Ollie fighting to keep his job..Link from ESPN

[August_West]

I strongly suspect that the University will divulge their grounds in terms of "cause" and that will result in a compromise settlement. As others have stated, the grounds for "cause" are very broad under the terms of the contract, and may involve numerous activities both within and outside the scope of the pending NCAA investigation.

If the university has substantial support for cause, why negotiate at all? Seems stupid.

 

[ctchamps]

If the university has substantial support for cause, why negotiate at all? Seems stupid.

If it's within the scope of the NCAA how does UConn not get hit with failure for institutional control?
If it's outside the scope of the NCAA is there documentation that KO has received university reprimands with a list of actions the university would take if violations weren't corrected. If not won't an arbitrator view the "just cause" claims suspiciously?

 

[Huskybass]

If the university has substantial support for cause, why negotiate at all? Seems stupid.

A closed file with certainty and finality is a good thing. Prolonged litigation can be very expensive, time consuming and disruptive.

 

[8893]

Prolonged litigation can be very expensive, time consuming and disruptive.

Stop talking dirty. You're getting me all aroused.

 

[Penfield]

Sorry -- but I disagree. AD Dave would be doing the university a disservice if he didn't do whatever it takes to save money and put it towards a new coach. Even if the violation was minor. It's a tough business.

I don't know what Ollie did and I dont know if Benedict made the right call. All that will come out I guess

 

[RJScootin]

I believe that the way this goes down is what most on the BY think; that this process will lead to a financial settlement where Ollie's name is maintained and UConn pays less than 10 million.

Of course, we'll lose time, recruits, and future coaching prospects in the process. It would have been better to let him go with the 10 mil and move on... If we only had the money...

It would have been better for Ollie, that's it.... (we know you have a crush) so not surprised you took this stance. Nothing will be lost, the process for a new coach goes forwards with no delays.

 

[Da_Aisijimo_Gou]

I don't know what Ollie did and I dont know if Benedict made the right call. All that will come out I guess

Or not, ... especially "All that"

 

[UConnDad]

Person A gets pulled over for speeding and is let go with a warning.

Person B gets pulled over for speeding and receives a ticket.

Person B can cry and whine about how unfair it is, but he was still speeding.

While this is true for a speeding ticket it's not the case necessarily in KO's firing. His additional union protection beyond his personal contract gives him more rights.

 

[JMick]

Would love to be the lawyer in that case too.

You're so delusional when it comes to Ollie it's pretty pathetic

 

[August_West]

A closed file with certainty and finality is a good thing. Prolonged litigation can be very expensive, time consuming and disruptive.

If funding the buyout is a problem and you can get out of the buyout using legitimate cause you don't give up millions.


Either that or now all you guys agree with me on my " love to be that lawyer” scenarios.

 

[August_West]

You're so delusional when it comes to Ollie it's pretty pathetic

What does this have to do with Ollie? He's gone.

 

[CL82]

This is going to be rather straight forward. Either UConn can show Ollie breached his contract or they can't.

If they can't KO leaves with 10M.
If they can, then they settle to avoid a lawsuit and extending this past March.

KO, will be fine either way. He won't be the coach but he won't be short of cash.

They may even agree to pay him the 10M over a longer term.

We don't know what UConn's case is.

This is a pretty Ollie favorable analysis. You don't see any other possible outcomes?

 

[HuskyHawk]

Would love to be the lawyer in that case too.

Then I can only guess that you don't know much about employment law. The majority of employees are employed at will, can can be fired without cause. What you can't do is fire someone for a prohibited reason (I'm not going to list them). So the common approach with bad performers tends to follow one of two scenarios. 1. layoffs...and you pick the losers to go. 2. you begin to build a case with HR, putting incidents in the file, bad reviews, etc., to support the decision to fire them. In most cases you don't need to actually build that case, but it's your firewall against a claim that you fired them for some improper reason.

UConn has almost certainly been building that case with Kevin Ollie for the last two years. I bet it's not going to be one thing, it will be the accumulation of many things.

 

[8893]

He's gone.

Rat in a drain ditch?

 

[Da_Aisijimo_Gou]

His additional union protection beyond his personal contract gives him more rights.

So says a union rep, but without knowing all of the facts most of may be unlikely to know in sufficient detail perhaps a dose of subjective interpretation exists.

 

[UCDaveD]

While this is true for a speeding ticket it's not the case necessarily in KO's firing. His additional union protection beyond his personal contract gives him more rights.

That’s the union’s position. The university disagrees.

 

[UConnDad]

So says a union rep, but without knowing all of the facts most of may be unlikely to know in sufficient detail perhaps a dose of subjective interpretation exists.

I'm not a union rep and my statement is not subject to interpretation. He has more rights by having union representation, some of which were already mentioned, (a hearing, his defense, arbitration, an appeal). I'm not choosing sides. These are facts.

 

[Da_Aisijimo_Gou]

Ollie appears to be on the hook for ANYTHING that occurred on his watch.

Subjective interpretation perhaps, but KO purportedly agreed to such oversight responsibilities in signing his own contract. On the other hand, perhaps the unknown, undefined "Just cause" falls much closer to squarely on KO's own shoes.

For a hypothetical example, what if "Just cause" involves a fair dose more than any NCAA allegations or FBI investigation, leans in to financial or HR issues, reputational considerations, etc. No facts regarding the latter; just tossing out some possible considerations versus a few others radar locked on some BS extra practice claims or some such tweeked or leaked quotes for borderline naive media or public consumption only.

 

[Da_Aisijimo_Gou]

I'm not a union rep and my statement is not subject to interpretation. He has more rights by having union representation, some of which were already mentioned, (a hearing, his defense, arbitration, an appeal). I'm not choosing sides. These are facts.

Sure, and yet it remains subject to interpretation without knowledge of all facts. We'll agree to disagree.

 

[UofCT]

What does this have to do with Ollie? He's gone.

Is he though? Is there a scenario in which Dave B handled this so poorly he loses his job and the support from former players is overwhelming and Susan decides to keep KO??

 

[August_West]

You’d lose both cases spectacularly.

No I wouldnt, they would be "settled".

 

[August_West]

That’s the union’s position. The university disagrees.

So is your position that the university should not settle this suit?

 

[Robertelamin]

I wonder if the other union members are thrilled that their dues are going to pay for attorneys to defend a millionaire hoping to get $10 million more.

 

[UConnNick]

A closed file with certainty and finality is a good thing. Prolonged litigation can be very expensive, time consuming and disruptive.

And a major PR headache, which we could do without under the present circumstances.

 

[8893]

I wonder if the other union members are thrilled that their dues are going to pay for attorneys to defend a millionaire hoping to get $10 million more.

Perhaps they appreciate the notion that ensuring proper invocation of "just cause" termination provisions helps protect all of them.