Steve McClaren’s Massive Incentives To Do Well At Newcastle

The Mail has revealed that Steve McClaren’s contract is for three years, but if he wins the FA Cup or finishes in the top eight in the Premier League he goes to an eight year contract automatically – much like Alan Pardew and his team received after he had guided Newcastle to a top five finish – which in retrospective was a remarkable achievement given all the constraints put on Newcastle managers by owner Mike Ashley.

So Steve McClaren and his coaching team have massive incentives to actually do well at Newcastle, in spite of their terrible initial five months at the club when we lost to Sheffield Wednesday at home in the League Cup and are third bottom of the league 3 points from safety after 20 games played.


Steve McClaren – eight year deal incentive

The chances of Steve achieving either an FA Cup win or finishing top eight in the Premier league are however slim at best.

But it seems that Mike Ashley wants stability at the club and that’s almost the opposite of what we had under Ashley in his two years at the club when Newcastle had five different managers – Allardyce, Keegan, Kinnear, Shearer and Hughton.

Ashley also followed Freddy Shepherd who was fond of firing managers after about 18 months in the job.

Today’s Newcastle are almost the polar opposite of what it was when Freddy managed the club and we used to change managers every 18 months or so.

After Kevin Keegan left in January of 1997 Kenny Dalglish, Ruud Gullit, Graeme Souness and Glenn Roeder all lasted eighteen months or less as Newcastle manager.

Only the great Sir Bobby Robson had success and stayed at the club five years before he was also fired in August of 2004.

But now when most clubs would have fired their managers –  like last season after John Carver had lost eight games in a row or  earlier this season when Steve in his first eight games in charge garnered just three draws – we didn’t.

Steve and his team are now massively incented to turn things around this season, and if he can do that big time in the second half of this season then there’s a chance – a small chance – that he will be on an eight year deal at Newcastle at the start of next season.

The remaining four games in January are massive for the short-term futures of both Steve McClaren and Newcastle United.

What do you think?

Comments welcome.

58 comments so far

  • YoungMagpieFromBurnley

    Jan 7, 2016 at 12:07 AM

    Comment #1


    Cheers mate, I don’t deserve it, but il gladly take it… I hit the big 18 so I’m going to stay as mature as possible!!

    Yes! Let’s move forward and hope for a great year for Newcastle and for the bloggers on this site.

  • Take a Chancel on me

    Jan 7, 2016 at 12:08 AM

    Comment #2

    dunno about 8 years, Macca will be lucky to last months if he doesn’t get his act together

  • YoungMagpieFromBurnley

    Jan 7, 2016 at 12:10 AM

    Comment #3

    You would have thought Ashley would have learnt that giving out these huge contracts is a bad idea… If you want to motivate them to do well promise them a Payrise! Oh wait… This is Ashley were talking about, payrise and Ashley aren’t mutually exclusive.

  • Our Toon

    Jan 7, 2016 at 12:12 AM

    Comment #4


    Apologies I was in the middle of a huge post, look the information is out there for you to source yourself. As for that information on debt taken on board, everyone part of that deal will inform you that the club had massive debts and Ashley didn’t do his due diligence, he didn’t even know that nufc didn’t own the stadium. That’s how much due diligence he did. He put himself out of pocket and punished us in the process as he could have bought the club for less…..but this was an advertising vehicle which worked a treat.

    That same article is in almost all journos, and commonly known by money men in and around the financial industry. Once bitten twice shy, he’s never made the same mistake again in amassing a whole host of failing companies but he did his due diligence before buying them!! Please find the information via companies house and them I’m more than happy to discuss….agreed?

    Good night I’ll reply tomorrow

  • GeordieTwo

    Jan 7, 2016 at 12:14 AM

    Comment #5

    I think the word might be incentivized Ed mate. Incented sounds a bit off.

  • GeordieTwo

    Jan 7, 2016 at 12:16 AM

    Comment #6

    Mike should know that the 8 year contract is obsolete now. All the top clubs are going for the 20 year contract. Just think of that. 20 years of Steve McLaren. I wonder if that little tufty bit at the front of his heed will last that long?


    Jan 7, 2016 at 12:17 AM

    Comment #7

    evening all,
    hope everyone’s areet,so more bull strories knocking about again what a bloody surprise…,.its the non-gift that keeps on giving!lol……i hope mitro starts at the weekend just to get him some game time hopefully he’ll run off his bad luck in front of goal or just score of his arse something to help his confidence… we field a strong team or use the squad?….head says squad…..heart says strongest team and go for it!

  • YoungMagpieFromBurnley

    Jan 7, 2016 at 12:19 AM

    Comment #8

    Are* not aren’t


    Jan 7, 2016 at 12:20 AM

    Comment #9

    the brolly might last but the tuft is getting thinner by the day!……you’ll be lucky if its there in 20 days never mind 20 yrs!!lol

  • YoungMagpieFromBurnley

    Jan 7, 2016 at 12:23 AM

    Comment #10


    I disagree, that tuft of hair is a survivor. If anything is going it’s the rest of it, that tuft will be on his head for a long long time.


    Jan 7, 2016 at 12:25 AM

    Comment #11

    he might be pulling the hair oot from the back and super gluing it at the tuft position…..therefore it never looks any different!!!!lol

  • Charlietoon

    Jan 7, 2016 at 12:25 AM

    Comment #12

    Put top 8 and a cup win in the same bracket as winning the league.

  • GeordieTwo

    Jan 7, 2016 at 12:26 AM

    Comment #13

    Don’t worry lads. I have contacted the Tufty Bit Conservation Society. They plan on putting a small picket fence around it with some signs saying Keep Off the Tufty Bit.


    Jan 7, 2016 at 12:28 AM

    Comment #14

    hahaha…. good to know something will get sorted properly over there for a change!lol


    Jan 7, 2016 at 12:33 AM

    Comment #15

    soccer sauce reckon close to 1m bid for williamson from sheff wed???

  • GeordieTwo

    Jan 7, 2016 at 12:33 AM

    Comment #16

    Spot on @7 Springy mate. Given the choice of using the strongest team or the squid I say “Bloody well use the squid!” Get some ink on them. Plus a squid can be a very slippery customer. Who knows what the score might end up being? Beautiful….

  • Blackley and Brownlie

    Jan 7, 2016 at 12:35 AM

    Comment #17

    Reilly plays the man. But you know nothing about the carry on with bro Troy and his big mate, blog hammer Dave. And I’m more than happy to discuss it at great length with you. But you know that. And that’s why you’re off. Because you’ll be exposed as knowing nothing about it.

    That reminds me. Troy sent a brief missive the other day. The first one for two years. I should respond.

  • GeordieTwo

    Jan 7, 2016 at 12:37 AM

    Comment #18

    A lot of things would be better taken care of if we were in charge Springy mate. I just can’t understand why they don’t snatch us up before some other top team does?

  • reilly

    Jan 7, 2016 at 12:41 AM

    Comment #19

    i know all about it and why big dave sent you packing,
    and how you begged to be let back on toonsys blog.


    Jan 7, 2016 at 12:43 AM

    Comment #20

    always thought the club would do well to listen to the comments on this blog….if nowt else might cheer them up!lol

  • BandB

    Jan 7, 2016 at 12:48 AM

    Comment #21


    If you want to go back and see my answer to Krul.
    It is nothing I haven’t mentioned on the blog before, and those on here who know me better than you do, know it to be true.
    I don’t imagine it will be persuasive to you, of course.


    Jan 7, 2016 at 12:50 AM

    Comment #22

    things are not looking good if reports are to be believed..
    lacazette bid accepted but he’s ran away screaming
    shelvey found out we might be interested and he wants to run way screaming back to london to his old mate percy
    sheff wed have gone screaming mad and offered nearly a million for williamson!
    and last but not least charnley and carr are screaming with laughter hiding in a cupboard somewhere pretending there trying to sign players!!!

  • ilovetoon8788

    Jan 7, 2016 at 12:51 AM

    Comment #23

    Williamson. A championship club is the one that comes bidding. While we have been playing him in the premier league. Says it all rereally.

  • Magpie Season

    Jan 7, 2016 at 1:29 AM

    Comment #24
  • Jail for Ashley

    Jan 7, 2016 at 1:31 AM

    Comment #25

    Wouldn’t it be a very bizarre but not an unlikely situation with this mob running the show to make huge bids for players they know beforehand won’t come, that way they think that by winning the fans over it might somehow save us from relegation.

  • Magpie Season

    Jan 7, 2016 at 1:37 AM

    Comment #26


    Mate what’s this discussion on Krul?

    Was pondering myself if he came back from injury now would he start ahead of Elliot.

    There have been instances where the back up, or 3rd choice as Elliot was, played due to injures & became the first choice all of a sudden even when the other 2 returned to fitness.

    David de Gea is an example that comes to mind. 3rd choice keeper for Atletico who got his chance because of injuries to 1st & 2nd choice GK & well, look at him now.

  • lesh

    Jan 7, 2016 at 1:39 AM

    Comment #27

    McClaren’s three year contract could be extended if we win the FA Cup or achieve a top eight place – and that’s an incentive?

    It might explain why we’re sitting in the bottom three. Who in their right mind want to work for Ashley for any longer than they need to!

  • Blackley and Brownlie

    Jan 7, 2016 at 2:12 AM

    Comment #28

    Our Toon
    From the previous thread. You say it still amazes me that I am trying to debate a subject on which I’ve clearly not done any research and which I clearly haven’t studied.

    Don’t be amazed. I’ve read and listened to many of the same old arguments and seen accounts etc over the years. It doesn’t mean I agreed with those arguments in the past or I have to agree with them when they’re trotted out now as if they’re settled wisdom.

    I try never to underestimate anyone’s knowledge. I’ve seen enough people take almighty, embarrassing falls claiming to know it all while putting others down. Telling someone to go away and do their homework simply suggests your own argument is weak and you’re afraid to be challenged. Either that or you’re so confident that you’re right as to be arrogant.

    This isn’t complicated. I may be wrong. I understand all that you say @4 above. Ashley cost himself a fortune. He got his fingers burnt. He overpaid. I know all that. I am just asking a simple question. How does that have a detrimental impact on our club? I imagine one or two sentences could suffice.

    I’ve tried time and again to get you to explain. I know you say you’re busy and you’ll come back tomorrow, and I’ll await that. But you keep having a stab at it, providing history, but you don’t directly address the question.

    Even when you have a stab at it you’re not always sure yourself. You keep saying I should go and check this and that, as if you’ve been convinced yourself somewhere down the line but can’t quite remember everything or how.

    You give a lengthy response @180 on the previous thread. However, you talk about the loan arrangements in 2007 and how, if everything had gone to plan, the loans would all be paid off by 2020 given the TV revenues. You make it all sound very simple. But it all assumes we would be in the top league; that relegation doesn’t happen to football clubs; that if it does happen, it’s not such a problem; that FFS would not have got the club relegated after he mortgaged the club to the hilt on big money signings; and even if he did he would ahve got us to bounce back up. Even though, as we know, he was taking money out of the club not putting it in.

    We were told the big money signings were no more. It’s my understanding that the banks wouldn’t lend much more, if anything at all. What would have happened if FFS had stayed and got us relegated? We’d might well be like Portsmouth or Leeds or worse.

    Then you talk about the lease. You keep going off topic. The loan arrangements aren’t relevant, other than the fact that the loan for the stadium had to be repaid immediately. Neither is the lease. What have they got to do with the lack of due diligence affecting the club detrimentally? That is what we are talking about. The lack of due diligence that you and others keep throwing at Ashley. And which your article throws at him. I touch above on your points about the sound financial plan, but they are a different argument for a different day.

    Perhaps if I give you something to go at? Let me give you this to help you focus your response. What I don’t understand is people read that damning article you produced and think that sounds very bad because so many supporters are saying Ashley should get out of the club. It mentions lots of money lost because of lack of due diligence and it’s all a disgrace. But it doesn’t explain. It just paints a bad picture.

    When I read it, I read this. Ashley buys the club. He doesn’t do due diligence. He overpays. He makes a whopping loss. (Bear in mind it’s a paper loss. NUFC might turn into a tidy paper profit or even a tidy actual profit, even ignoring the SD angle.) He’s made that paper loss. Whether it’s paper or not, it must hurt at the time. But there’s nothing he can do about it. It’s there for all time. He might make it up easily by an increase in his personal wealth which fluctuates substantially. But it will never take away the fact that he overpaid at the time.

    But none of that affects NUFC detrimentally. It affects the owner, but in the scheme of things, it’s small bacon to him. The club was the same club on the day before the sale/purchase as it was the day after. The club’s own wealth was unaffected. So how does it affect the club detrimentally?

    The only way the loan arrangements are relevant is that, because Ashley did not do due diligence, the loan for the stadium, taken out through a securitisation arrangement, had to be repaid immediately. That meant that the sum of £60m you say on which the club was paying interest at a commercial rate (12%? at the time I seem to recall?) was paid off by Ashley. The club no longer had to pay £7.2m (?) a year to the bank. That was a lot of money to NUFC in 2007. Still is today. If you’ve got the cash, it’s usually good advice to pay off loans anyway; in this case, the choice was taken out of his hands.

    But the main point about the lack of due diligence is that there were hidden debts, ones that weren’t immediately obvious. That is your whole point. Things that weren’t obvious. The trouble is it runs counter to the argument you want to make. You can’t have it both ways, can you? On the one hand, Ashley overpaid for the club because he wasn’t aware of how quite so parlous were its finances, given it had so much hidden debt. On the other hand, the club was in good shape and everything was on course for profit and debt freedom until Ashley got his hands on it.

    That speaks for FFS and his regime. In other words, the picture that you paint of the club, of FFS’s sustainable plan to eliminate the debt, raises serious questions. It shows the club was not in as a good shape as FFS would have people believe. It lends much weight to the view that the club was mortgaged to the hilt and was still in debt on outstanding player transfers. It explains why we were told the days of the big money signings were over. And you know what happens in football when you can’t afford to spend money on players. None of today’s lucrative TV monies that you’re assuming in your alternative future and that you’re counting on to pay off the debt. Oh if life were so simple.

    You say this debate has been going on for a week or more. If it has, it’s because you’re brushing me off as if I know nothing. You’re not answering a very simple point that doesn’t even need any research to answer. We seem to largely agree on the facts. So it is just a matter of logic.

    How does the lack of due diligence detrimentally affect our club? Ashley pays off he exorbitant loan. It saves the club money. Ashley discovers debts racked up by the previous regime that they kept under wraps. The hidden debts are detrimental of course. But Ashley discovering them is neither here not there to me. Should he be hung out to dry for being the bearer of bad news? Is that it?

  • posada

    Jan 7, 2016 at 2:17 AM

    Comment #29

    Jib/Transfer Sage
    Re Mike Ashley, his takeover of the club and hidden debts.
    I was a shareholder at the time and I knew about the debt. It was in the annual reports. 30M or so was kind of a secret in that future income from certain things had already been spent. But, whats 30M to a big shot billionaire. Also, even this was not hidden to any great degree.
    Lots of folk talk about MA and his lack of due diligence. That is a myth. When you buy a company as he did you don’t get the chance to do due diligence. He simply kept buying shares until he was the majority shareholder.
    The other way is to make an offer for the company at a set price, subject to due diligence. Mike Ashley did not buy NUFC this way.

  • Blackley and Brownlie

    Jan 7, 2016 at 2:19 AM

    Comment #30

    It shows you know nothing. Be honest.

    I know the whole story from back to front. You don’t and couldn’t hack it if you started.

    If you want to go into it, go into it. Give me your best shot. Otherwise, don’t bring it up. You’ve already got into another question that you had no care for. So I’d urge you to either get in or get out.

  • Blackley and Brownlie

    Jan 7, 2016 at 2:23 AM

    Comment #31

    I agree about the way people think it was a simple matter to do due diligence. It was a hostile takeover, done in a rush with FFS in hospital and trying to fend it off.

    You are well placed to comment. Please give me your thoughts on my substantive point to OurToon. How did Ashley’s omission to do due diligence detrimentally affect NUFC?

  • posada

    Jan 7, 2016 at 2:24 AM

    Comment #32

    The big problem was this.
    MA sold half of SD for about 900 million.
    He bought NUFC shortly after.
    He was confident with that sort of cash backing him and knew exactly what he was doing.
    Then the financial crisis kicked in. Banks went to the wall.
    Some of his assets were reportedly with those banks and for a while it looked like he may not get them back. Not his fault. Nobody saw that coming.
    MA was then suddenly not so confident and probably regretted buying a football club.
    The problem had nothing at all to do with a lack of due diligence.
    In any case a club like NUFC should be able to service that sort of debt.
    Arsenal 300-400 M to finance the Emirates Stadium. Man U even greater debt.
    The debt should not be a problem to MA who we are told is now worth 3.5 billion.

  • Jail for Ashley

    Jan 7, 2016 at 2:32 AM

    Comment #33

    What has Mike Ashley done for us ?

  • Blackley and Brownlie

    Jan 7, 2016 at 2:34 AM

    Comment #34

    Our Toon
    Have you or anyone else commented on Croftus’ figures for EPL finances and in particular the amount it shows other clubs are making on commercial activities including advertising? Those who continually and blithely throw “free advertising” at Ashley, just like “due diligence”, seem to go quiet when it comes down to it. At least you’re making some effort to back your views when challenged.

  • posada

    Jan 7, 2016 at 2:39 AM

    Comment #35

    B and B.
    The debts of the club should not have been a problem to Mike Ashley at all.
    Lack of due diligence was not an issue. I firmly believe that he knew exactly the position.
    Even if he took a gamble, he knew it was.
    I do think those debts would have been a problem to the old regime.
    You must remember that FS did not own the club 100%. He is not a billionaire like MA, although he is clearly a wealthy man.
    In fairness to FS, when he was in charge he had to get all the other shareholders ( big shareholders ) to agree. To find a consensus.
    In many ways I wish FS was a big shot billionaire with complete ownership. He is an NUFC fanatic and I think we would be in a better position. It would not be dull that’s for sure.
    Never loose sight of what a billion is. One thousand million.

  • Blackley and Brownlie

    Jan 7, 2016 at 2:39 AM

    Comment #36

    I completely agree about the crash. Ashley was slaughtered. He got a big kick in the teeth. It made him rethink his plans. He felt he couldn’t afford to finance the club as he’d originally thought. When your wealth drops so dramatically, which it could tomorrow, you could be forgiven for thinking the club should pay it’s way. Football clubs are a bloody risky investment with not much reward. FFS found that out; not surprising as he’s not in Ashley’s league. The recent TV deals have changed the complexion somewhat but it is still early days and may not last.

  • BandB

    Jan 7, 2016 at 2:45 AM

    Comment #37


    You seem in far higher spirits than I this evening.
    You asked me to look at what Krul to Be Kind wrote.
    I have. I’ve asked you to read the response.
    Are you too busy?
    I’m unlikely to sleep, so I can wait.

  • Blackley and Brownlie

    Jan 7, 2016 at 2:46 AM

    Comment #38

    Posada @35
    I agree with all of that. The debts were coming home to roost for the old regime. But Ashley gets the blame because he discovered them and rationalised them. And yet none of those who calls him for lack of due diligence is able to explain how it detrimentally affected the club.

    I don’t know where you’re situated but it’s late here. i’m off to bed. I’ll check out the flak in the morning. I’d rather hope there’s some light from folk, even if they’re disagreeing with me.

  • Blackley and Brownlie

    Jan 7, 2016 at 2:48 AM

    Comment #39

    I checked back but didn’t see it so thought I’d misunderstood. You’re keen for me to see it so you must be pleased with it. If you respond quickly, I’ll check it out before I depart.

  • BandB

    Jan 7, 2016 at 2:50 AM

    Comment #40

    Not pleased Blackley,
    No, self congratulation isn’t what it is about at all.


You must log in to post a comment.