A few weeks ago we heard clearly the message delivered by Ed Balls in his interview on the club’s end-of-year accounts. It didn’t make for great listening. Some phrases came to mind… ‘we are skint’, in the red, brassic, broke… however you would like to define our dwindling pot! It didn’t sound good.
‘Where has the money gone?’ A question I’ve heard on the lips of many fans this season…..
The loss of parachute payments, loss of TV appearance fees, a high wage bill and relegation cost us dearly. But these weren’t the only factors. However well Ed can (or cannot) dance, he couldn’t waltz around the cost to the club of severance pay. Most were accounted for, but the undisclosed fee for one Mr Neil was one not overlooked. And although there is no official word on how much Alex Neil received, a little look at the figures allows us to jump to our own conclusions.
Managers need to sign contracts and clubs need protection to retain their chosen ‘Gaffers’ . If the team performs it could draw attention and the risk of a club coming and poaching your key man could be costly by way of points on the table; however the cost to clubs when it’s not working, is also significant.
With the high turnover of English managers in the modern game, (60 left their positions between last September and June) – it’s amazing to think that in the early ’90s the average spell of a manager in football was three years. Are we too quick to move on, cut our losses and try a fresh approach? Does changing a seemingly under-performing manager make such a difference? Especially when more often than not we hear the same regurgitated names crop up for the vacant position, those sacked before for not achieving or getting their former teams to perform.
The so-called big clubs can look at existing managers, target the man for them and pay off the club, but in return the high achieving clubs look attractive to these ‘big guns’ knowing that money is available to fund incoming players of their choice.
Most clubs however have to hop on the managerial merry-go-round and hire cast offs from other teams, hoping they can now find their form, fit their team or build from the new manager ‘bounce’.
A few teams though are opting for a different route and are trying to find a rare gem of a manager from abroad or lower leagues; perhaps a cheaper option but risky business with the inexperience of learning a new league and adapting to a different style of play.
But these types of new managers need time… time to learn, to gel and to gain confidence in their newly promoted role. These type of appointments arguably have to be more long-term, They can’t be expected to transform a team overnight in an unknown league. Back to that ‘work in progress’ phrase again.
I recently listened to a former manager saying he believed yearly contracts could become the norm, but is this just an easier way for directors to solve short term problem with smaller compensations? Or is the answer that clubs should use more resources and money to find a better candidate than paying a large sum to get rid?
Clubs are not shy of breaking club records when it comes to buying players, so why not spend big on someone that can lead the way? There must be a shopping list of requirements needed – style of play, budget, former successes etc – and then if their top budget is used in securing the best man for the job this would likely be more productive, as opposed to another failure and a few months later scouring the market yet again in hope of another miracle worker.
We often despair when hearing of clubs sacking yet another manager but it’s not just the owners or board members. Fans are even quicker to judge. When you are on the receiving end of back to back loses or poor performances we are all just as guilty of jumping on that bandwagon. “Get xxxx out!” … “Sack him” … “He’s not up to the job … etc
Managers in the top leagues have enormous amount of pressure on them to deliver; whatever experience or background they have the expectations are sky high. We regularly see managers in front of the media looking a shadow of their former selves when results are not going their way. The pressure is enormous.
With players commanding high transfer fees and even higher salaries it must be a difficult job for a manager who is probably earning less than his players to come in and stamp their authority on the squad. Strong characters, superiority in the dressing room, player power are all things they have to contend with, so too the knowledge that it’s easier to replace a manager than a squad of players or, in some cases, even a single costly player.
So some managers are set up for a failure before their jobs have even begun. And we’ve seen supporters lambaste managers before they’ve even been officially appointed. There are just not enough Guardiolas to go round.
We – the fans – are indeed fickle and even if/when stability is restored, fans get bored and grow tired of the lack of ambition, of not wanting to be stuck as a mediocre team in a league or just a general lack of excitement.
The manager’s job is short lived and high in pressure and it’s all too easy to go from hero to zero; it all being played in large stadiums that resemble lions dens.
So… can we now see why the remuneration they receive when they are given the ‘heave ho’ is hefty?
Who’d be a manager?
That’s a pretty good perspective Anita.
My caveat would be the sheer amount of money these guys are paid in the first place. No way can I feel sorry for, say, Alex Neil. Without knowing the precise figures, even at Hamilton he would have earned more, I guess, than the majority of our readers and (he he) writers.
Then the move to Norwich and the subsequent salary hike, followed by THAT compo cheque.
Pressure? Sure. But we all have pressure in our jobs, often without the glamour and rewards that the football world attracts.
I’d be a Manager – for that kinda money they could lambaste me all they like!
Does money make us happy or healthy though?!
I agree the vast amounts of money in all aspects of professional football is ludicrous, However it’s becoming more and more highlighted the issues of mental health within this sport and others. the majority do well in the ‘business’ of football nowadays but for a minority it’s been a route to all evil…
I suppose this depends on your strength of character.
Great response Martin
I’m with Martin 100%. These guys are rewarded far inxs of the down sides of the stress. If it is indeed so stressful why do they all keep going back for job after job?
The renumeration they get when sacked is often a product of a couple of things, over generous contracts, which are usually the price if you want someone good and are trying to build for the future and their own failings, not many managers get sacked if they are doing their job well.
If I got sacked for any reason, the best I could hope for is some multiple of years served. Them, full contract paid up. I think boards need to look at ways to mitigate the pay outs in the event of failure. Defining that failure with respect to how well the club might have supported the manager in transfer windows may be tricky but, if you are getting up un comers, surely we could better dictate terms?
Bah!
In general former footballers do not become high flying managers in the world of commerce. Therefore to expect them to manage a business that does not conform to any sensible business model, having stakeholders as fickle as the average football fan and unrealistic expectations heaped upon them by owners can only lead to one outcome.
Is it any wonder that there is a only a small group of men who are prepared to try to manage a football club.
I believe that Norwich and other forward thinking clubs are now separating the roles of the classic manager into distinctive business and playing roles. This may in turn lead to a downturn in turnover and payouts.
Widely rumoured that Alex received around half of the “restructuring costs” shown in the recent accounts.
It’s always amused me that it’s far easier to get rid of managers than players and it’s usually down to the latter that the former lost his job in the first instance!
I think Anita has raised an important perspective. Sure, the amounts of money paid to managers are eye-popping for most of us. But would I put myself and my family through the abuse most of them receive?
No, thanks.
I’m with you in spirit totally Stewart, but it’s all so short-term for managers as Anita suggests,
If your relationship with your family is strong enough they can be well out of the firing line; maybe 250 miles away in the UK or even in a different country. Somewhere nobody knows –
or cares – enough about you to offer any level of abuse, anyway.
Don’t Instagram, don’t Twitter. Less opportunity for incoming abuse that way.
Spend maybe six weeks a year instead of 52 with your (say) partner and kids for two years and come out of it with two million quid clear? I’d do it for the sake of the family, Definitely.
It’s not as if you couldn’t afford the commuting costs in that situation
.
Get in, make your money and get out. The ones who have done that are the “clever ones”.
Fully agree Martin put the earplugs in, ditch the TV and computers /laptops cancel twitter, facebook live like a hermit for a couple of years then start living unless you want all the limelight, adoration, Celebrity status to want these you will need a thick skin and have a giants ego.
With the idea of splitting the position into two can result in paying twice the compo if they are sacked at the same time, but there is always the chance you sack the wrong one the coach just might be getting a poor selection of players and can’t make a silk purse out of a pigs ear, or he is just out of his comfort zone.
As with city we have a coaching team still trying to learn about the hurly burly and rigorous of a new league and country, and there are pessimists that already want a change, patients is a virtue these pessimists should stop stressing and let them achieve a miracle or fail trying.
David Moyes. He’s had all kinds of abuse in recent years and surely has the kind of money that would mean that he didn’t need to work ever again. If he wanted, he could do almost anything he wants for the rest of his life without working another day. He could get some media work, as often or as seldom as he’d like, or simply do nothing and live a life of luxury.
And yet, he’s just come back for more.
Its the old saying the more you have the more you want and don’t care what it takes to get it
Think a lot of people are missing the point when comparing it to the everyday workplace.
Football managers sign fixed term contracts. So if their employers break the terms of that contract, by deciding mid-term that the manager is no longer required to do the job they’re contracted to do, basic employment law says that they’re still entitled to expect the money owed that would be due had the contract run its course.
There’s no comparison to someone losing their job in the common workplace, and the usual tabloid-dumbed-down notion of “sacking” a manager is archaic at best,
Research shows that there tend to be three types of managers,
1. those who change nothing and maintain the status quo, possibly this approach is best applied immediately after a legendary manager, eg Alex Ferguson, leaves/retires.
2. Those who are a whirlwind of activity, often with very disruptive and dramatic results, not necessarily always positive, such as Harry Redknapp, focused upon the short-term following which momentum often ebbs and progress can’t be sustained.
And
3. Those who plan and implement a long-term, well defined, plan which those around them support and embrace. Results aren’t necessarily as rapid as under 2. but they are more likely to be sustainable and achieve the greatest outcomes overall, again Alex Ferguson is a great example of this approach.
I like to think that Stuart Webber and Daniel Farke are examples of the third type of manager. Consequently I am optimistic that, given the time and support, they will become Canary legends. I think that Paul Lambert had a similar management philosophy, albeit with a different footballing style, and this was embraced by David McNally, the problems came because Chris Hughton wanted to change everything again, ie we should have looked for someone in Paul Lambert’s image, after all it worked when Ken Brown took over from John Bond, when Dave Stringer took over from Ken Brown and when Mike Walker took over from Dave Stringer.