Let the links begin...

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Southcoastoldgaffer said:
I remain puzzled and disappointed that no-one, not a single voice from the club has come out to explain what is going on.

They are risking all the joy, praise and pride we have in our team's remarkable achievement. Only 20 days ago.
Click to expand...

We're past that now. Where we are now is drawing a line under the last 20 years and starting a new one in the Premier League. If I were in Ashton's shoes I'd be shortlisting and interviewing candidates, not offering a lucrative contract. If McKenna doesn't get a job now, it's too much of a risk that we'll spend the transfer pot and then he'll be off at the drop of a hat.

What's clear from the communication is that there is some substance behind the gossip. It's silly and it's a shame, but I don't want to see the club pander to it. I'd rather see them show some strength and distance themselves.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Evesham and Southcoastoldgaffer
YorkieLancsHampyLondoner said:
We're past that now. Where we are now is drawing a line under the last 20 years and starting a new one in the Premier League. If I were in Ashton's shoes I'd be shortlisting and interviewing candidates, not offering a lucrative contract. If McKenna doesn't get a job now, it's too much of a risk that we'll spend the transfer pot and then he'll be off at the drop of a hat.

What's clear from the communication is that there is some substance behind the gossip. It's silly and it's a shame, but I don't want to see the club pander to it. I'd rather see them show some strength and distance themselves.
Click to expand...

He hasnt exactly covered himself in glory has he? What on earth is going thru the minds of all the players on their hols?
 
  • Like
Reactions: YorkieLancsHampyLondoner, itfcptc and Evesham
Can someone help out the poor, uneducated American who lurks here but seldom posts? My knowledge of British football (or football in general) is quite limited, particularly the business-side of things.

Do we have to let McK go, or can we make him serve out the remainder of his contract with us? I doubt (but admit I'm not anywhere near certain) that his contract has a release clause/fee attached to it, so regardless of how much money another club throws at us do we just have to accept it or can we refuse? I understand there are pros/cons to both choices (letting him go or making him stay), but just wondering if we have a choice/say in the matter or if it will mostly be dictated by McK and/or a bigger club.

My knowledge of sports comes mostly from American sports, where this type of thing happens with players, but rarely with coaches/managers (I'm struggling to think of any similar comparison from the other sports I know/watch). Most of the time, the team with the player attracting attention/rumors makes it clear that the player isn't available (for trade in American sports, in lieu of a transfer fee)...mostly because they don't want that player and others to feel that the management is soft and will give into their (or their agents', or an interested team's) demands. Makes me wonder if maybe that's why Ed Schwartz is here...to try to play hardball with McK and the links/rumors to other clubs. But again, I'm not certain how or if such a thing will work in this situation (outside of the major American sports)...hence my asking about it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Evesham, Spanish and Nuggets
Maybe there is a flip side to all of this. Both KM and MA are smart men. KM is flattered and shows respect to the big 3 clubs and encourages his agent to talk to them, let it be in the public realm, and the besotted fans realm, but just maybe he isn't really listening to them.
He is then showing them the common courtesy. If, after all the wrangling, he came out with a public statement alongside MA too soon saying he's not going anywhere and staying with Ipswich for at least 2 more years, that would only be showing his hand and gives him no leverage when sitting down with the owners, as to how many players he wants in and the amount of funds needed to boost our bid to make a proper go of the Prem.

He is no-one's fool he's a very good man manager, top coach, he knows he doesn't yet have the experience required for a world club like Man Utd, but he needs all the tools to take on the challenges of the Premier league.

Just a thought.
 
Southcoastoldgaffer said:
I remain puzzled and disappointed that no-one, not a single voice from the club has come out to explain what is going on.

They are risking all the joy, praise and pride we have in our team's remarkable achievement. Only 20 days ago.
Click to expand...

to be fair Gaffer nothing yet has happened only speculation but if something does the club will communicate it to us. We just need to be patient
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bigalreigned, Nuggets and Southcoastoldgaffer
NotaYank said:
Can someone help out the poor, uneducated American who lurks here but seldom posts? My knowledge of British football (or football in general) is quite limited, particularly the business-side of things.

Do we have to let McK go, or can we make him serve out the remainder of his contract with us? I doubt (but admit I'm not anywhere near certain) that his contract has a release clause/fee attached to it, so regardless of how much money another club throws at us do we just have to accept it or can we refuse? I understand there are pros/cons to both choices (letting him go or making him stay), but just wondering if we have a choice/say in the matter or if it will mostly be dictated by McK and/or a bigger club.

My knowledge of sports comes mostly from American sports, where this type of thing happens with players, but rarely with coaches/managers (I'm struggling to think of any similar comparison from the other sports I know/watch). Most of the time, the team with the player attracting attention/rumors makes it clear that the player isn't available (for trade in American sports, in lieu of a transfer fee)...mostly because they don't want that player and others to feel that the management is soft and will give into their (or their agents', or an interested team's) demands. Makes me wonder if maybe that's why Ed Schwartz is here...to try to play hardball with McK and the links/rumors to other clubs. But again, I'm not certain how or if such a thing will work in this situation (outside of the major American sports)...hence my asking about it.
Click to expand...

If he wants to go we don’t have a choice. The contract will be breached and then compensation will be paid. We can’t stop it. After we officially become a Premier League club, it changes and the club would have to ask our permission to make an approach or be in breach of Premier League rules too, for which there could be sanctions. We would have that status in a few weeks following the AGM so currently that protection isn’t there for us. In practice though, they might make a very strong case to keep him but there is no way that we would force a manager to stay at the club against his will.

As for the compensation fee, there would be arbitration if the two sides can’t agree.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: NotaYank
NotaYank said:
Can someone help out the poor, uneducated American who lurks here but seldom posts? My knowledge of British football (or football in general) is quite limited, particularly the business-side of things.

Do we have to let McK go, or can we make him serve out the remainder of his contract with us? I doubt (but admit I'm not anywhere near certain) that his contract has a release clause/fee attached to it, so regardless of how much money another club throws at us do we just have to accept it or can we refuse? I understand there are pros/cons to both choices (letting him go or making him stay), but just wondering if we have a choice/say in the matter or if it will mostly be dictated by McK and/or a bigger club.

My knowledge of sports comes mostly from American sports, where this type of thing happens with players, but rarely with coaches/managers (I'm struggling to think of any similar comparison from the other sports I know/watch). Most of the time, the team with the player attracting attention/rumors makes it clear that the player isn't available (for trade in American sports, in lieu of a transfer fee)...mostly because they don't want that player and others to feel that the management is soft and will give into their (or their agents', or an interested team's) demands. Makes me wonder if maybe that's why Ed Schwartz is here...to try to play hardball with McK and the links/rumors to other clubs. But again, I'm not certain how or if such a thing will work in this situation (outside of the major American sports)...hence my asking about it.
Click to expand...

In essence, it’s typically very hard and counter-productive to hold a manager to their contract - if they want to leave. Unlike players, managers can just resign their contract and walk away from a job. So if McKenna had offers on the table elsewhere and wanted to leave - but we told him to honour his contract - he would just quit. There are arbitration costs involved, as Hampy says, but managers have much more flexibility than players. Another reason why it’s hard to keep hold of a manager who wants to leave is the impact they have. They won’t be committed to their job, their negativity is more likely impact to players and staff, and so it’s easier to let them go and replace them with somebody who wants to be there. Particularly as managers aren’t really sellable assets - club won’t pay a transfer fee for a manager, they’ll pay the compensation required to get them out their contract/any arbitration costs.

On the other hand, players are worth a transfer fee if they’re in contract and there are only incredibly rare instances of players resigning/quitting. It’s easier to hold them to their contract and play hardball with other clubs. Players are not as influential as the manager in the running of the club, so a wantaway player isn’t as detrimental as a wantaway manager.

Hopefully that clarifies the situation and please keep posting - always good to see more people on here :emoticon-0148-yes:
 
  • Like
Reactions: San Diego, NotaYank and YorkieLancsHampyLondoner
Nuggets said:
In essence, it’s typically very hard and counter-productive to hold a manager to their contract - if they want to leave. Unlike players, managers can just resign their contract and walk away from a job. So if McKenna had offers on the table elsewhere and wanted to leave - but we told him to honour his contract - he would just quit. There are arbitration costs involved, as Hampy says, but managers have much more flexibility than players. Another reason why it’s hard to keep hold of a manager who wants to leave is the impact they have. They won’t be committed to their job, their negativity is more likely impact the players and staff, and so it’s easier to let them go and replace them with somebody who wants to be there. Particularly as managers aren’t really sellable assets - club won’t pay a transfer fee for a manager, they’ll pay the compensation required to get them out their contract/any arbitration costs.

On the other hand, players are worth a transfer fee if they’re in contract and there are only incredibly rare instances of players resigning/quitting. It’s easier to hold them to their contract and play hardball with other clubs. Players are not as influential as the manager in the running of the club, so a wantaway player isn’t as detrimental as a wantaway manager.

Hopefully that clarifies the situation and please keep posting - always good to see more people on here :emoticon-0148-yes:
Click to expand...

It’s worth mentioning too that from a legal standpoint, clubs treat their manager’s contracts with utter contempt and frequently fire them without any contractual grounds, so there is no legal basis whatsoever for a manager to be held to it the other way around. If anything, the rights of a worker will have more protection than a company, not less.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NotaYank and Nuggets
Most likely at our club (not every club though), the decision over players and managers’ futures will be decided on moral grounds.

So Ashton might say, “McKenna’s dream job is Manchester United, so we won’t stand in his way.” If the club in question were Norwich City, the club would likely make a different choice.

That’s also why Leif Davis would likely leave if Newcastle came in for him, although as nuggets says we could put our foot down with players if we wanted to. Wayne Rooney at Manchester United under Alex Ferguson was one famous case of that happening.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NotaYank
Southcoastoldgaffer said:
He hasnt exactly covered himself in glory has he? What on earth is going thru the minds of all the players on their hols?
Click to expand...

I agree it’s not a good look. If we are to believe the 24-hour news cycle of national newspapers and social media “football insiders” - McKenna’s flirting with any top flight vacancy with a pulse. He appears to be a man on a mission to get out of a club that he has helped build over the last two and a bit years, but a club he doesn’t appear to believe are capable of staying up. And he has a point there. We are more likely to go down than stay up with this current squad as things stand.

McKenna’s agency, CAA Base, are notoriously known for being aggressive pursuers for their clients. We know they have met with Manchester United a week ago. But they’ve presumably met/will meet with the likes of Tuchel, Pochettino, Potter etc. should they fire Ten Hag. I can’t see why McKenna, who hasn’t managed a Premier League game, would be preferred over them unless they see McKenna as a “project yes man”.

As for the players - a penny for their thoughts! They were probably bemused at the speculation to begin with, but I imagine a few are now getting worried. There would already be some doubts about who’s staying, who’s going in the team with McKenna in charge. With a new manager behind the dug out, I think they’d be more radical and aggressive in buying in players who they think can perform well in the Premier League - particularly when you’re replacing McKenna, who is considered a legend to essentially all the players.
 
  • Like
Reactions: itfcptc, Southcoastoldgaffer and YorkieLancsHampyLondoner
Nuggets said:
I agree it’s not a good look. If we are to believe the 24-hour news cycle of national newspapers and social media “football insiders” - McKenna’s flirting with any top flight vacancy with a pulse. He appears to be a man on a mission to get out of a club that he has helped build over the last two and a bit years, but a club he doesn’t appear to believe are capable of staying up. And he has a point there. We are more likely to go down than stay up with this current squad as things stand.

McKenna’s agency, CAA Base, are notoriously known for being aggressive pursuers for their clients. We know they have met with Manchester United a week ago. But they’ve presumably met/will meet with the likes of Tuchel, Pochettino, Potter etc. should they fire Ten Hag. I can’t see why McKenna, who hasn’t managed a Premier League game, would be preferred over them unless they see McKenna as a “project yes man”.

As for the players - a penny for their thoughts! They were probably bemused at the speculation to begin with, but I imagine a few are now getting worried. There would already be some doubts about who’s staying, who’s going in the team with McKenna in charge. With a new manager behind the dug out, I think they’d be more radical and aggressive in buying in players who they think can perform well in the Premier League - particularly when you’re replacing McKenna, who is considered a legend to essentially all the players.
Click to expand...

I think whether he stays or not depends on a few things:
1) will Brighton wait for the United situation to unfold or appoint someone else?
2) Chelsea needs a major change of course, it seems very unlikely he’s going there
3) will United sack Ten Hag? If they then do, will they take a punt on McKenna? IMO it’s a big punt for an untested and unproven manager that would have to control the big egos there, and would be utter madness for them to do that.
4) will another club come knocking some time before August?

I think most likely United will stick with Ten Hag and it will be off to Brighton for no more reason than to save face after all the headlines. It would be in our interests for whatever business will be done to be done quickly so if he won’t sign a new deal by the end of next week then we should look elsewhere. It’s not beyond the realms of possibility that McKenna finds himself unemployed and back in the Championship.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Southcoastoldgaffer
Ashton and the big bosses will know exactly what McKennas thoughts are, and whether we wants to go or not.
McKenna has not spoken to any other clubs, and his agents and representative have every right to speak to clubs, maybe they have other managers and players on their books who are interested.
All this paper talk, is just that...they ate looking to make their stories that bit more interesting, and definitely put a spin on issues.
McKenna is currently our manager, and until I find out he's spoken to other clubs, I'll take all linking stories with pinch of salt
 
  • Like
Reactions: San Diego, Southcoastoldgaffer and Bigalreigned
Bigalreigned said:
I'm reserving any comment on this until we have definite news rather than pure speculation.The sooner it's sorted, though,the better.
Click to expand...

For a while I was doing exactly the same, but this is way past the point of being tabloid gossip and they’ve had every opportunity to address it by now and haven’t.

and stretchy - I take this report with a pinch of salt but - apparently McKenna has interviewed for Brighton.
 
One of these things has got to happen by the end of next week:

- He’ll be announced as manager of somewhere else.
- The club will say he’s signed a new contract and it was all speculation.
- The club will stop backing McKenna unreservedly and will make a statement about interest from other clubs and what they are doing about it.

If it’s still up in the air then my frustration will turn from McKenna to Ashton for being weak and allowing it to drag on.
 
With Man U carrying out an "end of Season review" over the next week I think we're going to be in a state of limbo for at least another seven days.
My big fear about all this is that any time advantage we had by avoiding the Playoffs has been frittered away.
 
  • Like
Reactions: YorkieLancsHampyLondoner
stretchyboy said:
May well be proved wrong and look foolish, but being spotted on a train back front London, doesn't corroborate anything.
Click to expand...

The only person who is in any danger of looking foolish is McKenna himself. Like I said, I take that report with a pinch of salt, but we can't say categorically that "McKenna has not spoken to any other clubs"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back