Fitz & Reeves Contract

[Ace Face]

Does anybody know for DEFINATE when their contracts end?

[gavobee]

so lucky the board didn't off them a longer deal after that winning streak. Thank the lord:sorted:

[Bill Benn]

Does anybody know for DEFINATE when their contracts end?
End of December 2007.(see other threads)

[hanworthbee]

End of December 2007.(see other threads)

great another pay off then

[Bill Benn]

great another pay off then

Yes could be £30,000(also see other threads)

[abee]

End of December 2007.(see other threads)

Six months notice period though Bill. That is if they were erm.......released on say May 1 then they get six months monies each. If they go after July 1 then paid up to end of December regardless of when (if) they leave.

My guesstimate is that if Fitz is not kept on to start next season then we are looking at maybe £45k to say goodbye to him and Reeves. It's the supporters of course who pay for this farce........what has the past few months cost us.......£40k Fighting Whimper cash just pissed away together with whatever additional funds were provided by the BFC board from cash flow. Add in the contracts that were given to Fitz and Reeves and I could safely say that the decisions of the Managing Director regarding the Patterson episode........(first you see him then you don't and the guy they really wanted was sitting under their noses all of the time......yeah right!!!) will have certainly cost us somewhere north of £100k and although we'll never know maybe our League One status. No one ever resigns of course, no one ever holds up their hands and says "It's not working. It's not through lack of effort and I've truly done my best but in all honesty you now need someone else".

"That'll Be The Day" (copyright John Wayne, The Searchers 1956)

[West Ealing Bee]

A lot of this is quite confusing, but I can be easily confused ;)

Fitz was given a contract with a six month pay-off so if he goes today he gets six months cash, if he goes in three months time he only gets four-five months cash.

One of the public reasons stated for Paterson not taking the job was that he wanted a 12-month pay-off if he did a bad job.

We could know be in the scenario of having been relegated and facing a bill double what we now face to ditch the boss.

Yet the club are being criticised for the Fitz deal when it could, by my reckoning, have been a damn site worse. And no-one can tell me anyone would take the job without a level of security in terms of a pay-off, except Stuart Pearce but he doesn't need the cash.

As there is still no-one coming out and publically stating what happened at the final appointment stage, at least not that I have seen, I am again cofused as to what has gone wrong here. I would love to be enlightened :shrug:

[Les Beeavinu]

A lot of this is quite confusing, but I can be easily confused ;)

Fitz was given a contract with a six month pay-off so if he goes today he gets six months cash, if he goes in three months time he only gets four-five months cash.

One of the public reasons stated for Paterson not taking the job was that he wanted a 12-month pay-off if he did a bad job.

We could know be in the scenario of having been relegated and facing a bill double what we now face to ditch the boss.

Yet the club are being criticised for the Fitz deal when it could, by my reckoning, have been a damn site worse. And no-one can tell me anyone would take the job without a level of security in terms of a pay-off, except Stuart Pearce but he doesn't need the cash.

As there is still no-one coming out and publically stating what happened at the final appointment stage, at least not that I have seen, I am again cofused as to what has gone wrong here. I would love to be enlightened :shrug:

It'll be airbrushed from history. All you need to know is that people are "sorry for the mistakes". Regarding Patterson, I don't think we'll ever get the details of what went on.

[Simon C]

It's paying for failure that I most object to. WEB's probably right about the contracts (he usually is) but again we're giving someone money because they did a bad job

[AB]

I think Fitz did a decent job as Youth Team manager and could have carried that on probably quite securely so negotiating a pay off as part of the package for taking the poisoned chalice of the First Team job doesn't strike me as particularly bad. The errors were at the Board level in not being able to get anyone else in so that Fitz had to do the job.

[londondude]

was it fitz fault he had to work with the c**p thT Leroy brought in.

[keefor]

No he didn't have to do that job. :nono:

He had a choice. He knew what he was entering into (or at least he should have done), so he took a risk which didn't pay off. Once again the club are going to be be paying out 'compensation' because of poor decision making and worse management.

How much has the club paid out over the last years? I wouldn't be surprised if it is close to £0.5m. Where does this come from? S/Os, bucket collections, 'donations' from shopping portals, sponsored walks etc. Is it any wonder that a lot of people (myself included) question the point of continually donating money to see it pissed away by BFC/BU?

[GABS]

When I was contracting (in IT Security) my notice period, no matter what the length of the contract, was 1 WEEK !

Add to this I would not have got any pay off at all :nono: These football folk, from the top to the bottom, have it way too easy

[Gee Bee]

was it fitz fault he had to work with the c**p thT Leroy brought in.

He has signed Leary, Keith, Shipperley, Abbey, Richards, Taylor, Wilson and has also regularly played Ide & Mousinho whch Leroy didn't. On paper those players should have improved perfomances and results, apart from a small blip in early February they haven't.
So in some respects you could easily say that he is worse than Leroy as he has a better squad now than what Leroy had.

[GABS]

He has signed Leary, Keith, Shipperley, Abbey, Richards, Taylor, Wilson and has also regularly played Ide & Mousinho whch Leroy didn't. On paper those players should have improved perfomances and results, apart from a small blip in early February they haven't.
So in some respects you could easily say that he is worse than Leroy as he has a better squad now than what Leroy had.

Can't argue with that point although I would say the rot started with Leroy and it was a case that Fitz was unable to stop it

[Hungerford Bee]

He has signed Leary, Keith, Shipperley, Abbey, Richards, Taylor, Wilson and has also regularly played Ide & Mousinho whch Leroy didn't. On paper those players should have improved perfomances and results, apart from a small blip in early February they haven't.
So in some respects you could easily say that he is worse than Leroy as he has a better squad now than what Leroy had.

And in the Standard today he is quoted as saying its the same crap every week and the players aren't good enough but he is going to give them the hardest 4 weeks of their lives from now to the end of the season.

I think the pressure of the last few months has got to him and he should go lie down in a dark room for a few months.

[IsleofWight_Bee]

possibly a better squad although, that is debateable. One thing for sure he was trying to rid the team of a losing mentality they earned under Leroy so in that respect he was a failure.

[Downbeat Bee]

This afternoon

[SKA BEE]

TODAY !!!

[EASTBRISTOLBEE7]

He,s gone , end of .:wave: