By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Cifuentes on gardening leave on 15:24 - Apr 30 by kensalriser
Of course the owners can override the CEO. They can also dismiss him and any other executive or board member. .
Removing the CEO would probably be cheaper than sacking the manager.
But CEO's tend to have lengthy notice periods in their contract as standard. Even a complete newbie like Nourry is unlikely to be on less than three months notice and probably at least twice that.
I dd wonder if keeping Hoos on the staff was partly to ensure they had a handy interim to step in just in case Nourry bombed and got put on the naughty step.
But that might just have given Hoos one more reason to ensure he had Nourry's back and didn't let the little runt sneak out with daddy's car keys and wrap us around a lamppost. Although that is where the on pitch recruitment might be taking us anyway! But then Hoos isn't a football guy, as he keeps telling us!
[Post edited 30 Apr 16:01]
1
Cifuentes on gardening leave on 15:57 - Apr 30 with 1966 views
Cifuentes on gardening leave on 15:43 - Apr 30 by BklynRanger
Have been thinking about that same thing for a few months now (sometimes the penny drops slowly for me.)
When that concept was first raised (a few years ago maybe?) it sounded a bit like pragmatism, possibly realism. Maybe it would allow us to get a few players who we might not otherwise have got.
I've now come to think it's one of the elements that has caused successive squads to phone it in, drop out injured for long periods, look generally disinterested and any number of other issues we've seen. You can also say it's the way players are these days, no argument there, but that policy seems relevant.
Cifuentes on gardening leave on 15:42 - Apr 30 by JamesB1979
But you would need to give green light to your agents to do that. What irritates me most is last summer. He was here 6 months and looking for something better. Are we that bad? Give us a year at least!
makes you think whats going on behind the scenes to make first Mick Beale openly say to fans 2 months into the job that this wasn't what he was told it would be and why Marti after a good first season is looking to move on
It's also the clubs model to bring you in develop and sell you on for profit, thats players and managers so when you do that as a club you can't be shocked when the players have a look at what is on offer
3
Cifuentes on gardening leave on 16:00 - Apr 30 with 1913 views
Cifuentes on gardening leave on 15:57 - Apr 30 by JamesB1979
Thanks for the patronising last sentence. No. Because I’ve signed an extension already. Why sign that if you hate it?
Two reasons. You don't hate it. You love it. You love (some of) the staff you manage, you love your customers. You just hate your boss.
And the other one is they're giving you more money.
99% plus of people would take more money when offered rather than resign out of principle. If you wouldn't - well done Mother Theresa but you're the outlier not MC.
1
Cifuentes on gardening leave on 16:00 - Apr 30 with 1911 views
Cifuentes on gardening leave on 16:00 - Apr 30 by daveB
makes you think whats going on behind the scenes to make first Mick Beale openly say to fans 2 months into the job that this wasn't what he was told it would be and why Marti after a good first season is looking to move on
It's also the clubs model to bring you in develop and sell you on for profit, thats players and managers so when you do that as a club you can't be shocked when the players have a look at what is on offer
Oh 100% on first point.
Agree but not in first year.
0
Cifuentes on gardening leave on 16:03 - Apr 30 with 1881 views
Cifuentes on gardening leave on 15:43 - Apr 30 by BklynRanger
Have been thinking about that same thing for a few months now (sometimes the penny drops slowly for me.)
When that concept was first raised (a few years ago maybe?) it sounded a bit like pragmatism, possibly realism. Maybe it would allow us to get a few players who we might not otherwise have got.
I've now come to think it's one of the elements that has caused successive squads to phone it in, drop out injured for long periods, look generally disinterested and any number of other issues we've seen. You can also say it's the way players are these days, no argument there, but that policy seems relevant.
the problem is thay way of doing it is the right way to go, you sell an Eze invest in better players to get a better team, do it again and improve the team again but the second part of that plan needs to be we end up with a good team pushing to go up, the Brentford and bristol City model. We don't seem to have grasped the second part of the plan yet
Cifuentes on gardening leave on 16:00 - Apr 30 by daveB
makes you think whats going on behind the scenes to make first Mick Beale openly say to fans 2 months into the job that this wasn't what he was told it would be and why Marti after a good first season is looking to move on
It's also the clubs model to bring you in develop and sell you on for profit, thats players and managers so when you do that as a club you can't be shocked when the players have a look at what is on offer
Well said Dave.
If Madsen had come in and played like Jean Tigana from day one and we sold him to Newcastle for 4x what we paid for him in the January window we'd all love him still.
0
Cifuentes on gardening leave on 16:03 - Apr 30 with 1867 views
Cifuentes on gardening leave on 16:02 - Apr 30 by JamesB1979
Oh 100% on first point.
Agree but not in first year.
why not the 1st year? Go whilst your stock is high, only have to see how his stock has fallen a year later. No club watching our last 2 games is thinking thats the man we want as our manager
3
Cifuentes on gardening leave on 16:05 - Apr 30 with 1843 views
Cifuentes on gardening leave on 16:00 - Apr 30 by Padulas_Shampoo
Two reasons. You don't hate it. You love it. You love (some of) the staff you manage, you love your customers. You just hate your boss.
And the other one is they're giving you more money.
99% plus of people would take more money when offered rather than resign out of principle. If you wouldn't - well done Mother Theresa but you're the outlier not MC.
Well in that case you’d stay. But why would I be looking for new jobs 6 months into my role? Sounds like a good gig!
0
Cifuentes on gardening leave on 16:07 - Apr 30 with 1829 views
Cifuentes on gardening leave on 15:55 - Apr 30 by TeddRanger
Taking off our QPR focused spec for a moment- isn't that exactly the case for the vast majority of Championship clubs?
Whether Manager or player, it's "Come here, do well and we'll either get to the Prem together or your success will put you there"
To be honest, not paying much attention to it at other clubs, I don't know. Am sure you're right, it's just felt quite front and centre at times in terms of how the club markets itself.
Might be interesting to look at the extent to which clubs push that message and their relative league positions over time. You'd have to control for an insane amount of other factors of course.
0
Cifuentes on gardening leave on 16:08 - Apr 30 with 1816 views
Cifuentes on gardening leave on 13:34 - Apr 30 by Rangersw12
I would give him the DOF today .
We need an adult in charge
Not going to happen though sadly. A few weeks back he accepted a position as Sporting Director and Head of Soccer at a second tier expansion franchise in Jacksonville. He's basically got a blank sheet of paper to create something there from the ground up.
Cifuentes on gardening leave on 12:57 - Apr 30 by SimplyNico
For what it’s worth, a few comments on the situation.
MC is contracted to QPR through to the end of his notice period or the remainder of the fixed term of his contract (we don't know if there is a notice period; it could just be a fixed term employment contract (very common for managers), and, if the latter, we do not know what the duration of the fixed term is).
We do not know if MC gave notice (if there is a notice clause) or indicated he wanted to leave, or whether the Club told MC he was being relieved of duties/ placed on garden leave. What we can say with some certainty is that there must be a garden leave clause as it would be a breach of contract by QPR simply to remove his duties (this has long been clarified by the Court of Appeal). The underpinning of garden leave is a right for the employer to have exclusivity of service whether or not the employer chooses to make use of the same.
The speculation about no compensation being payable is just that. The position with release fee compensation from another club is purely contractual. Nobody but the parties (and their agents) to MC's employment contract will know what the position is and if/when it might be payable (payment would be from MC, but a new employer would underwrite the cost).
That said, if another club in the Champ wants to employ MC before the end of his notice period/fixed term, then, irrespective of what MC’s employment contract provides, they will have to negotiate with QPR and pay something. If they don't, and they try and employ MC, inevitably, they will be inducing a breach of a contract. An injunction would be a possible remedy if it is a Champ club, damages more likely in other leagues (there would be no need to injunct outside the Champ because clubs in other leagues would be unlikely to be competitive with QPR during the remainder of MC’s employment with QPR).
As regards clubs outside the Champ, what would be the measure of damages? That is difficult to assess - there would arguably be no direct financial loss to QPR because MC is not currently doing anything. Further, there would need to be an offset against the saving made in relation to his salary. So, outside the Champ, damages could be nominal.
However, with clubs in the same league, it is a trodden path – Palace did the same thing with Bruce.
Thanks for this, Nico.
Really helpful.
"The opposite of love, after all, is not hate, but indifference."
Cifuentes on gardening leave on 16:03 - Apr 30 by daveB
the problem is thay way of doing it is the right way to go, you sell an Eze invest in better players to get a better team, do it again and improve the team again but the second part of that plan needs to be we end up with a good team pushing to go up, the Brentford and bristol City model. We don't seem to have grasped the second part of the plan yet
Very true. A successful side needs a little group of these prospects that pushes the team up the table, and let's the others look better by not being replied upon.
But if your recruitment is lacking (based on limitations of money/strategy/egos/fcuk knows) it also impinges on your culture, standards etc.
1
Cifuentes on gardening leave on 16:25 - Apr 30 with 1637 views
Cifuentes on gardening leave on 16:03 - Apr 30 by daveB
the problem is thay way of doing it is the right way to go, you sell an Eze invest in better players to get a better team, do it again and improve the team again but the second part of that plan needs to be we end up with a good team pushing to go up, the Brentford and bristol City model. We don't seem to have grasped the second part of the plan yet
Marc Bircham made pretty much the same point on the WLS podcast three years ago.
The club still doesn't know what it is.
If you're starting in a weak position and want to be a development club you have to take chances on young players and some of them might not work out. But it takes several years of steady trading and continuous improvement before you can get into a position where you are both developing players and playing at a level good and consistent enough to push for the top six.
Brighton, Brentford, and now Bristol City have shown it can be done. But it was a long journey for all of them and along the way they were cashing in on players that it must have hurt to let go.
[Post edited 30 Apr 16:26]
4
Cifuentes on gardening leave on 16:37 - Apr 30 with 1567 views
On the "he signed a new contract he must have been happy point" - I've suggested it in the piece, and Dave Mc has said it explicitly several times now...
Quite apart from nobody ever turns down a pay rise, that contract was simply what they were entitled to for keeping us up. It wasn't a big sit down, negotiate a new deal thing. When they arrived we were six points adrift at the bottom, if they kept us up the reward for doing that would be your deal goes from this to this.
13
Cifuentes on gardening leave on 16:38 - Apr 30 with 1561 views
Cifuentes on gardening leave on 16:25 - Apr 30 by KensalT
Marc Bircham made pretty much the same point on the WLS podcast three years ago.
The club still doesn't know what it is.
If you're starting in a weak position and want to be a development club you have to take chances on young players and some of them might not work out. But it takes several years of steady trading and continuous improvement before you can get into a position where you are both developing players and playing at a level good and consistent enough to push for the top six.
Brighton, Brentford, and now Bristol City have shown it can be done. But it was a long journey for all of them and along the way they were cashing in on players that it must have hurt to let go.
[Post edited 30 Apr 16:26]
Not a QPR specific point - but this model is broken regardless. What Brentford did is no longer achievable in the post Covid world. Clive and many others have covered this in much better prose that I can write here, but essentially the market we want to sell doesn’t exist anymore. It’s an Eze sale or nothing, we’ve missed the boat completely (just like 97 and 2015).
Bristol City and Millwall are still doing it pretty well, but unless it’s premier league buyers you’re not getting any return.
Football Ramble podcast explain this really well in recent mailbag episode if anyone wants a non qpr perspective on why our approach is doomed in the modern game
1
Cifuentes on gardening leave on 16:45 - Apr 30 with 1500 views
Cifuentes on gardening leave on 16:38 - Apr 30 by dm97
Not a QPR specific point - but this model is broken regardless. What Brentford did is no longer achievable in the post Covid world. Clive and many others have covered this in much better prose that I can write here, but essentially the market we want to sell doesn’t exist anymore. It’s an Eze sale or nothing, we’ve missed the boat completely (just like 97 and 2015).
Bristol City and Millwall are still doing it pretty well, but unless it’s premier league buyers you’re not getting any return.
Football Ramble podcast explain this really well in recent mailbag episode if anyone wants a non qpr perspective on why our approach is doomed in the modern game
I would say the reason we haven't been able to make it work so far is because whenever we have got to the point where we should be trying to sell a player for a profit and reinvestment we have bottled it and looked for reasons not to sell.
One of the points Birch makes is that Brentford fans had low expectations so it was easier to sell fan favourites and reinvest.
Here fans don't like to see their favourites being sold. So when we reach the optimal time for selling a Dickie or Dieng we look for reasons to hang on to them.
Imagine the uproar if we try to sell Ilias Chair this summer!
As for the overall model. You're right to say that times have changed since Covid and also Brexit. But as you yourself also say Bristol City and Millwall are doing pretty well. It's been a long road and they have had setbacks along the way but they are still moving in the right direction.
0
Cifuentes on gardening leave on 16:59 - Apr 30 with 1355 views
Cifuentes on gardening leave on 16:50 - Apr 30 by KensalT
I would say the reason we haven't been able to make it work so far is because whenever we have got to the point where we should be trying to sell a player for a profit and reinvestment we have bottled it and looked for reasons not to sell.
One of the points Birch makes is that Brentford fans had low expectations so it was easier to sell fan favourites and reinvest.
Here fans don't like to see their favourites being sold. So when we reach the optimal time for selling a Dickie or Dieng we look for reasons to hang on to them.
Imagine the uproar if we try to sell Ilias Chair this summer!
As for the overall model. You're right to say that times have changed since Covid and also Brexit. But as you yourself also say Bristol City and Millwall are doing pretty well. It's been a long road and they have had setbacks along the way but they are still moving in the right direction.
We actually started to work ourselves into the position quite well.
We got good money for Smithies, then better money for Freeman, then amazing money for Eze.
We then made a couple of mistakes.
1 - We took a lot of the Eze money and used it for GET PROMOTED NOW short term signings like Austin, Gray, Johansen, De Wijs, McCallum, Odubajo etc. Of that intake really only Jimmy Dunne was the sort of profile that 'model' requires.
2 - We had developeed some sellable assets to get back on track and dig us out of that hole (Dickie, Dieng, Chair, Willock) but when they were at the peak of their form and value the following summer we then let the manager dictate that he'd only come if we promised none of them would be sold. That should have been a 'thanks but no thanks' however good his PowerPoint is, and at least one of those should have gone that summer.
4
Cifuentes on gardening leave on 17:17 - Apr 30 with 1206 views
Cifuentes on gardening leave on 16:59 - Apr 30 by Northernr
We actually started to work ourselves into the position quite well.
We got good money for Smithies, then better money for Freeman, then amazing money for Eze.
We then made a couple of mistakes.
1 - We took a lot of the Eze money and used it for GET PROMOTED NOW short term signings like Austin, Gray, Johansen, De Wijs, McCallum, Odubajo etc. Of that intake really only Jimmy Dunne was the sort of profile that 'model' requires.
2 - We had developeed some sellable assets to get back on track and dig us out of that hole (Dickie, Dieng, Chair, Willock) but when they were at the peak of their form and value the following summer we then let the manager dictate that he'd only come if we promised none of them would be sold. That should have been a 'thanks but no thanks' however good his PowerPoint is, and at least one of those should have gone that summer.
I think we also had Charlie Austin making similar demands about Chair and Willock not being sold as a condition for him coming here!
Essentially I think we're in agreement:
1. The club has tried to rush what is inherently a slow process
2. We haven't been able to bring ourselves to do the selling bit when we should have.
I think it can still be done but it has got harder.
If you look at Bristol City and Millwall they had some quite austere years under Gary Rowett and Nigel Pearson respectively. But all the while they were ticking over in the league they were still developing young players and have had success cashing in on them and reinvesting. So it can still be done, and for a club in our position it might be the best option, but it's going to be bloody hard work!
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
