Reds 2017

[Scrubber2050]

See the roles of CEO and HC as non-exclusive.

"They" are talking about a couple of potential CEO's that have zero rugby experience, only business and admin experience (which is fine). Don't understand what input one of those guys would have in the selection of a HC.

Would have thought that the CEO oversees the whole operation, pursuant to the Boards general line of thinking and there would be "executives" for the areas of administration, grassroots, finance and football operations accountable to him (the CEO)

Just thought that the HC would head up the footy dept, including recruitment and retention.

That's essentially my reasoniong

 

[Jeeper]

The worldwide search continues.. However I keep hearing Matt Taylor is definitely the front runner.

 

[BaysideBird]

Could Mitch Felsman from Brothers get a go next year? He's scored 15 tries in QPR in only 9 games, he's bloody ridiculous in the scoring department.

 

[Scrubber2050]

Just as important as HC and CEO is the job of player recruitment and retention. Job needs to be vacated now or a new HC does so immediately upon his appointment.

 

[hammertimethere]

I reckon that Felsman deserves a good run in the NRC this year and at the very least an offer of a pre-season with the Reds. He's absolutely shredding in QPR.

 

[RugbyReg]

agree. He was in the Reds squad many moons ago, but would love to see him get an NRC gig (that is, of course, assuming he wants one)

 

[Strewthcobber]

See the roles of CEO and HC as non-exclusive.

"They" are talking about a couple of potential CEO's that have zero rugby experience, only business and admin experience (which is fine). Don't understand what input one of those guys would have in the selection of a HC.

Would have thought that the CEO oversees the whole operation, pursuant to the Boards general line of thinking and there would be "executives" for the areas of administration, grassroots, finance and football operations accountable to him (the CEO)

Just thought that the HC would head up the footy dept, including recruitment and retention.

That's essentially my reasoniong

CEO is on the board of the QRU - is there any reason they'd need a full board to appoint the coach?

And doesn't the HC now report through Dan Herbert's position?

 

[Scrubber2050]

CEO is on the board of the QRU - is there any reason they'd need a full board to appoint the coach?

And doesn't the HC now report through Dan Herbert's position?

Think he on the Board but non voting - he is invited to Board meetings .

HC SHOULD report to the CEO and be responsible for his area of authority. Every position SHOULD be accountable. Ultimately accountability is supposed to flow uphill and stop with the Board

Then, I suppose the Board is accountable to the organisation's members.

 

[Braveheart81]

The CEO is a voting member on every board I have ever seen.

They're the main executive director.

 

[hammertimethere]

I hope the Reds hang onto Browning but I don't know how likely that is.

Tui, Timu and Houston all offer similar things, with Browning offering a bit more presence over the ball at 6 or 8 + a superior lineout option. He balances the group nicely and I think Schatz time is up

 

[Braveheart81]

The Reds should hang onto Browning but I don't think Reds fans should be too concerned about players getting pushed out of the starting XV or matchday 23.

If you look at all the best teams in Super Rugby, it is the depth and quality of players that miss out on selection that ultimately goes a long way to determining the overall quality of a side.

The Reds need more good players who can't make the side. A good culture and strong results will make it easier to keep players than certainty of selection in my view.

 

[Scrubber2050]

Reg
Can you advise if the CEO has full voting rights on the Reds Board or is a member with non-voting rights

 

[RugbyReg]

Reg
Can you advise if the CEO has full voting rights on the Reds Board or is a member with non-voting rights

Only if he is Executive Director. Jim Carmichael was, which basically means he's a Board Member with the same duties and responsibilities as other directors.

You can expect the new CEO to be the same

 

[TOCC]

The Reds should hang onto Browning but I don't think Reds fans should be too concerned about players getting pushed out of the starting XV or matchday 23.
.

Brownings agent was putting out the feelers in Europe at the start of the season when RG was still coach, and if it weren't for his knee injury in 2015 he would have signed with the Rebels. He might have already signed to head overseas.

 

[liquor box]

It is a shame there is no transfer payments for the team that develops a player along the way. Reds would have a bit of money from all the talent they have provided to the world

 

[Strewthcobber]

It is a shame there is no transfer payments for the team that develops a player along the way. Reds would have a bit of money from all the talent they have provided to the world

To be fair, going through the current list, we'd be paying a fair bit for the current squad in return though.....

 

[Train Without a Station]

But LB how would that resolve anything?

The Bosman ruling prevented any teams charging transfer fees on out of contract players.

We lose players who are out of contract.

There is no legal way to restrict movement of free agents, beyond anything that is put in place to allow them to maintain Wallaby eligibility.

Why do people continue to think this is any possible solution?

 

[liquor box]

But LB how would that resolve anything?

The Bosman ruling prevented any teams charging transfer fees on out of contract players.

We lose players who are out of contract.

There is no legal way to restrict movement of free agents, beyond anything that is put in place to allow them to maintain Wallaby eligibility.

Why do people continue to think this is any possible solution?

I don't want to restrict free movement or to use it as a way to retain players.

If you buy a player and had to give 10% of the contract to the previous team it allows the previous team to get some money from producing a player and also give funds to replace a player if you wish to recruit from outside your team.

If someone is poaching your developed player then it would be safe to assume they are paying more than you were prepared to pay so the 10% gives you a chance to buy a replacement that would be the same quality.

I would also use it for all teams, if a player is contracted to the Reds then the club side they play for should get money, or even a school.

This would also direct funds to the clubs that are developing talent.

The big upside would be to poorer pacific countries that are raped and pillaged by bigger unions, the payments might fund the ability to field test teams that can retain their own talent.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Anything that adds additional cost to contracting a player restricts the movement. In legal terms it does.

All it would do is reduce the portion of the contract that the player receives, as teams aren't just going to choose to pay more.

But why would anybody just agree to do this? As there is no legal basis to enforce it. How would it work if players go for less money? It's hard enough for some players to secure the right contract and now they are going to lose 10% to the team that no longer wants them?

You contract players to stop them moving. If you're worried about them leaving you should contract them longer.

If you leave should your boss get 10% of your salary at your next job?

 

[Tomikin]

I don't want to restrict free movement or to use it as a way to retain players.

If you buy a player and had to give 10% of the contract to the previous team it allows the previous team to get some money from producing a player and also give funds to replace a player if you wish to recruit from outside your team.

If someone is poaching your developed player then it would be safe to assume they are paying more than you were prepared to pay so the 10% gives you a chance to buy a replacement that would be the same quality.

I would also use it for all teams, if a player is contracted to the Reds then the club side they play for should get money, or even a school.

This would also direct funds to the clubs that are developing talent.

The big upside would be to poorer pacific countries that are raped and pillaged by bigger unions, the payments might fund the ability to field test teams that can retain their own talent.

Yeah as he already stated its illegal.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk