forums

Jurich

Empirical Cane said:
No offense, but this makes absolutely no sense.

Zero. Nein. Nada.
Click to expand...
Agreed, it’s almost like this could be click-bait.
Will Smith Reaction GIF
 
Advertisement
I don't know if there's some substantive difference between a "search firm" and a "recruiting firm" when it comes to sports. My sense is there is not, but some discussion on this thread suggests that there might be. Does a search firm get paid hourly/flat fee etc. just to do procedural work like bg checks and such on candidates the Uni presents, or as some % of the annual salary of the position they hire because they are actually doing the initial work of vetting? Both?

Recruiting firms I have worked with in the past get paid the latter way. If this is the case (and I think it is), then I think the most likely explanation is that Jurich is somehow outside their list (perhaps the intro was made by a BOT member working outside, or perhaps prior to, Turnkey's process) and thus they would not get paid if he gets hired.

If they get paid only the former way, there's not really a financial reason why they would prefer one candidate over another; their incentives would be to be as "thorough" (read: take as much time) as possible so they bill more hours. This pay structure doesn't really seem to align incentives very well, so I doubt that's what it is. Maybe it's a combination of the two, but I doubt they are simply doing clerical work for billable hours. Otherwise what's the real value add? Just typing out this scenario makes it seem kind of ridiculous and implausible.

Past history or something like that is maybe a consideration, since I suppose you could make an argument that if something blows up it either reflects poorly on Turnkey or opens them to the potential of liability. Without the contracts we have no way of knowing, but there are certainly ways to reasonably indemnify a search firm if, for instance, it turns out an AD candidate was running a secret meth lab out of their basement or something else that wouldn't come up on a bg check. So I don't think this in and of itself would be an issue if there wasn't already some dispute about money.

I'd not read too much into the diversity stuff on their website. Every company has to make some gesture toward that shvt now. The two guys who work for them who have the college sports placement experience (Chad Chatlos and Gene DiFillipo) are normal white dudes (assuming you consider Jersey italians white...YMMV....).

Bottom line is I think there is an 85%+ chance that this is exclusively about the fact that they wouldn't get paid if Jurich is hired. Whatever residual possibility remains is probably still mainly about the money, combined with reputational/litigation risk that is either real or just an excuse to back out because of the money thing.

EDIT: Should have included the caveat that this response takes the news at face value. I agree with others that I'm not sure the story makes a ton of sense without knowing more context.
 
Genghis Cane said:
Not super impressed, to be honest. Napier is a great recruiter, but not an X and O’s savant.

The purpose of my post was to underscore how UF has their **** together, while we are a clusterfvck.
Click to expand...
From what I gather he's a meticulous HC who recruits extremely well.

We'll see if that recruiting carries over to the P5 level. He calls the O too - and I don't think he's great at it, so that'll be interesting.

I'd have him over Diaz.
 
OriginalCanesCanesCanes said:
I don’t know if anybody here has worked with a search firm.

I have.

The one thing about the search firms that I am familiar with, is that most of the time, in fact probably all of the time, they have a stable of candidates, and there are definitely financial incentives to hiring one of their candidates.

I think most people in the business world realize that search firms aren’t necessarily honest brokers, but you use them to widen the pool of candidates to look at and possibly interview.

My mantra in hiring people has always been that the larger pool of candidates that I have to choose from, the greater chance I have for making a correct decision.

So that’s why you use a search firm even though they’re not necessarily a 100% honest broker. To widen your pool of possible candidates.
Click to expand...
I have. They can be useful. We also make the final hiring decision. Recruiters aren't running our firm, LOL.
 
TheOriginalCane said:
What in the actual fvck of fvcks is happening here? The background-checkers are overruling the resume evaluators?

This makes no ******* sense.
Click to expand...
Sometimes agencies of all types fire the client if they think the client is either going to damage their overall reputation by their decisions or the client is too much to manage. From consultants to lawyers to ad agencies to pr firms….

not saying we shouldn’t do what we want regarding jurich but this isnt exactly outside of the norm
 
Advertisement
Angry Ibis said:
Why? And who do you want?
Click to expand...
I want jurich but let me send out a reason against…


even if he was cleared, all this still happened under his watch….either you are in charge and own it all or you shouldn’t be in charge at all.

I want him not because he was later cleared but because 20 years of **** ty football has me willing to sell my soul to the devil..
 
Nah, someone on the WEZ posted the bio for the guy who runs Turnkey and it speaks for itself .

Guy is one of these garbage woke diversity inclusion pieces of dog ****. Those values don’t align themselves with making football decisions that correlate to winning . It sounds like whoever on the BOT recommended this firm did so with intent to send the entire process into chaos .

Only at Miami . Start preparing yourselves for a puppet AD and either Manny returning or an extremely underwhelming HC hire .
 
Last edited:
Advertisement
CaneintheWilderness said:
I don't know if there's some substantive difference between a "search firm" and a "recruiting firm" when it comes to sports. My sense is there is not, but some discussion on this thread suggests that there might be. Does a search firm get paid hourly/flat fee etc. just to do procedural work like bg checks and such on candidates the Uni presents, or as some % of the annual salary of the position they hire because they are actually doing the initial work of vetting? Both?

Recruiting firms I have worked with in the past get paid the latter way. If this is the case (and I think it is), then I think the most likely explanation is that Jurich is somehow outside their list (perhaps the intro was made by a BOT member working outside, or perhaps prior to, Turnkey's process) and thus they would not get paid if he gets hired.

If they get paid only the former way, there's not really a financial reason why they would prefer one candidate over another; their incentives would be to be as "thorough" (read: take as much time) as possible so they bill more hours. This pay structure doesn't really seem to align incentives very well, so I doubt that's what it is. Maybe it's a combination of the two, but I doubt they are simply doing clerical work for billable hours. Otherwise what's the real value add? Just typing out this scenario makes it seem kind of ridiculous and implausible.

Past history or something like that is maybe a consideration, since I suppose you could make an argument that if something blows up it either reflects poorly on Turnkey or opens them to the potential of liability. Without the contracts we have no way of knowing, but there are certainly ways to reasonably indemnify a search firm if, for instance, it turns out an AD candidate was running a secret meth lab out of their basement or something else that wouldn't come up on a bg check. So I don't think this in and of itself would be an issue if there wasn't already some dispute about money.

I'd not read too much into the diversity stuff on their website. Every company has to make some gesture toward that shvt now. The two guys who work for them who have the college sports placement experience (Chad Chatlos and Gene DiFillipo) are normal white dudes (assuming you consider Jersey italians white...YMMV....).

Bottom line is I think there is an 85%+ chance that this is exclusively about the fact that they wouldn't get paid if Jurich is hired. Whatever residual possibility remains is probably still mainly about the money, combined with reputational/litigation risk that is either real or just an excuse to back out because of the money thing.
Click to expand...
This seems mostly right, but here's where I'm a bit confused. If we're hiring a search firm to fully vet our next AD, why wouldn't we have the firm vet Jurich? That seems logical enough to me. If they vet him and turn over their findings to the University, then wouldn't they still get a percentage of his future pay?
 
Back
Top