retired_jessieb

Can't really remember this being discussed before.

Situation:

My club needs coaches and I find an unemployed player/coach who is willing to sign up for me. The problem is that as well as having good coaching stats, he is also a good player. I know this as I have signed him in a previous game.

So if I sign him up, I am using previous game experience. I feel I should not sign him , but he is one of a very few coaches available. I guess I could sign him up just as a coach, and forfit the playing aspect of this backroom staff member. I think most would know whom I am talking about if you have played in any of the UK comps.

Seems to be the best way out, but what do other LLaMa's think?

retired_rmjohnston

You could sign him and not play him, using him solely as a coach. This of course could lead to his discontent, and cause problems, but maybe he will be okay with it.

Or you could not sign him at all.

Or, you could scout him as an individual prior to signing him. Look at it as he has applied for the job when you put out the call for new coaches. You tell your scout, "This guy would be a good coach, he also claims he is a fair player, too, check him out." In any case, it is a fair bet that if hired as a coach, you would have ample opportunities to determine his skill level during practices, right?

I would say the last choice meets the spirit of LLM, being that it is realistic - the catch to all of it is - make sure you are hiring him for his coaching abilities, not his previously known playing skills. If that is truly the case, it follows that you should play him as you see fit.

retired_ms.jones55

The question is, in my opinion, in this: would you sigh the one you are talking about only having a look at his non-playing stats?
If "yes", then, i guess, it's no problem at all. You just get him (this means, i beleive, offer him a "coach" contract), and then in time you realise that a guy can not just teach how to kick the ball, but can also do it himself pretty well. And then nothing stops you from offering a "player/coach" contract to him. This sort of stuff would be close to reality, if you ask me.

P.S. I've played only in UK and don't have a clue whom you've been talking about, so don't worry

retired_mdibrell

I think the problem will be that if is still capable of producing the goods on the pitch he will not sign as "merely" a coach. He will demand player/coach status and wages.

Personally speaking, I would sign him anyway. I have myself signed a certain Welsh Wing Wizard in his late 30s as a P/C with no real chance of a game solely for his coaching skills.

retired_pmetzger1

Taips,

I would think of his pplaying stats as incidental. You were looking for a coach. He fits the bill.

Had you not bought him in a previous life you would sign him with no qualms.

Get on with it and treat him as you would any other player coach you signed primarily as a coach - notice his playing stats seemed okay, try him out in a few games, take it from there.

You never know, he might be shÃ*t this time anyway.

retired_jsammut

There is a compromise, Alkinear. I agree with Andy that you try and hire him purely on his coaching ability, but if he rejects the coach-only contract ('coz he thinks he can still cut it on the pitch), and you really, really want him, bring him along for a trial. But a bit of me is unsure about that, now I come to think of it.

Maybe we should classify player/coaches as one of those grey areas which is down to the discretion of the LLaMa.

retired_sargent

I am with mkus on this, if he is good enough as a coach for you, sign him. If he wants a player/coach contract, give it to him. Check him out and play him if he is good enough. I cannot see anything wrong with this personally.

retired_pmetzger1

Careful lads, this is turning into a bit of a me love in.

retired_cherndon711

Don't worry. You're music taste is still shÃ*t

retired_ms.jones55

BTW, how much the guy wants (money i mean)?

All my coaches are in 50-60 punds a week. Would you get yourself a guy and pay him extra 150-200 a week just because he has that pretty "player/" before his "coach" thing? Or is it because you *know* he should be damn good (and worth) those money?

But maybe he's a sort of coaches who come and say "hey guys look at me kicking that ball! and i can also tackle well and run fast! i wanna be a player!"

If you want to sign him as a player, then treat him as a player. So, scounting and trial staff comes into touch. I guess.