Nope. I said yesterday my contact is away on holiday so I've not got a clue what the hold up is. The rumour on the forums is that there's still a couple of issues around the contract that need resolving and they decided to wait until he was back from his hols to resolve them. I have no idea whether this is accurate or not, but it makes sense - sort of.
Nope. This is some poor rationalization. I remember that story came out before Everton made their second approach, and when thinking when I read it that it couldn't be true because no team would be that cocky. A club in your own league with a very rich owner has not only offered the manager a contract but has been publicly announcing they want him, and you don't even have like a short 20 minute meeting about it? If only to discuss what the club will say if asked about it? I don't think it actually happened, but if it did that's awful planning. Yes, they would be very confident to not even discuss it. And that's the entire point of the article. They were overly confident and it may have come to bite them in the ass. There's no way you can be "Yeah, it wasn't important. No one could have seen this coming." Of course you can see it coming. Koeman hasn't signed yet, and there's a competing party for his services. In the meantime, he's making noises about "ambition" which means he's not entirely happy.
If they had very recently spoken to Koeman, as the board had, (prior to Koeman's first holiday) and they had been assured for the umpteenth time, by Koeman, that he had no intention of leaving for Everton, and that he was ready to sign a new contract, subject to the finalisation of some details by Koeman's agent and legal team, then why would the board need to convene a meeting, to discuss an approach that Koeman had told them he wasn't interested in? If anything, we haven't been guilty of being "over confident". We've been guilty of being too trustful.
The reports are that if we really wanted to then we could have kept Koeman by giving him more money. We chose not too No planning in the world can prevent another team approaching Koeman and Koeman being ready to accept that approach. The planning can be judged on how we respond
Really? How high were we willing to go? And when it went higher we simply said no without ever once meeting on it? I doubt it. Also, apparently Koeman was hurting the youth development and unwilling to commit to our philosophy/five year plan. So why did we want him at all. In the end it doesn't matter, because Everton made him an offer too good to refuse. And no, not just the wages. The whole deal with the transfer money and stadium... yadda yadda. They sweet-talked him into it. And I think they are overpaying. But there's a whole ton of cringeworthy post-breakup "We never wanted him anyway and besides it was all his fault and he'll probably get fat when he's older and anyhow I'm totally over it except I keep talking about it." rationalization going on right now.[/I]
I doubt that Koeman would ever expect us to match Everton, but may have thought we could increase spending a bit....perhaps we even did up the offer...who knows. But remember the figure arrived at for wages and future signings wasn't picked out of a hat....it would have been arrived at by discussion. There would have been some flexibility, but I bet that was in the +10 million bracket, not a lot more than that. So of course we could have kept him, but perhaps not in any feasible way.
Perhaps your behind the curve, but Koeman asked us to match or improve our original offer. We were not prepared to do that because of the minor concerns which have been stated. Saints (rightly or wrongly) don't consider Koeman to be essential to the progression of the club. So we've not got involved in a bidding war. By the way, stadium chat has nothing to do with anything. If Koeman is still the Everton manager when they move into their new stadium. I won't just eat my hat, I'll eat all the hats in the world
http://www.fansnetwork.co.uk/football/southampton/news/43048/ Bit from the Ugly Inside....saying that details yet to be sorted. Gone too far to pull out now...I would suggest this is mere fine tuning. Also suggests that compo not sorted...I would have thought that would be sorted before he was given permission to speak to Everton.
As I suggested a few days back, maybe this was discussed and both parties agreed to give it another go. You seem determined to find fault with the board.
Yes,and I could have married that super-attractive girl I went out with right after college if I'd lost 20 pounds, gotten a job, and been a little nicer to her. I just chose not to.
Not at all. I'm generally supportive of the board. But the way the views on here constantly morph in accordance to facts is silly. A few days ago, Koeman was a greedy bastard who only cared about the money. But honestly, the personal wages Koeman is getting aren't really that big a deal for a PL club. It seems as though Koeman might be making as little as 5m a year at Everton. We were supposedly already paying him 3.5m. So the difference is 30k a week, which is not an unreasonable raise. Except that now it's NOT the wage. It's that Koeman didn't fit our philosophy of promoting from within the Academy. But if we had meticulously drawn up a five year plan, and the Academy was so integral to our long-term success that was included as one of our main 4 or 5 objectives then that **** should be non-negotiable. If you aren't cool with playing the youth, you don't get the job. Not "well, if you aren't cool with it that's fine but we pay you slightly less." Everyone now is like "Oh, well Koeman overplayed his hand and good for the board for not be held hostage." But I can guarantee you that if, three weeks ago, we had simultaneously announced that 1) We'd signed Koeman to a 5m a year contract, 2) We were looking to spend 100m plus sales during the summer, and 3) We were planning an expansion of St. Mary's sometime in the not-distant future because we anticipated being a CL club... everyone here would be saying exactly what the Everton supporters are now. That this is a shot across the bow, we are announcing our intentions, our "ambition" is great, etc. If we were willing to hire Koeman despite the fact that he clashed with our core philosophy, that would be stupid. If we wanted Koeman but didn't even deign it necessary to meet when we knew he had been made an offer, that would be stupid. If we had the opportunity to sign Koeman, and didn't because of a mere 1.5m/year, that might be kind of stupid, too. If we didn't want to promise Koeman a new stadium or a 100m transfer budget.... that might actually be rather wise. But it would mean acknowledging that maybe we aren't on a level with Everton, or maybe that KL could be criticized for being cheap. I think that Koeman is probably not quite as greedy/evil as is being made out. I think that there is some truth that there were concerns about him. I think that probably some players and staff did not like him much, but probably some players and staff did. I think that contract negotiations can always turn on a dime, and that you have to look at every contingency/demand/clause/offer/counter-offer/competitor,etc. including many things most of us haven't even thought of yet. Basically, I think these sorts of decisions are highly complex, and there is great risk involved and you have to just do the best you can. The board could be proven wrong. Like way, way, disastrously wrong. They could also end up looking like geniuses. You just never know, or at least the supporters certainly don't.
The board could be proven wrong. Like way, way, disastrously wrong. They could also end up looking like geniuses -------------------------------------------- Somewhere quietly inbetween I reckon.
