MDCCCLXVI, on 06 May 2015 - 04:39 PM, said:
There'll be acrimony when Cook leaves in a few weeks, no doubt about it.
I'm sure Cook will blame the Club, accusing them of a lack of support, perhaps even ambition and repeating stories of frozen funding. Though let's remember he enjoyed one of the largest budgets in L2, a more than reasonable one for L1, and was allowed to surround himself with an extended entourage. No complaints when he signed lucrative contract extensions, either.
I'm sure the Club will blame Cook, suggesting a lack of loyalty on his part, actively courting interest at the most inappropriate time possible and 'jumping ship' regardless of putting pen to paper on a new deal only a few months earlier. There might even be rumours regarding issues similar to those mentioned by Sligo fans, too. But all that will contradict the fact he'd delivered everything asked - and more - yet saw only a fraction of the income he'd generated re-invested.
Meanwhile the fans will blame both, asking why they witnessed interviews and tweets from figures close to the Club openly discussing Cook's exit, who prompted Pompey's interest in someone with the ink still wet on a two year agreement, why Cook's budget remained stagnant after all he'd achieved, and exactly what're the financial shortcomings underpinning everything that's happened?
The truth, I guess, is a combination of them all.
There are certainly two stories to listen to.
However, how many times do you see this from companies when a half decent employee decides to leave, it's almost like a built-in defence mechanism. Oh, I'm sorry to see such and such leave, well it's no loss, he/she was no good anyway. What makes you say that? Well X, Y & Z. Did you ever take the issues up with her/him? Well, no.
Strong Managers tackle issues as and when they arise and good companies acknowledge contribution and service when employees move on, what they don't do is get involved in muck spreading to soften the blow. Had Cook been flavour of the month still, a number of postings on this messageboard would have been deleted by now, at the Club's request.
I never bought into the belief that when Paul Cook came here, he managed to slash the playing budget and at the same time build a successful squad. The Paul Cook brand is an expensive one, make no mistake about that, yet we have an owner who wants the business to trade profitably & in doing so, reduce the level of debt. I believe that if we had a numbers driven CEO or a Financial Controller, Paul Cook would not have been as successful as he was last season because his budget would have been significantly lower from the off and the contractual obligations concerning exceptional income & bonus payments would have been stacked in the Club's favour and as a result, we would have missed out on some of the quality players that Paul Cook has brought to the Club.
Paul Cook has already raised his concerns for the second summer running that without investment, we will not progress. History tells us that from a footballing point of view, Paul Cook is successful, now who would be under the spotlight next season if we did actually start to struggle and Cook was still the Manager?
The Club is being financially restructured and I think it suits to have a new manager at the helm. I know who my money will be on once the finger pointing starts should we see things deteriorate on the pitch.
Finally, we heard a lot about the new stadium being badly underfunded, I just wonder if we have seen a lot of naivety and another underfunded project.
Help
