Jump to content

New Manager Thread [Mergomatic Active]


Recommended Posts

I'd like to see Curtis get it.

 

Would be very different to any appointment we've had for a while. Has the credentials in the game and probably the contacts. Coached at Swansea where they have a philosophy of good football. Wouldn't mind seeing how he tries his hand in the top job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 3.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

As a director of the club Simon Brooke should have complete access to every piece of information.

Directors are responsible and accountable for the actions of bodies which they oversee.

 

There's a lot of uninformed crap on here about him only getting what Corney lets him have, so when he's vague it's not his fault. That is garbage. He has the legal right and obligation to have access and use that right.

 

If he's scared of using that right cos it might upset Corney, anyone sensible would wonder what Corney has to hide.

Or maybe he uses the right and (correctly) keeps commerically sensative data confidential.

 

Statements that are vague are not necessarily based on incomplete knowledge or uncertainty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Obviously I cant change anything nowadays, I'm from an old school when bank managers combed books with a fine tooth comb. I just wonder what's to hide by not disclosing transfer fees?

No such problem with the big clubs where transfer fees are widely reported in the media, e.g. the new Man United centre back at £30m, why didn't they insist on 'undisclosed' leaving the fans guessing ?

 

They haven't officially disclosed the fee - big clubs rarely do. It's just that there's far more public appeal in a transfer at that level, so it's in the interests of journalists/media outlets to find out (through 'leaks', 'inside sources' etc.) and report a figure.

 

In our case, nobody really cares enough about our transfers to find out more details than the club's willing to provide.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like to see Curtis get it.

 

Would be very different to any appointment we've had for a while. Has the credentials in the game and probably the contacts. Coached at Swansea where they have a philosophy of good football. Wouldn't mind seeing how he tries his hand in the top job.

Not a chance of getting near his salary as 1st team coach in the Premiership. He's 62 and I can't believe he'd leave a club he's been associated with on and off for 40 years to manage a potless 1st division club such as ours.

 

Why would he throw all that away at this stage of his

career?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or maybe he uses the right and (correctly) keeps commerically sensative data confidential.

 

Statements that are vague are not necessarily based on incomplete knowledge or uncertainty.

Absolutely this.

 

At my last company I knew the salaries of every single employee I kept it quiet that I even knew that detail. If I'd told all and sundry about how much people are earning it would of caused all kinds of unrest amongst the employees in the business. You simply don't go round telling every single financial detail its bad business practice and if you tell agents the details of you're budget and you're transfer fees paid and received then it weakens you're position in negotiations.

 

But that's far to boring isn't it. I've heard that Corney keeps everything quiet because he is secretly funding Isis.

Edited by GlossopLatic
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Parkinson going to Bolton according to the BBC which is funny as they have been saying it's between Cotterill and Adkins all week

Yeah, got a good deal on the compensation too, because the new Bradford owners liked the idea of bringing their own man in but didn't want to upset the fan base, who loved Parkinson, by sacking him. Good deal for all parties.

 

Just goes to show that the media and bookies don't always get it right. BBC looking a bit foolish now having stated it was definitely either Adkins or Cotterill yesterday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or maybe he uses the right and (correctly) keeps commerically sensative data confidential.

 

Statements that are vague are not necessarily based on incomplete knowledge or uncertainty.

Spot on. I'm amazed transfer fees aren't kept more secretive than they have been. It gives competitors significant financial information about each other and any future transactions that they may wish to undertake with that club.

 

Simon Brooke may well have access to all the information he needs to carry out his duty, putting that information into the public domain so that other League one clubs can have a good nosy really isn't part of that duty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Absolutely this.

 

At my last company I knew the salaries of every single employee I kept it quiet that I even knew that detail. If I'd told all and sundry about how much people are earning it would of caused all kinds of unrest amongst the employees in the business. You simply don't go round telling every single financial detail its bad business practice and if you tell agents the details of you're budget and you're transfer fees paid and received then it weakens you're position in negotiations.

 

But that's far to boring isn't it. I've heard that Corney keeps everything quiet because he is secretly funding Isis.

Doesn't stop people claiming SB only knows what he's told as a justification for vagueness.

Also doesn't explain why SB said he'd been "assured" that the necaru loan was part of a long term strategy but also that it could just "disappear" - anyone with half a brain can see what a load of rubbish that is. Loans don't disappear and directors should be assuring themselves, not being assured.

What is being hidden? We know the car park money was being quietly siphoned off (until someone asked) so why are people so bothered about those who ask questions? About those who want some answers?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doesn't stop people claiming SB only knows what he's told as a justification for vagueness.

Also doesn't explain why SB said he'd been "assured" that the necaru loan was part of a long term strategy but also that it could just "disappear" - anyone with half a brain can see what a load of rubbish that is. Loans don't disappear and directors should be assuring themselves, not being assured.

What is being hidden? We know the car park money was being quietly siphoned off (until someone asked) so why are people so bothered about those who ask questions? About those who want some answers?

I've told you we are funding ISIS. Thats what we are hiding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not a chance of getting near his salary as 1st team coach in the Premiership. He's 62 and I can't believe he'd leave a club he's been associated with on and off for 40 years to manage a potless 1st division club such as ours.

 

Why would he throw all that away at this stage of his

career?

Would he be throwing away his career?

 

He's virtually guaranteed a job for life at Swansea. If he fails at a potless League 1 side, so what? He's at the point in his life where he may never manage a side. Maybe he fancies a shot at it before retiring.

Edited by NewBlue
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would he be throwing away his career?

 

He's virtually guaranteed a job for life at Swansea. If he fails at a potless League 1 side, so what?

I might be totally wrong here but he's obviously settled at Swansea. If he'd wanted to get into management I think he would have done it a bit earlier, at 62 I don't think he'd be too keen on moving his wife up here from South Wales, don't think she'd be too keen either.

Edited by oafc1955
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I might be totally wrong here but he's obviously settled at Swansea. If he'd wanted to get into management I think he would have done it a bit earlier, at 62 I don't think he'd be too keen on moving his wife up here from South Wales, don't think she'd be too keen either.

We just don't know

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

In our case, nobody really cares enough about our transfers to find out more details than the club's willing to provide.

apart from a lot of loudmouth keyboard warriors hell bent on proving that they have been right all along !! the privacy clause may not be from our end it may be at the other clubs insistance as part of the contract of sale but then that doesent fit all the conspirisey theorys does it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

In our case, nobody really cares enough about our transfers to find out more details than the club's willing to provide.

apart from a lot of loudmouth keyboard warriors hell bent on proving that they have been right all along !! the privacy clause may not be from our end it may be at the other clubs insistance as part of the contract of sale but then that doesent fit all the conspirisey theorys does it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im still amazed at the numbers of people that think we have something to hide by declaring each transaction as undiclosed

a) As others have said, it keeps our negotiating position a little stronger.

B) Practically every club in the land does it, declaring a transfer fee is very unsuual

Look at June 2016 transfers. Spot the Transfer Fee.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/transfers

 

Look at May 2016, try and spot the transfer fee

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/36304880

 

Look at Transfer deadline day, see how many fees you can spot

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/35400688

January 2016

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/35210714

 

 

So you think it is recent, look at

Deadline Day Sept 2015 and not one transfer outside the top flight stated a fee.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/34073713

 

Even as far back as 2014 Deadline Day only 2 fee outside top flight were declared.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/28981268

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've told you we are funding ISIS. Thats what we are hiding.

Did you tell me the car park money went to Brassbank?

Playing reductio ad absurdam doesn't look half as clever when you are just guessing; can you guarantee that there is no funding issue? That revenue is not dropping year on year? And that Corney is not now more focused on paying back his pals losses than any idea of footballing success?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am quite amazed how the questions raised about certain information not being available and perhaps being hidden from those who could and perhaps should know has been diverted into the cul-de-sac about undisclosed transfer fees,

I care not about this particular aspect of any disclosure-lets face it we all know that we get ripped off by other clubs on incoming transfer fees!

I do care that we have made short sighted business decisions based on crisis management and that staff including players did not get paid on time........again

Edited by ChaddySmoker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am quite amazed how the questions raised about certain information not being available and perhaps being hidden from those who could and perhaps should know has been diverted into the cul-de-sac about undisclosed transfer fees,

I care not about this particular aspect of any disclosure-lets face it we all know that we get ripped off by other clubs on incoming transfer fees!

I do care that we have made short sighted business decisions based on crisis management and that staff including players did not get paid on time........again

My guess is the club is constantly fire fighting, I hope they don't run out of water.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At a meeting last year I asked SC why all the transfers are undisclosed

He reckons it is done so other clubs dont know how much we got when we try and sign players!!!

Could understand that argument if we were talking hundreds of thousands of more but doesn't wash

when dealing in peanuts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At a meeting last year I asked SC why all the transfers are undisclosed

He reckons it is done so other clubs dont know how much we got when we try and sign players!!!

Could understand that argument if we were talking hundreds of thousands of more but doesn't wash

when dealing in peanuts.

Of course it does...

 

If you keep the fees undisclosed for the likes Spencer, Trotman, Philiskirk, Eaves and Renshaw and then think OK we sold for example Coleman for 100k, Brown 10k, Mills for 40k then it raises the question why?

 

The answer being larger fees which immediately shows the clubs hand in negotiations.

 

Undisclosed every fee and :censored: those that feel they have a right to know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...