• You may have to login or register before you can post and view our exclusive members only forums.
    To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Moneyball and Performance Related Pay

Status
Not open for further replies.
Well, perhaps I didn't word it correctly, but winning that title definitely built on the image that the gravy train was still going to keep running despite the riches City and Chelsea were pouring into their clubs. The winning margin - 11 points - was just after losing a season before that on goal difference on the final day. If you're signing on a new global sponsor or renewing an existing one, you'd definitely be able to make a good song and dance about that.

Of course, that and the fact their negotiators are top class devils, what with the new deals they were able to snag with Nike and Chevrolet the following season.


Which is the point: their people seem excellent at what they do. And, specifically, excellent *compared* to ours.

I'd point out, btw, that they had excellent growth in both years subsequent to 2012. So all things considered any benefit from yet another title win can only have been of very very marginal effect to the total growth.
 
Whether or not performance related pay is good surely depends how you judge the performance?

For example do you want a striker thinking if I don't pass I give myself a better opportunity to make more money?

Bayerns head of analysis was at Sloan this week describing Opta's stats as useless when it comes to judging the performance of their team, they collect their own data instead.

I'd like to think we're doing something similar and rewarding players for doing what we think is important rather than what's easily counted

I would be schocked if Clubs used OPTA stats to judge the individual performances and how to pay. I must clearly be own measurments and judgements that is behind how you pay Your players.

Without having any detailed Insight to how this happens, it should be good for the Whole Group to be rewarded by certain performance based criterias. Instead of just winning the golden lorttery With a i.e. 70K a week contract, paid however you performed or took care of yourself, you should be motivated to work on improving yourself as a player and athlete. Maybe 45-50 were taken home anyway, but then the rest should be achivable on easy and Clear measurements. Like i.e. Your basic form is not allowed to drop (body fat, oxygen intake etc). Your goalscoring form will drop and raise from time to time, so that is impossible to measure by.
 
It's pretty absurd to compare Utd's commercial performance to our own. They might have top class people working for them but by and large the reason they're able to secure the deals they do is because they're one of the biggest sports clubs in the world. We're not in their league in that respect, like it or not.
 
As Woland observed a while ago, it's surely naive to still think in terms of pay incentives for performances these days. It's fine if you go back in time and offer Alf Tupper or someone a hundred more for winning the cup final or something, but will it really affect how the likes of Sterling perform if a deal promises to make him a bit more of a millionaire than he already is? It's financial white noise.
 
May be its absurd to compare absolute numbers. But it is completely practical to compare growth percentage. If anything a higher growth rate is not only feasible but also should be the goal for us.

If they are growing at a faster rate, considering how far ahead they are, then we are not doing it right.
 
As Woland observed a while ago, it's surely naive to still think in terms of pay incentives for performances these days. It's fine if you go back in time and offer Alf Tupper or someone a hundred more for winning the cup final or something, but will it really affect how the likes of Sterling perform if a deal promises to make him a bit more of a millionaire than he already is? It's financial white noise.

I think it will matter to these players. You judge how you're doing in relation to your peers.
Ashley Cole did not move to Chelsea because they offered him more money, he moved because Arsenal tried to get him on the cheap. Imagine walking into work, knowing you are worth the same as others but everyone knowing you're being stiffed by the bosses.
No one would work in Greggs for £6.50 an hour if they knew the other staff were getting £7. You'd want to know why you weren't getting £7 too.
And also want to know where your life went so catastrophically wrong.
It also would mean something to players like Ibe Rossiter etc when they got a first team chance.
 
Whether or not performance related pay is good surely depends how you judge the performance?

For example do you want a striker thinking if I don't pass I give myself a better opportunity to make more money?

Bayerns head of analysis was at Sloan this week describing Opta's stats as useless when it comes to judging the performance of their team, they collect their own data instead.

I'd like to think we're doing something similar and rewarding players for doing what we think is important rather than what's easily counted

I think any team's analytics squad that's worth its own salt would have their own set of measurements instead of relying on Opta's (well, I assume there aren't many other sets of data that Opta squirrels away and sells to teams only). Opta stats are great for the journos, fans, and sites like Squawka, FFT and whoscored which cater to fans' curiosity, but I'd be surprised if the top teams relied on them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom