Kevin Ollie’s lawyers ask for depositions from NCAA president Mark Emmert and national search firm as contract dispute with UConn

[CL82]

Will Wade, Sean Miller... we could make a long list of cheating coaches that don’t get fired.

10 times out of 10 times is not correct. Also in non-sports business.

9.999 times out of 10? Note that there were five elements. 1), being a bad employee, 2) breaking rules, 3) lying to your employer about it, 4) lying to an outside regulating authority, and 5) having both the employee and the entity be punished for it. Do you know what? I think I’ll go back to my original 10 times out of 10. It is egregious conduct that would inevitably move an employer to action.

 

[AZHuskiePop]

It looks as if they're making a couple arguments:
1. The hiring of Hurley was in the works prior to Ollie's termination; and
2. Calhoun made the same type transgressions and he wasn't fired because he was white.

We don't know when Hurley's hiring process began and if it was started before Ollie was fired.

As to Calhoun skating for the same type violations, that could be true, but he may not have been in violation of the terms of his contract. As I recall, coaching contracts were strengthened as a result of some of the violations that occurred under Calhoun and the new contracts (including Ollie's) include tougher standards of conduct and harsher penalties for violations.

The Key here is which contract takes takes precedence.
Under a union contract if someone if fired for a violation that they can prove was routinely overlooked in the past ( it’s called past practice ) than 99.9% of the times the company will lose. Everyone is equal under a Union Contract that’s the chief reason for a union.
It is unusual to say the least for an employee with a personal contract to be covered under a union contract.

 

[Dean Wormer]

I disagree. NOBODY cares. When UConn is brought up on the national scene, no one is talking about this situation. the conversations about UConn are centered around the Big East, Hurley, James Bouknight, and our return to prominence. Again, NOBODY cares. Ollie is the one who's taken the perception hit. He'll never get a major coaching opportunity in the NCAA ever again

Honestly, I’m a lot more concerned by the rift this has bought about with our basketball alums like Ray, Caron, and Rudy, then I do about the ignorant Cuse or Rutgers fan shooting off at the mouth.
This situation HAS caused some bad feelings and that’s a shame. I think it does taint and put a cloud over the program internally. And I think it would’ve been worth it to settle with KO early, to avoid that happening.

 

[CL82]

Honestly, I’m a lot more concerned by the rift this has bought about with our basketball alums like Ray, Caron, and Rudy, then I do about the ignorant Cuse or Rutgers fan shooting off at the mouth.
This situation HAS caused some bad feelings and that’s a shame. I think it does taint and put a cloud over the program internally. And I think it would’ve been worth it to settle with KO early, to avoid that happening.

It is a shame that Kevin is working so hard to alienate our other alums from the university. It is unforgivable, really. From what I've read from Caron, he will hold off on coming back to the university while the KO thing is done. After that? We'll see.

It's been reported that KO got a offer to settle in the 2-3M range. It was very foolish not to accept that and then go on a scorched earth campaign threaten to smear the guy he who got him the job and who Kevin referred to as a second father. Kevin has made a lot of questionable choices that cost him his job, has marriage, friends and long time mentor/father figure. It is sad. Hopefully he realize that fault is no one's but his own. That will be the first step to getting his life back together.

 

[Umami Zen]

Honestly, I’m a lot more concerned by the rift this has bought about with our basketball alums like Ray, Caron, and Rudy, then I do about the ignorant Cuse or Rutgers fan shooting off at the mouth.
This situation HAS caused some bad feelings and that’s a shame. I think it does taint and put a cloud over the program internally. And I think it would’ve been worth it to settle with KO early, to avoid that happening.

Dan Hurley ..to his credit..seems to be trying to re-open channels/dialogues with our BB Alums..Other schools harvest substantial benefits from their boosters and alums for their athletic programs.. Why can't UConn as well?? Some of our more recent NBA alums seem to be coming around again.. Will be interesting to see how the NCAA announcement on Friday affects recruiting vs P5/SEC schools in future.. If approved.. Would allow NCAA athletes to have business relationships with boosters re: NIL..Names..Images.. Likenesses.. while playing Ball. If we can resolve the KO situation sooner rather later.. Would allow Dan Hurley much more flexibility when competing vs Bag Men at other schools.. Have you noticed how often we are always competing vs SEC BB schools for recruits?

 

[Tenspro2002]

Honestly, I’m a lot more concerned by the rift this has bought about with our basketball alums like Ray, Caron, and Rudy, then I do about the ignorant Cuse or Rutgers fan shooting off at the mouth.
This situation HAS caused some bad feelings and that’s a shame. I think it does taint and put a cloud over the program internally. And I think it would’ve been worth it to settle with KO early, to avoid that happening.

I just don't understand the alums here.

They should be more pissed at KO for how he treated JC and embarrassed the university. What do any of them owe KO?

 

[Zissou]

It's been reported that KO got a offer to settle in the 2-3M range. It was very foolish not to accept that and then go on a scorched earth campaign ...

That is a very low low ball. 80% of contract should have gotten the settlement done and saved the university a few mil.

both sides have gone scorched earth. It benefits neither.

 

[CL82]

That is a very low low ball. 80% of contract should have gotten the settlement done and saved the university a few mil.

both sides have gone scorched earth. It benefits neither.

80% of the contract? And what pray tell are you basing that on? How would paying $8.8M that it does not owe save the university millions? How, exactly,has the university "gone scorched earth"?

 

[Zissou]

Those two were meeting their working objectives to a large extent. As many have pointed out, Ollie is probably still around if he was still doing his job and minimally meeting objectives. Bad analogy.

this is a key point in favor of Kevin. Most agree with you that he was fired for performance

 

[CL82]

Those two were meeting their working objectives to a large extent. As many have pointed out, Ollie is probably still around if he was still doing his job and minimally meeting objectives. Bad analogy.

Uh since the NCAA gave a three year show cause to Ollie, I think we can be fairly confident that he wouldn't be the coach of UConn regardless of his record.

 

[Zissou]

80% of the contract? And what pray tell are you basing that on? How would paying $8.8M thtit does not owe save the university millions? How, exactly,has the university "gone scorched earth?

Paying 80% honors the contract, gives a small penalty for the clause claim, avoids all of the legal costs, and avoids all of the bad blood with others around the program. UConn went scorched earth by low balling the offer and working with the NCAA to throw Kevin under the bus.

 

[superjohn]

Nova fan trolling again.

 

[Zissou]

Nova fan trolling again.

Seemed like you needed some perspective outside of the homer club

 

[CL82]

Paying 80% honors the contract, gives a small penalty for the clause claim, avoids all of the legal costs, and avoids all of the bad blood with others around the program. UConn went scorched earth by low balling the offer and working with the NCAA to throw Kevin under the bus.

Lol, it absolutely does not honor the contract because Kevin is owed nothing under the contract. What do you do for a living? At any place I've ever worked, paying someone nearly $9M that they are not owed would cost you your job.

UConn didn't low ball Kevin, since he is owed nothing under the contract. And are you seriously suggesting a conspiracy between UConn and the NCAA. SMH. How old are you?

 

[Zissou]

Lol, it absolutely does not honor the contract because Kevin is owed nothing under the contract. What do you do for a living? At any place I've ever worked, paying someone nearly $9M that they are not owed would cost you your job.

UConn didn't low ball Kevin, since he is owed nothing under the contract. And are you seriously suggesting a conspiracy between UConn and the NCAA. SMH. How old are you?

Well, we don’t know what is owed yet as the decision is still pending. We shall see the outcome.

imo it is better to settle and not have the legal fees and bad blood and scorched earth and risk of outcome. Pay and move on.

 

[superjohn]

Seemed like you needed some perspective outside of the homer club

We don't weigh in on your former coaches, don't weigh in on ours.

 

[mussels]

I think the analysis is more like this:

Employee X is a bad employee and is not meeting their objectives. Employer discovers that employee X not only is a poor employee, but also has been breaking outside regulations which could cause the business to be sanctioned. Employer then finds out that employee X has been lying to them about these violations and then finds out that employee X has also been lying to regulatory authorities who sanction both employee X and the business.
Employee X gets fired 10 times out of 10, regardless of the business.

The suggestion that the University of Connecticut has done something wrong in following exactly this pattern seems like a pretty big stretch, don’t you think? The notion that employee X wants to be paid in full for not working, after performing so poorly and jeopardizing the business seems ridiculous, don’t you think?

Your logic is sound, but the scenario used as example is more applicable to the typical professional level employee "at will" (not covered by a collective bargaining agreement, or any other type of contact). In the case at hand, employee X has a contract that doesn't stipulate anything about performance on the court.

In college sports, coaches in demand have leverage to get contracts that pay them for a pre-determined period, regardless of the outcome on the court/field etc. Further, its a common practice, that when results aren't what was expected, coaches are either paid the remainder of their contract or something is negotiated.

So lets see what we have here: A coach, not in a protected class, who's team was found to have violated NCAA rules resulting in them being banned from post season play. Resultant discipline to the coach, or anyone else associated with the program - nothing; and a coach in a protected class, who violated NCAA rules. Resultant discipline to the coach - termination with no buyout.

Not a lawyer (or HR person), so not sure if this can go to a jury; but assuming it can, imagine presenting your "ironclad" case to a jury with some members used to finding that all the "small print" and rules always seem to stack the deck against them.

Still feeling 10 out of 10 ?

 

[Chief00]

9.999 times out of 10? Note that there were five elements. 1), being a bad employee, 2) breaking rules, 3) lying to your employer about it, 4) lying to an outside regulating authority, and 5) having both the employee and the entity be punished for it. Do you know what? I think I’ll go back to my original 10 times out of 10. It is egregious conduct that would inevitably move an employer to action.

I know Chief would get fired where I work if those 5 things happened Or likely if even one of them happened.

 

[Chief00]

Your logic is sound, but the scenario used as example is more applicable to the typical professional level employee "at will" (not covered by a collective bargaining agreement, or any other type of contact). In the case at hand, employee X has a contract that doesn't stipulate anything about performance on the court.

In college sports, coaches in demand have leverage to get contracts that pay them for a pre-determined period, regardless of the outcome on the court/field etc. Further, its a common practice, that when results aren't what was expected, coaches are either paid the remainder of their contract or something is negotiated.

So lets see what we have here: A coach, not in a protected class, who's team was found to have violated NCAA rules resulting in them being banned from post season play. Resultant discipline to the coach, or anyone else associated with the program - nothing; and a coach in a protected class, who violated NCAA rules. Resultant discipline to the coach - termination with no buyout.

Not a lawyer (or HR person), so not sure if this can go to a jury; but assuming it can, imagine presenting your "ironclad" case to a jury with some members used to finding that all the "small print" and rules always seem to stack the deck against them.

Still feeling 10 out of 10 ?

I think you are missing the fact the regulator not only punished him but banned him from coaching for 3 years. UConn literarily could not have had him coach.

 

[mussels]

I think you are missing the fact the regulatory not only punished him but banned him from coaching for 3 years. UConn literarily could not have had him coach.

Did they fire him before or after that was determined ? (being banned for three years)

Edit: added parentheses to hopefully clarify

 

[CL82]

Well, we don’t know what is owed yet as the decision is still pending. We shall see the outcome.

imo it is better to settle and not have the legal fees and bad blood and scorched earth and risk of outcome. Pay and move on.

I’m pretty confident that legall fees aren’t going to approach $8M. Just sayin.

 

[Peacefrog]

I don't think my beliefs help Ollie's legal case in any way.

 

[CL82]

Your logic is sound, but the scenario used as example is more applicable to the typical professional level employee "at will" (not covered by a collective bargaining agreement, or any other type of contact). In the case at hand, employee X has a contract that doesn't stipulate anything about performance on the court.

In college sports, coaches in demand have leverage to get contracts that pay them for a pre-determined period, regardless of the outcome on the court/field etc. Further, its a common practice, that when results aren't what was expected, coaches are either paid the remainder of their contract or something is negotiated.

So lets see what we have here: A coach, not in a protected class, who's team was found to have violated NCAA rules resulting in them being banned from post season play. Resultant discipline to the coach, or anyone else associated with the program - nothing; and a coach in a protected class, who violated NCAA rules. Resultant discipline to the coach - termination with no buyout.

Not a lawyer (or HR person), so not sure if this can go to a jury; but assuming it can, imagine presenting your "ironclad" case to a jury with some members used to finding that all the "small print" and rules always seem to stack the deck against them.

Still feeling 10 out of 10 ?

Yep. Keep in mind that Ollie was advised that there was a zero tolerance for NCAA violations when he was hired. He went on to have multiple violations, lied to UConn about it, lied about it to the NCAA, and got the school and himself sanctioned. Tough to say that there wasn’t a basis for discharge.

 

[Huskybass]

Paying 80% honors the contract, gives a small penalty for the clause claim, avoids all of the legal costs, and avoids all of the bad blood with others around the program. UConn went scorched earth by low balling the offer and working with the NCAA to throw Kevin under the bus.

80% is a preposterous figure given the relative strength of the parties' cases. Something like 20% would make sense simply to end the saga, and even at that it's basically a gift to Ollie since his case is so weak. Violations by Ollie constitute "cause" and the 3 year show cause penalty he recieved from the NCAA is certainly ample grounds that violations took place. Is that really that difficult to comprehend?

 

[mussels]

Yep. Keep in mind that Ollie was advised that there was a zero tolerance for NCAA violations when he was hired. He went on to have multiple violations, lied to UConn about it, lied about it to the NCAA, and got the school and himself sanctioned. Tough to say that there wasn’t a basis discharge.

So why do you think that Ray Allen, Caron Butler, and others feel differently? It open and shut right? Are you really confident that you can convince a jury ?

 

[CallMeBruce]

So why do you think that Ray Allen, Caron Butler, and others feel differently? It open and shut right? Are you really confident that you can convince a jury ?

good thing those guys can't be on a jury

 

[casual-yardin]

Kevin, loss his focus and did not put the work in. He had a good thing going but he thought Calhoun was getting too much credit for his success. So he kicked Calhoun out of practices and listening to his counsel - and the downhill descent began, further turbo charged by personal issues. KO would have been so much better off sharing some credit and keeping that old *er around. He would still be making $3.5 million a year.

Someone else "getting too much credit" for your success is bad for your wallet. If this was the case (and I have very little confidence that anything you say is accurate) after winning the Natty in '14 Calhoun should have completely removed himself and Ollie would have wanted to be on his own. Your scenario, real or imagined,
is actually a worse look for Calhoun.

"Not a dime back"

 

[superjohn]

Someone else "getting too much credit" for your success is bad for your wallet. If this was the case (and I have very little confidence that anything you say is accurate) after winning the Natty in '14 Calhoun should have completely removed himself and Ollie would have wanted to be on his own. Your scenario, real or imagined,
is actually a worse look for Calhoun.

"Not a dime back"

This is an unbelievably dumb take. Worked out great for Ollie and his wallet.

 

[casual-yardin]

It's been reported that KO got a offer to settle in the 2-3M range.

Do you have a link? The only "report" I've ever seen is a that he was offered ~$1M and that "source" isn't exactly credible.

PS: If he was able to get $3M he probably should have taken it.

 

[casual-yardin]

This is an unbelievably dumb take. Worked out great for Ollie and his wallet.

I'm talking 2014. Ollie had the College BB world at his feet. You were probably first in the BY line back then to blow the guy. When the way to get more money is to continually draw more interest from other programs or the NBA being dependent on a mentor lowers your value. i assure you that Jim Calhoun understands this.