Ollie, Auriemma and Diaco contracts

[nelsonmuntz]

UConn has committed to $6.5 million a year in salary to its top 3 coaches in just the last 15 months. That is a lot of money, particularly for the two basketball coaches.

This is really the only validated positive signal we have about our conference and revenue situation. Warde and Herbst must have some plan for generating more revenue, because otherwise they are stepping on the gas as we are approaching the brick wall.

 

[noeynox]

Or the fundraising and other revenue streams outside the tv contract are really good.

Ill admit though, my thoughts are along the same that a p5, invite must be in the bag.

 

[Kevin Caliendo]

the contracts are not beyond when the cash from the Big East breakups will dry up. Basically they provide the window for UConn to escape the AAC. If Uconn is not P5 in 3-4 years, then Ollie and Diaco will be gone. Geno may retire? I don't think you can read too much into it sadly

 

[OkaForPrez]

But of more interest is the fact that if they change athletic conferences, there can be a contract renegotiation.

http://adimeback.com/a-dime-back-goes-full-lawyer-on-the-new-ollie-contract/

 

[Kevin Caliendo]

nice catch.

 

[SAMCRO]

Warde and Herbst must have some plan for generating more revenue, because otherwise they are stepping on the gas as we are approaching the brick wall.

Best way to increase your odds of getting through the brick wall is to step on the gas...

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Warde tied his own job to Ollie's. Unbelievable, and a total conflict of interest on the part of both Herbst and Manuel.

 

[UConn9604]

Warde tied his own job to Ollie's. Unbelievable, and a total conflict of interest on the part of both Herbst and Manuel.

How is that unbelievable? I think Ollie tied his job to Warde's, not the other way around, and this is very common in contracts.

Really, this condition only requires Warde and/or Susan to stick around for another year. The contract allows Ollie to renegotiate one year after either departs, and that's when the NBA lockout drops to $1 million (chump change for any of the NBA teams that might want him).

If Warde or Susan leaves in 20 minutes, then we have an issue in 2015-16. Other than that, it's insignificant.

 

[whaler11]

Warde tied his own job to Ollie's. Unbelievable, and a total conflict of interest on the part of both Herbst and Manuel.

That is totally and completely disgusting.

I'm supposed to respect Manuel after this? Guy writes a poison pill favoring himself into someone's contract who is more critical to the enterprise.

Disgraceful.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

How is that unbelievable? I think Ollie tied his job to Warde's, not the other way around, and this is very common in contracts.

Really, this condition only requires Warde and/or Susan to stick around for another year. The contract allows Ollie to renegotiate one year after either departs, and that's when the NBA lockout drops to $1 million (chump change for any of the NBA teams that might want him).

If Warde or Susan leaves in 20 minutes, then we have an issue in 2015-16. Other than that, it's insignificant.

I have to argue with you on this, then you are a lost cause. It is a total conflict of interest, and Manuel should have never accepted the demand.

 

[Jerry27]

Ollie is the one benefiting if Warde and Herbst leave not them if Ollie leaves. Or are you saying that the disgraceful part is that Ollie should he be forced to stick around even if they hire another Hathaway?

"Also of note is the fact that if either Athletic Director Warde Manual or President Susan Herbst leave UConn, after one year Ollie can leave without paying a buyout. So if the way the university or the athletic department is run changes and KO isn’t feeling it, he can get out. This tracks with statements he’s made about making sure his players are taken care of and treated in a way he agrees with."

 

[Jerry27]

I have to argue with you on this, then you are a lost cause. It is a total conflict of interest, and Manuel should have never accepted the demand.

I think you'll have to dazzle us with your infinite wisdom then. Explain the conflict of interest you see.

 

[UConn9604]

I have to argue with you on this, then you are a lost cause. It is a total conflict of interest, and Manuel should have never accepted the demand.

Define the "conflict." As for lost causes, yours is frequently like the S.S. Minnow, so I will take your insult as a compliment.

 

[Dooley]

I also don't understand what Warde did that was so disgraceful. KO likes his AD and President. There is a working relationship there that works. IF either were to leave, KO should have every right to evaluate the replacement(s) to see if he has a good working relationship with them. It wasn't too long ago that our coaches had to deal with Jeff Hathaway. Not to say that Manuel or Herbst will appoint somebody that bad, but you never know. This piece gives KO a little peace knowing that the administration that he is comfortable with will stay.

I like this part:
There’s also some interesting language about contract renegotiations. They can go back to the table after the 2015-2016 season, which seems pretty standard. But of more interest is the fact that if they change athletic conferences, there can be a contract renegotiation. Ollie’s new contract makes him the highest paid coach in the AAC, right above Memphis Coach Josh Pastner, who made $2.6 million last year. Now if UConn goes to the ACC, Ollie won’t be out earning Coach K and his nearly-$10-million salary, or Rick Pitino’s $5.7 million. It feels gross to just type that.

God I hope that that contract renegotiation happens soon. Bump him into the $4M-$5M/yr range on par with other P5 college hoops coaches and really make it difficult for the NBA to come in and poach.

 

[Fishy]

Welcome to the AAC.

You want a coach who can get an NBA job tomorrow?

You're gonna have to take on some conditions.

 

[CL82]

Or the fundraising and other revenue streams outside the tv contract are really good.

Ill admit though, my thoughts are along the same that a p5, invite must be in the bag.

We're doomed, but the same thought crossed my mind.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

I think you'll have to dazzle us with your infinite wisdom then. Explain the conflict of interest you see.

Warde, who is responsible for negotiating the contract, allowed himself to be named in the contract as a condition by which Ollie can avoid a $1MM or more buyout.

Next time you bring in a customer at your job, write into their agreement that they can terminate their contract with your employer immediately and go with you if you quit. See what your boss thinks about that.

 

[Jerry27]

Warde, who is responsible for negotiating the contract, allowed himself to be named in the contract as a condition by which Ollie can avoid a $1MM or more buyout.

Next time you bring in a customer at your job, write into their agreement that they can terminate their contract with your employer immediately and go with you if you quit. See what your boss thinks about that.

But that's not what it says, it says Ollie can void the buyout if either of them leave, it allows him an out if someone is hired that doesn't have the same goals in mind. Did you ever stop to think that it was a clause that Ollie had them put in? And the ridiculous analogy doesn't work because the clause doesn't mention anything about him going with them if they leave. Your interpretation of this is nearly as dumb as your football independence idea...nearly.

 

[UConn9604]

Warde, who is responsible for negotiating the contract, allowed himself to be named in the contract as a condition by which Ollie can avoid a $1MM or more buyout.

Next time you bring in a customer at your job, write into their agreement that they can terminate their contract with your employer immediately and go with you if you quit. See what your boss thinks about that.

Not for another year, meaning that even if Warde or Susan were that devious, this clause has the effect of a non-compete agreement, which is presumably valid as long as it is limited in scope and duration (and is, as you must know, extremely common).

For the record, if I ever leave my company, my clients will leave with me the very next day (or even the same day) and there's nothing my boss can do about that, regardless of what he or she thinks.

Nice try, though.

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

Warde, who is responsible for negotiating the contract, allowed himself to be named in the contract as a condition by which Ollie can avoid a $1MM or more buyout.

Next time you bring in a customer at your job, write into their agreement that they can terminate their contract with your employer immediately and go with you if you quit. See what your boss thinks about that.

Only you can create a Strawman when discussing an iron clad legally binding contract.

 

[Chuck]

Seems like a clear conflict to me. Whether or not it was Ollie's idea is irrelevant. Warde should've recused himself from negotiation regarding that clause.

That being said, I assume this was Ollie's requirement, especially if JC told him about having to deal with Hathaway. Also, we don't have insight into who negotiated the terms and if Warde/Susan had someone else review the propriety of these terms. So the outrage seems a bit misinformed (although it may be warranted if we had all the facts).

Nelson, I have often negotiated terms that include a Key Man clause that allows for termination upon the departure of someone I feel is important. It's pretty common. Of course, the firm I'm negotiating with should ensure that clause is in their best interest.

 

[Jerry27]

Seems like a clear conflict to me. Whether or not it was Ollie's idea is irrelevant. Warde should've recused himself from negotiation regarding that clause.

That being said, I assume this was Ollie's requirement, especially if JC told him about having to deal with Hathaway. Also, we don't have insight into who negotiated the terms and if Warde/Susan had someone else review the propriety of these terms. So the outrage seems a bit misinformed (although it may be warranted if we had all the facts).

Nelson, I have often negotiated terms that include a Key Man clause that allows for termination upon the departure of someone I feel is important. It's pretty common. Of course, the firm I'm negotiating with should ensure that clause is in their best interest.

For clarity my reference to it being Ollie's idea was only to point out that it didn't benefit WM or SH as Nelson was claiming so it made more sense that it came from KO's side. I have no idea who put it in there but I'm sure the legal team on both sides reviewed it thoroughly before it was signed. In that context only is it relevant.

But I'm sure Nelson will be back any minute to tell everyone how we don't get it, we're lost causes, and that our only hope of survival is to join the BE in BB and go Indy for football and and if we don't we are all DOOMED!

 

[itgoeslike]

It's is pretty common in senior executive agreements to contain clauses that are triggered by changes in organizational leadership, structure or ownership. In fact, aside from being released under favorable conditions and it can often result in a sizable payout.

I suspect Nelson is upset that the departure of the AD and/or President could put the university at risk, perhaps easier than we would like, but I'm not sure that it is a conflict of interest on the part of WM. The reality is that KO was holding all the cards in this negotiation and I can't blame him for securing it. He's making a commitment to the team and wants to make sure his CEO and COO are going to stand alongside him and his players. It is what it is. Let's enjoy it while it lasts.

 

[whaler11]

It's a conflict because any potential decision to replace Manuel isn't predicated only on Manuel's performance.

It also gives Manuel a lot of leverage in any contact situation where he is being recruited by another school.

It's negotiated by the very person who benefits most: Manuel.

It's a joke and should be illegal for a state employee to give themselves this type of leverage through contacts they negotiate.

Seriously if you think this is acceptable for a state employee, you can't possibly live here.

 

[whaler11]

Extra bonus: the players can't leave without penalty if Ollie leaves, but Ollie is actually rewarded if Manuel leaves.

That's pure insanity.