Is Ollie part of s new paradigm?

[Madmannsucks]

Buyout clauses may become a thing of the past. Can you imagine being so terribly bad at your job that it's affecting the reputation and bottom line of your company, and them having to pay you 3-4 year's salary to fire you? Crazy.

Happens all the time with CEO's...cost of doing business. How many times have you seen a CEO get a huge bonus while the company is in bankruptcy?

 

[Travelman6]

Coaches that make $ 4 mil in a year will make as much in one year as workers do in a working career. People out plowing snow all night, anyone try that? Snow coming at the windshield, try and stay on the road. People putting power lines and systems back together. People up in bucket trucks cutting trees. Police officers responding to domestics. Want to knock on that door? People responding to fires wildland and urban. Coaches have been rewarded quite well for the "work" they put in. When they suck they should be able to be fired pointblank. When attendance craters like it did at UCONN for Ollie. When the team is non-competitive like it was this year under Ollie. When you have the largest fanbase and best facilities in yours and other conferences and you fail to get the job done as in no postseason. He will get another job coaching and be paid well. UCONN should pay the market rate but there should never be the golden parachute buyout again. Maybe agree your job is safe with a losing season but 2 years with no postseason and we have to part ways. Case closed.

Absolutely but be careful or you might be accused by some bitter bum of having no job, for some reason, as if there is somehow a correlation between saying something like that and not being employed (hint: there is not, that is what we call logical fallacy kids). Any way, I could not agree more. I was actually saying something very similar about golden parachutes in another thread and it is amazing that other than CEOs at huge corps, coaches really seem to be the only others ones with such a thing.

 

[intlzncster]

Why would there be a bear in the cupboard?

Wide body down low. Can't be moved off the block. Can board a little bit. Apparently coachable. Real sticking point is shooting. Not sure about those claws. Limited upside as a result.

 

[businesslawyer]

I’m thinking no one ever saw the possibility of poor performance after 2014. But its a terrible lawyer the state or school has.[/QUOT]

Yes. Blame the lawyer. Because when the school agreed to a long term contract, how could they have understood that you couldn't then terminate the contract whenever they wanted.

 

[AZHuskiePop]

It will be interesting to watch over the next couple of years but I wonder if we aren’t seeing a change in the way schools deal with coaches. The actions by UConn, Pitt, Florida and some others in football to fire for cause could be a movement away from huge contracts with long term guarantees. I am guessing that we will start seeing more deals that allow schools to fire failed coaches with far less in the Way of buyouts. We saw a trend maybe 15 years ago of requiring coaches to buy out contracts if they planned to leave to take another job. This might be the start of another change.

Why to you pay big salaries ?

If your a coaching a position making a million and half a year and your chances of a long tenure there were very good.
And another school offers you a three million dollar five year contract that that could get out of in one year .

Would you take that job?
It’s been a sellers market for good coach’s

 

[Mr. French]

Agree. Multiple losing seasons should be "just cause." It's the same as a salesman not making his minimum quota.

Except it’s not really the same at all except in the most vague terms.

Both those situations have contracts that stipulate whether it’s job or numbers related or whatever, but obviously coaching high level D-1 and the vast amount of things people aren’t considering makes the two situations much different, respectfully.

Which is why coaching contracts are done differently than a sales position employment contract.

 

[jdb50]

Absolutely but be careful or you might be accused by some bitter bum of having no job, for some reason, as if there is somehow a correlation between saying something like that and not being employed (hint: there is not, that is what we call logical fallacy kids). Any way, I could not agree more. I was actually saying something very similar about golden parachutes in another thread and it is amazing that other than CEOs at huge corps, coaches really seem to be the only others ones with such a thing.

At the end of the Courant article the union president says in regards to a negotiated settlement, perhaps meeting in the middle of the $10 million gulf, "We would have to be part of that. Ultimately, I would have to sign off on that. If there are any negotiations for his departure, that would have to go through the AAUP as well. We're protecting the bargaining unit as a whole as opposed to an individual." A union for millionaires. This really is theater of the absurd. For the sake of the State I hope the next Governor can reign in collective bargaining.

 

[Paesano]

This is my position as well. You want to act like a p5 school and put big buyout clauses in contracts, honor them. Or offer more money up front with a more favorable buyout in case of poor performance. I don't like the shenanigans. Find a deal you can live with.

Did Ollie "honor" the rest of the contract?

 

[noeynox]

Did Ollie "honor" the rest of the contract?

I don't know the extent of the violations.

If you're talking about the team sucking, that was simply a bad gamble, that this was "the guy".

We were trending in the wrong direction. Ollie had to go. I'll wait til I hear the full extent of the violations.

 

[GemParty]

Courant says, CT politicians want contracts written differently going forward at UConn. Fire for performance & stop offering huge buyouts, is coming to our school.

 

[Danzz]

So you want to eliminate multi-year contracts altogether?

A multi year contract is not a multi year contract if one side can get out without penalty during the contract period. We won't see that.

 

[Onions]

At one point not that long ago coaches didn’t have to buy out their contracts. They wanted to leave for a new gig they left. Then it became standard practice to put in buyout clauses and now nobody even thinks about it. We are seeing schools firing guys for cause because they want out. In at least some cases it is for things they knew about before the contract was even signed. I think we will start seeing a return to a more rational structure soon. After all if the Arizona coach gets perp walked off the court by the FBI during the Sweet 16, is Arizona not going to face criticism when they have to pay him $12 million or whatever it is?

If the Miller allegations are proved Arizona pays nothing because all these contracts have "good conduct" clauses. While it may be true that AD's have learned that fully guaranteed 5 year contracts are insane, every situation is different and if we get in a bidding war with Pitt for instance, who knows what Benedict will offer. It's all about what you're willing to walk away from.

 

[uconNYC]

At this point I have no issues if one of UConn's coaches gets poached for being successful. It will mean we are winning.

 

[jbdphi]

I would like to see the elimination of the “for cause” clause and let the markets therefore lower the buyouts in contracts. Instead of $10 million KO might get $5 million but no one could back out.

So if a coach gets convicted of assault or rape or some other criminal proceeding, you'd be OK paying him $5 million?

 

[Stainmaster]

So if a coach gets convicted of assault or rape or some other criminal proceeding, you'd be OK paying him $5 million?

Given Chief’s propensity to reflexively defend coaches who engaged in criminal conduct, my guess is yes.