Should we sack Blackie .... with a twist!? ;)

[boo radley]

What on earth are you talking about?

Of course the financial reason has to be considered, but along with the success factor. This thread was instigated because many (including myself) wondered whether we could afford to sack Blackwell. Some clubs simply can't afford to sack their manager (e.g. Liverpool) and I wanted to know if United were in that boat.



It depends on the circumstances Lou, but in our case promotion. It is usually results, but depends on resources. With the resources Blackwell has had I would expect promotion.

This is quickly turning into a should we sack Blackwell on merit thread and this is NOT the point of this thread! I'll say it again, my views on KB are clear (I think he should be sacked for being a rubbish manager) but I wanted to explore whether we could afford to sack him.

In exploring this I have actually uncovered that it would be beneficial to sack him (in terms of finance and revenue).

Ahh sorry for diversifying of subject.

So you believe he is a rubbish manager Your opinion. ( but thats not the point of this thread so dont discuss that) ok

So on the item highlighted, You from a point of self discussion in your opening to the thread, reasoned that your financial figures were roughly acurate and from this you discoverd that it would be beneficial fianacially to sack Blackwell. AMAZED?

 

[DuncDisorderly]

Interesting response Dunc and I am happy that someone has challenged my original post. But can I ask you Dunc, did you actually read all my post?

Yes. My head hurt after a bit, but yes...

The problem I had with it is that you already have the conclusion in mind (Blackwell should be sacked) before you choose the parameters of the assumptions that you make.

I accept that 25% of posters who gave an answer etc etc etc, but I just wonder what would have happened to your post if the result had been the reverse, and it wasn't economically advantageous to sack him. Would that mean that you'd have published a piece like this saying that you were going to support him as manager now, because that was the economically prudent thing to do..?

Perhaps using the the economic case as the criterion for keeping or firing someone is actually pretty irrelevant, and the only thing that really matters is 'can he do the job he's been asked to do' by the board of directors. In the end they hire the guy give him targets and a job spec and and tell him what they expect from him. If he doesn't deliver then they are within their rights to fire him. Bearing in mind that we don't really know the parameters that Blackwell is working within, do you think that it is likely that Blackwell is 'failing' from the boards perspective..?

You're not an accountant are you, btw..?

On your final point. I cannot see any situation where a serious business would maintain a failing manager in a critical post purely for the financal repercussions. As I've said above, I really doubt that Blackwell is seen to be failing by the board in the same way that many of my fellow supporters feel he is...

 

[Grecian2000]

I really doubt that Blackwell is seen to be failing by the board in the same way that many of my fellow supporters feel he is...

This will only become clear when the season ticket renewal deadline passes. If there is a significant downturn in sales I would have thought that will signal as some kind of failure.
If we actually increase sales then he will be rewarded with a further extension because I'm sure he will then have exceeded all current expectations.

 

[SwissBlade]

Ahh sorry for diversifying of subject.

So you believe he is a rubbish manager Your opinion. ( but thats not the point of this thread so dont discuss that) ok

So on the item highlighted, You from a point of self discussion in your opening to the thread, reasoned that your financial figures were roughly acurate and from this you discoverd that it would be beneficial fianacially to sack Blackwell. AMAZED?

I don't think that was the point of the thread Boo.

The point seemed to be that whilst Olle and many others have banged on for most of the season about Blackwell being crap (and now some of the rest of us have stepped over to their side) and McCabe should sack him for this reason, this is an alternate view.

Whether the figures are correct or not is almost irrellevant (sorry Olle). The point is that there is a commercial view to keeping or ditching a manager.

Fans will vote with their wallets as we know, but so will Sponsors and investors. If we/ they do that, then the club may be forced to get rid of Blackie as like it or not, money rules the game.

Personally I think more people would be making an effort to renew if we knew what the club's new "vision" was after this week let alone after this season.

We're very much in limbo!

 

[DuncDisorderly]

If we actually increase sales ...

I think its highly unlikely that we will be increasing sales. I'd be surprised if the club didn't expect 10-20% loss of crowds next year regardless of what else happens. Forget the football, the economic downturn will see to that on its own, as it will for the large majority of clubs. Last year Kev McCabe warned us that a chill wind would be blowing through football. He's not far wrong is he..? I'm just hoping that he was smart enough to do the cost cutting early enough. He does have the blessing of good timing...

 

[Willie Carlin]

I think its highly unlikely that we will be increasing sales. I'd be surprised if the club didn't expect 10-20% loss of crowds next year regardless of what else happens. Forget the football, the economic downturn will see to that on its own, as it will for the large majority of clubs. Last year Kev McCabe warned us that a chill wind would be blowing through football. He's not far wrong is he..? I'm just hoping that he was smart enough to do the cost cutting early enough. He does have the blessing of good timing...

Just like to add this thought to the thread. I wonder if Coventry fans want to sack Coleman and the same applys to Middlesbro, Barnsley, Donny and now Blackpool because they are all below United. Just a thought

 

[boo radley]

I don't think that was the point of the thread Boo.

The point seemed to be that whilst Olle and many others have banged on for most of the season about Blackwell being crap (and now some of the rest of us have stepped over to their side) and McCabe should sack him for this reason, this is an alternate view.

Whether the figures are correct or not is almost irrellevant (sorry Olle). The point is that there is a commercial view to keeping or ditching a manager.

Fans will vote with their wallets as we know, but so will Sponsors and investors. If we/ they do that, then the club may be forced to get rid of Blackie as like it or not, money rules the game.

Personally I think more people would be making an effort to renew if we knew what the club's new "vision" was after this week let alone after this season.

We're very much in limbo!

Please be careful Swiss, You don't want to get drawn to the dark side too much your a more level headed poster.
Olli makes this point:
''In exploring this I have actually uncovered that it would be beneficial to sack him (in terms of finance and revenue).''
He said he wanted to explore if we could afford to sack him.
the figures arnt irrelevant if he comes to a conclution based on them. and that is why i am Amazed that he can back up an argument to sack based on some loose figures plucked from nowhere apart from rough assessment.

On your point most on here realise that to sack will have financial implications.
PS. hows the weather been over there today? 14c here today and the result last night made it feel even warmer.
Also check Duncans out he seems to have it reasoned.

 

[Micalijo]

I think its highly unlikely that we will be increasing sales. I'd be surprised if the club didn't expect 10-20% loss of crowds next year regardless of what else happens. Forget the football, the economic downturn will see to that on its own, as it will for the large majority of clubs. Last year Kev McCabe warned us that a chill wind would be blowing through football. He's not far wrong is he..? I'm just hoping that he was smart enough to do the cost cutting early enough. He does have the blessing of good timing...

The only really chill wind at BDTBL has been caused by McCabe's property dealings and by the continued employment of our joke manager.

Why should a 15% drop in crowds from 25 to 22ish mean that we have to sell two low earners and scrap around for players from Derby reserves - especially when West Ham are giving us another 2 years worth of parachutes

 

[GRUMPY BLADE]

'West Ham are giving us another 2 years worth of parachutes'

It's already spoken for, it's in McC's back pocket!

 

[GRUMPY BLADE]

But would you walk? I don't think any of us would and we'd take the flack that goes with the job.

 

[Micalijo]

'West Ham are giving us another 2 years worth of parachutes'

It's already spoken for, it's in McC's back pocket!

Exactly, take our propertyu debt out and we aint got a problem - OK crowds will be down because of the recession but not by enough to justify the drastic cuts we are seeing. The Tevez wedge should have easily allowed us to keep hold of Kyle Walker for another season and allowed to us to build a decent competitive squad for the medium term rather than stagger from week to week with this at times desperate bunch of loanees.

 

[Rustyblade]

Everyone appears to be forgetting that the Blades have just been demoted from the Chinese first division due to corruption and have taken a huge hit there revenue wise plus the amount the club was fined. The state of the art academy there also needs funding, remember.

Point being, 's not just us we got to support. I wonder just how much of the season ticket cash is earmarked for places East.

The silence from the club on this is overwhelming.

 

[GRUMPY BLADE]

But McC has got some shopping malls on the cheap!!

 

[blades1889]

blackwell out still hes wank

 

[Ollessendro]

The problem I had with it is that you already have the conclusion in mind (Blackwell should be sacked) before you choose the parameters of the assumptions that you make.

I accept that 25% of posters who gave an answer etc etc etc, but I just wonder what would have happened to your post if the result had been the reverse, and it wasn't economically advantageous to sack him. Would that mean that you'd have published a piece like this saying that you were going to support him as manager now, because that was the economically prudent thing to do..?

Perhaps using the the economic case as the criterion for keeping or firing someone is actually pretty irrelevant, and the only thing that really matters is 'can he do the job he's been asked to do' by the board of directors. In the end they hire the guy give him targets and a job spec and and tell him what they expect from him. If he doesn't deliver then they are within their rights to fire him. Bearing in mind that we don't really know the parameters that Blackwell is working within, do you think that it is likely that Blackwell is 'failing' from the boards perspective..?

You're not an accountant are you, btw..?

On your final point. I cannot see any situation where a serious business would maintain a failing manager in a critical post purely for the financal repercussions. As I've said above, I really doubt that Blackwell is seen to be failing by the board in the same way that many of my fellow supporters feel he is...

Interesting point Dunc and I can see what you are getting at (even if I don;t agree). I believe you are coming from the view that 'statistics can bend the truth', i.e. any good statistician (or not so good one in my case ) can manipulate stats to back his argument up.

Your post got me questioning my own motivations, but I'm pretty confident that I would have put up the results even if they had have favoured keeping Blackwell. This whole post came about because I stated in a different thread that 'I didn't think we could afford to sack KB'. I was challenged on this (by Lenners) and hence went about the calculation. So if we couldn't afford to sack him then i'd have originally being right. Hence by making these calculations I proved myself wrong.

The morale of the story is that yes you can have confidence I would have posted the thread if the calculations were different. I would have come out and said, 'look we are stuck with him, it's not economically advantageous to sack him so let's (begrudglingly) get behind him'. I know you only have my word for this, but i am being straight up.

Oh and I'm not an accountant. I'm a (social) researcher, but have studied economics to masters level. I use a fair bit of stats in my job ...... and this probably explains my approach/calculations.

Please be careful Swiss, You don't want to get drawn to the dark side too much your a more level headed poster.
Olli makes this point:
''In exploring this I have actually uncovered that it would be beneficial to sack him (in terms of finance and revenue).''
He said he wanted to explore if we could afford to sack him.
the figures arnt irrelevant if he comes to a conclution based on them. and that is why i am Amazed that he can back up an argument to sack based on some loose figures plucked from nowhere apart from rough assessment.

I hate to admit it Swiss, but Boo is right, the figures ARE important. It's the whole point of this thread.

Why are you so mazed Boo? How come no one has a problem with my logic except you. I (personally) think that KB should be sacked on merit and hence wanted to see if we could do it. And the figures are not just 'plcucked from nowhere', they are gathered from evidence and facts and put forward in a clearly articulated and constructed argument. Maybe you just can't understand it? I think that you are purely being obtuse because of some grudge held from the whole Monty/Killa thing.

 

[boo radley]

Interesting point Dunc and I can see what you are getting at (even if I don;t agree). I believe you are coming from the view that 'statistics can bend the truth', i.e. any good statistician (or not so good one in my case ) can manipulate stats to back his argument up.

Your post got me questioning my own motivations, but I'm pretty confident that I would have put up the results even if they had have favoured keeping Blackwell. This whole post came about because I stated in a different thread that 'I didn't think we could afford to sack KB'. I was challenged on this (by Lenners) and hence went about the calculation. So if we couldn't afford to sack him then i'd have originally being right. Hence by making these calculations I proved myself wrong.

The morale of the story is that yes you can have confidence I would have posted the thread if the calculations were different. I would have come out and said, 'look we are stuck with him, it's not economically advantageous to sack him so let's (begrudglingly) get behind him'. I know you only have my word for this, but i am being straight up.

Oh and I'm not an accountant. I'm a (social) researcher, but have studied economics to masters level. I use a fair bit of stats in my job ...... and this probably explains my approach/calculations.



I hate to admit it Swiss, but Boo is right, the figures ARE important. It's the whole point of this thread.

Why are you so mazed Boo? How come no one has a problem with my logic except you. I (personally) think that KB should be sacked on merit and hence wanted to see if we could do it. And the figures are not just 'plcucked from nowhere', they are gathered from evidence and facts and put forward in a clearly articulated and constructed argument. Maybe you just can't understand it? I think that you are purely being obtuse because of some grudge held from the whole Monty/Killa thing.

Obtuse - so now you have a problem with me personally?
You have an awful lot of figures in ther and it doesnt't take much to realise if one is out that can thow an awful lot of money the other way. Even allowing for you error margins.
what you already stated was you now want KB out and youve used money issues to back this up.
So have you considered the fact that some of your 25% not renewing may be using KB in the job as an extra excuse not to renew and they may not be renewing anyway because of their financial situation. (I may struggle to renew for that reason but i still want to ). Have you considered that people may see KB as a financially stabalising factor and say 5% would not renew if he was sacked. If KB was to remain and 25% not renew but he brought in players that some of the 25% liked would they renew late and thus pay a higher price, how much more would that bring in? If the 25% did not renew at all but we won first five /six /seven games would they start to pay day prices? if by christmas 15% of the non renews had paid day prices would they then buy half season tickets because of a good run of form and top or second in table? How much more would those possibilities bring in?

I am sure we could juggle a lot of figures and dent lots of holes in eachother points Dont get personal you big abino you.

 

[Ollessendro]

Obtuse - so now you have a problem with me personally?

Relax Boo me old mucker, I'm not insulting you or getting personal. I was suggesting that you are being delibarately difficult, but you shouldn't get upset about it.

So have you considered the fact that some of your 25% not renewing may be using KB in the job as an extra excuse not to renew and they may not be renewing anyway because of their financial situation. (I may struggle to renew for that reason but i still want to ).

Yes. I have addressed this in the first post (and later).

Have you considered that people may see KB as a financially stabalising factor and say 5% would not renew if he was sacked

5% was my cut of point. If 25% of supporters are not renewing then I think it is fair to say that 20% of those will not be renewing because of Blackwell and that they would renew if he was sacked. After all 55% of fans attributed the blame to Blackwell. There are some pretty big margins for error.

If you disagree that as little as 5% of the Blades would renew (who said they wouldn't renew) if KB was sacked then I can't see what we can do other than disagree. Unless we put it to the vote?

. If KB was to remain and 25% not renew but he brought in players that some of the 25% liked would they renew late and thus pay a higher price, how much more would that bring in?

It is highly unlikely the supporters who won't renew because of Blackwell, will change their mind based on a few signings.

If the 25% did not renew at all but we won first five /six /seven games would they start to pay day prices? if by christmas 15% of the non renews had paid day prices would they then buy half season tickets because of a good run of form and top or second in table? How much more would those possibilities bring in?

We could easily argue the other way. What about if we lose the first 3 or 4 games. The the 6000 extra fans who are coming to games will go down and we lose more revenue. I see your point here Boo and it is a valid one. There are many factors that come into the equation and my calculation is certainly not a rock solid one.

For the benefit of everyone, this post is not meant to too be taken too literally. I was coming from the point of view that the vast majority of fans have lost faith in Blackwell and wanted to see if we can afford to sack Blackwell. I have made assumptions that could be seen to be on shaky foundations and there are many exogenous factors that are difficult to take into the equation (as Boo correctly pointed out). This thread was started as a quirky attempt to see if the club could afford to sack KB (if they wanted to) and pay him up to the end of his contract. I am not for one minute suggesting my argument is entirely accurate, or models everything. However, I think it broadly shows that if the board (and/or KM) lose(s) confidence in KB then we are in a position to get rid of him.

 

[boo radley]

Relax Boo me old mucker, I'm not insulting you or getting personal. I was suggesting that you are being delibarately difficult, but you shouldn't get upset about it.



Yes. I have addressed this in the first post (and later).



5% was my cut of point. If 25% of supporters are not renewing then I think it is fair to say that 20% of those will not be renewing because of Blackwell and that they would renew if he was sacked. After all 55% of fans attributed the blame to Blackwell. There are some pretty big margins for error.

If you disagree that as little as 5% of the Blades would renew (who said they wouldn't renew) if KB was sacked then I can't see what we can do other than disagree. Unless we put it to the vote?

. If KB was to remain and 25% not renew but he brought in players that some of the 25% liked would they renew late and thus pay a higher price, how much more would that bring in?

It is highly unlikely the supporters who won't renew because of Blackwell, will change their mind based on a few signings.



We could easily argue the other way. What about if we lose the first 3 or 4 games. The the 6000 extra fans who are coming to games will go down and we lose more revenue. I see your point here Boo and it is a valid one. There are many factors that come into the equation and my calculation is certainly not a rock solid one.

For the benefit of everyone, this post is not meant to too be taken too literally. I was coming from the point of view that the vast majority of fans have lost faith in Blackwell and wanted to see if we can afford to sack Blackwell. I have made assumptions that could be seen to be on shaky foundations and there are many exogenous factors that are difficult to take into the equation (as Boo correctly pointed out). This thread was started as a quirky attempt to see if the club could afford to sack KB (if they wanted to) and pay him up to the end of his contract. I am not for one minute suggesting my argument is entirely accurate, or models everything. However, I think it broadly shows that if the board (and/or KM) lose(s) confidence in KB then we are in a position to get rid of him.

Agree If they lose confidence , But i believe they have every confidence in him andare probably using him as a potential fall guy( i think you said that also) (Would Gorbachev and the soviet union be an example of that?) I also think that the Blades/us despite most peoples finacial concerns have placed ourselves well to compete next year. We did it early watch others struggle next year.