Sack Humphreys

[cktiger]

In hindsight he played well for the knights but at the time no other c
UBS wanted to touch him, our sponsors didn't want him ( who pay our bills) and most fans didn't want him so we made the right decision. Also who is to say Willie in Newcastle where players are sheltered and protected and he is near family would be the same as Willie in sydney

The fact that many of our fans didn't want him tells you all you need to know about the large majority of our fan base.

I wonder what any of the sponsors who didn't want Willie would think now? They sure got value from their deals this year after we missed the 8\. :crazy

Totally agree , hybrid.
Not too hard to explain to sponsors the value of the team going as far as they can in the comp.
If they had a backbone both Humphries and Sheens should have told them they wanted Mason - end of story.
They are paid to bring success to the club… not pander to everybodys likes and dislikes.

 

[happy_tiger]

Sometimes as a leader you have to make decisions that are risky if you want to make the next step .

Humphrey's biggest concerns are his job , not the club

 

[innsaneink]

In hindsight he played well for the knights but at the time no other c
UBS wanted to touch him, our sponsors didn't want him ( who pay our bills) and most fans didn't want him so we made the right decision. Also who is to say Willie in Newcastle where players are sheltered and protected and he is near family would be the same as Willie in sydney

Just goes to show if you leave idiots to make the decisions, those decisions are more often poor ones

Seriously, fans have their roles.
Sponsors have their roles.

Neither have anything to do with recruitment, except at WTs where its a bloody circus

 

[snowleopard]

Agree Happy.. In business.. And that's what Wests Tigers is.. You live and die by the sword.. That is of course unless ur Humphreys , Sheens or certain players

 

[snowleopard]

From what we see happening now it seems to me that Humphreys verbally agrees to contracts with players so that they are taken off the market and any mid season player unrest is minimised. Then, he turns around and does not honour his word when it comes to finalising the deal and uses the salary cap as an excuse. Beau is a good example of this.

How the hell can you build a successful club if players can't trust the CEO? Is it fair and reasonable to treat players this way and expect to get their loyalty and best performances week in week out in return? Does the Board condone these type of actions or do they think it is standard practice?

 

[Karma_Tiger]

Humphreys job involves a lot more than trying to build a winning football team,sponsorship,a link between our club and the NRL, a link between the board and the players and lots of other things. In general he is doing a good job,he has not sent us bankrupt and we have a good profile.I think he is one of the better CEOs going around. Sheens is a different kettle of fish, he is paid big big money to get a winning team and he has failed more than he has succeeded .

He has not sent us bankrupt.Is that how you judge a successful.ceo.

 

[snowleopard]

Karma- refer to the Financials thread & you might then hold a different view.

 

[Chunk]

Hysteria had ceratinly taken hold

We are one of the most successful clubs off the paddock, we don't have the huge leagues clubs like the Canterbury's or the private owners.

The club has to generate the majority of its funds from 'grass roots' levels and our CEO is very good at it.

He doesn't have an endless pit of money to throw around which make things much easier.

Humphrey's is one of the better CEO's in town but a an eay scapegoat…..........

 

[Tiger_Watto]

**From what we see happening now it seems to me that Humphreys verbally agrees to contracts with players so that they are taken off the market and any mid season player unrest is minimised.** Then, he turns around and does not honour his word when it comes to finalising the deal and uses the salary cap as an excuse. Beau is a good example of this.

How the hell can you build a successful club if players can't trust the CEO? Is it fair and reasonable to treat players this way and expect to get their loyalty and best performances week in week out in return? Does the Board condone these type of actions or do they think it is standard practice?

Its a pretty good tactic really… Player Managers have been doing it for years. Their best trick is to sign a player for 3 years, get their commission and after 12 months , shop there talent around for a better contract. Then they fill the players head with conspiracy theories and get the player to ask for a release if they cant match the new offer... Bingo, Xmas Bonus!

The only negative to what Humpty is doing [if he is actually doing it] is the Player Managers will catch on pretty quick and adjust how they do business with him. It could backfire long term?!