2024-04-03 11:12:00
Quote from balli1187
Quote from robstarQuote from balli1187Quote from robstar
It went very well for Tuchel.
Bad training work is worth it at FC Bayern Munich. If you are sent off with your full salary and can then collect an additional EUR 10 million at the next club, you can…
A bad performance is a worthwhile goal for every future Bayern coach because you
then you can cash in twice.
I find it amateurish. The conditions for terminating a contract must be standard
agree when drawing up the contract and they must then be significantly lower than what the trainer
in the working phase.
If the coach has the opportunity to seamlessly receive a full salary from the next club,
it cannot be more than 30-50% of the salary without bonuses. A Bayern coach is always asked
and can start again pretty much straight away. There’s no need to act like there’s a threat of 2 years
Unemployment for which he must receive compensation.
If you’re a top company throwing money around like that, you won’t stay at the top for long.
In general, the fact that such things are only negotiated after an expulsion seems weak.
Something like this has to be stated in the employment contract with some percentage when the contract is signed.
If a coach starts letting a commitment fail at this point, I would immediately
Stay away from him if he is more interested in negotiating failure than success.
Why should a coach agree to such a clause?
I would consider this a blatant management error on the part of his consultant.
The club alone makes the decision whether to take the coach on leave or not. Usually due to poor results or missed goals, but there can also be other reasons. At Tuchsel’s other stations, “political reasons” were mentioned in order to make a clear cut. These then have nothing to do with the trainer’s performance.
In this case, the trainer is exposed to a certain degree of arbitrariness and then gets paid accordingly.
And even if it would probably make sense to discuss the case when the contract is signed, since most contracts in professional football are not kept anyway, something like this always seems like the club is not fully convinced by the coach.
Last but not least, we don’t know at all what Bayern have “saved” by only paying out the basic salary. I find it rather adventurous that bonuses are paid to a trainer who is on leave. This trainer no longer has anything to do with the success that occurred after his leave of absence.
Only if these are not paid could one really criticize Bayern’s side and would there be an incentive for Tuchel to forego part of his basic salary.
Why should he agree?
Because he wants to come for the success. Because he wants to collect titles.
Not because he wants to make the lack of success optimal for himself.
Anyone who negotiates the maximum for failure when hiring has the wrong motivation and is the wrong trainer.
And again. These are top personnel that FC Bayern employs. Here come coaches who have 20 new offers the day after they were kicked out. You don’t have to pretend that you have to support a social security case.
That’s very idealistic and somehow rosy.
You write yourself that it’s about top personnel. And you now expect this top staff to accept such cuts? They know full well that they can work at another top club without such a clause…. We could also go there and generally cut everyone’s salary by 2-3 zeros. If the football world agrees, they can all stomp and complain and complain but that’s how the conditions are. Only that won’t happen. and then the question arises as to whether the FCB are not missing out on better coaches because they are limiting themselves with this regulation.
As written, it would definitely make sense from my point of view, but it is almost impossible to implement as FCB alone. Therefore, you should be a little careful with your (amateurish) criticism.
The coach makes the decision whether to fire him? Yes. But the coach decides with the quality of his work whether there is something that needs to be decided on.
And when it comes to political decisions, they lie in the behavior of the coach. If someone like Tuchel allows himself to be financially equipped so that he can then have a big mouth because he is financially secure, he is the wrong partner.
Why do political decisions inevitably depend on the behavior of the coach?
A sports director/sports director is cut off and a new one comes. He has his own idea and philosophy, wants to implement it and gets another trainer to do it. Simply out of the belief that someone else would do it better. This doesn’t have to have anything to do with the current coach’s poor performance or demeanor.
For example, Tuchel and Nagelsmann: A little further on, a user found out that Tuchel currently has about as many points as he did at the same time and in previous seasons. They are still represented in the CL. They’re already out of the cup, but they didn’t win it three years ago either.
In any case, based on the results, it is really difficult to prove that Tuchel was a sporting failure.
If clauses like the ones you are calling for are introduced by the clubs, I would in return have the conditions for a leave of absence defined just as harshly and then it would get as complicated as you want. The championship was no longer considered a success because it was won so often.
It also doesn’t seem weak if you negotiate the separation when signing the contract. You simply have to tell the coach that this is standard practice at the club and that it is generally handled this way regardless of the person.
In business (contractual penalties) and in marriages (marriage contract), everything is always considered beforehand and not regulated later. But the industry is known for allowing itself to be milked by consultants. Unfortunately, the professionals at the negotiating table always only sit on the players’ side in the form of the demanding advisors. And since the clubs have no courage to say no, we are where we are.
It’s funny that you mention the marriage contract in particular. This also regularly leads to relationships breaking up shortly before marriage because one cannot emotionally cope with the fact that the other wants to protect themselves in the event of a separation.
Coaches at this level want to work with the top teams. There aren’t that many of them. And when Bayern calls, you have a club like that. I don’t know of any case where a coach canceled because he wouldn’t have received enough money if he was kicked out. Of course, it could also be that it was never reported. Since many managers report having a career break at the end of their careers, something like this would certainly have been reported. I claim that no one dares to do it.
I would rather offer a trainer an additional EUR 5 million bonus if he is successful and leave him empty-handed if he fails. If he chooses the failure option, he would be the wrong man.
I see the separation from Tuchel as being entirely behavioral. He sometimes antagonizes the team and reacts rudely to the media, which leads to the media getting on his nerves and the negative reporting affecting the performance. So he had it in his own hands.
And as far as separation before marriage is concerned, I can only say “lucky you”. The marriage wouldn’t have lasted. With a divorce rate of 60%, you can of course put on the blinders and take bold risks. It is of course more pleasant and effective to settle the separation when you have just broken up in an argument, rather than beforehand with all your senses and all objectivity.
1712151486
#Tuchel #Bayern #agree #severance #pay #change #July