So what's up with Ollie? Did he ask for arbitration?

[Madmannsucks]

That's exactly how they want you to think. Look at the nerve of this rich basketball coach who wants to cut further into the state deficit! If it wasn't bad enough that we paid him out the ass to drive the program into the ground, now he wants money for time he's not going to work! Even though he clearly violated the contract!

The optics aren't on KO's side. But that's when we're most susceptible to foul play and they know that. Fairness and due process tend to evaporate when the mob covets and suspects a certain outcome. It's a classic case of scapegoating - two victims (in this case, the coach and the fan base) are being pitted against one another by an indebted third party (the school) to provide cover for their mistakes.

Truth be told, I don't give a damn about the constitution or the arbitrator or the lawyers. I just want people to know the whole story. And the story is about a bureaucracy manipulating the good-intentions of American people - amateurism, honoring a contract, working hard - to make a dollar. The school does not rise to that level of corruption for me, but they are certainly complicit in the operation. Think about how much of a farce the APR penalties were a few years ago - think about how much cognitive dissonance it must have required to sit there and absorb all that PR without ever fighting back. I mean, Christ, Shabazz fought more for himself than any of the administrators did for the people they were supposed to protect. And now, five years later, you're going to join forces with them - while pedaling an insultingly crass narrative about your commitment to compliance - to axe the guy who brought you out of that nightmare?

Sorry, I can't swallow that. I can put up with a lot - I can put up with coaches pulling scholarships from players, future pros blowing their knee out, coaches getting fired in the middle of a plane ride...but not that. I can't tolerate back-stabbing of that nature. KO may well have dogged it and cheated the fans their money, but he's going to face the consequences for it. Contracts are guaranteed for a reason and you cannot prioritize the ugly optics of KO's downfall over his right to be treated fairly in a capitalistic society. He made the school a lot of money and deserves compensation that is consistent with that leverage.

What he said.

 

[temery]

I have a couple thousand words languishing away in a word document if you're really interested. I've pondered posting them on this board but figured best case scenario I might convert a couple people, and what's the point of that? For as strongly as I feel about the matter, UConn basketball is kind of a big part of my life. I feel like I have little recourse right now, because acting in step with my convictions would entail protesting something I'm not sure I can do without. I imagine others feel the same.

The premise shields people from something of an intractable fallacy. It isn't a fallacy that they're incapable of tracking through their own devices so much as it requires more investment than any sane person would volunteer. The logic is pretty simple. The more informed you are, the better you're able to negotiate a mutually beneficial outcome. Wars happen when people don't understand each other. This is a war.

There are times when you think you're right and then there are times when you know you're right. This is closer to the latter in my eyes, for the simple reason that I can make the case against KO better than the people fighting him. I can convert villains to victims better than they can themselves. Whether I can do it in a manner that holds their attention is another question. That's the great dilemma our country faces today; our best minds are muted by a prevailing anxiety that, in media consumption, precludes us from exploring paths outside the beaten course, not because we have an innate understanding of justice, but because it threatens our claim to identity.

You and a handful of other posters who routinely take the time to read my posts are much appreciated. As someone who, ironically, struggles with attentional issues of his own, I envy your patience and try to build from that model. Essays might not directly transform cultural values like they used to, but they can still reap valuable capital that has a way of trickling from executives to media personalities to foot soldiers. If you're in KO's camp, there's enough ideological overlap with enough important people to turn this into a full-out media assault on the school and the NCAA.

What?

 

[auggie22]

That's exactly how they want you to think. Look at the nerve of this rich basketball coach who wants to cut further into the state deficit! If it wasn't bad enough that we paid him out the ass to drive the program into the ground, now he wants money for time he's not going to work! Even though he clearly violated the contract!

The optics aren't on KO's side. But that's when we're most susceptible to foul play and they know that. Fairness and due process tend to evaporate when the mob covets and suspects a certain outcome. It's a classic case of scapegoating - two victims (in this case, the coach and the fan base) are being pitted against one another by an indebted third party (the school) to provide cover for their mistakes.

Truth be told, I don't give a damn about the constitution or the arbitrator or the lawyers. I just want people to know the whole story. And the story is about a bureaucracy manipulating the good-intentions of American people - amateurism, honoring a contract, working hard - to make a dollar. The school does not rise to that level of corruption for me, but they are certainly complicit in the operation. Think about how much of a farce the APR penalties were a few years ago - think about how much cognitive dissonance it must have required to sit there and absorb all that PR without ever fighting back. I mean, Christ, Shabazz fought more for himself than any of the administrators did for the people they were supposed to protect. And now, five years later, you're going to join forces with them - while pedaling an insultingly crass narrative about your commitment to compliance - to axe the guy who brought you out of that nightmare?

Sorry, I can't swallow that. I can put up with a lot - I can put up with coaches pulling scholarships from players, future pros blowing their knee out, coaches getting fired in the middle of a plane ride...but not that. I can't tolerate back-stabbing of that nature. KO may well have dogged it and cheated the fans their money, but he's going to face the consequences for it. Contracts are guaranteed for a reason and you cannot prioritize the ugly optics of KO's downfall over his right to be treated fairly in a capitalistic society. He made the school a lot of money and deserves compensation that is consistent with that leverage.

I would venture that Ollie has lost the school a lot of money, particularly the last few years. Directly as a consequence of dogging it on the job he was paid a lot to do. And by dogging it he has also robbed a dozen or so ambitious young men of an earning opportunity. Think about that. These kids that he made promises to should be the most aggrieved.

If you strip out the dubious premises in your post, I think you would come around to why there should be little sympathy for KO ...

 

[Dogdeacon]

I would venture that Ollie has lost the school a lot of money, particularly the last few years. Directly as a consequence of dogging it on the job he was paid a lot to do. And by dogging it he has also robbed a dozen or so ambitious young men of an earning opportunity. Think about that. These kids that he made promises to should be the most aggrieved.

If you strip out the dubious premises in your post, I think you would come around to why there should be little sympathy for KO ...

Exactly, 99&04 creates the administrative boogeyman & gets to blame a deep state enemy for both Ollie's debacle (inarguably his own doing) AND the APR suspension!? Try the simpler explanation, the coach failed to do his job in every aspect & got fired.
And even if the conspiracy theory of deep state incompetent administrative phuckery is true the remedy for this is not to pay a co-incompetent, that fixes nothing.

Happily the Louisville ongoing dumpster fire comparatively puts this melodrama into its small, sunken place.

 

[ctchamps]

I'm not taking any side here, I'm just not as passionate as others are on this matter. I know the one thing I don't want, is for there to be any substantive allegations against Ollie to be proven. I hope they all arrive at a negotiated settlement.

Now I'll try to answer your question. I'm not an attorney, but I comprehend enough to give bad advice.

I think there are at least two mitigating factors to that "Calhoun did it" sort of legal argument.

1) A different management team. New President and new AD can make different decisions for different reasons, and can't be bound by the poor decisions of their predecessors

2) After the last set of violations, the post season ban, the bad press, the school adopted a zero tolerance policy and every coach knows of this new policy position.

I have no skin in the game either but as a rebuttal to your points I will counter with Bob Diaco. Just his red pants alone argues that this administration did not dismiss someone for bad performance.

 

[CL82]

That's exactly how they want you to think. Look at the nerve of this rich basketball coach who wants to cut further into the state deficit! If it wasn't bad enough that we paid him out the ass to drive the program into the ground, now he wants money for time he's not going to work! Even though he clearly violated the contract!

The optics aren't on KO's side. But that's when we're most susceptible to foul play and they know that. Fairness and due process tend to evaporate when the mob covets and suspects a certain outcome. It's a classic case of scapegoating - two victims (in this case, the coach and the fan base) are being pitted against one another by an indebted third party (the school) to provide cover for their mistakes.

Truth be told, I don't give a damn about the constitution or the arbitrator or the lawyers. I just want people to know the whole story. And the story is about a bureaucracy manipulating the good-intentions of American people - amateurism, honoring a contract, working hard - to make a dollar. The school does not rise to that level of corruption for me, but they are certainly complicit in the operation. Think about how much of a farce the APR penalties were a few years ago - think about how much cognitive dissonance it must have required to sit there and absorb all that PR without ever fighting back. I mean, Christ, Shabazz fought more for himself than any of the administrators did for the people they were supposed to protect. And now, five years later, you're going to join forces with them - while pedaling an insultingly crass narrative about your commitment to compliance - to axe the guy who brought you out of that nightmare?

Sorry, I can't swallow that. I can put up with a lot - I can put up with coaches pulling scholarships from players, future pros blowing their knee out, coaches getting fired in the middle of a plane ride...but not that. I can't tolerate back-stabbing of that nature. KO may well have dogged it and cheated the fans their money, but he's going to face the consequences for it. Contracts are guaranteed for a reason and you cannot prioritize the ugly optics of KO's downfall over his right to be treated fairly in a capitalistic society. He made the school a lot of money and deserves compensation that is consistent with that leverage.

But if the contract says, as pretty much everyone agrees, that he is not entitled to any further payments under it, why would you ignore what it says? Shouldn't your moral indignation be aimed at the person who didn't live up his contractual obligations and yet still wants to be paid?

 

[HuskyHawk]

That's exactly how they want you to think. Look at the nerve of this rich basketball coach who wants to cut further into the state deficit! If it wasn't bad enough that we paid him out the ass to drive the program into the ground, now he wants money for time he's not going to work! Even though he clearly violated the contract!

The optics aren't on KO's side. But that's when we're most susceptible to foul play and they know that. Fairness and due process tend to evaporate when the mob covets and suspects a certain outcome. It's a classic case of scapegoating - two victims (in this case, the coach and the fan base) are being pitted against one another by an indebted third party (the school) to provide cover for their mistakes.

Truth be told, I don't give a damn about the constitution or the arbitrator or the lawyers. I just want people to know the whole story. And the story is about a bureaucracy manipulating the good-intentions of American people - amateurism, honoring a contract, working hard - to make a dollar. The school does not rise to that level of corruption for me, but they are certainly complicit in the operation. Think about how much of a farce the APR penalties were a few years ago - think about how much cognitive dissonance it must have required to sit there and absorb all that PR without ever fighting back. I mean, Christ, Shabazz fought more for himself than any of the administrators did for the people they were supposed to protect. And now, five years later, you're going to join forces with them - while pedaling an insultingly crass narrative about your commitment to compliance - to axe the guy who brought you out of that nightmare?

Sorry, I can't swallow that. I can put up with a lot - I can put up with coaches pulling scholarships from players, future pros blowing their knee out, coaches getting fired in the middle of a plane ride...but not that. I can't tolerate back-stabbing of that nature. KO may well have dogged it and cheated the fans their money, but he's going to face the consequences for it. Contracts are guaranteed for a reason and you cannot prioritize the ugly optics of KO's downfall over his right to be treated fairly in a capitalistic society. He made the school a lot of money and deserves compensation that is consistent with that leverage.

This is one of the more wacky, tin foil hat conspiracy things I've read on this board, and that's saying something. But it confirms my general view on the split among us on this issue. Some will side with labor over management every time, no matter what. And if the "labor" in the particular case is in the wrong, it doesn't matter, because systematically they are "exploited".

Yeah, UConn really screwed Kevin Ollie. It took an uneducated kid from the LA gang land, gave him a degree and lead him to an NBA career in which he earned in excess of $20,000,000. Then, when his playing days were over, UConn hired him as an assistant coach, despite his lack of qualifications. Then it made him head coach in 2012, again despite a lack of qualifications. He earned over $11,000,000 as head coach over the last 6 years.

 

[Madmannsucks]

Wow...very even handed. Yup they took a kid who no one wanted...gave him a degree. Then they gave him an NBA career...then they gave him a time all set up for a championship run...13 years in the NBA certainly would not qualify anyone to be an assistant coach.
What I like most is the complete lack of bias.....and the part about how they "gave him a degree"...oh and took a kid from "gang land"...time to shut this one down.

 

[freescooter]

The real point is that they took a guy who was the third coach at the end of the bench, the one that hands towels to the guys coming off and brings the coffee for the other guys and made him the head coach and everyone is shocked this ended badly! The guy caught lightening in a bottle in 2014. It happens. But he wasn’t up to the task in any sense.

 

[8893]

The real point is that they took a guy who was the third coach at the end of the bench, the one that hands towels to the guys coming off and brings the coffee for the other guys and made him the head coach and everyone is shocked this ended badly! The guy caught lightening in a bottle in 2014. It happens. But he wasn’t up to the task in any sense.

To what issue is that the real point?

 

[champs99and04]

I would venture that Ollie has lost the school a lot of money, particularly the last few years. Directly as a consequence of dogging it on the job he was paid a lot to do. And by dogging it he has also robbed a dozen or so ambitious young men of an earning opportunity. Think about that. These kids that he made promises to should be the most aggrieved.

If you strip out the dubious premises in your post, I think you would come around to why there should be little sympathy for KO ...

Exactly. So why does he not deserve more for outperforming his first contract? Does this only work one way?

 

[UConnNick]

He wasn’t even fired for poor performance.
He was fired because the fans responded to two years of non winning records by deserting the ship in droves.
Men’s basketball at UConn is the only program that historically made money. Now it is losing money.
Its not ununual for attendance to drop off because of bad years but in 2013-14 we won 31 games and a NC and as recrcent as 2015-16 we won 25 games the AAC championship and got to the round of 32 . At most schools that glow would have lasted a bit longer than at UConn. No Billy the folks at Storrs are in panic mode.
The fear Ollie is the man responsible for killing the goose that laid the golden eggs.
Maybe to a degree it’s true but he is certainly not responsible for us being relagated to a conference we didn’t choose to be in. With a commissioner that had no regard Basketball.

The women's BB program at UConn has also historically turned a profit, which is quite a feat, considering only a tiny number of schools manage to do that.

 

[auggie22]

Exactly. So why does he not deserve more for outperforming his first contract? Does this only work one way?

Well, because of the contract. He was not forced at gun point to sign either. These things have to be a good deal for both parties to execute.

He signed the first contract despite the “meager” base salary because he knew that he was unproven, a risk that the school was willing to take at a certain price point. Still a far better deal than he would have received from any other D1 or NBA team at that time, which is also why he signed it. His reward for outperforming the first contract was a renegotiated deal that paid him as a top 5 coach.

 

[champs99and04]

But if the contract says, as pretty much everyone agrees, that he is not entitled to any further payments under it, why would you ignore what it says? Shouldn't your moral indignation be aimed at the person who didn't live up his contractual obligations and yet still wants to be paid?

The point of a contract is money. The entire reason for including that clause in the contract was to provide insurance against a scandal that depleted revenue and hindered their ability to rebuild the program. That is obviously not what happened here. They fired him because he sucked as a coach. They know that, but they feel justified in doing this anyway because they believe he slacked on the job and took advantage of people.

Fine. If that's the argument, the school should come out and say it. Don't try to insult people with the bit on compliance. Compliance wasn't going to get you out of this hole. If anything, compliance helped put you in the hole. Ask Diamond Stone, Jordan Bell, Hamidou Diallo, Tremont Waters, and the Heron kid about that. We didn't sign David Onuorah because Ollie was breaking the rules.

I understand that it's convenient to blame Ollie for signing a dumb contract and forcing the school into playing this game. It genuinely makes sense to think that way, because let's face it, we're victims. We watched that putrid basketball. We dealt with the CR firestorm. We have endured attack after attack from the NCAA. We deserve to cut this corner, this one time, because sometimes fighting fair isn't an answer, even for fair people.

Long-term, we lose thinking like that. Long-term, this is the type of thinking that sinks the program. We as college sports fans have been baited into thinking a certain way, but it doesn't have to be like that.

So yes, we have the right to make this all go away because that's what the contract allows us to do, and morally speaking, it's only what everyone else has always done to us. I'd rather use that good will to back our own guy and call attention to all the other things that have actually held us back.

 

[QDOG5]

The point of a contract is money. The entire reason for including that clause in the contract was to provide insurance against a scandal that depleted revenue and hindered their ability to rebuild the program. That is obviously not what happened here. They fired him because he sucked as a coach. They know that, but they feel justified in doing this anyway because they believe he slacked on the job and took advantage of people.

Fine. If that's the argument, the school should come out and say it. Don't try to insult people with the bit on compliance. Compliance wasn't going to get you out of this hole. If anything, compliance helped put you in the hole. Ask Diamond Stone, Jordan Bell, Hamidou Diallo, Tremont Waters, and the Heron kid about that. We didn't sign David Onuorah because Ollie was breaking the rules.

I understand that it's convenient to blame Ollie for signing a dumb contract and forcing the school into playing this game. It genuinely makes sense to think that way, because let's face it, we're victims. We watched that putrid basketball. We dealt with the CR firestorm. We have endured attack after attack from the NCAA. We deserve to cut this corner, this one time, because sometimes fighting fair isn't an answer, even for fair people.

Long-term, we lose thinking like that. Long-term, this is the type of thinking that sinks the program. We as college sports fans have been baited into thinking a certain way, but it doesn't have to be like that.

So yes, we have the right to make this all go away because that's what the contract allows us to do, and morally speaking, it's only what everyone else has always done to us. I'd rather use that good will to back our own guy and call attention to all the other things that have actually held us back.

If UConn is sinking and this supposed administration tomfoolery is going to hurt the mens bb program how were they able to sign the most sought after coach this off season? If that is sinking I'm ten toes in.

 

[Dogdeacon]

99&04 oversimplifies when it serves, 'The point of a contract is money' (?then why have words in there?) and then makes things more complex where needed 'morally speaking, long-term, sinks the program, etc...'

Also; "The entire reason for including that clause in the contract was to provide insurance against a scandal that depleted revenue.."
It actually nullifies the contract (part of Ollie's side's goal) to argue the 'entire reason' (intent) of putting something into a contract was to provide insurance, avoid scandal or avoid loss $. A contract is for both parties to agree EXACTLY WHAT IS EXPECTED AND WHAT TO DO IF THOSE TERMS OR EXPECTATIONS ARE NOT MET. When the contract was signed both parties intended to comply and set out parameters to define exactly what that job performance expectations are. Arguing UConn intended only to use that clause to fire Ollie assumes they entered in bad faith (they didn't, at the time they obviously wanted to keep him). That very biased interpretation reverses the intent at time of signing into a negative that serves Ollie's case only.

Use the same logic and tell us why would Ollie put that clause in there? I think that'd be a convoluted Ollie wanted it so that when he got fired (as if he intended to try to get fired) he'd still get his money unless he broke the law.

Clinging to won-lost records or attendance or $ as alleged reasons for the firing is inherently false because we all know those things happened because of failure to diligently & faithfully perform the duties of a head coach. Had Ollie worked hard, complied with all rules and still failed the firing may not have happened, the buyout would be an entirely different conversation & outcome. Plus incidentally in that instance he would have agreed to arbitration and won easily. That is not the case.

 

[Pudge]

I simply don’t accept the pejorative “dogging” it ... nor do I think he got lucky in 2014.

Why can’t we accept that he had a good part of the job in his wheelhouse ... the one where he could groom 8 guys into a Championship mode through a grueling stretch. But Kevin Ollie simply had scant preparation for core components that were needed to sustain a big time Program. The contrast to Danny Hurley is stark; yet, Hurley may never perform like KO through a March. Recruiting. High school & AAU relationships. Leading a staff. Relations with fan base & media & even your former mentor. The arc of Ollie is bizarro. But he proved lacking. And the last 2 years, his strategic choices were a mess.

Plus his personal divorce and struggle.

Second. He proved to work. That’s his Brand. Sometimes when you are failing ... you simply tread water fast. He lost his way. And being separated ... from Calhoun& other key parts of what we are about hurt. Him. And Me. He was sinking. And we all could see that.

 

[CL82]

Exactly. So why does he not deserve more for outperforming his first contract? Does this only work one way?

You're right UConn should have renegotiated his deal then and there and give him a contract making him one of the more highly paid college coaches in America!

Oh wait, they did, didn't they?

 

[CL82]

The point of a contract is money.

No the real point of contract is to lay out the rights and duties of the respective parties and the consequences for breaching them. This contract does that. Some, now, inexplicably want to ignore the express agreement of the parties. Well not the entire agreement, only the portions that benefit the school. Sorry Dog, that's not a morally superior opinion, that is a morally arbitrary opinion.

The entire reason for including that clause in the contract was to provide insurance against a scandal that depleted revenue and hindered their ability to rebuild the program.

No, the entire reason for including that in the contract was to clearly communicate that violating NCAA rules and regulations were grounds for terminating the contract.

They fired him because he sucked as a coach.

No, they fired him because he violated NCAA rules and regulations which were grounds for a "just cause" dismissal under the contract. There is documentation of this fact and none to the contrary.

I understand that it's convenient to blame Ollie for signing a dumb contract and forcing the school into playing this game.

Yeah, this is red herring. I don't think anyone is doing that. Most are saying that he should have to abide by what he agreed to. You have yet to provide any basis, a lot of words notwithstanding, to say why he should be able to ignore the express written agreement of the parties.

 

[Pudge]

He sucked as our coach.

Any lawyerly and President words to the contrary. He did not meet anyone's expectations for winning ballgames at our Mens Basketball Program. He lost games. This notion ... that many are chewing on ... is the false narrative used to pay him far less than $10m. And, while not a lawyer, I just don't think arbitration and then court is where We or Kevin Ollie wants to be.

 

[CL82]

He sucked as our coach.

Any lawyerly and President words to the contrary. He did not meet anyone's expectations for winning ballgames at our Mens Basketball Program. He lost games. This notion ... that many are chewing on ... is the false narrative used to pay him far less than $10m. And, while not a lawyer, I just don't think arbitration and then court is where We or Kevin Ollie wants to be.

And what exactly is the false narrative?

 

[8893]

 

[HuskyHawk]

 

[HuskyHawk]

The point of a contract is money. The entire reason for including that clause in the contract was to provide insurance against a scandal that depleted revenue and hindered their ability to rebuild the program. That is obviously not what happened here. They fired him because he sucked as a coach. They know that, but they feel justified in doing this anyway because they believe he slacked on the job and took advantage of people.

Fine. If that's the argument, the school should come out and say it. Don't try to insult people with the bit on compliance. Compliance wasn't going to get you out of this hole. If anything, compliance helped put you in the hole. Ask Diamond Stone, Jordan Bell, Hamidou Diallo, Tremont Waters, and the Heron kid about that. We didn't sign David Onuorah because Ollie was breaking the rules.

I understand that it's convenient to blame Ollie for signing a dumb contract and forcing the school into playing this game. It genuinely makes sense to think that way, because let's face it, we're victims. We watched that putrid basketball. We dealt with the CR firestorm. We have endured attack after attack from the NCAA. We deserve to cut this corner, this one time, because sometimes fighting fair isn't an answer, even for fair people.

Long-term, we lose thinking like that. Long-term, this is the type of thinking that sinks the program. We as college sports fans have been baited into thinking a certain way, but it doesn't have to be like that.

So yes, we have the right to make this all go away because that's what the contract allows us to do, and morally speaking, it's only what everyone else has always done to us. I'd rather use that good will to back our own guy and call attention to all the other things that have actually held us back.

The point of a contract is to set forth the obligations and expectations of two parties to an agreement. To codify that arrangement in clear language, in the event of a later dispute between the parties. A contract that does not have consideration on both sides is unenforceable.

So, the point of Ollie's contract was not "money". The payment of money is a part of it, as are the performance of certain duties and compliance with various rules and expectations. None of those elements stand alone. It's one arrangement. The obligation on Ollie not to violate any NCAA rules is no less important to the contract than the obligation on UConn to pay him. There is no valid rule of contract interpretation that says "well we really didn't mean this part".

Certainly, UConn and Ollie could have agreed that they would not need to pay him if he violated rules that caused "a scandal that depleted revenue and hindered their ability to rebuild the program". That is not what they agreed. Honestly, I don't think even Kevin Ollie believes that that what was expected of him was "just avoid a major scandal and your're good". Now, Kevin may have believed that if he was doing a great job, they might overlook violations short of those causing a major scandal. He might even be right. It doesn't really matter.

 

[huskyinfl]

I don't agree or understand something so let me make stuff up to continue my false narrative rather than address reality.