[Archived] Mike Newell

[daren]

Whatever about his press relations, his players thought he was great. He had £9 million worth of players sold out from under him. From a championship side! When they were doing well earlier in the season, he had two sold in January. There's no way he can be blamed if he didn't sanction the departures, and it didn't seem like he had funding to replace them. Harsh

[Anti Euro Smiths Fan]

"Newell took £800,000 from football transfers"

So a number of managers have this type of arrangement then - It's a bit of a kick in the teeth for the supporters when they see their best players being sold by managers who are making large sums of money from selling the players on to rival clubs.

[Eddie]

!I don't really see anything wrong with it. It is just a type of performance related pay and as long as it is only being used as a percentage of the profit made on the player I think it is fine. If his wages were being structured accordingly then it seems like a rather logical way of running a club.

[BuckyRover]

Im not sure about that.

I can't imagine criticising my boss for selling my players if I got 10% of the fee.

It should have been made clear when he was the manager, he has lost credibility in my eyes

[modes98]

It should have been made clear when he was the manager, he has lost credibility in my eyes

It may have been a way of him trying to stop the board selling his best players. Obviously worked!

A manager can still have a go at the board even if he is gaining money from transfers, they are the single reason that Luton are going down.

[thenodrog]

It should have been made clear when he was the manager, he has lost credibility in my eyes

You need to give things more thought Bucky....

1. If Newell has objected to the board selling off his best players even though he was due a 10% cut means that he has gained credibility surely?

2. Maybe he was he on a low basic salary for that division with the 10% clause put in as an incentive bonus?

Whatever it's something that I've been dissed on here by many for suggesting it happen at BRFC! I repeat I wouldn't mind seeing Hughes benefitting from such a 'bonus' clause in his contract. It might persuade him to stay at BRFC as long as BRFC want him. Imagine if we off load Bentley for 10m after picking him up for buttons? Same with Benni, Roberts, Jeffers ( ), Warnock, Samba, Nelsen etc. One sale would make all the difference in finances to us. A 10% kick back properly set up might just persuade Hughes and his men to stay and keep the production line going. He's doing too good a job at the moment with the players to let some club with bigger resources work on his obvious ambition and talent and snaffle him off us. There will be many avaricious eyes on him after his 3 year performance at BRFC.

[costakiau]

You need to give things more thought Bucky....

1. If Newell has objected to the board selling off his best players even though he was due a 10% cut means that he has gained credibility surely?

2. Maybe he was he on a low basic salary for that division with the 10% clause put in as an incentive bonus?

Whatever it's something that I've been dissed on here by many for suggesting it happen at BRFC! I repeat I wouldn't mind seeing Hughes benefitting from such a 'bonus' clause in his contract. It might persuade him to stay at BRFC as long as BRFC want him. Imagine if we off load Bentley for 10m after picking him up for buttons? Same with Benni, Roberts, Jeffers ( ), Warnock, Samba, Nelsen etc. One sale would make all the difference in finances to us. A 10% kick back properly set up might just persuade Hughes and his men to stay and keep the production line going. He's doing too good a job at the moment with the players to let some club with bigger resources work on his obvious ambition and talent and snaffle him off us. There will be many avaricious eyes on him after his 3 year performance at BRFC.

Speaking of giving things much thought... I dont know if you really thought that one through.

How is the selling of our best players going to benefit the club? Basically you are claiming financial incentive would help keep MH at Blackburn. Then i say 1 - either pay him more, or 2 - give him a real incentive clause (performance based). A scheme whereby profits are gained by managers via the sale of players are a conflict of interest and im sure each sale will receive full scrutiny by not only the media but even worse for Sparky - BRFCS messageboard.

[thenodrog]

How is the selling of our best players going to benefit the club? Basically you are claiming financial incentive would help keep MH at Blackburn. Then i say 1 - either pay him more, or 2 - give him a real incentive clause (performance based). A scheme whereby profits are gained by managers via the sale of players are a conflict of interest and im sure each sale will receive full scrutiny by not only the media but even worse for Sparky - BRFCS messageboard.

1. Our best player imo is our manager. We do not want to lose him! There will of course have to be a mechanism in place to limit the ins and outs in any one period of time.

2. Like it or not our top players will go. We are more of a selling club at the moment. Hughes is making a fantastic job of turning cheap players into valuable ones so give him a workable incentive to continue doing so. Bellamy and Neill leaving do not present as big a problem as we envisaged because he has replaced them with arguably better players for less money! A fantastic ahievement. Also we have money in the bank with the likes of Nelsen, Warnock, Samba Bentley etc.

3. Have you thought it through costakiau? If we offer him / them a performance based incentive and we still sell our best players ... as we always will ..... then he and his staff will soon become disenchanted as their performance related bonus will evaportae with the best players departures and Hughes etc will leave in double quick time.

[Billy Castell]

This stuff about getting a % of sales is silly. It would encourage less scrupulous managers to asset strip a team in return for a bit of cash. The team suffers, and the manager gets sacked with a nice bit of money after getting his contract cancelled. Hughes doesn't strike me as that sort of greedy person. Ferguson is infected with avarice, but his pathological need for success would stop him from selling Christiano Ronaldo and getting £4m+ for himself.

The kind of manager that would eagerly do this sort of thing is someone who knows they're in their last job as they've been mediocre or worse elsewhere (e.g. Souness, Hoddle) or a young manager that loves money and knows every player in his squad has a price (e.g. Newell?). Either of these sorts of manager could end up at Blackburn after Hughes.

[costakiau]

1. Our best player imo is our manager. We do not want to lose him! Their will of course have to be a mechanism in place to limit the ins and outs in any one period of time.

2. Like it or not our top players will go. We are more of a selling club at the moment. Hughes is making a fantastic job of turning cheap players into valuable ones so give him a workable incentive to continue doing so. Bellamy and Neill leaving do not present as big a problem as we envisaged because he has replaced them with arguably better players for less money! A fantastic ahievement. Also we have money in the bank with the likes of Nelsen, Warnock, Samba Bentley etc.

3. Have you thought it through costakiau? If we offer him / them a performance based incentive and we still sell our best players ... as we always will ..... then he and his staff will soon become disenchanted as their performance related bonus will evaportae with the best players departures and Hughes etc will leave in double quick time.

Ok so we reward the manager for selling our better players whilst continuing to finish mid table or lower. If your type of arrangement was in place we might we have lost nelson to pompey pre season and we might well start becoming a feeder club for the likes of Pompey, Villa, Middlesborough, Fulham as they would start approaching our players knowing very well they have a greater chance of snaring them because the manager might be more inclined to let them go. Obviously the board would block anything they deemed suss but that would in turn see sparky leave. The more i think about it the more flaws there are. Thenodrog, i dont know your politcal persuasions but you seem like an idealist.... maybe you should be supporting the Reds.

[thenodrog]

Ok so we reward the manager for selling our better players whilst continuing to finish mid table or lower. If your type of arrangement was in place we might we have lost nelson to pompey pre season and we might well start becoming a feeder club for the likes of Pompey, Villa, Middlesborough, Fulham as they would start approaching our players knowing very well they have a greater chance of snaring them because the manager might be more inclined to let them go. Obviously the board would block anything they deemed suss but that would in turn see sparky leave. The more i think about it the more flaws there are. Thenodrog, i dont know your politcal persuasions but you seem like an idealist.... maybe you should be supporting the Reds.

Stanley?

btw costakiau re: Nelsen....Your argument holds little water there. In hindsight 4.5 million from Arry would have been a fantastic deal for very good defender who unfortunately appears to have become a crock! Especially considering

1. the amount that we paid for him.

and

2. the amount that we paid for Samba!

and

3. the frequency that he clutches his buttock as he troops off the field to be subbed.

[thenodrog]

This stuff about getting a % of sales is silly. It would encourage less scrupulous managers to asset strip a team in return for a bit of cash. The team suffers, and the manager gets sacked with a nice bit of money after getting his contract cancelled. Hughes doesn't strike me as that sort of greedy person. Ferguson is infected with avarice, but his pathological need for success would stop him from selling Christiano Ronaldo and getting £4m+ for himself.

The kind of manager that would eagerly do this sort of thing is someone who knows they're in their last job as they've been mediocre or worse elsewhere (e.g. Souness, Hoddle) or a young manager that loves money and knows every player in his squad has a price (e.g. Newell?). Either of these sorts of manager could end up at Blackburn after Hughes.

Precisely why he could be offered a 'controlled' deal of that nature.

[costakiau]

Stanley?

btw costakiau re: Nelsen....Your argument holds little water there. In hindsight 4.5 million from Arry would have been a fantastic deal for very good defender who unfortunately appears to have become a crock! Especially considering

1. the amount that we paid for him.

and

2. the amount that we paid for Samba!

and

3. the frequency that he clutches his buttock as he troops off the field to be subbed.

Not stanley, when i mentioned the reds it was cryptic reference linking communists and idealists.

And your claims regarding my Nelson argment holding no water; I was merely highlighting a situation that could have arisen as a result of this sort of a structure in place, regardless of whether his hamstring is crocked or not. Personally i think he will be back next year with samba (a preseason and premiership experience behind him this guy could really become special) and we will then have one of the meanest defences in the league, but thats probably something for another thread.

[thenodrog]

Not stanley, when i mentioned the reds it was cryptic reference linking communists and idealists.

Ahhh... I see. Sorry but being from Blackburn we don't really do 'cryptic'.

Anyway my point is that whatever we do we will always lose our best players to clubs with greater resources of which there seem plenty. That fact is definite and irrefutable and proven by the Lucas Neill 70K pw situation. Also I read that Man City are attracting interest and Randy Larner is funding O'Neill to the tune of 30m this summer. Our traditional rivals are beginning to leave us behind financially.

Your way, though honourable would see us lose not only our best players BUT our manager too and pdq. We all know through bad experience that managers like Hughes do not grow on trees and replacing him with another with his ability to talent spot and nuture players would be mighty difficult. I am just offering a solution which might just make it more tempting for MH to stay here and continue with his good work. A sort of Prem League Dario Gradi who just happens to be subject to little health threatening pressure yet with the mechanisms in place for him to end up as rich as Croesus through his own best efforts. It's a win win situation that only his apparently fierce personal managerial ambitions could threaten.

[Fife Rover]

Ok so we reward the manager for selling our better players whilst continuing to finish mid table or lower. If your type of arrangement was in place we might we have lost nelson to pompey pre season and we might well start becoming a feeder club for the likes of Pompey, Villa, Middlesborough, Fulham as they would start approaching our players knowing very well they have a greater chance of snaring them because the manager might be more inclined to let them go. Obviously the board would block anything they deemed suss but that would in turn see sparky leave. The more i think about it the more flaws there are. Thenodrog, i dont know your politcal persuasions but you seem like an idealist.... maybe you should be supporting the Reds.

I would suspect he is more of a blues supporter.

[Anti Euro Smiths Fan]

The plot slightly thickens in the Mike Newell saga....

Bill Tomlins has resigned as chairman of Luton Town after admitting making irregular payments to agents on three occasions.

Last year Mike Newell launched a strong attack on agents, who he described as "the scourge of the game". Newell said: "A lot of people involved with agents are taking back-handers."

When asked if he had been offered money himself from agents, Newell said: "Of course I have. If George Graham is the only person guilty of taking a bung in the last 10 years, I would be absolutely amazed."

Link: Luton chairman resigns as the club face FA probe over payments

[thenodrog]

The plot slightly thickens in the Mike Newell saga....

Bill Tomlins has resigned as chairman of Luton Town after admitting making irregular payments to agents on three occasions.

Last year Mike Newell launched a strong attack on agents, who he described as "the scourge of the game". Newell said: "A lot of people involved with agents are taking back-handers."

When asked if he had been offered money himself from agents, Newell said: "Of course I have. If George Graham is the only person guilty of taking a bung in the last 10 years, I would be absolutely amazed."

Link: Luton chairman resigns as the club face FA probe over payments

Another interesting link...... http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/t...own/6470567.stm

Looks like Newell might have been seen as a whistle blower by Tomlins and not potted for their league position after all. Newell was reportedly pretty peed off with having the board sell all his strongest players without providing him with funds to replace them. Maybe the snouts have been in the Luton trough for quite some time.