Ok first of all Scally does not pay off the remaining part of their contract. He uses the term ‘to mutually end the contract’ that basically means you can leave for free and get another club but you won’t be getting any cash from me.
Not sure if you’re responding to me or not. I don’t think I did suggest he pays off the whole of the remaining part of his contract. I doubt Scally or any chairman has ever done that as it’s just a waste of money. You’d sooner leave them in the reserves as an example. Actually we might have done it with JET, but that was a loan not a perm contract. I said the reality would be closer to ripping up the contract (as you’ve suggested), or your third choice, pay some of the contract up:
The third choice is to go as a free agent do a deal with scally to pay some of your contract and then you take a huge risk on finding a club.
This is clearly what happens with a number of our players when they leave and then re-sign with another club a few hours later IMO. I can imagine the situation exactly. Player is told he’s not wanted. He goes to find another club, but new club will only offer him 70% of his current wages, which he doesn’t want to take a pay cut. Player goes to scally and agrees to leave if Scally pays off 30% of his contract as a ‘mutual termination agreement’. Scally offers 20% and the player accepts, knowing he’ll be going to a new club he’s wanted at. GFC saves 80% of the player’s wages off the budget and can spend that on a new player they think will be an improvement, and the player gets a 10% wage reduction etc. but is able to move on.
The next issue is that many clubs in league one and two have now largely spent budgets and the squads are pretty much sorted. So this makes it difficult to move or get a club in a similar division. They have to really need a player who plays in a specific position. If this had have happened weeks ago it would have been much easier for some players to get clubs.
While a lot of budgets have been spent, there are still lots of clubs signing players. We still need 3-4 players for example. Evans clearly hadn’t made up his mind yet, or has changed his mind based on getting to know the players more. He is entitled to do so.
Remember the club signs the player on these deals so they should honor them and not put them into ‘constructive dismissal ‘ position.
Really? Are we that naïve here? It also works both ways. Players ultimately demand moves and down tools when they want to move on. As long as Evans is better at it than Hessie was (we all know what he did with Mccammon when trying to force him out), then it’s okay by me. I don’t doubt it happens everywhere up and down the country. Given we have a Lawyer as CEO and Scally’s been burnt before in the Mcgammon case, as well as the fact Evans has a huge wealth of experience, I would assume we’re doing it just on the right side of the law this time. In fact if we had Evans when Mccammon was around we might have saved a load of money (and our reputation too).
Alphabet he just tells them they are not part of his future plans and bully’s them and makes the atmosphere hostile for them
Yes this does not surprise me at all. In fact I would expect this would need to be his approach. It’s ruthless but required to achieve his aims. Hessie tried the same with Mccammon, but was clearly not as experienced at this.
What’s absolutely evident is that Kettners absolutely hates Evans and the approach he’s taken for this. I guess because you know the players personally that he’s bullying/getting rid of. I’d imagine a fair few of the players hate him too now, but it’ll no doubt be written into their mutual termination agreements that they cannot make negative comments about the club/manager.
Of course it becomes an issue if you see players aren't playing for him. But yesterday the players definitely seemed to be playing for him in my eyes.
