I enjoyed reading this post Terry. I cant really fault anything you say here.Why in Gods name would you offer the same salary and autonomy to any potential replacement?
I could understand (although perhaps not agree with) the argument to change manager on the basis that Tisdale hasn't really performed to scratch for 4 seasons now (difficult to argue against), that his salary and contract structure is way out of step for a club at our level (also difficult to argue against), and that he enjoys a level of autonomy practically unheard of at other professional clubs (more debatable than the other two but again, far from easy to dismiss.) As such if Tisdale WERE to go (and personally, I'm not sure that I would want him to), I would want any replacement to be an improvement in all 3 areas e.g. either a good track record at L2/L1 level, or good potential to improve our on field performances (especially at home), salary demands in line with what we can afford (and on a fixed term contract, not a rolling deal), and willing to work within a sensible governance framework (within which the manager can be held accountable for performance against agreed metrics).
Otherwise we're just taking a punt on 'percieved problem 1' (performances) and leaving 'perceived problem 2 & 3' (high salary & too much overall control) exactly as they are today.
I use the term 'perceived' because it seems that not everyone agrees that performances are poor, not everyone agrees that Tis' salary is too high, and not everyone agrees that he has too much control. And then even if you do agree with all 3 of those (as I do), there are seemingly still those (like me) who just want the man to stop being such a stubborn sod and do what we know he can do from 2008 and put together an exciting side again. I guess the subjective side is still currently swaying me away from the objective nature of the issues we are facing, but my god it's frustrating, especially in the aftermath of the weekends shambles.