SI: How Kevin Ollie Could Contest UConn's 'Just Cause' Firing

[August_West]

If what you are hinting at is true it will come out anyway.

Why would Ollie negotiate against that threat.

Jmick leaves in a fantasy land.

 

[Point6]

So you really think anyone thinks that?

In any event by the same measure, just because people remember Ollie fondly as a player and as coach of the 2014 championship team doesn't mean that his (well documented) obligations don't exist or should be forgiven. The standard for "just cause" termination are clear and expressly include the failure to comply NCAA rules (or the failure to correct subordinates' non-compliance after proper notice.)

Ignoring that language "isn't how contracts work."

Right! If the contract was written in a way that he is not due $10M because he violated the NCAA bagel clause, that's too bad - but it can't be ignored. He is only due $10M under the terms of the contract. If the contract gives UConn an out, he is not due $10M.

 

[August_West]

Right! If the contract was written in a way that he is not due $10M because he violated the NCAA bagel clause, that's too bad - but it can't be ignored. He is only due $10M under the terms of the contract. If the contract gives UConn an out, he is not due $10M.

Then there should be no settlement. So why is Jmick calling for a settlement?

 

[HuskyHawk]

Yeah Kevin Ollie lighting up my TV with endorsements the last 5 years.

I didn't make the Tiger analogy. I don't think it's similar. Kevin may not care about that. I agree with those who said it would mean nothing to the NBA. So he's fighting. Fair enough.

 

[Da_Aisijimo_Gou]

@Huskyforlife, If this hasn't been settled yet, then Ollie believes he didn't do any wrong. Should proceed further we will find out what the "just cause" is.

@Javjudah , why would you expect a settlement so soon, e.g., within less than 2 business days and particularly given some purported contractual or union arbitration requirements? As you suggest without any supporting facts, what if KO hypothetically "... believes he didn't do any wrong ... " yet possibly acknowledges some allegations could stick and stink badly? Perhaps KO and his attorney(s) are just playing poker, i.e., holding some cards (time) while potentially using time to pursue a bigger settlement than zero.

 

[Javjudah]

There are four possible outcomes I see.

• Keep Ollie = Program goes down in flames
• Fire and Pay Ollie = no money to replace him -> program goes down in flames
• Fire Ollie and end up having to pay him in arbitration = no money to replace him -> program goes down in flames
• Fire Ollie and reduce the buyout so we can hire a good coach = Program survives and eventually thrives

For the record, I am not rooting for the program to go down in flames.

I

There are four possible outcomes I see.

• Keep Ollie = Program goes down in flames
• Fire and Pay Ollie = no money to replace him -> program goes down in flames
• Fire Ollie and end up having to pay him in arbitration = no money to replace him -> program goes down in flames
• Fire Ollie and reduce the buyout so we can hire a good coach = Program survives and eventually thrives

For the record, I am not rooting for the program to go down in flames.

@HuskyHawk, Ollie has a contract and wanted one more season. Should he fail, he would have walked away with nothing. Ollie will fight this until the end because of the actions from Benedict and Herbst.
For the record, I am not rooting for the program to go down the dumpster.

 

[August_West]

Unfortunately, that was not an option. There's no money

Didnt @Chief00 say a donor stepped up?

 

[Point6]

Then there should be no settlement. So why is Jmick calling for a settlement?

Adverse parties don't usually agree that contract language is clear, so, rather than go "all in" on their own interpretation, they settle.

 

[HuskyHawk]

I

@HuskyHawk, Ollie has a contract and wanted one more season. Should he fail, he would have walked away with nothing. Ollie will fight this until the end because of the actions from Benedict and Herbst.
For the record, I am not rooting for the program to go down the dumpster.

We didn't have another year to wait for competent coaching. Last year was his "another year", and they got even worse. Meanwhile, if he failed next year, they'd still have to pay out the rest of the contract, plus pay him for the year. Same money.

 

[August_West]

We didn't have another year to wait for competent coaching. Last year was his "another year", and they got even worse. Meanwhile, if he failed next year, they'd still have to pay out the rest of the contract, plus pay him for the year. Same money.

Not same money because you are overlooking them not paying 3 mil to another coach for next season.

 

[CL82]

Right! If the contract was written in a way that he is not due $10M because he violated the NCAA bagel clause, that's too bad - but it can't be ignored. He is only due $10M under the terms of the contract. If the contract gives UConn an out, he is not due $10M.

Correct. KO was represented and both sides need to live with the terms that they agreed to.

Your petulant sarcasm is duly noted and ignored.

 

[August_West]

Adverse parties don't usually agree that contract language is clear, so, rather than go "all in" on their own interpretation, they settle.

thats not why jmick is calling for a settlement.

 

[CL82]

Adverse parties don't usually agree that contract language is clear

They do if they are smart and well represented.

 

[Da_Aisijimo_Gou]

He's "back" as player. For now. He's not coming back as a guy who gets commercials and endorsements like he once did. That part of his reputation is pretty permanently tarnished.

With absolutely zero knowledge of what Woods is paid for his current Nike, TaylorMade, MonsterEnergy, some tire company, and other endorsements, but the "get in the hole" douhcebags don't give a hoot about his many trash bags. Whether Woods is "back" (nice one) may be premature, but his current endorsement compensation is unlikely to be trump change. Happy to go 1/2s with you on his 2018 and potential 2019 endorsement dollars!

 

[Javjudah]

""...but....but...but..... Ollie better never plan on showing up on campus if he doesnt accept less"..

I don't think he will ever show up at UCONN again, period. At least not anytime soon unless he's brought back as the Head Coach, which I don't think will happen either.

 

[UConnNick]

I don’t think the university fires Ollie for cause without knowing they would win in the legal battle. That’s why everyone knows it’ll be settled.

If the university is so sure they would win if this ever goes to court, why would they settle? Taking it all the way means zero dollars paid to Ollie.

 

[tzznandrew]

If the university is so sure they would win if this ever goes to court, why would they settle? Taking it all the way means zero dollars paid to Ollie.

Hedging bets. You can believe you'll win and still settle in the off chance you lose. Game Theory.

 

[MadDogRevival]

posters think that because they don't like Ollie that UConn doesn't have to pay him, but that is not how contracts or negotiations work.

Save the straw man. Nobody believes that.
What I believe, however, is that even bad claims have value. Particularly if it's in favor of the status quo. In this case, the status quo is that UConn has the money, and Ollie does not. The burden is on Ollie to change it. Expensive and time consuming. And, to be clear, it would be very unlikely for UConn to proceed without at least some evidence in its favor.


I have a case right now where my Amish client was owed 10k on a 30k home improvement contract that was 90% completed. Homeowner was going bankrupt, however, so he didn't pay. My guy, being Amish, writes it off and gets on with his life. Almost 4 years later the homeowner filed for Chapter 13 bankruptcy. His lawyer files a lawsuit against the Amish guy for 16 grand, claiming that the work the Amish guy did was horrible. What's really going on is the lawyer knows the Amish guy won't counter sue because of his religion, and he knows from experience that the Amish guy will just write a check for 5 or 7 grand to make it go away and not have to pay an attorney, regardless of the truth.
Problem for him is that the Amish guy has a lawyer working for him mostly pro bono.

 

[8893]

mostly pro bono

 

[August_West]

Sharks gotta swim or they die

 

[HuskyHawk]

With absolutely zero knowledge of what Woods is paid for his current Nike, TaylorMade, MonsterEnergy, some tire company, and other endorsements, but the "get in the hole" douhcebags don't give a hoot about his many trash bags. Whether Woods is "back" (nice one) may be premature, but his current endorsement compensation is unlikely to be trump change. Happy to go 1/2s with you on his 2018 and potential 2019 endorsement dollars!

I'm not saying he won't get anything. But they fired him quickly. Nike is out of the golf equipment game now anyway. He had hurt his prior status in a permanent way. I don't think that's debatable. It doesn't mean he's still not marketable. He's an underdog now. People are rooting for him to make a comeback from all those injuries. It's good to see an older guy go challenge these kids.

 

[Point6]

Correct. KO was represented and both sides need to live with the terms that they agreed to.

Your petulant sarcasm is duly noted and ignored.

my sarcasm? I was only intending to convey that a "technical" violation (bagel clause) may be a sufficient violation if that's the way the contract is written. The language I've seen quoted may not be that clear but that is the position I would take if I were on the UConn side.

 

[MadDogRevival]

Oquet

Well, "reduced fee" doesn't sound quite as magnanimous of me. Lol.

 

[TRest]

Situational pregnancy.

 

[FDNY99]

If the university is so sure they would win if this ever goes to court, why would they settle? Taking it all the way means zero dollars paid to Ollie.

They will offer him what will be expended between his salary and arbitration/legal fees plus agree to seal/redact documents related to the entire procedure. He fights it everything is open game. One thing all of you seem to not realize..this termination “for cause” was done with HR & signed off by legal. He also is bound by the contract that his union operates on. Anything not stipulated in his contract is covered by the other deal..that’s why he has union representation.