Kalman won’t have seen it as he has me on ignore but I wrote the same earlier in the thread. It isn’t really much of an assumption as if he is sacked before the end of his existing contract an extension automatically means a larger payout.
Not really. Longer contract = larger pay-out. I don't know the exact numbers but I would say the overwhelming majority of managers leaving their clubs are sackings rather than resignations.
I would imagine most managers these days will have any compensation for being sacked as a fixed amount written in to their contract rather than just being payed off what wages are left over the remaining term the and I bet it’s not all that much at championship level.
But then surely the contract has no value? If clubs aren't actually agreeing to pay the manager for the length of the contract then what are they agreeing to?
Depends on the termination clauses. Rosies 'new deal' may revolve around incentive payments which may not form part of any severance. None of us know of course.
I'm still using lead based paint, as is obvious to anyone that knows me. The views expressed in my posts are not necessarily mine.
There will obviously be increased job security for him in a new/extended contract, it has to work both ways doesn’t it. All I’m saying is I’m sure there will just be a fixed severance fee, managers get the chop far too often even by teams that are totally skint for it to be a complete settlement of the outstanding contract every time, and it just makes sense.
it depends what the terms of the contract are he might get a longer contract but payouts could depend on league position if he's sacked it's like when managers get a long contract but if the club doesnt finish in the champions league spot they can be sacked with a relatively small payout they can be put on gardening leave and still get paid until they get a new job the club will expect an ex manager will want to get another job werent Chelsea paying the wages of several ex-managers at one time?
If his contract has been extended by a year then if he was sacked before the expiration of his contract then it would follow he would get one more year’s money which would be more than he would get at the moment. Gardening leave means they are still getting paid. Rarely do lot all managers lose out.
He could get a years extension but if one of the terms of his contract was he had to finish top ten at the end of this season otherwise he could be sacked with no payoff then he wouldnt get an extra year's pay.
I wasn't talking about Rosenior specifically, just contracts in general. If a club gives someone a contract to pay them X amount over Y years, but they don't actually have to pay them that amount if they change their mind, that would make the contract worthless surely. It might as well just say we'll pay you what we feel like for as long as we're minded to. I recall Nigel Adkins failing to agree a new contract under the Allams and the talk from local media then was that it was because they wanted to insert a clause that would allow them to sack him with no severance (or maybe it was a reduced severance) if the team were in the bottom three. So I suppose it's possible to have a clause like that based on a specific performance, but Adkins walking away suggests it isn't normal.
In general a contract is an agreement between two parties, it can contain anything both sides agree to. Normally there will be a bit about what happens if either side want to exit the contract early. Could be anything, no one knows apart from those concerned but that won't stop at least half a dozen on here claiming to know the details.
it's quite simple: if the club wants to sack a manager they will have to pay what the contract says it might say something like you said about being in the bottom three if the club offered a contract along the lines that you made out in your first paragraph, while it may not be financially beneficial to the manager, there could be non-financial terms that would make it worthwhile
The real value of a job at this level to a manager is the opportunity, do a good job somewhere and they can easily live off the back of that for another 5 or 6 years. Both the manager and the club will know that most managers will probably be back in work within a few months too so it’s not like they’re just missing out on wages. In an industry that is renowned for having extremely complex and downright bizarre contracts and clauses, for a job role that has a an expectancy measured in months rather than years, I would be 99.9% certain that any severance pay is going to be pre agreed in the contract and wouldn’t be so simple and black and white as just being paid off whatever wages are left outstanding.
Often ends up in negotiations with the club and manager represented by the LMA. Think sometimes if the manager gets re employed within the term of the contract then there's a reduction in any payoff.
when Chelsea sack their current manager they will most likely continue to pay his wages of, say, £1m per month. If he gets another job on £750k per month then Chelsea will reduce his wages to £250k per month. That's if there's no severance pay agreement or if they dont want to pay whatever it is.
