Voice of Reason
Juniors
- Messages
- 359
If we are making business decisions on purchasing/re-purchasing assets (players) for our business, I believe that we need to apply a tried and true business model in our decision making. Whilst this approach is very impersonal, we need to accept that we are in a business environment, irrespective if we like that or not. In making a decision on renewing a contract I would pass the decision through 4 fundamental gateways and if the answer is NO to any of these I would put a "red line" through that player. The questions would be:
1. Does the player have the ABILITY to do the job at 1st grade level?
2. Does the player have the ABILITY to LEARN/IMPROVE?
3. Has the player DEMONSTRATED over time that he has improved/learnt?
4. Is this improvement SUSTAINABLE?
For mine, the following applies to some of our players:
Perry- Y, Y, N,N
Woolnough- Y,Y,N,N
Tighe- Y,?,N,N
Carmont- ?,?,N,N
Newton- Y,Y,N,N
On this I would NOT resign any of these players. Having said that, the inevitable questions arises, "who do we replace them with". If there is not a BETTER ALTERNATIVE then that must be considered in the argument. It finally comes down to money. My conclusion is based upon paying these guys mid-range contracts. If we cant get any better we may need to persevere with some of these guys but ensure that we PAY THEM LESS. My personal feeling is that if a player scores a No at question three or earlier then its time for them to go and on that logic it would be goodbye to all of these guys. Any thoughts?:?
1. Does the player have the ABILITY to do the job at 1st grade level?
2. Does the player have the ABILITY to LEARN/IMPROVE?
3. Has the player DEMONSTRATED over time that he has improved/learnt?
4. Is this improvement SUSTAINABLE?
For mine, the following applies to some of our players:
Perry- Y, Y, N,N
Woolnough- Y,Y,N,N
Tighe- Y,?,N,N
Carmont- ?,?,N,N
Newton- Y,Y,N,N
On this I would NOT resign any of these players. Having said that, the inevitable questions arises, "who do we replace them with". If there is not a BETTER ALTERNATIVE then that must be considered in the argument. It finally comes down to money. My conclusion is based upon paying these guys mid-range contracts. If we cant get any better we may need to persevere with some of these guys but ensure that we PAY THEM LESS. My personal feeling is that if a player scores a No at question three or earlier then its time for them to go and on that logic it would be goodbye to all of these guys. Any thoughts?:?
