The length of the deal

[Deleted User 18963]

2 and a half years. Can someone please explain to me how this is meant to show ambition? How it is meant to show that PP has been given a clear mandate to get us promoted? If he fails, we keep him next year? Should have been 1 year IMO.

 

[Chop Sauce]

Parkinson. Just let that sink in.

 

[dcl0sc]

2 and a half years. Can someone please explain to me how this is meant to show ambition? How it is meant to show that PP has been given a clear mandate to get us promoted? If he fails, we keep him next year? Should have been 1 year IMO.

Shouldn't have been appointed in the first place...

He's clearly been appointed as a yes man! Hill and Coton think he's a shoe in though!

 

[Hongkongphooey]

Gone by Xmas

 

[Deleted User 18963]

Shouldn't have been appointed in the first place...

He's clearly been appointed as a yes man! Hill and Coton think he's a shoe in though!

I agree that he should not be appointed. Its the length of the deal that has utterly confused me.

 

[North Yorks Mackem]

2 and a half years. Can someone please explain to me how this is meant to show ambition? How it is meant to show that PP has been given a clear mandate to get us promoted? If he fails, we keep him next year? Should have been 1 year IMO.

Very risky move giving him a 2 1/2 year contract imo. But I suppose you could argue that it shows they have faith in the appointment and view him as being someone who can take us forward in the championship. Where he has pretty much always failed.

 

[Deleted member 35923]

I think any notion that the people running our club have anything like a long term vision can be consigned to the dustbin. And any notion that the takeover or ‘investment’ is ongoing can equally be consigned to the same dustbin.

 

[dcl0sc]

I agree that he should not be appointed. Its the length of the deal that has utterly confused me.

Agreed, anything over 0 months is too long!

 

[Wearside2Wrwkshire]

Ridiculous giving him 2 and a half years man. Should have been a contract to the end of the season with an automatic 12 month renewal if we get promoted. Doesn't surprise me though i mean these are the same idiots that gave Loovens 2 years, Leadbitter 2 and a half years and have yet to renew contracts for McLaughlin and O'Nien.

 

[Toothless]

We’re going to be in league one a very long time arnt we..

 

[Deleted User 18963]

Ridiculous giving him 2 and a half years man. Should have been a contract to the end of the season with an automatic 12 month renewal if we get promoted. Doesn't surprise me though i mean these are the same idiots that gave Loovens 2 years, Leadbitter 2 and a half years and have yet to renew contracts for McLaughlin and O'Nien.

Very fair points.

 

[deleted user 785]

I could have understood a year and a half. Just.

The length of this deal has me baffled.

 

[Deleted member 35923]

We’re going to be in league one a very long time arnt we..

we may go up with Parkinson. But with him and the current ownership, it’ll be never anything more than bottom end championship or top end league one. It’s an awful appointment in terms of sending out positive messages RE the direction of the club. Absolutely awful

 

[jonnie_makem]

It could quite easily be to give the illusion of stability. I wouldn't be surprised if there were clauses in there if we didn't get promoted this year.

 

[Sleepy]

Length of the deal means nothing, why are you getting your knickers in a twist?

There are always clauses/targets in contracts, the length means nothing unless everything goes to plan.

 

[Wearside Wanderer II]

Said 18 months on the initial press release then changed to 2 1/2 years.
Tinpot from top to bottom

 

[Deleted member 35923]

I could have understood a year and a half. Just.

The length of this deal has me baffled.

Well I think it certainly indicates once and for all, beyond any doubt, that the takeover is dead.

 

[The Good Sir]

Ridiculous decision. If he fails to get us up, he will be sacked. If he does get us up, he's hit his well known glass ceiling, and will still need replacing. Either way, we'll need to pay him off, in an absolutely needless expense.

 

[snarlz II]

Needs to hit the ground running...

 

[pwsafc]

2 and a half years. Can someone please explain to me how this is meant to show ambition? How it is meant to show that PP has been given a clear mandate to get us promoted? If he fails, we keep him next year? Should have been 1 year IMO.

Not many managers with any sense would accept a short term contract