How long before the Bank tells Lowe to go?

[saintjay77]

what is the gossip (assuming no-one actually knows?) of JP's salary?

 

well he bought himself out of his last contract and I think the cost has been said before although i cant remember how much it was.

 

Considering the jump up from the division he was in to the CCC I would guess he is on more now? unless its similar but performance related bonuses based on where we finish?

[Weston Saint]

what is the gossip (assuming no-one actually knows?) of JP's salary?

JP & Wotte salary together is less than Pearson's was, I am told.

[NickG]

if that's right, I am not convinced NP v JP would be hugely different so it does make some sense - particularly if Lowe knew he was going to cull the "stars" and JP would be more accepting of that.

[um pahars]

if that's right, I am not convinced NP v JP would be hugely different so it does make some sense - particularly if Lowe knew he was going to cull the "stars" and JP would be more accepting of that.

 

Whenever someone continues to trot out the lines that Pearson didn't want to work with youngsters, or that he wasn't willing to work within the financial parameters I think I should trot out this post from a while back:

 

 

 

 

And of course you have these quotes from Pearson a few months back which hardly make him out to be a dinosaur and backward looking when it comes to youth.

 

"A lot of my background is working with youngsters. I worked with the England youth teams for three years and I see the Academy as a massive part of the club.

 

I have worked at clubs where the academy and first-team are separate entities and not integrated at all and those clubs are the poorer for it.

 

If you put the right effort into recruiting and developing the right players then it can save the club a lot of money on transfer fees."

 

And as for whether he knew of and/or could deal with the financial situation we find ourselves in, I think the answer to the following question also makes it clear that he was aware of our predicament (and willing to work within some tough parameters).

 

"Is it hopeless or are there ways we can improve the team to get back in the Premier League? Can we do it through wheeling and dealing or the youth team or is it hopeless?"

 

"It will be a combination. The reality is there will be comings and goings, there is no doubt about that.

 

Economics will play a part and there will be some natural wastage as players come to the end of their contracts. Then it will be a case of finding players who fit the bill.

 

We need a side capable of getting success but which fits in with the financial situation. But we are not going to be splashing fortunes on players.

 

Even in the short time I have been here, I have been looking to see if we can get players on loan. Short-term is the immediate priority but I am looking long-term too."

[ottery st mary]

From one camp Pearson was on £360,000 a year. From another camp he was on £160,000 a year. Both camps have full access to details and have reconfirmed the figures recently (don't ask!) . Which one is correct? Only those camps know the truth. Not us supporters.

 

To be fair to both Nick and John, the information I have proffered up is adding the joint salaries of both JP and Wotte and yes I am led to believe and suspect that ultimately JP will not be out of pocket regarding the 60,000

compensation to Helmond.. So in other words the whole package..

 

I was becoming frustrated that some posters were trying to suggest, without apparent evidence, that Pearson was too costly and The Dutch duo were a cheaper option in line with our financial structure going forward..

 

It is my belief from all the facts I have been able to glean, is that the Dutch coaches were in place ready and up and running regardless of the Pearson situation and therefore statements about the cost of Pearson were nul and void and a total red herring. That is the perogative of Lowey and Wildey and in this case I am biased because I was a great fan of Pearson and thought he was our best bet..

 

Like other Managers and Chairman, who come and go, us supporters will be here forever.

 

I still believe Lowey should be man enough to walk or be pushed now...My own personal opinion in view of all that has gone before.

 

Nothing personal with Nick, John, the prof or the rest of the crew...Hopefully they are all fans and will still be here when Lowey has departed.

[NickG]

Whenever someone continues to trot out the lines that Pearson didn't want to work with youngsters, or that he wasn't willing to work within the financial parameters I think I should trot out this post from a while back:

 

 

 

 

And of course you have these quotes from Pearson a few months back which hardly make him out to be a dinosaur and backward looking when it comes to youth.

 

"A lot of my background is working with youngsters. I worked with the England youth teams for three years and I see the Academy as a massive part of the club.

 

I have worked at clubs where the academy and first-team are separate entities and not integrated at all and those clubs are the poorer for it.

 

If you put the right effort into recruiting and developing the right players then it can save the club a lot of money on transfer fees."

 

And as for whether he knew of and/or could deal with the financial situation we find ourselves in, I think the answer to the following question also makes it clear that he was aware of our predicament (and willing to work within some tough parameters).

 

"Is it hopeless or are there ways we can improve the team to get back in the Premier League? Can we do it through wheeling and dealing or the youth team or is it hopeless?"

 

"It will be a combination. The reality is there will be comings and goings, there is no doubt about that.

 

Economics will play a part and there will be some natural wastage as players come to the end of their contracts. Then it will be a case of finding players who fit the bill.

 

We need a side capable of getting success but which fits in with the financial situation. But we are not going to be splashing fortunes on players.

 

Even in the short time I have been here, I have been looking to see if we can get players on loan. Short-term is the immediate priority but I am looking long-term too."

 

thanks for trotting that out! I didn't say he refused to work with young players or disliked them, merely making the point that it is generally suggested on here that Lowe has insisted what players go, or issues re appearance fees etc -whatever the truth his own man is more likely to work with him, would you think?

[NickG]

To be fair to both Nick and John, the information I have proffered up is adding the joint salaries of both JP and Wotte and yes I am led to believe and suspect that ultimately JP will not be out of pocket regarding the 60,000

compensation to Helmond.. So in other words the whole package..

 

I was becoming frustrated that some posters were trying to suggest, 1without apparent evidence, that Pearson was too costly and The Dutch duo were a cheaper option in line with our financial structure going forward..

 

It is my belief from all the facts I have been able to 2 glean, is that the Dutch coaches were in place ready and up and running regardless of the Pearson situation and therefore statements about the cost of Pearson were nul and void and a total red herring. That is the perogative of Lowey and Wildey and in this case I am biased because 3 I was a great fan of Pearson and thought he was our best bet..

Like other Managers and Chairman, who come and go, us supporters will be here forever.

 

I still believe Lowey should be man enough to walk or be pushed now...My own personal opinion in view of all that has gone before.

 

Nothing personal with Nick, John, the prof or the rest of the crew.4..Hopefully they are all fans and will still be here when Lowey has departed.

 

1) I personally do not have any evidence of salaries -do seem to remember on OS that a comment that the two were on less than NP -maybe wrong, also appreciate all the criticisms of OS and don't trust it completely, but without meaning offence, would trust it bit more than anonymous posters on here

2) agree totally, as in my post above,clearly Lowe wanted his own man

3) I wanted NP to stay, was optimistic of how he would do with preseason etc, however don't think he was great -more promising, but that's another thread! Not convinced he would have been much better/worse than JP in same circs, but who knows

4) said many times how glad I was to rid the club of the embarassment that was Lowe, how I had a drink with Hoos and talked about the future and fans days etc, I support the team as I did when Golac was my hero and the board is secondary. I don't think Lowe is evil and just don't believe the OTT comments on here at times

[ottery st mary]

1) I personally do not have any evidence of salaries -do seem to remember on OS that a comment that the two were on less than NP -maybe wrong, also appreciate all the criticisms of OS and don't trust it completely, but without meaning offence, would trust it bit more than anonymous posters on here

2) agree totally, as in my post above,clearly Lowe wanted his own man

3) I wanted NP to stay, was optimistic of how he would do with preseason etc, however don't think he was great -more promising, but that's another thread! Not convinced he would have been much better/worse than JP in same circs, but who knows

4) said many times how glad I was to rid the club of the embarassment that was Lowe, how I had a drink with Hoos and talked about the future and fans days etc, I support the team as I did when Golac was my hero and the board is secondary. I don't think Lowe is evil and just don't believe the OTT comments on here at times

 

Cheers......Never thought Lowey evil...just not up to the job and wondered why Lowey got in with the Mob..AND why oh! why that particular consortium put Lowey in the chair and if Wildey is the Chairman of Football it all seems a shambles and that is why as each fiasco occurs I dread what will happen...

 

All in my own opinion...

 

Good talking to you and your crew...

[um pahars]

thanks for trotting that out! I didn't say he refused to work with young players or disliked them, merely making the point that it is generally suggested on here that Lowe has insisted what players go, or issues re appearance fees etc -whatever the truth his own man is more likely to work with him, would you think?

 

As far as I am aware, Pearson had no problem working under Lowe, (indeed when he went off to Malta, he thought the job was his!!!) nor did he have any problems working under tough financial constraints, as he was more than aware of our financial worries.

 

The plain fact was that Lowe wanted his own man and do things his own way. The Dutch pair were already lined up and Pearson was a dead man walking the minute Lowe rocked up. The money issue is irrelevant.

 

PS I also don't think Lowe is evil, and the constant claims that it is against this pretext that people post against him is rather tiresome and somewhat insulting. I simply judge Lowe by his results, and have praised him when he has done well and will cntinue to hold him to account with regards what happens on his shift.

[NickG]

not arguing! Think it is likely he would want his own man, not sure about relevance of money could have been an issue as well but who knows

[dubai_phil]

As far as I am aware, Pearson had no problem working under Lowe, (indeed when he went off to Malta, he thought the job was his!!!) nor did he have any problems working under tough financial constraints, as he was more than aware of our financial worries.

 

The plain fact was that Lowe wanted his own man and do things his own way. The Dutch pair were already lined up and Pearson was a dead man walking the minute Lowe rocked up. The money issue is irrelevant.

 

PS I also don't think Lowe is evil, and the constant claims that it is against this pretext that people post against him is rather tiresome and somewhat insulting. I simply judge Lowe by his results, and have praised him when he has done well and will cntinue to hold him to account with regards what happens on his shift.

 

Agree with what you say, except I would add that IMHO it wasn't simply about "being his own man", and I am sure that "the football industry opinion" of his appointment was not very high AT THE TIME.

 

If WE all think back to NP's appointment, it is fair to say we "felt it came out of left field" ie we were pretty well stunned. If you also recall there was a whole thread dedicated to MLT's reaction....

 

Around the time of his appointment I was "lucky" enough to be sharing Bullfrogs with the local "EPL" Sports Channel's soccer crew and their "CL" competitors, along with their two "ex PL" manager pundits. Good laugh, great gang and they've fast become part of the scenery over here.

 

The conversation got around to Southampton and NP, and the "industry opinion" was very much "negative". In fact it was the first time I heard "Boot Boy" used to describe NP, along with "there's more to management than kicking a few drinks bottles over".

 

In the end, results count, he kept us up and good luck to him at Leicester and maybe beyond, however, when we use the NP stick to beat Lowe with, just remember that we weren't 100% behind him on day one, and possibly, others out in the "football industry" had reservations about him stepping up. So, while he was sitting and planning his return, there are indicators that some of his old contacts may well have been bending his ear.

 

(oh and before you tag me a luvvie, I think we WOULD have performed better with NP running the kids and the strategy we have this season, as I think the whole new broom was one gamble too many

[Gemmel]

not arguing! Think it is likely he would want his own man, not sure about relevance of money could have been an issue as well but who knows

 

The relevance is Nick, is that money was the reason lowe and wilde gave for letting Pearson go

[dubai_phil]

The relevance is Nick, is that money was the reason lowe and wilde gave for letting Pearson go

 

Which, at the end of the day is a good catch all excuse, although we moan, we can't REALLY fight back against that one as we don't have all the facts except that we KNOW we are in trouble.

[NickG]

The relevance is Nick, is that money was the reason lowe and wilde gave for letting Pearson go

 

agree, what I meant is personally not sure if this was a real relevant issue in keeping him, i.e. whether it was purely the Lowe's man thing, or a combination of his man, who he wanted to work with and thought was good being cheaper as well

[um pahars]

Agree with what you say, except I would add that IMHO it wasn't simply about "being his own man", and I am sure that "the football industry opinion" of his appointment was not very high AT THE TIME.

 

If WE all think back to NP's appointment, it is fair to say we "felt it came out of left field" ie we were pretty well stunned. If you also recall there was a whole thread dedicated to MLT's reaction....

 

Around the time of his appointment I was "lucky" enough to be sharing Bullfrogs with the local "EPL" Sports Channel's soccer crew and their "CL" competitors, along with their two "ex PL" manager pundits. Good laugh, great gang and they've fast become part of the scenery over here.

 

The conversation got around to Southampton and NP, and the "industry opinion" was very much "negative". In fact it was the first time I heard "Boot Boy" used to describe NP, along with "there's more to management than kicking a few drinks bottles over".

 

In the end, results count, he kept us up and good luck to him at Leicester and maybe beyond, however, when we use the NP stick to beat Lowe with, just remember that we weren't 100% behind him on day one, and possibly, others out in the "football industry" had reservations about him stepping up. So, while he was sitting and planning his return, there are indicators that some of his old contacts may well have been bending his ear.

 

(oh and before you tag me a luvvie, I think we WOULD have performed better with NP running the kids and the strategy we have this season, as I think the whole new broom was one gamble too many

 

That's fair enough Phil, and it probably has some mileage in that Lowe & Wilde had their plan already laid out well before they actually took over as Frank's Cousin has intimated (further proving that Pearson was a dead man walking).

 

But it is still their judgement call, and they have to live or die by the success of their appointment.

[NickG]

a lot more reasonable debate tonight cheers all! I'm off.

[saintjay77]

a lot more reasonable debate tonight cheers all! I'm off.

 

tell you what this place is a much better place to come and talk saints when the debate is more reasonable.

 

we can all have a laugh at the extreme every now and then but we are all saints fans and supporting saints is what comes first to all of us.

 

will probably desend into the asylm again tomorrow so for now its been a pleasure.

[Gordon Mockles]

Some say that attendances were already in decline last season.......

Looking at the last 3 home games before Sheff utd.

 

Burnley = 21,762

Bristol City = 22,890

Coventry =22,014

 

That doesn’t even figure in the current climate. The rise and fall in attendances last season is not the issue. We are talking the dramatic downturn in attendance this season (from 22,000 [approx.] to figures around 10-12, 000 [approx.] – and those figures aren’t totally accurate as they include season ticket holders, in attendance or not. I am aware of a great number of season ticket holders this season staying away purely down to Lowe and Wilde and their decisions this season. No speculation, solid fact.)

 

The catalyst for this downturn, as mentioned, being the return of Lowe (and Wilde) and the board’s utter disregard to the fan-base and media black out, countered by the non-attendance of the fans in response to the poor performances, ludicrous decisions and awful results.

 

Problem with that is Oakley is probably on more of a wedge than we would pay likwise howard. that blend of experience would be there with pearson in charge IF he was alloud to get the players he wanted in. My argument is based on the players he would want would cost more than we are willing or able to pay.

 

How much would Pearson be on compared to JP?

How much would Pearson want to spend compared to JP?

 

I think you’ll find money doesn’t come into it. After all, the mere acquisition of the Dutch Duo must have made an impact in attendances from the onset (i.e. people were annoyed Lowe was back, even more so he appointed his pre-determined regime, dismissing Pearson without so much as a sniff) which would have affected finances.

 

I believe Lowe thought Pearson didn’t fit into his ‘business model’ (which was to have a manager who would work entirely with youth, may succumb to pressure or influence from outside factors [the Lowe faction], have players selected for him and work with what he was given and, generally, have very little control in matters. Essentially – Employ a “Yes Man”). Pearson was certainly his own person and I don’t believe he would have taken kindly to manipulation or excessive meddling from inexperienced executives. Using money and finances as a constant excuse to support the Dutch guys is weak and an easy get out clause. Whichever manager came in, he would have had to lose experienced players and cut costs. It just didn’t have to be in the dramatic style which Lowe/Wilde implemented (total youth with no steadying balance of experience and stupid loans). I think results have proved that risk to be a foolish one (which many of us contested from pre-season)

 

We could argue that the money Pearson would want is justified as we sit hovering above the relegation spots but financial restrictions seem to be there more on the banks choice than ours. OK Lowe wants the youth to be used but even he must see that total youth does not win games which IMO is why we have seen Skacel return but otherwise the cheap option is always used above the preferred.

 

If the financial side wasn’t a problem then we could all come up with dream situations going from the possible to the fantasy but all else is guess work and opinions.

 

You don’t know how Pearson would have worked. He certainly seemed to have drawn up a plan for the season but this was overlooked and Lowe refused to accept keeping Pearson on, for whatever reasons he felt at the time. Very little was said at the time and, judging by their track record, what the “paying public” would have been told would probably have been heavily spun, especially if the Echo reported on it.

 

I’d hardly think “dream situations” would be an appropriate moniker for drawing up a semi-competent plan for the season, compared to the abortion of a model Lowe swung heavily into action. Historically, this was destined to fail (risking so much, so whole heartedly. I can’t help but think this ‘massive gamble’ was made because it was dramatic and arrogant – if it succeeded, Lowe could bask in the glory and smugly refute previous concerns by fans. If it fails (as is happening), he can sit in the shadows, hide from the media, controlling his puppets until all falls apart and he moves on to his next venture.

 

Skacel was thrown in due to desperation, rather than choice. If they’d brought in adequate cover early on, we’d maybe have not started so badly. Hindsight is a wonderful thing but, as you say, anything else is guess work and opinion. I just know I’d not have taken the silly risks Lowe has but what do I know. I’m just a fan.

[Topcat]

Many people have written on this site that Barclays have to give their approval to major decisions. That being the case the role of Chairman/CEO is a major decision and that is why I expect Barclays to have a say about Lowe continuing. Lowe chose and appointed JP. The appointment of JP is a failure. Whether because of JP or because of Lowe's meddling, the fault is Lowe's.

 

Lowe has one of the worst track records in appointing Managers/Coaches why trust Lowe with appointing JPs replacement? Barclays can also see the adverse impact that Lowe has on the attendances and revenue. Barclays has to act and act soon.