| O'Neil's comments re PL contract 16:48 - Feb 6 with 2126 views | kizaitfc |
“But I think that’s where it’s fair to say you don’t judge it on a week-to-week basis, you judge it at the end of the season and where we are at that point and then we can appraise what went well and what didn’t go so well during that process."
Then why not wait til the end of the season to offer such a large contract?
I personally really like PL a want him to succeed but the contract seemed a little odd and shows the mismanagement this club is currently under [Post edited 6 Feb 2020 16:49]
|  |
| |  |
| O'Neil's comments re PL contract on 18:17 - Feb 6 with 2010 views | Garv |
Do you not then get into a Mick style 'will he won't he' situation? The kind of situation Evans got slaughtered for letting happen before...
Worth noting obviously Lambert had more than the end of this season on his contract already, but I think the point is still relevant regarding longevity and forward planning. [Post edited 6 Feb 2020 18:43]
|  |
| |
| O'Neil's comments re PL contract on 18:19 - Feb 6 with 1999 views | Pecker |
The whole situation makes no sense. |  | | |
| O'Neil's comments re PL contract on 20:34 - Feb 6 with 1897 views | Oxford_Blue |
As had been said before the contract will have safeguards and early termination clauses in | | | |
| O'Neil's comments re PL contract on 20:36 - Feb 6 with 1890 views | haynes_toe1 |
| O'Neil's comments re PL contract on 20:34 - Feb 6 by Oxford_Blue |
As had been said before the contract will have safeguards and early termination clauses in |
Completely unbelievable that those clauses put Lambert in a worse position than his previous contract. Otherwise, he wouldnt have signed it. He was in control, not Evans | | | |
| O'Neil's comments re PL contract on 20:41 - Feb 6 with 1863 views | BlueBadger |
| O'Neil's comments re PL contract on 20:34 - Feb 6 by Oxford_Blue |
As had been said before the contract will have safeguards and early termination clauses in |
This is assuming a hitherto unprecedented level of competence from ME. |  |
| |
| O'Neil's comments re PL contract on 20:55 - Feb 6 with 1825 views | C_HealyIsAPleasure |
| O'Neil's comments re PL contract on 20:34 - Feb 6 by Oxford_Blue |
As had been said before the contract will have safeguards and early termination clauses in |
And as pointed out frequently, it’s completely mental to think those safeguards will put us on better ground if we choose to sack Lambert with 5-odd years left on his contract, as opposed to 18 months left on a contract which also would have had similar provisions |  |
| |
| O'Neil's comments re PL contract on 21:01 - Feb 6 with 1813 views | tractorboy1978 |
In one article he says this squad is good enough to win the league, in the next he backs Lambert and the five year contract. We are 16th in the form table over the last 18 games. | | | |
| O'Neil's comments re PL contract on 07:10 - Feb 7 with 1604 views | TractorWood |
| O'Neil's comments re PL contract on 21:01 - Feb 6 by tractorboy1978 |
In one article he says this squad is good enough to win the league, in the next he backs Lambert and the five year contract. We are 16th in the form table over the last 18 games. |
Yes there are lots of nebulous statements that when put together don't really make any sense. That does also summarise the ME quite well, so you could argue he's bang on strategy! |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| O'Neil's comments re PL contract on 07:14 - Feb 7 with 1595 views | Chrisd |
A ridiculous decision. I'd really like to know how ME and LO'N can justify why the club have given him that deal at that point in time? What has he actually done since his appointment to warrant it? We looked clueless on Saturday and that's happened a few times this season, in the current form table over the last 18 games we're 16th and we're doing our best to slip out of the promotion race! I could quite understand if we could see signs of improvement, but we look no further forward in terms of how we play than when PL first arrived. We are so limited as a side and PL has had more than enough time to stamp his mark on this squad or perhaps he already has and this is it? Worrying, but it's to be expected under ME, just comical. [Post edited 7 Feb 2020 7:41]
| |
| |
| O'Neil's comments re PL contract on 07:31 - Feb 7 with 1566 views | Oxford_Blue |
| O'Neil's comments re PL contract on 20:55 - Feb 6 by C_HealyIsAPleasure |
And as pointed out frequently, it’s completely mental to think those safeguards will put us on better ground if we choose to sack Lambert with 5-odd years left on his contract, as opposed to 18 months left on a contract which also would have had similar provisions |
No it isn’t.
If the contract has a break clause at the end of each season based on performance targets, then Lambert can be dismissed cheaply. In any event it’s Evans’ money. The only reason there would be an issue is if it was too expensive to sack Lambert and so this prevented Evans from doing so. But that is precisely why the contract had safeguards in. The club’s lawyers will have drafted it. I would imagine Lambert is on a base salary of around £300k - £400k or so, so even if he had to be paid paid off entirely, it wouldn’t stop Evans. | | | |
| O'Neil's comments re PL contract on 08:14 - Feb 7 with 1497 views | PrideOfTheEast |
| O'Neil's comments re PL contract on 07:31 - Feb 7 by Oxford_Blue |
No it isn’t.
If the contract has a break clause at the end of each season based on performance targets, then Lambert can be dismissed cheaply. In any event it’s Evans’ money. The only reason there would be an issue is if it was too expensive to sack Lambert and so this prevented Evans from doing so. But that is precisely why the contract had safeguards in. The club’s lawyers will have drafted it. I would imagine Lambert is on a base salary of around £300k - £400k or so, so even if he had to be paid paid off entirely, it wouldn’t stop Evans. |
He’s on close to double that. | | | |
| O'Neil's comments re PL contract on 08:19 - Feb 7 with 1484 views | BackToRussia |
| O'Neil's comments re PL contract on 08:14 - Feb 7 by PrideOfTheEast |
He’s on close to double that. |
 I'll admit, unsure how much championship managers get these days, but that's got to put him somewhere in mid table for the championship doesn't it?
With a salary that large with a long contract, surely that's a lot of compo whichever way you write it. |  |
| |
| O'Neil's comments re PL contract on 09:15 - Feb 7 with 1416 views | thebooks |
I’m more concerned with what the contract is implying than how much PL receives in compensation.
In Turnstile Blues O'Neill says ITFC is a longterm project based around PL and bringing young players through. He also says, quite clearly, that this means we may not get promoted at the first attempt.
This is deeply worrying, as promotion should be the be all and end all. And that doesn’t mean we can’t develop young players. They’re not exclusive of each other — getting promoted = more money to bring them through.
If I’m being cynical this is simply yet more flannel to cover the fact the club is effectively being mothballed.
As a strategy it seems very high risk. Which players have we developed from the academy and sold at a profit? Rather, we’ve relied on picking up lower league players and shifting them on (Mings and Cresswell), and then not investing the money we make (sorry, servicing our “debt” is not investing).
Your Woolfendens and Downeses will only go for less if we don’t get promoted — they’ll simply start agitating for moves sooner.
Incidentally, more incentive to get back in the Championshiop as soon as possible: https://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2020/feb/06/championship-wider-audienc |  | | |
| O'Neil's comments re PL contract on 09:24 - Feb 7 with 1390 views | TRUE_BLUE123 |
I view Lee O'Neil the same as I did Milne, he says an awful lot of nothing and isn't really offering anything to the football side, which is the main part of his job |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
