BOROCHAT
Newest article: Re: Revs by bcb1994Yesterday 22:04Yesterday at 22:04:18view thread
Oldest article: Simpson Contract Status by HitchinBoro exCalling 5/5 14:58Mon May 5 14:58:39 2025view thread
Revs
Views: 408
Signed a contract extension do we think?
reply to this article | return to the front page
4 people
Re: Revs
Views: 96
Only reason I can think that he’s signed a huge contract is PW knows clubs are sniffing about.
He’s had a fantastic start to the season. Done okay last season and his first spell was terrible.
Be a hefty bit of money having to be paid if Revs is ever sacked.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Revs
Views: 378
A 5-year contract, at this level, for a club like ours, is pretty rare, maybe even unprecedented (for us).
A really am impressed with Revs but I'm worried that if the wheels come off in a few years we're left with quite the bill to pay him off.
Can't see it happening but the worry is there.
reply to this article | return to the front page
1 person
Re: Revs
Views: 144
Such a move can only suggest the club are massively worried about losing him. Never thought I'd see the day we give a manager a 5 year contact.
Hope it doesn't come back to bite us.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Revs
Views: 134
Wonder if the contract specifies 5 years as manager of 5 years of employment.
Anyway, even if you have to pay off say 2 years of the contract, I can't imagine he's on millions, so it would be a manageable hit.
I like the thought of having a manager for that long though. These days the turnover of managers at clubs is crazy and I'd love us to be different and give a manager time to carry out a long term project.
reply to this article | return to the front page
2 people
Re: Revs
Views: 88
Generally, if you sack a manager part way through their contract you only have to keep paying them until they get their next job.
So if he was out of work for 6 months, you'd only pay 6 months wages even if the contract had 3 years to run.
I think.
Edited by BALDOCKBORO at 22:38:16 on 31st October 2025
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Revs
Views: 239
It could also be loaded with performance bonuses and stuff like that, which means the total payoff (should it be needed) won't be as horrendous as it could be.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Revs
Views: 276
I can’t recall us handing out a five year contract at any time in our history.
It’s a statement. Protects our investment in Revs if he carries on his current trajectory. There’s always a risk he won’t but there’s a risk in everything.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Revs
Views: 226
I was wondering if we'd ever handed out one. Did GW ever get anything like that from us?
I also wonder if it comes with a release clause and what we'd set that at. Surely got to be up at around £1 million at least.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Revs
Views: 208
"Did GW ever get anything like that from us?"
Of course not, Wallace isn't an idiot.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Revs
Views: 160
He probably made GW pay him for the privilege to manage us.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Revs
Views: 206
Pretty certain he didn’t.
Few three year contracts handed out to players on our last foray into League One I believe but after how that turned out we’ve been reticent to do so again.
A five year contract to anyone would usually be quite concerning for me but we’ve been getting these things more right than wrong for a while now so on the face of it this is positive news.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Revs
Views: 344
If we carry on punching way above our weight Revs will be at a big L1/Championship club in the next few years. But also If my nan had a pair of bollocks she would be my grandad.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Previous thread: FA Cup ifollow by RockyBottomYesterday 16:43Yesterday at 16:43:09view thread