forums

An additional big issue with administration in the future

C

Canescorrey15

Recruit
Joined
Nov 30, 2012
Messages
15
Is how school has handled buyouts after firings. I’ve heard from coaches and agents that not only is the leadership structure problematic, but the fact that two former head coaches have had to sue in order to receive the buyouts in their contracts has left a very sour taste with these agents who represent a ton of key coaches in the industry. Most schools come to an agreement on final numbers when paying out the buyouts and try to keep it clean in order to not burn any bridges with these agents. Not a good look that Shannon and Golden both sued on money they were owed because it ties in to the reputation of us being very cheap.
 
Last edited:
Advertisement
Im not really concerned with what the agents think, their job is strictly to get the most money they can for their client. with the kind of head coaches we attract (first time head coaches or head coaches from Non-power 5 teams) this isn't really a factor. May be if a top tier established coach like (Mario Cristobal or Dan Mullens) came here, but when was the last time that happened? Not since Dennis Erickson or Jimmy Johnson. It certainly wasn't a factor for Richt.

But the fact that we have this happen shows how bad Blake James is at picking head coaches.
 
Canesfreak89 said:
There’s a good chance Miami paid the buyouts perfectly and those two guys weren't smart enough to know the difference!
Click to expand...
Not really. Litigation is expensive. They didn’t represent themselves. There were likely colorable claims. Never know - amd I don claim I know in these instances - but twice in a row is a bad look.
 
Advertisement
Canesfreak2020 said:
Im not really concerned with what the agents think, their job is strictly to get the most money they can for their client. with the kind of head coaches we attract (first time head coaches or head coaches from Non-power 5 teams) this isn't really a factor. May be if a top tier established coach like (Mario Cristobal or Dan Mullens) came here, but when was the last time that happened? Not since Dennis Erickson or Jimmy Johnson. It certainly wasn't a factor for Richt.

But the fact that we have this happen shows how bad Blake James is at picking head coaches.
Click to expand...
Distrust in negotiations - particularly relational contracts - is a serious issue and anyone who has negotiated professionally knows this.

We won’t know who doesn’t express interest or where discussions break down. But I wouldn’t minimize the trust factor given all the other headaches the U comes with.
 
EE499ED8-EF92-423D-9E6F-CC7557E502F7.jpeg
 
LOL please at those two clowns that haven’t had a head coaching job since? Way overstated. Richt literally gave Miami money for an IPF (have you heard of saban or Dat Boy doing that?) and could’ve gotten Miami for more millions when he retired.

If Miami had did that to respected coaches, then it would be a bigger deal. Nobody cares if you cut a bench player in the nba to prevent him from getting a guaranteed salary the rest of the year just like nobody cares Al Golden had to sue (lol at Golden considering he hustled us with the going to Pedo State for more money).
 
Advertisement
Canesq said:
LOL please at those two clowns that haven’t had a head coaching job since? Way overstated. Richt literally gave Miami money for an IPF (have you heard of saban or Dat Boy doing that?) and could’ve gotten Miami for more millions when he retired.

If Miami had did that to respected coaches, then it would be a bigger deal. Nobody cares if you cut a bench player in the nba to prevent him from getting a guaranteed salary the rest of the year just like nobody cares Al Golden had to sue (lol at Golden considering he hustled us with the going to Pedo State for more money).
Click to expand...
That they havent had a job since is irrelevant to whether UM pays money owed.

You can be sure the agent for our next coach will want to understand what happened here.
 
Advertisement
With the exception of Richt, the overriding factor is that corches have had to be fired in the first place. No matter which party - the ex-corch or the U - is culpable in the buyout fiascos, the perception of not negotiating/settling in good faith by the U is not a good look.
 
Its not because the school is cheap. It's because the school is Broke, with a capital B. It's amazing that a large % of this delusional fanbase still does not understand this.
 
craval85 said:
Its not because the school is cheap. It's because the school is Broke, with a capital B. It's amazing that a large % of this delusional fanbase still does not understand this.
Click to expand...
It's amazing that you're so sure of that. None of us really know how much money the school has...not the people who think we're rich or you who think we're broke. It doesn't really matter though, it's more about what we're willing to spend.
 
Advertisement
kryptonite said:
It's amazing that you're so sure of that. None of us really know how much money the school has...not the people who think we're rich or you who think we're broke. It doesn't really matter though, it's more about what we're willing to spend.
Click to expand...

I think it's ridiculous to suggest that any school would willingly be cheap towards its football program. All of the data shows that spending on football is a worthwhile investment where schools routinely earn astronomical returns. This is especially true @ MIA where the football program has given the university so much. So the question is why would the administration literally bite the hand that has fed it if it actually has a choice?
 
supersaiyanshel said:
All true, but Im still dying at those.25 cent check to Golden.

Blake's a real one for that.
Click to expand...

The school did similar to Randy Shannon. It didn't work out for Randy as a head man, but that man dedicated his life to this University. Still would. And they still fvcked him over where he had to bring a suit. They didn't pay the man a bonus for qualifying for a bowl game, tried to pay him some prorated amount on the termination of the deal that was far short of the agreed upon terms, they were supposed to pay him a per annum for the remaining years and simply didn't send the payment. Garbage like that. That's some dirtbag ****.

While we can chuckle at some of the nonsense for Al Golden, because he's Al Golden, thats now a trend. Yeah, we didn't see it with Richt because he didn't care about the money, but this university is filled with a bunch of nickel and dime cheap fvcks and it shows in every way. Randy and Golden just being two of the myriad of examples. Pay what you owe.
 
Ethnicsands said:
That they havent had a job since is irrelevant to whether UM pays money owed.

You can be sure the agent for our next coach will want to understand what happened here.
Click to expand...
Who cares what the agent wants. The agent will use anything to get his client more money.

The point is that a respectable coach isn't going to not come to UM because of Al golden and Randy Shannon contract litigation. Could it cost UM money as the agent uses the litigation for additional money? Sure it could.
 
Canesq said:
Who cares what the agent wants. The agent will use anything to get his client more money.

The point is that a respectable coach isn't going to not come to UM because of Al golden and Randy Shannon contract litigation. Could it cost UM money as the agent uses the litigation for additional money? Sure it could.
Click to expand...
You’re just jumping to a conclusion. You’ve aknowledged the issue by saying past conduct by UM could cost more money in the future. Sure, it.could. It could also cause contract term negotiations that cause a discussion to bog down, or that raise distrust on both sides enough to move on. It could even cause some people just not to bother. We don’t know what it will cost, but it sure isn’t helpful.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top