Dave Jones Rolling Contract Whats wrong with it

Over the months I have seen several criticisms of the deal made between PR and Dave Jones where he is on a one year rolling contract so whenever he is sacked we would have to pay him a years salary.

Personally I can't see what the problem is with this. Surely the club could be far worse off if he was on a fixed contract.

For example say TG offered him a three year contract starting now ( a pretty stamdard deal from what I have seen of other managers these days). Then say we have a bad time until Christmas and the club decide to sack him. In that case they would now be faced with having to oay him for the remaining two and a half years of his contract as against the 1 year they would have to pay him now

The same scenario would hold good until he reaches the end of the second year of his contract i.e the club would end up paying him more in compensation under a fixed three year contract than under a one year rolling contract.

Obviously once you are into a third year of his contract then of course the club would be better of sacking him than if he was on a rolling one year contract.

However unless DJ is remarkable stupid he or his agent if he uses one will of course have been negotiating an extension to his contract rather than letting it run down.

I would there see it as being quite likely that by the halfway stage (18 months) or shortly thereafter of tbis theoretical 3 year contract DJ will have negotiated at least a years extension to his contract.

This being the case and if he then went on to be at the cllub for many more years renegotiating hs contract at regular intervals I would suggest that the likelihood is that under this fixed term deal DJ will always have around 18 months at least to run of this contract and that therefore the club will always be better off with a one year rollling contract tnan a fixed term one that is alway being extended.

Or am I missing something?

His premier wage is what you are missing.

Most non rolling contracts stipulate fixed percentages for the paying out of compensation. Given Jones is on a higher salary than other Championship managers, means it's still more expensive to fire him.

excellent post.

i was thinking along the same lines, but if dj was sacked in the 1st month of his rolling contract we would have to pay him 23 months pay. but as you said it will work out cheaper in the long run to continue with a rolling contract.

Most non rolling contracts stipulate fixed percentages for the paying out of compensation. Given Jones is on a higher salary than other Championship managers, means it's still more expensive to fire him.

I ndon't think this is always the case.

I have frequently seen fixed term contracts mentioned where managers have claimed the full amount for the outstanding npart of the contract.

And in any case it would depend what the fixed percentage was.

His premier wage is what you are missing.

No I am not. I am presuming he would be getting the same annual wage under both a rolling and fixed term contract

The problem against a rolling contract is the £800,000 price tag which never goes away. It could be argued that it is a good thing as it guards against knee jerk reactions, or bad if you just can't take the constant let down which is Dave Jones.

Either way he has to have a contract of some sorts, the real problem being he is paid too much.