DiMauro: Ollie did enough wrong to warrant his firing by UConn

[huskymedic]

Read Miller’s ‘testimony’. He says he heard it was set up. He doesn’t say it happened.

... but Ollie doesn't seem to be saying the call didn't happen - just that it wasn't prearranged.

 

[Hans Sprungfeld]

Of course another way of saying the same facts would be that Ollie:

• violated UConn and NCAA rules regarding recruit workouts (CL82 aside: This is one cringe worthy in my opinion. I wouldn't have included it, especially not first),
• facilitated booster contact with recruits in violation of NCAA rules,
• allowed UConn staff to work out players that were prohibited under NCAA rules, and
• paid for room and board for players to attend off season workouts in Atlanta which violates NCAA rules.
• While these violations were occurring, Ollie repeatedly represented to the university that he and the program were complying with NCAA.

Sounds worse that way doesn't it?

Sounds like you might be moving into "undermining" territory for someone who thinks it's a big nothingburger that fits inside a 30-second clock.

Fortunately, the source article is easy to link to, easy to read, was excerpted, and given a fair synopsis prior to yours, which in itself isn't bad given what you're intending to highlight for, rather than, say, force on others.

 

[CL82]

Sounds like you might be moving into "undermining" territory for someone who thinks it's a big nothingburger that fits inside a 30-second clock.

Fortunately, the source article is easy to link to, easy to read, was excerpted, and given a fair synopsis prior to yours, which in itself isn't bad given what you're intending to highlight for, rather than, say, force on others.

I have no idea what the point is that you are trying make.

 

[noeynox]

I cannot speak for the arbitration rules that will be followed here, but IN GENERAL, an arbitrator has the ability to decide culpability and damages. It's not an all or nothing, so they can award part of a plaintiff's claim. It's one of the problems with arbitration where you think you have the winning case. I find arbitrators more likely to "split the baby" so that neither party is too upset. Emotion can also come into play. The little old lady who lost money may get something because it's a sad story, even if there is no great legal reason why she should get something.

Isn't the 1st step to agree to arbitration to keep it out of the courts? Has that been agreed upon? My impression is that we are at the union involvement step and nothing has been agreed upon as far as deciding on arbitration. This whole thing seems all little weird and I would think KO would have to sue the union if he doesn't get a resolution to his satisfaction.

 

[huskymedic]

Isn't the 1st step to agree to arbitration to keep it out of the courts? Has that been agreed upon? My impression is that we are at the union involvement step and nothing has been agreed upon as far as deciding on arbitration. This whole thing seems all little weird and I would think KO would have to sue the union if he doesn't get a resolution to his satisfaction.

From AAUP Contract link above:

 

[Hans Sprungfeld]

I have no idea what the point is that you are trying make.

It's not directed toward you.
There's a frequently contentious poster who has voiced objection to people "undermining" his posts when they find them a little too self-validating. Sometimes he misses the the confidence-delusion balance. OK, often.

 

[Yardigan]

I think the problem is that there are only 4 threads on Ollie-gate. Could folks please crank up a few more?

 

[8893]

From AAUP Contract link above:

View attachment 32321

Thank you. That’s the exact provision I recalled and to which I was referring in an earlier post today

If I was Ollie I would definitely opt for de novo judicial consideration instead of arbitration, and I would combine that with all other claims, like breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing

 

[noeynox]

From AAUP Contract link above:

View attachment 32321

So they're at step 3, if they can't agree on arbitration numbers say 3 million UConn 7 million Ollie, either side can say no dice see you in court? I can't imagine UConn is sticking to 0, and Ollie 10 million as an arbitration case.

 

[freescooter]

Ollie really hasn’t denied any of the alleged violations. His defense seems to be along the lines of “other guys did similar stuff and didn’t get fired.” Or a variation “Well it wasn’t that bad.”

My sense is that Ollie was way over his head and neither understood nor cared to learn about the NCAA rules. Sort of figured they were chicken crap and no biggie if you played fast and loose with them. In other words he approached it like he approached other aspects of his coaching.

 

[huskymedic]

So they're at step 3, if they can't agree on arbitration numbers say 3 million UConn 7 million Ollie, either side can say no dice see you in court? I can't imagine UConn is sticking to 0, and Ollie 10 million as an arbitration case.

They (Ollie/AAUP) need to decide whether to file for arbitration or not where the question very likely will be was he terminated for “just cause” under the applicable CBA language not “how much”.

Arbitration under the American Arbitration Associationis is not a “court proceeding” (considered outside of court).

 

[krinklecut]

Of course another way of saying the same facts would be that Ollie:

• violated UConn and NCAA rules regarding recruit workouts (CL82 aside: This is one cringe worthy in my opinion. I wouldn't have included it, especially not first),
• facilitated booster contact with recruits in violation of NCAA rules,
• allowed UConn staff to work out players that were prohibited under NCAA rules, and
• paid for room and board for players to attend off season workouts in Atlanta which violates NCAA rules.
• While these violations were occurring, Ollie repeatedly represented to the university that he and the program were complying with NCAA.

Sounds worse that way doesn't it?

Thank you.

We don't get to talk about the violations as "A phone call with Ray Allen" or "a workout with a friend." The NCAA won't. He violated rules about booster contact and paid for player expenses.

 

[WallStreetHusky]

They (Ollie/AAUP) need to decide whether to file for arbitration or not where the question very likely will be was he terminated for “just cause” under the applicable CBA language not “how much”.

Arbitration under the American Arbitration Associationis is not a “court proceeding” (considered outside of court).

I think another nuance for people to understand, in addition to the above, is not to confuse "mediation" with "arbitration". Two very different animals.

 

[sledog]

NY Post also has summary story in print today. Could not find o/l, however.

 

[intlzncster]

To me it is pretty clear Ollie violated the contract and that is before the NCAA gets into reviewing the $30 000 allegation. Unless it was Adams, if Ollie paid money for ANY other recruit that should prove beyond doubt his ineptitude.

What review can they possibly do? No one involved (if it even happened) is required to talk or work with them.

 

[krinklecut]

What review can they possibly do? No one involved is required to talk or work with them.

Well the FBI is getting involved in player payments and subpoenas exist.

 

[intlzncster]

Well the FBI is getting involved in player payments and subpoenas exist.

Yeah, but the NCAA isn't ruling on any of that until it's done which could take years.

And it's only going to raise the FBI's eyebrows if it involves the shoe companies. They couldn't care less about the players and their families. They just squeeze them to testify against the big boys.

 

[freescooter]

The NCAA Was told per the transcript that such a payment might have been made. You don’t think they are looking into it? You think the investigation of possible recruiting violations is a phone call to Ray Allen? Email me off line and I’ll send you a deed to this great bridge in Brooklyn. Be sure to include your social security # bank accounts and passwords. Yeesh! As my cousin the cop used to say you talk to everyone because you never know who might say something. And while it is true that people don’t have to talk to the NCAA you never know who will talk.

 

[Deadrody]

I always thought we wouldn't know until the asst coaches started talking and now we are starting to get that. The rest will come out in dribs and drabs as to why players transferred and he basically lost the team. His attorneys will point to many things that happened under Calhoun without recourse and who is to say they are wrong? If I were KO and could get 2 million at this point I would take it and run.

The crux of the matter, however, is that UConn responded to violations under Calhoun's watch by adding the zero tolerance language to Ollie's contract.

Yeah, firing him for cause due to violations doesn't completely align with "past practices", but then, neither does his contract. Guaranteed that would be UConn's argument here. I don't doubt Ollie gets some part of his buyout, but I doubt it's even close to half of the buyout.

 

[CL82]

It's not directed toward you.
There's a frequently contentious poster who has voiced objection to people "undermining" his posts when they find them a little too self-validating. Sometimes he misses the the confidence-delusion balance. OK, often.

Ah okay.

 

[Deadrody]

Does the union have to bless any settlement? I remember hearing something about the union being able to force the full process if they want. Hate unions in their current incarnation.

No. They'd like to think they can, but they really have no actual power, other than standing in the eyes of the court. If Ollie agrees to a settlement, the union is not going to waste money fighting it any further, despite their grandstanding to the contrary.

 

[CL82]

The crux of the matter, however, is that UConn responded to violations under Calhoun's watch by adding the zero tolerance language to Ollie's contract.

Yeah, firing him for cause due to violations doesn't completely align with "past practices", but then, neither does his contract. Guaranteed that would be UConn's argument here. I don't doubt Ollie gets some part of his buyout, but I doubt it's even close to half of the buyout.

Actually the zero tolerance language is almost identical in Calhoun's last contract (2010, 2011 maybe.) Until I read it recently my thinking was the same as yours.

 

[Yardigan]

The crux of the matter, however, is that UConn responded to violations under Calhoun's watch by adding the zero tolerance language to Ollie's contract.

Yeah, firing him for cause due to violations doesn't completely align with "past practices", but then, neither does his contract. Guaranteed that would be UConn's argument here. I don't doubt Ollie gets some part of his buyout, but I doubt it's even close to half of the buyout.

Maybe there should be a pool thread, just to guess the amount paid...somewhere between jakk and $10M....

 

[krinklecut]

Yeah, but the NCAA isn't ruling on any of that until it's done which could take years.

And it's only going to raise the FBI's eyebrows if it involves the shoe companies. They couldn't care less about the players and their families. They just squeeze them to testify against the big boys.

Still though, the idea that the NCAA isn't going to review an allegation like this because "what review can they possibly do?" is a very small-thinking kind of idea when we're dealing with an organization like the NCAA.

 

[intlzncster]

Still though, the idea that the NCAA isn't going to review an allegation like this because "what review can they possibly do?" is a very small-thinking kind of idea when we're dealing with an organization like the NCAA.

Look, they can review all they want, but it's simply hearsay. And none of the potentially involved parties would admit to it, never mind talk about it.
And the Ncaa has no subpoena power. So what can they do? There's literally nothing there.

Now it could potentially come up in an associated fbi investigation I suppose, but that's probably unlikely.

 

[whaler11]

You people are unhinged.

Nobody is investigating an obvious lie from Glen Miller about some fantasy payment.

UConn isn’t even interested in pursing it. Now why might that be?

 

[whaler11]

Miller: You know, I heard later when we were discussing the terms of my being fired, you know, one of the mothers on the trip, she was lonely you know, and she told us, you know that Kevin Ollie was a serial murderer, you know.

NCAA: He was, is he still active, which serial killer was he?

Miller: I don’t know if he is still active, I recall being told by my wife that, I believe, you know that he is the Zodiac Killer


Boneyard: The FBI is not going to ignore a hot tip like that

 

[Pudge]

OMG ... I agree with whaler11

 

[UCDaveD]

Nobody is investigating an obvious lie from Glen Miller about some fantasy payment.

Good thing we have our very own Columbo on the case.

 

[whaler11]

Good thing we have our very own Columbo on the case.

The best part is: IF IT WERE TRUE AND THE NCAA INVESTIGATED IT THAT WOULD BE A BAD THING FOR UCONN.

In your ongoing despiration to nail Kevin Ollie to a cross - you’ve lost the plot so badly that you want Glen Miller’s ridiculous lies to be true.

But keep celebrating the rat, who totally worked alone Lee Harvey Oswald style