Fergie says that he always insisted on being paid more than his players, because it reminded them who was boss. Of course, in almost every other business that you can think of, the boss generally earns more than those he manages, so Fergie's argument is rooted in good managerial sense. Personally, I think he's right, on the basis that if you pay peanuts you're going to get a monkey! Also, if a club doesn't think the manager is good enough to manage players on top wages, they should find someone who is and pay him the top wage. It cannot be a tolerable situation where one or two players earn more than the bloke who is telling them what to do! What do you boys think?
Tough one. The players bring in the money for one thing (though the very elite managers do just as much). Most fans go to see the players not the manager. Only the likes of Fergie could and should have commanded the highest wages but most managers, well they are ten a penny. They don't get transfer fees and can be very costly to sack so if they were on 300k a week, well you could say goodbye to many clubs, especially selling clubs who often change their manager..... Can't think of a Chelsea that fits the billl though...
Managers, also players, should be paid according to their ability. In Fergie's case, he was the glue that held the whole thing together, so yes he was entitled to the top wage. In the case of managers like Brenda, the idea of him getting paid more than any of the overpriced, overrated players he's bought does have a certain amusement factor - if you're not a Pool fan.
A manager should get paid what he is worth to the club in the same way a player should. Fergie deserved a high wage but did Moyes deserve to come in and immediately earn more than Rooney? Probably not. Why should players even know what a manager is on anyway? I can see what Fergie is saying but the players shouldn't know what he is on anyway and it's just a reason to justify a massive hike in his own wages. Jeez that Rooney saga really did cost United a fortune. Both pretty much double their wage overnight. Most United fans still lick his arse though, much like with De Gea. Fickle plastics are like that.
Not really, the players own and provide the product. You can't apply a normal corporate financial structure to the contracts of highly paid elite athletes. Athletes are selling something after all, their ability. Player ability is the single biggest factor in football quality
True but that is not factored into player contracts when signing though is it. They are being paid for what ability they can provide. It's the same in other sports too. Boxers used to get absolutely robbed, these days Mayweather gets 80 million for a fight. Good footballers can play good football without a manager (isn't this what many say about Barca ), good managers cannot provide good football without good players. There are sort of, exceptions though, as good as you may be as a manager there are probably only two in modern times that could ask for as much as players get or more, Maureen and Fergie. No one else, because those two guaranteed success more or less year on year. While Maureen requires very good players to provide his success, only Fergie has been very successful with a fair few average players. So really, only Fergie is the exception to the rule ergo Fergie got paid more than the players #fullcircle
If the manager isn't the most important person in the club, and paid accordingly by the club's owner(s), why on earn should any of the players have any respect for him? Fergie made sure that the club paid him the most, not only to demonstrate to him, the club, the players, and the fans, that the club's owners saw him as the most important person in the club, but also to make it absolutely clear to the players that none of them was more important than the manager. If I was a club manager, I'd insist on being paid more than the club's most expensive player, and if the club refused to do that, then that would inform me of everything that I needed to know about where I stood in the club's hierarchy, including the fact that the club viewed me as being less important than one or more of my players. If I took that job (and I'm not saying that I wouldn't), I'd do so knowing that, in the event that I got into a serious disagreement with one of those players who was being paid more than me, that I'd likely be the one who would be told to leave.
I like to think my wumming is directly in line with my team's performances. Relegation form = relegation wumming.
You obviously don't remember the reaction from many an armchair yoonited fan when those transfer requests went in then....
I think what characterises a good manager is firstly the ability to build a team. I.e. A functioning unit, not just a collection of talented individuals who don't function as a team. Secondly, is the ability to man manage, know what motivates each of his players and how to get them to play for him.
A few pesky million is literally nothing. Were not the kind of club that desperately has to offload before it can buy. I could name a club like that but you would get upset and we don't want that.
In most cases, fans go to dee the players, the players make the money. They are the clubs biggest assets. There's a handful of managers who deserve the very highest wages. Most don't.
A club should not employ someone who it does not believe is capable of managing the team. Also, a manager who takes a position at a club where it is known that there is one or more players who earn more than he earns must expect to have to take **** from that/those player(s), if things start to go tits up. That is clearly what happened to Moyes, at United, and we all saw how that one turned out!
You have to remember football is not the real world, despite how we like to believe. It is of course not the only line of work where the stuff can out earn the boss, salesmen are capable of this too as are F1 drivers and singers/actors. Ryan's Giggs wage has decreased since retiring. He was worth more as a player than as a coach, maybe in time he will command the highest v managerial wages but not now.
