Wilkins - What really went on...

[y2dave]

Right, from a sound source and apparently direct from an ex player. Dick Knight and the entire Board lost confidence in Deans Wilkins during the January transfer window.

Dick was involved in negotiations for new signings and more specifically was hoping to extend the contracts of several players. After consultation with the manager Dick usually negotiates direct with the player or agent.

It seems Dean Wilkins was part of an attempt to manipulate the board to secure Dean Hammond a contract outside of the clubs constraints. It also seems this was not an isolated incident and resulted in agents exploiting this division and leveraging Wilkins perceived valuation of players when in negotiations.

What really done for Dean was this being all played out in the press and his perceived support of the players over the club as a business. Savage playing at Millwall certainly didnt help. Once Barry Llloyds targets were secured the plan was to dismiss Wilkins to allow the new manager time to assess the squad and settle in.

As it turned out the club didn't want to risk a playoff push so Wilkins was retained, perhaps knowing his time was up. Judging by his lack of interest in the fate of senior pro's and from what Paul Reid had to say I assume he did.

 

[Row Z Creased Shirt]

Right, from a sound source and apparently direct from an ex player. Dick Knight and the entire Board lost confidence in Deans Wilkins during the January transfer window.

Dick was involved in negotiations for new signings and more specifically was hoping to extend the contracts of several players. After consultation with the manager Dick usually negotiates direct with the player or agent.

It seems Dean Wilkins was part of an attempt to manipulate the board to secure Dean Hammond a contract outside of the clubs constraints. It also seems this was not an isolated incident and resulted in agents exploiting this division and leveraging Wilkins perceived valuation of players when in negotiations.

What really done for Dean was this being all played out in the press and his perceived support of the players over the club as a business. Savage playing at Millwall certainly didnt help. Once Barry Llloyds targets were secured the plan was to dismiss Wilkins to allow the new manager time to assess the squad and settle in.

As it turned out the club didn't want to risk a playoff push so Wilkins was retained, perhaps knowing his time was up. Judging by his lack of interest in the fate of senior pro's and from what Paul Reid had to say I assume he did.

As unsubstantiated rumour goes (not having a go there y2dave, just adding the tradititional touch of salt to the understandbly un-named source), that all sounds fairly plausible and would explain that whilst respected as coach the board didn't rate him as a manager. If conflicts like this were to arise regularly then Wilkins tenure would be untenable.

 

[cjd]

Right, from a sound source and apparently direct from an ex player. Dick Knight and the entire Board lost confidence in Deans Wilkins during the January transfer window.

Dick was involved in negotiations for new signings and more specifically was hoping to extend the contracts of several players. After consultation with the manager Dick usually negotiates direct with the player or agent.

It seems Dean Wilkins was part of an attempt to manipulate the board to secure Dean Hammond a contract outside of the clubs constraints. It also seems this was not an isolated incident and resulted in agents exploiting this division and leveraging Wilkins perceived valuation of players when in negotiations.

What really done for Dean was this being all played out in the press and his perceived support of the players over the club as a business. Savage playing at Millwall certainly didnt help. Once Barry Llloyds targets were secured the plan was to dismiss Wilkins to allow the new manager time to assess the squad and settle in.

As it turned out the club didn't want to risk a playoff push so Wilkins was retained, perhaps knowing his time was up. Judging by his lack of interest in the fate of senior pro's and from what Paul Reid had to say I assume he did.

That all sounds very plausible..................so where was the help from Knight, that Wilkins clearly needed in contract-management...............bearing in mind that Knight knew Wilkins was inexperienced in these matters when he appointed him..............?

 

[y2dave]

I think the problem was Dean was trying to be a little too clever and when the damage was done he didn't backtrack.

 

[FamilyGuy]

Right, from a sound source and apparently direct from an ex player. Dick Knight and the entire Board lost confidence in Deans Wilkins during the January transfer window.

Dick was involved in negotiations for new signings and more specifically was hoping to extend the contracts of several players. After consultation with the manager Dick usually negotiates direct with the player or agent.

It seems Dean Wilkins was part of an attempt to manipulate the board to secure Dean Hammond a contract outside of the clubs constraints. It also seems this was not an isolated incident and resulted in agents exploiting this division and leveraging Wilkins perceived valuation of players when in negotiations.

What really done for Dean was this being all played out in the press and his perceived support of the players over the club as a business. Savage playing at Millwall certainly didnt help. Once Barry Llloyds targets were secured the plan was to dismiss Wilkins to allow the new manager time to assess the squad and settle in.

As it turned out the club didn't want to risk a playoff push so Wilkins was retained, perhaps knowing his time was up. Judging by his lack of interest in the fate of senior pro's and from what Paul Reid had to say I assume he did.

Whatever the source, that sounds eminently feasible!?

Onward and upwards!

 

[Don't get me started]

I think Knight did it just to give us something to talk about on here! Be honest it's normally very dull in the summer months..

All hail the chairman and his attempts to save us from ourselves

 

[SurreySeagulls]

Is it me or is the board quiet this morning

 

[sten_super]

I agree, sounds feasible; also fits in with what Lord B was saying in the other thread.

However it does suggest that there was no impetus from Wilkins for this change to happen; and in that case I can't really see him wanting to stay, which is a shame.

 

[Mendoza]

When did Wilkins contract run out? Was it this summer? and all we have done is not offered him a new one? Or has he been relieved of his duties early?

 

[y2dave]

Wilkins was 1 year into a 3 year term.

 

[backson]

That's the thing that confuses me, his reward for just missing relegation was a 3 year contract.

And his reward for just missing the play offs....?

 

[beorhthelm]

it sounds an interesting theory upto a point. maybe the loosing of confidence and time of that is right, but the reason

It seems Dean Wilkins was part of an attempt to manipulate the board to secure Dean Hammond a contract outside of the clubs constraints. It also seems this was not an isolated incident and resulted in agents exploiting this division and leveraging Wilkins perceived valuation of players when in negotiations.

i dont buy that. it sort of goes against the image of Wilkins too much: manipulate the board? who would be the backer for such an externally funded arrangement? Is that even allowed?

 

[acrossthepond]

it sounds an interesting theory upto a point. maybe the loosing of confidence and time of that is right, but the reason



i dont buy that. it sort of goes against the image of Wilkins too much: manipulate the board? who would be the backer for such an externally funded arrangement? Is that even allowed?

No, not an external arrangement. the implication here is that Dean Wilkins tried to leverage his position to get a better deal for Hammond.
e.g. Hammond talks to Colchester as he is entitled to do, because he is coming to the end of his contract. Colchester offer him an extra couple of grand a week. Hammond doesn't want to move, but fancies the extra cash. Wilkins rates Hammond, and is building a team around him, so promises to try and get Knight to match the Colchester offer. Wilkins overplays his hand (primarily via a combination of agent and the media) and Hammond ends up going to Colchester. In this scenario, Knight's comments subsequent to failing to strike a deal with Hammond's agent ring all too true.

The whole thing is underlined in Reid's interview, where he says that Wilkins tried to shift blame onto the chairman. Were I knight I would have gone mental on reading that.

Goodbye Dean Wilkins, fired for the want of some moral fibre. If he'd taken on the responsibility of the position, he would probably still be in the manager's office.

Oh, and I don't have a source or anything like that. Occam just had a word in my ear...

 

[Jimmy Grimble]

 

[Carrot Cruncher]

Why?

 

[WATFORD zero]

Why?

Because he's just figured out what everyone else has known for the last few months

 

[Jimmy Grimble]

Why?

Just making it clear to some who still believe Wilkins should still be here.

 

[Mendoza]

Just making it clear to some who still believe Wilkins should still be here.

so how do you feel now that Adams re signed one of Wilkins signings?

 

[Skaville]

Just making it clear to some who still believe Wilkins should still be here.

Nothing clear about it. It's just another unsubstantiated rumour as far as I'm concerned. IF (and it's a big if) Wilkins was fired for that how the hell has Gordon Strachan survived the charity he bestowed on his old mate Mark McGhee?

 

[Jimmy Grimble]

so how do you feel now that Adams re signed one of Wilkins signings?

Pleased, because he is a good player and is only on loan. Does that mean Wilkins should have stayed then? I think other people at the club may have played a part in spotting Richards in the first place.