea if it's old news or even accurate, but the person sharing is very close to the deal.
Have asked of Chorley is involved, but told "no idea".
The 'Performance Clauses' bit is interesting. TS should be able to dispense of a manager fairly cheaply if they are doing a crap job. However I would argue that 13th is the cut off for that kind of agreement.
If TS is thinking you will get top 6 if you have a performance based contract that demands it, he is mad. It simply does not work that way. You could argue that 6th by the end of season 2 could be justifiable in that you have a year to build and a year to achieve it, but he needs instant results financially so he is not going to be minded to operate on that model IMO.
Knowing our luck it's probably completely unrelated but getting in both the DoF and the manager that put together a decent team at short notice would be a great move. It would also seemingly limit the amount of universe-level control that Martin apparently has, which would be hilarious given the months of wailing on here about it. You'd imagine if Gallen were also staying then we'd be looking at one who idenitifies the correct players and one who handles the negotiations from there, which would be good. It would also explain the delay in making the announcement. Interesting, possibly exciting stuff. (cue: Welcome Steve Evans)
Though three directors covering negotiations, analytics, recruitment and appointing head coaches feels a bit much?
Here’s what the Swindon OS said when they were appointed last year, seems Chorley ran recruitment and it was up to him appoint the head coach:
I can almost hear Thomas saying most of the things said there.
'I want a director of football and head coach model rather than a
traditional manager because I want continuity to run through the club.
If the head coach moves on, the philosophy of the club carries on and
the playing squad does not need to be a complete overhaul' is a pretty useful line. In many ways it just shows that TS needs to get better at communicating in a football way. Him talking about pressing being the best way to get promoted rubbed eveyrone the wrong way. If he'd said what the Swindon owner did then everyone would recognise it as a fairly typical model and think less about meddling and more about good planning
Latest snippet. Garner deal on the brink of collapse. Very close on money and not insurmountable (possible bonuses etc) but various performance clauses are a huge sticking point. Garner not budging and refusing to accept them.
Again, only what I have been told. No idea if it's old news or even accurate, but the person sharing is very close to the deal.
Have asked of Chorley is involved, but told "no idea".
it’s easy to sack a manager, so performance related reductions in severance is only doing 2 things - saving money for Sandgaard if his choice is a mistake, and making the manager accept factors outside of his control as a reason to reduce severance package (his and his family’s security). I don’t know why anyone would accept this if true. In fact, ignoring these rumours about the contract, if I was Garner reading what TS is actually saying, while having had the discussions leaked, I’d have said something by now or told him to stick it. The DoF thing whilst interesting is rather a 2+2=5 sidetrack, without any substance added. So, p 190 and the answer is “not yet”……
TS is being pretty dumb if there is any truth in the fact he's playing silly buggers with the contract again (albeit this isn't surprising in the slightest given it's already 'worked' for him once).
This appointment is his make or break. He has to appoint who he thinks is the best candidate available provided they aren't out of reach on financial terms - it would be lunacy to let anything else be a factor.
TS is being pretty dumb if there is any truth in the fact he's playing silly buggers with the contract again (albeit this isn't surprising in the slightest given it's already 'worked' for him once).
This appointment is his make or break. He has to appoint who he thinks is the best candidate available provided they aren't out of reach on financial terms - it would be lunacy to let anything else be a factor.
We all just accept it, but it's football that is "pretty dumb". No other business would sign a vital employee to a 3 year fixed term contract and put themselves in the situation where no matter who poorly that employee performs, the only way to get rid of them is to pay the contract up in full. It is crazy, and anybody coming in from outside of the football bubble will see that it's crazy and try to find a way around it.
We can complain that TS hasn't accepted the ridiculousness of the industry he has joined fast enough, but we can't call him dumb for recognising how ridiculous it is and trying to at least mitigate some of that craziness.
TS is being pretty dumb if there is any truth in the fact he's playing silly buggers with the contract again (albeit this isn't surprising in the slightest given it's already 'worked' for him once).
This appointment is his make or break. He has to appoint who he thinks is the best candidate available provided they aren't out of reach on financial terms - it would be lunacy to let anything else be a factor.
We all just accept it, but it's football that is "pretty dumb". No other business would sign a vital employee to a 3 year fixed term contract and put themselves in the situation where no matter who poorly that employee performs, the only way to get rid of them is to pay the contract up in full. It is crazy, and anybody coming in from outside of the football bubble will see that it's crazy and try to find a way around it.
We can complain that TS hasn't accepted the ridiculousness of the industry he has joined fast enough, but we can't call him dumb for recognising how ridiculous it is and trying to at least mitigate some of that craziness.
I agree wholeheartedly with the underlying message but the second paragraph is the crux of it. It's not the time to make a stand driven by logic. There won't be pats on the back all-round if we finish 14th next season and we get the reward of being able to terminate the manager's contract more economically.
TS is being pretty dumb if there is any truth in the fact he's playing silly buggers with the contract again (albeit this isn't surprising in the slightest given it's already 'worked' for him once).
This appointment is his make or break. He has to appoint who he thinks is the best candidate available provided they aren't out of reach on financial terms - it would be lunacy to let anything else be a factor.
We all just accept it, but it's football that is "pretty dumb". No other business would sign a vital employee to a 3 year fixed term contract and put themselves in the situation where no matter who poorly that employee performs, the only way to get rid of them is to pay the contract up in full. It is crazy, and anybody coming in from outside of the football bubble will see that it's crazy and try to find a way around it.
We can complain that TS hasn't accepted the ridiculousness of the industry he has joined fast enough, but we can't call him dumb for recognising how ridiculous it is and trying to at least mitigate some of that craziness.
Many manager contracts in football do have break clauses so pay outs are "only" 6 or 12 months. Also why rolling contracts are used.
So now we are maybe going for the whole Swindon set up, DoF, Manager, and two coaches, this whole thing is getting very complicated, if it is so, it is little wonder there is a delay in making any new announcements, anyway WIOTOS eh...
TS is being pretty dumb if there is any truth in the fact he's playing silly buggers with the contract again (albeit this isn't surprising in the slightest given it's already 'worked' for him once).
This appointment is his make or break. He has to appoint who he thinks is the best candidate available provided they aren't out of reach on financial terms - it would be lunacy to let anything else be a factor.
We all just accept it, but it's football that is "pretty dumb". No other business would sign a vital employee to a 3 year fixed term contract and put themselves in the situation where no matter who poorly that employee performs, the only way to get rid of them is to pay the contract up in full. It is crazy, and anybody coming in from outside of the football bubble will see that it's crazy and try to find a way around it.
We can complain that TS hasn't accepted the ridiculousness of the industry he has joined fast enough, but we can't call him dumb for recognising how ridiculous it is and trying to at least mitigate some of that craziness.
Many manager contracts in football do have break clauses so pay outs are "only" 6 or 12 months. Also why rolling contracts are used.
Correct. Everyone assumes that, for example, a manager a year into a three year contract must be paid the other two years if terminated. That is not the case.
all this Linkedin messaging, I decided to message him today, wow, he responded, and stated he HOPES that a new manager will be in charge with regard to the Spain trip,
Performance related contracts are fine if you have control of the resources that govern the performance. From the little we know it does not seem that the manager/1st team coach at Charlton has control of the budget, the playing style or the recruitment. The only way it would work is if the owner set a budget for the season, expressed his playing style preference which would be advisory not mandatory, and his season end expectations. If the potential manager felt that was reasonable then fine and dandy sign the contract. Over to you TS
Latest snippet. Garner deal on the brink of collapse. Very close on money and not insurmountable (possible bonuses etc) but various performance clauses are a huge sticking point. Garner not budging and refusing to accept them.
Again, only what I have been told. No idea if it's old news or even accurate, but the person sharing is very close to the deal.
Have asked of Chorley is involved, but told "no idea".
Perhaps Garner isn't happy having performances linked to players he's had no say in being here / being recruited. Therefore Chorley is being brought in to placate/reassure him that it will be HIS team.
Somebody on ITTV (normal person) messaged TS on LinkedIn who apparently said 'We will hopefully have a manager in place by the Spain trip'... That is June 25th. I should probably log off before I have an attack.
Comments
FWIW though if true, then if money is a sticking point for a manager from Swindon (who are pretty potless and can't be paying much), and he doesn't accept the job then i'd hate to see who we do end up with.
https://www.swindontownfc.co.uk/news/2018/july/town-hire-chorley-as-chief-scout/
If TS is thinking you will get top 6 if you have a performance based contract that demands it, he is mad. It simply does not work that way. You could argue that 6th by the end of season 2 could be justifiable in that you have a year to build and a year to achieve it, but he needs instant results financially so he is not going to be minded to operate on that model IMO.
'I want a director of football and head coach model rather than a traditional manager because I want continuity to run through the club. If the head coach moves on, the philosophy of the club carries on and the playing squad does not need to be a complete overhaul' is a pretty useful line. In many ways it just shows that TS needs to get better at communicating in a football way. Him talking about pressing being the best way to get promoted rubbed eveyrone the wrong way. If he'd said what the Swindon owner did then everyone would recognise it as a fairly typical model and think less about meddling and more about good planning
This appointment is his make or break. He has to appoint who he thinks is the best candidate available provided they aren't out of reach on financial terms - it would be lunacy to let anything else be a factor.
We can complain that TS hasn't accepted the ridiculousness of the industry he has joined fast enough, but we can't call him dumb for recognising how ridiculous it is and trying to at least mitigate some of that craziness.
Correct. Everyone assumes that, for example, a manager a year into a three year contract must be paid the other two years if terminated. That is not the case.
The only way it would work is if the owner set a budget for the season, expressed his playing style preference which would be advisory not mandatory, and his season end expectations. If the potential manager felt that was reasonable then fine and dandy sign the contract.
Over to you TS
Just a thought.