Sorry to post ANOTHER thread about him but a comment earlier got me a little confused.. So he lost that many games on the bounce and we couldn't afford to get rid of him- figures of £500k floated due to his lengthy contract SO does this or does this not mean we are due a large pay out for him leaving and if not why not and whats the point of a manager on a long term contract if they can leave when they fancy but can't be sacked without a juicy pay day. Extremely miffed at him wanting to leave to be honest. Days like this remind you what modern football really is about. Enjoy returning to L1 next year, Lee.
The length of the contract has nothing to do with anything really. Within the contract it will be stated how much compensation Johnson receives should we sack him. We don't simply pay up the remainder of the contract. Also, it will state how much compensation we will receive should he be poached by another club. So we will receive some money. It's standard practice these days and Ben Mansford has spoken about this in relation to both Wilson and Johnson's contracts. The idea that we didn't sack Johnson because he was on a 3 year contract was nonsense.
Didn't realise that, very interesting. So we purposely put in a £500k sacking clause seems mad to me!
I don't know for certain, but I doubt it was anything like that much. I would imagine the person who told you that simply doesn't know. Ben Mansford talked about Wilson's sacking after the story appeared in The Chronicle relating to how much it cost the club to get rid of Flicker, which was about £500,000 according to The Chron. He said it cost nowhere near that much to dismiss Wilson and it never would again.
Probably be lucky to get 100k for him. That fee would be to pay him off, his coaching staff off and bring in another guy and another set of coaching staff.
