This is perhaps just a symptom of my American sporting vernacular, but when I sign a player to a Backup contract I expect they'll be okay with riding the end of the bench and earning their paycheck quietly.
Backups are backups because they don't play unless a lot of people get hurt, I'd rather not have them out there at all if I can help it. Sure, I throw them a start or some minutes off the bench on infrequent occasions when it really doesn't matter who is out there, but it's never enough for them.
Granted, I'd understand completely if I had a player on First Team status or Rotation that I then downgraded to Backup. They'd have different expectations. But a guy I sign off the street who has always had the Backup status to begin with ought to accept that role I think. If they wouldn't be happy, they shouldn't take the role and demand a bigger role during negotiations. Failing that, I'd advocate a level between Not Needed and Backup called "Depth" that means basically what I've said I expect out of Backups. I'm sure there are plenty of players out there with the right combination of attributes, age, and reputation who would take just such a role at any given club.
For the curious, the complainers this year are Michael Owen (shoulda known with that one), Mark Wilson, Paul Robinson, Zat Knight (finally broke in to the squad and shut up) and David James.

Reply With Quote

Bookmarks