KO - Victim of discrimination and denied due process?

[Goat]

The NCAA isn't allowed to dismiss Ollie at all. It isn't a party to the employment contract. The language absolutely means that if Ollie violates any law, rule, regulation, policy or university's official interpretation it is grounds for a just cause under the contract.

The matter "is proceeding" because Ollie has administrative review options under his contract and is exercising them.

Ollie has not yet asked for arbitration. If he does, which we should know shortly, than the arbitrator will make a determination whether just cause exists. I don't think there is anyone out there who seriously believes that will not happen. Do you?

Not sure I understand the question, but agree arbitration will occur if demanded.
If arbitration proceeds we will hear a defense, learn the opposing position and the arbitrators decision.

 

[CL82]

Ollie got a job (head coach) above what he can now obtain and a pay level far above what he can now earn. Other coaches don't contest being fired because in a year or a few they can get a similar job. Ollie cannot, he may be able to earn $300k at most the rest of his career. So $10 mn looks large to him -- 30 years of earnings, more than the rest of his life's earnings.

Fair point, but that presumes that KO's max salary is $300K, which may or may not be true. The comparison to $10M is a false one because he was unlikely to get the full amount but that may well have been his thinking. The thing is, his best chance to get cash in hand was earlier on so UConn and he could have a shared narrative that worked for everyone. I'm not sure why that didn't happen. We will probably will never know.

 

[DMIL]

While I get it concerning this as a legal strategy, there is no way I am buying into the idea that any of this has to do with him being black, white , an Eskimo or a man from Mars. It has to do with Uconn not wanting to pay him, and were it a white guy, they would not want to pay him either. I'm sure this is the lawyers idea ( well pretty sure) and
I see this kind of crap as very disrepectful to the people who fought for civil rights all those decades ago,putting their lives on the line. I personally witnessed and even participated in marches in the 60's. This is not what those people had in mind, using racism as a legal tool everytime a black person doesn't get what they want. Does anyone really believe, in 2018, that educated people, president of a university and so on, behind closed doors are saying, screw him, he's just a blankety blank? I don't.

Who knows what they are really saying behind closed doors. Clearly something was said. Clearly conversations were occurring to secure Hurley while this man was still coaching and other assurances being made. Not all discrimination is intentional or conscious and without explicit evidence reasonable people would need to determine simply if there were similar or worse transgressions by prior UCONN coaches and there were related buyouts for them then why not for Kevin Ollie. That is the question and of course no one outside of the school knows the detail of this with prior coaches in similar situations because it was settled quietly.

I agree with you if your position is that this is strictly a legal tactic on it's face with completely no merit (throw something at the wall to see if it sticks strategy)however it is not an ideal tactic or strategy and that is why you find a way to reach a settlement and part of that process is not poisoning the well. My take is that if it is so clear cut and dry then there should not be anything to worry about because nothing is there. The Administration will win in Arbitration and everyone moves on. The fear and elephant in the room is that deep down people would not be surprised if there is something there.

 

[pj]

Fair point, but that presumes that KO's max salary is $300K, which may or may not be true. The comparison to $10M is a false one because he was unlikely to get the full amount but that may well have been his thinking. The thing is, his best chance to get cash in hand was earlier on so UConn and he could have a shared narrative that worked for everyone. I'm not sure why that didn't happen. We will probably will never know.

Agreed. However, if KO needs money, and UConn didn't make a large settlement offer, it's easy to see why he's fighting.

Bottom line, he appears to have found he didn't enjoy being a college head coach. If he can't succeed as a college head coach, the chances he will succeed as an NBA head coach are slim. Therefore his ceiling is assistant coach. Entry level NBA assistants, which is what KO can hope for next and which he may or may not succeed at, make $300k or so. College assistant coaches, the other option, make $100-250k. So his earning prospects are $100k-$300k for 3-4 years until he either washes out or proves himself, with a chance at more or a chance at less. Unless he gets a big paycheck from UConn, he is going to have to radically pare back his lifestyle and his sense of entitlement.

KO is 45 years old. If he works until 65, he has 20 years of potential $200k/year earnings or $4 mn in future earnings, but a lot of hard work to get it. If he thinks a lawsuit might get him a significant fraction of $10 mn, say $3-4 mn, he's doubling his lifetime income. If he loses, and if his lawyers are working on contingency, then he's only lost his pride and maybe a slight hit to future earnings through reputational loss. He may feel that by fighting he's risking 10% of $4 mn future earnings to win a labor-free $4 mn. He only needs a 10% chance of winning to make the fight worthwhile.

 

[Mokum]

Who knows what they are really saying behind closed doors. Clearly something was said. Clearly conversations were occurring to secure Hurley while this man was still coaching and other assurances being made. Not all discrimination is intentional or conscious and without explicit evidence reasonable people would need to determine simply if there were similar or worse transgressions by prior UCONN coaches and there were related buyouts for them then why not for Kevin Ollie. That is the question and of course no one outside of the school knows the detail of this with prior coaches in similar situations because it was settled quietly.

I agree with you if your position is that this is strictly a legal tactic on it's face with completely no merit (throw something at the wall to see if it sticks strategy)however it is not an ideal tactic or strategy and that is why you find a way to reach a settlement and part of that process is not poisoning the well. My take is that if it is so clear cut and dry then there should not be anything to worry about because nothing is there. The Administration will win in Arbitration and everyone moves on. The fear and elephant in the room is that deep down people would not be surprised if there is something there.

Clearly not an ideal tactic and will breed all kinds of resentment with the public. They may well have been doing all the things you said behind Ollies back while he was still coaching. I would be surprised if they were not, but I find it hard to believe that anyones race factors into this. But yes, crying racial discrimination is a tactic now days and can backfire. I guess we just all have to wait and see.

 

[CL82]

If he loses, and if his lawyers are working on contingency, then he's only lost his pride and maybe a slight hit to future earnings through reputational loss.

Agree with all of it except slight hit to future earnings. He's killing his reputation right now. So the analysis is really whether the difference between anything UConn initially offered and what he'll make at the end of this process is worth the hit to his future earning power.

I've said elsewhere that $3M-$3.5M over four years, probably settles this thing back in March but part of that value was the avoidance of a public debate on the dismissal. I'm not sure that the value is still that high to UConn.

 

[pj]

Agree with all of it except slight hit to future earnings. He's killing his reputation right now. So the analysis is really whether the difference between anything UConn initially offered and what he'll make at the end of this process is worth the hit to his future earning power.

I've said elsewhere that $3M-$3.5M over four years, probably settles this thing back in March but part of that value was the avoidance of a public debate on the dismissal. I'm not sure that the value is still that high to UConn.

The big question is if there's a fight, what comes out to hurt KO's reputation. I don't think contesting the just cause is that harmful to him if nothing new comes out, people will understand the financial motives. But if things come out in court that have been rumored on the Boneyard, KO's reputation could take a big hit. I hope he's forthright with his lawyers about what he did and exercises good judgment.

 

[Yorkeez4]

I think Ollie’s future earnings do take a hit. If he had settled his chances for a good opportunity existed. He had won a national championship with a team most thought had no chance. And that was after exceeding expectations the prior year. His spiel to potential employers would be that he knows how to get it done and has learned from the under-achieving years. By contesting the dismissal he hurts himself in two ways. First, it places before the public any violations in which he may have been involved. Second, future employers may worry that he would do the same with them.

UConn’s situation is quite different. They hired the coach they wanted and as long as there is not another messy separation no coach will give it a second thought. The one place it has potential to hurt UConn is in recruiting with negative campaigning from other coaches. And although Hurley has no commits for next year the recruits appear to like what they are hearing/seeing.

 

[Madmannsucks]

Be careful here...I have not read anywhere about "racial" discrimination. someone said it here so now it takes on a life of it's own.

 

[Hans Sprungfeld]

And I guess that is why we have contracts and related processes to enforce them. Simple, you terminate the contract prior to the expiration and short of any gross violations or misconduct and you'll owe me the balance. These kind of contracts have nothing to do with if someone deserves the balance or not. These were offenses however no gross violations or misconduct. The NCAA hasn't even given their determination to solidify their investigation yet. If it were that cut and dry then you wouldn't need lawyers other than to draw up bullet clad contracts in these situations.

"Everyone is just so outraged because they love Kevin Ollie so much and he is such a good guy!" Folks are outraged because this stinks and smells like "ISH". That's why. We're not stupid or born yesterday so your contingent should stop insulting our intelligence. UCONN isn't paying the money because they don't have the money. There are plenty examples of schools as well as professional teams paying the balance of these contracts or settling quietly. It's not happening here with Kevin Ollie because we simply don't have the money to make this go away. That's on the Administration. Don't enter a contract you can't afford period and intentionally bring everyone into this "ISH Storm" trying to destroy what's left of the reputation of yes a "Good Man" and the program. The cost of the contract was simply market value and not necessarily a fortune for a National Championship winning coach of a Top 20 program. This is part of the cost of doing business.

Kevin Ollie had plenty of other options at the time and I'm sure he was naive enough to think that his Alma Mater would not screw him to this level. Kevin is also a big boy and doing what he feels he needs to do. Terminate my contract early or give me my damn money. He asked for another year and didn't get it so here we are.

I really don't care if he gets the money or not but I do care about you guys not appreciating his contribution to UCONN and the piling on. Hurley is here now. Focus on him. This is kind of stuff is feeding bad karma to our program.

I just got around to reading this with care. "Your contingent"? Hardly. For the most part, I remain resolute in advising settlement and wondering what or who has most impeded it.

From the looks of Likes alone, I find myself in surprised agreement with certain sustained Ollie detractors, including some who I used to have on Ignore. Similarly, I can recognize that some of my favorite posters have taken what seems like a more sympathetic stance toward the departed coach. Throughout, I believe that nearly the entirety of posters lack fundamental pieces of information that possibly could shift opinions one way or another. I count myself firmly in this group.

Throughout, I remain in the lookout for a certain type of pro-KO partisan who doesn't show clear evidence sustained over time of having the program or team's success as their clear focus. I regard such posters as this season's version of last post-season's negative recruiting trolls, people like Russ56 pursuing an agenda that doesn't align with my sense of a UConn fan.

I was delighted by the unexpected success of 2012-13, thrilled by the 2013-14 team coming together, disappointed by the follow-up year, more accepting of 2015-16, and a clear member of the late majority in recognizing that the past two years featured a lot of lousy basketball beyond the undeniable injury narrative.

Anything I write could be interpreted as a clue toward where I think the settlement number should be. For a variety of reasons and factors, I think anyone at or anywhere near either pole is being unrealistic . And yet, the still unconfirmed Arbitration path offers only all or nothing. I think there would be bad energy over the long haul for all parties if either of those outcomes is reached.

 

[Madmannsucks]

Are Ollie and his lawyer claiming racism?

Sad that people post without reading and if it is in the BY it must be true(Like Rolling Stone?). Don't see race mentioned yet people equate discrimination with racism. The only place that has been mentioned is here.

 

[DMIL]

I just got around to reading this with care. "Your contingent"? Hardly. For the most part, I remain resolute in advising settlement and wondering what or who has most impeded it.

From the looks of Likes alone, I find myself in surprised agreement with certain sustained Ollie detractors, including some who I used to have on Ignore. Similarly, I can recognize that some of my favorite posters have taken what seems like a more sympathetic stance toward the departed coach. Throughout, I believe that nearly the entirety of posters lack fundamental pieces of information that possibly could shift opinions one way or another. I count myself firmly in this group.

Throughout, I remain in the lookout for a certain type of pro-KO partisan who doesn't show clear evidence sustained over time of having the program or team's success as their clear focus. I regard such posters as this season's version of last post-season's negative recruiting trolls, people like Russ56 pursuing an agenda that doesn't align with my sense of a UConn fan.

I was delighted by the unexpected success of 2012-13, thrilled by the 2013-14 team coming together, disappointed by the follow-up year, more accepting of 2015-16, and a clear member of the late majority in recognizing that the past two years featured a lot of lousy basketball beyond the undeniable injury narrative.

Anything I write could be interpreted as a clue toward where I think the settlement number should be. For a variety of reasons and factors, I think anyone at or anywhere near either pole is being unrealistic . And yet, the still unconfirmed Arbitration path offers only all or nothing. I think there would be bad energy over the long haul for all parties if either of those outcomes is reached.

I just got around to reading this with care. "Your contingent"? Hardly. For the most part, I remain resolute in advising settlement and wondering what or who has most impeded it.

From the looks of Likes alone, I find myself in surprised agreement with certain sustained Ollie detractors, including some who I used to have on Ignore. Similarly, I can recognize that some of my favorite posters have taken what seems like a more sympathetic stance toward the departed coach. Throughout, I believe that nearly the entirety of posters lack fundamental pieces of information that possibly could shift opinions one way or another. I count myself firmly in this group.

Throughout, I remain in the lookout for a certain type of pro-KO partisan who doesn't show clear evidence sustained over time of having the program or team's success as their clear focus. I regard such posters as this season's version of last post-season's negative recruiting trolls, people like Russ56 pursuing an agenda that doesn't align with my sense of a UConn fan.

I was delighted by the unexpected success of 2012-13, thrilled by the 2013-14 team coming together, disappointed by the follow-up year, more accepting of 2015-16, and a clear member of the late majority in recognizing that the past two years featured a lot of lousy basketball beyond the undeniable injury narrative.

Anything I write could be interpreted as a clue toward where I think the settlement number should be. For a variety of reasons and factors, I think anyone at or anywhere near either pole is being unrealistic . And yet, the still unconfirmed Arbitration path offers only all or nothing. I think there would be bad energy over the long haul for all parties if either of those outcomes is reached.

You know, people get emotional about this because we care about the school and program for a variety of reasons. I can understand why the Administration made the move they did for Hurley when they did. He is the type of coach that you can easily get excited about and can see him quickly impacting the projectory of the program.

K.O.’s termination has opened up a bees nest within the UCONN family but at the same time we are all dying to move on from this. I believe this contingent I’m referring to has finally calmed down a little bit and started to transition. We’ll see if it continues.

It’s easy and convenient to kick a man when he is down and wish that he will just magically go away. It’s typical behavior that’s exhibited about ex employees that didn’t leave on their terms.

K.O. will be getting a plaque one day from the school and oddly enough Hurley may be the guy presenting it to him. He is still our UCONN brother no matter what and we have to believe that reasonable minds will reach a settlement. No one in College basketball enjoys this kind of situation and there is a fear that this could set some type of precedent if an agreement is not reached.

 

[Hans Sprungfeld]

... and there is a fear that this could set some type of precedent if an agreement is not reached.

...even possibly by the act of following precedent.

 

[huskyrob1]

Be careful here...I have not read anywhere about "racial" discrimination. someone said it here so now it takes on a life of it's own.

This thread should be locked right now. It's interesting to see which side of the fence the mods are on?

 

[Hans Sprungfeld]

This thread should be locked right now. It's interesting to see which side of the fence the mods are on?

Agreed.
At this point it's dimishing returns, and the next big related story - whether Arbitration is selected or not - is right around the corner based on a 15-day window after Herbst's decision to uphold Benedict's determination.

 

[tentoes4rings]

Disagree. I think Ollie is still the head coach next year if there wasn't grounds for just cause dismissal.

CL, I’m as happy as anyone on this board that we were able to replace Ollie with Danny Hurley but you can’t honestly believe what you just wrote. We all know it was the horrible, apathetic and inept performance that got Ollie fired, not issues off the basketball court.

 

[Chief00]

Sad that people post without reading and if it is in the BY it must be true(Like Rolling Stone?). Don't see race mentioned yet people equate discrimination with racism. The only place that has been mentioned is here.

What other legal form of discrimination. would apply which differentiates how KO was treated vs. Calhoun and Geno. You may think it’s frivolous but even here when discussed posters want to lock the thread. Its something no one or institution wants to be accused of. It’s a negotiating ploy to get a better settlement when the facts in the case are not in KO’s favor. You use what you have.
In Chief’s opinion, the problem here is you have two entities that want to have a big payday in addition to KO. His private lawyer and ex wife. So whatever money someone throws out directionally divide it three ways. His alimony was based on making around $3 million per year. So he will have to likely modify if this goes against him. That could get ugly for him as well.

 

[Madmannsucks]

What other legal form of discrimination. would apply which differentiates how KO was treated vs. Calhoun and Geno. You may think it’s frivolous but even here when discussed posters want to lock the thread. Its something no one or institution wants to be accused of. It’s a negotiating ploy to get a better settlement when the facts in the case are not in KO’s favor. You use what you have.
In Chief’s opinion, the problem here is you have two entities that want to have a big payday in addition to KO. His private lawyer and ex wife. So whatever money someone throws out directionally divide it three ways. His alimony was based on making around $3 million per year. So he will have to likely modify if this goes against him. That could get ugly for him as well.

There are many forms of discrimination. I troubles me when posters who appear to be white start making unfounded allegations. By violating his right to due process, He could be discriminated because of the Glenn Miller hearsay evidence, which could hurt him finding another job at the college level.

 

[Chief00]

There are many forms of discrimination. I troubles me when posters who appear to be white start making unfounded allegations. By violating his right to due process, He could be discriminated because of the Glenn Miller hearsay evidence, which could hurt him finding another job at the college level.

The legal forms of discrimination include protective categories of race/color, national ancestry, religion, age, gender, disability and veteran’s status.
Due process is entirely another issue or legal area. Hearsay, also is a different legal argument.
When you look at the protective categories, race/color is the only one that could be in play.

 

[HuskyHawk]

The legal forms of discrimination include protective categories of race/color, national ancestry, religion, age, gender, disability and veteran’s status.
Due process is entirely another issue or legal area. Hearsay, also is a different legal argument.
When you look at the protective categories, race/color is the only one that could be in play.

Really, his poor performance renders that category out of play here. They had ample reason to fire him for poor performance, which is a valid reason for treating him differently, and invoking the for cause provision of the contract. But yes, because he is in a protected class, my assumption is that UConn would have been quite careful in building the case against him, including formal performance reviews.

 

[CL82]

CL, I’m as happy as anyone on this board that we were able to replace Ollie with Danny Hurley but you can’t honestly believe what you just wrote. We all know it was the horrible, apathetic and inept performance that got Ollie fired, not issues off the basketball court.

I absolutely do. I think we were in for at least a year more and possibly two. The NCAA violations were the difference.

 

[Huskybass]

I absolutely do. I think we were in for at least a year more and possibly two. The NCAA violations were the difference.

Awful performance is what got Ollie fired. The other stuff is the "cause" that justifies not to continue to pay him. There was no way based upon the last two years performance that he was on the sideline next season, even in the absence of any NCAA violations.

 

[CL82]

Awful performance is what got Ollie fired. The other stuff is the "cause" that justifies not to continue to pay him. There was no way based upon the last two years performance that he was on the sideline next season, even in the absence of any NCAA violations.

Disagree. Without the violations the $10M payout probably gets him a year. Possibly, with some assistant changes.

 

[Huskybass]

Disagree. Without the violations the $10M payout probably gets him a year. Possibly, with some assistant changes.

You cant posiibly be serious. Given how bad things were last year, there was no way anyone in a position of authority was going to allow that to continue.

 

[CL82]

You cant posiibly be serious. Given how bad things were last year, there was no way anyone in a position of authority was going to allow that to continue.

Completely serious. That was the consensus of the board as well until he was actually fired.

 

[HuskyHawk]

You cant posiibly be serious. Given how bad things were last year, there was no way anyone in a position of authority was going to allow that to continue.

I don't think they had the stomach to pay the $10m. I think they'd let him have more time if not for the ability to fire "for cause". It's one of the reasons I am so perplexed by the "just pay him" people. Paying him likely means laying off other people, people who are doing their jobs properly. Or making other cuts, maybe dropping a team from scholarship status.

 

[dennismenace]

He was hired as an interim coach.

Yes Calhoun strong armed him in.

Yes there was really no choice to but to go with him that 1st year.

But he was still an interim coach. He had to prove himself for a contract. And won 20 games in the big east with a team not tournament eligible and then won a NC the next season.

Preferential treatment got his foot in the door. But he EARNED the permanent position and contracts.

Yes he did earn the contract and position. The real question which will soon be answered is did he violate the specific language which he agreed to which could be grounds for firing with cause.

 

[pj]

We'll never know what UConn would have done in counterfactual situations, but the juxtaposition of having cause, the poor performance, and Hurley's availability (waiting a year would have lost him forever to Pitt) made it a no-brainer.

 

[Chief00]

Completely serious. That was the consensus of the board as well until he was actually fired.

True, when I broke the news, many doubted me. What was a surprise to UConn though is how KO would not settle within the reasonable settlement parameters despite justified cause. There is some disconnect between KO and his lawyers is my guess.

 

[Chief00]

Really, his poor performance renders that category out of play here. They had ample reason to fire him for poor performance, which is a valid reason for treating him differently, and invoking the for cause provision of the contract. But yes, because he is in a protected class, my assumption is that UConn would have been quite careful in building the case against him, including formal performance reviews.

I don’t disagree in terms of results but when they throw the word discrimination out there - what Chief is saying is that’s the only category that they could even try to use.