AJC > Sports > Blog > Archives > 2007 > December > 20 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.USNCAA can’t stop coaching carousel
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Several folks have written and asked: Why can’t the NCAA step in and just stop the movement of coaches between the end of the regular season and bowls?
It is so disruptive and so unfair to the kids, you argue. And you’re right about that.
If the NCAA can dictate a dead period in recruiting in December, why can’t they dictate a dead period in coaches leaving to take other jobs? That’s a fair question.
For those of you who have asked such questions I have three words: Sherman Antitrust Act.
You may recall that back in the 1990s the NCAA, in a effort to rein in costs, mandated that the third basketball assistant be designated as a “restricted earnings coach” and be paid no more than $16,000 per season. The NCAA, a voluntary organization, was trying to limit the amount that its members could pay its employees. I’m not a lawyer but even I know that’s a no-no.
When the lawyers and the courts got through with the NCAA, the organizing body of college athletics was hit with a $67 million judgment.
You can believe that the NCAA will not dip its toe in those waters again.
Yes, it’s tough on the schools and on the players when a coach suddenly leaves in December. A quick count reveals that seven teams in the bowl season will be playing with interim head coaches and two more have coaches who will be gone after the game.
But right now it is a seller’s market when it comes to established head coaches. The proven coaches have the negotiating leverage because getting a good head coach and keeping him is so important when the financial stakes are this high. You can’t blame the coaches and their representatives for using that leverage now that the market has changed. Coaches are well paid, but they also know that in today’s climate they are one 6-6 season from being shown the door.
Some coaches handle their departure better than others. Some disrupt their old employer and their former players more than others. Given the nature of college football, there is never a good way or a good time to leave. It will always be messy. Some coaches will flat out lie about their intentions. They deserve the criticism they get and will have to live with the consequences.
But the NCAA cannot, and should not, make a rule to stop it.
Comments
By BigDawg
December 20, 2007 9:31 AM | Link to this
The NCAA couldn’t put a freeze on the period but they could impose scholarship penalties and/or fines on an institution that hired another school’s coach during that penalty.
By reseviourDAWG
December 20, 2007 9:42 AM | Link to this
The sooner these kids realize to pick a school and not a coach the better off they will be. Unfortunetly, few of these coaches really have an interest in the future of these kids. Some coaches do care but others are in it for the money.
By Rusty
December 20, 2007 10:03 AM | Link to this
Yep….scholarship reductions or fines is the only way to curtail this activity.
Bowl Picks have been released…
http://www.rustybanks.com
By old gold engineer
December 20, 2007 10:15 AM | Link to this
One of the excuses I’ve heard for the status quo is that the coaches have to be in place at the new school to take advantage of recruiting windows. The NCAA ought to be able to adjust the recruiting windows to make it less imperative that a coach leave before his current school plays in their bowl game. There’s no easy fix, but the current system seems to really hurt the fans of teams that have coaches hired away to other schools.
By Ramblin Wrecker
December 20, 2007 10:18 AM | Link to this
I love the hypocrisy that resides in every corner of this issue. Most of it gets laid at the feet of coaches, and a lot of them certainly deserve it (or in Petrino’s case…earn every ounce of it). But it’s funny to me to hear fans/media complain that coaches are only in it for the money. I’ll tell you right now, if another company offered me twice my salary, what scrupples exactly would prevent me from accepting that offer? Would I lie about it and leave my former employer hanging? It depends on my former employer and how they treat me. But for the most part I would be forthright and try to leave on good terms. But for fans and media to decry coaches as greedy is just hypocrisy. Every person would like to be paid better than we are, and if someone was willing to pay us 50%-100% or more than we currently make, 99% of us would do it. So let’s all stop with the holier than thou attitude. Now that doesn’t mean I give coaches a pass for the WAY they leave. Guys like Nick Saban and Bobby Petrino have lots of explaining to do about lying and always negotiating that next job. Just be honest. If a media report comes out that your representatives are in contact with another school about a vacancy, just admit it. Say “I have been contacted by North Dakota State and I am just listening to what they have to say. I love my current job (if that is actually true) but owe it to my family to listen to any opportunity that could improve their quality of life. If my status as coach of this school might change, I will let my school and team know before anyone else. But for now I am committed to our program.” Why is that so hard? People respect honesty, even if you are being honest about something bad. (See the MLB players who have owned up to why their names were in the Mitchell report. Those who admitted are less villified than those who deny it.)
As for the schools, they are not innocent victims of these coaching carousels. Every school is the chicken when their coach is targeted, but are the fox when they have a coaching vacany. They will be on both sides at one point or another, so complaining about getting their coach “stolen” seems disingenuous. Smaller schools may have more of a beef, as they sometimes serve as a minor league affiliate to the big BCS schools, a place for coaches to ply their craft until they get called up to the big leagues. But even that argument seems weak. You should know thyself and be prepared for that situation in advance, by having succession plans in place. Once you begin to have on field success, keep an eye out for a successor and be ready when your HC gets the call. Navy was ready when Paul Johnson was hired at GT. They named a replacement a week later from within their own staff, to continue what PJ started. Smart move, but who would expect less from the smart people at the Naval Academy.
The players are almost always the ones that people shake their heads and feel sympathy for. I don’t. If you don’t think that these players are just as cut throat, look at what happens when a coaching change is made. Recruits decommit, players transfer. Few of them have a sense of loyalty or committment either. All they see is “which coach can make me an NFL star, or get my face on TV a lot.” What ever happened to having your favorite team, watching them every week, dreaming of playing for them one day. I know if I were a good high school player, I’d have one team on my list…GT. Maybe I wouldn’t be good enough for them, but until they said “no” I’d hold out until I had no choice but to go somewhere else. Players like that are the ones who make a “team”.
Bottom line: it is hypocritical to complain about coaches leaving for better jobs. Complain about the lying or back door lobbying. But not taking a better job or more money.
By JustMe
December 20, 2007 10:25 AM | Link to this
I like the idea of the NCAA imposing a fine/penalty on the hiring school if there is any announcement. Also, I think that the NCAA should ‘approve’ any coaching changes and this would also help to reduce the coaching changes in the middle of the season. The NCAA won’t announce the ‘approved’ changes until after bowl season.
By old gold engineer
December 20, 2007 10:36 AM | Link to this
Ramblin Wrecker, you bring up some valid points. However, the concern is about the timing of the moves between the end of the season and the bowl games. I don’t blame the coaches for jumping at better opportunities, but I believe the schools and fans deserve better treatment than to lose key members of the coaching staff right before a bowl game.
By Ramblin Wrecker
December 20, 2007 10:57 AM | Link to this
Just Me,
The problem with your logic about the NCAA getting involved, is that it is a governing body to make and enforce the rules surrounding student athletes. Coaches are only subject to the NCAA as it pertains to the recruitment/education/treatment of those student athletes. They don’t have the power to govern the hiring practices of these schools. Most of these schools are public, state funded institutions, so the people to complain to in most cases would be your state legislature, to make laws about hiring practices at these state funded schools. But it isn’t likely to be that big of an issue that a state legislature would make it a priority.
By Ramblin Wrecker
December 20, 2007 11:00 AM | Link to this
But the reason these coaching changes happen post regular season but pre-bowl is because of how the recruiting schedule is setup. Maybe the best way for the NCAA to have an impact on the timing of coaching changes is to move signing day to sometime around the end of the regular season or later than February, so that schools don’t feel pressure to have a new coaching staff in place to get on the recruiting trail in December.
By Luke
December 20, 2007 11:02 AM | Link to this
You can’t prevent people from quitting. But you can prevent schools from hiring a coach that quit until the school he previously coached at finishes it’s season.
For example, Michigan shouldn’t have been able to hire Rich Rodriguez until West Virginia’s season was over. That’s to punish the coach for quitting on his team.
The greed of these coaches is taking advantage of the young men who are playing for free.
By I am a Lawyer
December 20, 2007 11:04 AM | Link to this
This is not legal advice. You should not rely on it. I’m not licensed to practice in Georgia (or 48 other states). I practice transactional law and my exposure to Antitrust was the class I took in law school.
I can see where dictating a salary should be a clear restraint on trade (price agreements are illegal per se) but maybe I’m missing something regarding declaring a hiring dead period of a few weeks (coaches can still come and go; in fact, a hiring frenzy with schools bidding on hot coaches after the dead period very well may increase salaries). I’m not a journalist but maybe a call to the UGA Law School to get the Antitrust professor’s take on the scenario is warranted.
Isn’t the problem a need to hire a coach right before signing day. Can the problem be fixed (or greatly reduced) by moving signing day?
Coaches are allowed to come and go but student athletes must sit out a year to transfer (and schools sometimes put restrictions on the ability to transfer). From a fairness issue, if the coach can go then the kids should be allowed to go (maybe not to the same school as the coach [so the outgoing coach cannot take the best players with him] but elsewhere). Imagine a scenario where you were recruited by pro-style coach who is hired elsewhere; you know the replacement coach will run the option. You likely won’t play and it had nothing to do with anything you did.
By All that said ...
December 20, 2007 11:18 AM | Link to this
… what’s the upside for Tennessee or Duke for Cutcliffe to remain with the Vols through the bowl game?
Fulmer should say, “Dave, I love you and thanks for everything, but we’ve got it. Your new school needs you more.”
By Ramblin Wrecker
December 20, 2007 11:20 AM | Link to this
No offense “I am a Lawyer” but I don’t care if Johnny Pocket Passer went to Michigan and now will be on a team that employs the Spread offense. He should be a football player first, and not worry about the “system.” If that’s all they care about, then we should not have UGA and USC or Texas, and just have the University of Pro Style Offense or the Institute of 3-4 Defense. The PURPOSE of college football is to play for the school you are getting an education from, not to get an education from the school you are playing football for. Next thing you’re going to tell me is that kids should pick the high school they attend because they run a two tight end, two back set, or the west coast offense. That’s a bull sh-t concept.
By Gene
December 20, 2007 11:23 AM | Link to this
The problem is, there is too much money available at all levels. Many players do pick a coach that they believe can give them national exposure that leads to a big pro contract. Coaches, with the exception of Joe Paterno, then have to play these mercenaries and criminals regardless of their behavior on or off the field—Marcus Vick is a great example. Fat cats throw tons of money at schools, like Arkansas, so they can watch their team win from expensive suites. Academics and integrity are lost in the process as evidenced by the 25 cheater/athletes at FSU whose cheating was facilitated by the athletic department. Many college presidents are politicians and not educators. There was discussion at Kentucky recently about buying a jet airplane for basketball recruiting while coal mines in the state remain unsafe and inadequately monitored. It is a sad state of affairs, and it is not going to change anytime soon.
By DOUG
December 20, 2007 11:31 AM | Link to this
IS IT JUST ME, OR DOES ANYONE ELSE ON THE GT. WEBSITE FEEL SLIGHTED WITH REGARDS TO OUR NEW COACH WHRN IT COMES TO PUBLICITY FROM ESPN. I’VE BEEN WATCHING EVER SINCE PJ WAS HIRED AND SEE OR HEAR VERY LITTLE ABOUT THE PROS OR CONS FROM ESPN. THE OTHER DAY JIM DONAN DID A SEGMENT ON NEW COACHES. HE LISTED MICHIGAN, NEBRASKA, ARKANSAS, AND TEXAS A&M. TECH AND PAUL JOHNSON WAS NOT MENTIONED. NO WONDER GEORGIA TECH HAS SUCH A HARD TIME RECRUITING. WHEN THE ATLANTA PAPERS AND ESPN ARE OBVIOUSLY PREDIJUDICED TOWARD GEORGIA, AND ONLY MENTION TECH IN A NEGATIVE LIGHT, IF THEN.I FOR ONE AM TIRED OF PLAYING SECOND FIDDLE TO THE BIG TEN AND THE UNIVERSITY OF GTEORGIA. I SAY TO HELL WITH GEORGIA, AND ESPN.
By Dawgcrzy
December 20, 2007 11:43 AM | Link to this
Can the schools stop the leaving of coaches until the season is over by putting a clause in their contract? Most schools probably don’t think that their coach would leave them before a bowl game.On the other hand I guess the door swings both ways,as if the coach can’t win and the school needs to make a change mid-season.
By UGA'01
December 20, 2007 11:48 AM | Link to this
Tech has a hard time recruiting because they are not a good program, Doug. ESPN focuses on top 10 programs, not mediocre programs like Tech. UGA is a pernnial top ten program and still gets less play than teams like Fla even after we beat them.
ESPN definitely has an agenda, but it has nothing to do with being anti-Tech. If Tech were good, they would get much more publicity.
And that goes for the Atlanta media, too. If tech were any good and sold out games without the help of 15,000 UGA, Clemson, Aub, ND fans then they would deserve attention.
As it stands, tech does not sell out many games, they do not win championships, and they do not deserve the media attention that a top ten program like UGA does. We sell 92,746 tickets for each home game. Tech is lucky to sell 40,000, unless UGA is in town. Why do you think you deserve equal publicity?
By Dawgcrzy
December 20, 2007 11:48 AM | Link to this
Doug you must be out of your mind!If anything the AJC is prejudice AGAINST UGA.
By Football fan
December 20, 2007 11:54 AM | Link to this
I’m not so concerned about the timing of the coach leaving, but I don’t understand how a coach can leave if he is under contract. If a coach signs his name on a five-year contract at School X, how can he leave the next year for School Y? What good is the contract? Why not just put all coaches on one-year contracts? It’s absurd for a school to think it has its coaching situation settled for the next five or 10 years, then have the coach up and leave.
By Thenwhat?
December 20, 2007 11:55 AM | Link to this
Doug, you’re a moron. ESPN.com graded the schools with coaching vacancies just a day or two ago and GT was the only school given an A grade. As for the AJC there will always be that bias. I mean how many Tech fans (particularly those that went to Tech) have experience in journalism? Couple that with the fact that this entire state is in a love affair with CMR and you get your answer. Beat u(sic)ga and the respect will return.
By dear "i'm a lawyer"
December 20, 2007 11:57 AM | Link to this
Why in the world would Tony call the law school in Athens when it’s the fourth best law school in the state?
Doug—jim donnan got fired b/c he couldn’t beat GT. He’s not going to mention us. ESPN has given us plenty of publicity, especially online.
By Wes King
December 20, 2007 12:07 PM | Link to this
I love College Football and the Drama only makes it more fun.
By Tville Dawg
December 20, 2007 12:13 PM | Link to this
I have not seen any press relating to any schools trying to talk to CMR about a coaching change. I would like to think (although I’m not naive) that Coach Richt likes his situation and that if any money issues are out there, they will be addressed. Saban and Petrino have certainly upped the ante.
I would also like to think that coaching the DAWGS is an attractive job that would keep a sucessful coach like CMR intact. The key is developing and maintaining a culture and environment that would be hard to leave.
I take CMR’s word that he doesn’t want to be anywhere but Athens. FSU’s succession plan with Jimbo Fisher should put everyone at ease that CMR won’t be returning to Tallahassee. Besides, what a mess FSU is in now.
By I am a Lawyer
December 20, 2007 12:32 PM | Link to this
Ramblin Wrecker: No offense taken. I respect your opinion, and I get it that allowing kids to transfer without penalty might cause wholesale gutting of a program. I think the athletes go to the colleges they select for a variety of reasons. If a kid views college as a stepping stone to the NFL then that’s his call. However, the current system that lets the coach skip out for a bigger bag of money but ties the kid to the school just might be a little bit hypocritical. The kid isn’t allowed to hurt the team but the coach can run it through a food processor. Maybe the kid came to a college solely because of the coach, and maybe it was solely because of the system that the school was running. In the unique scenario of a head coach leaving (and maybe, just maybe for the DC/OC leaving), I think the kid should be able to transfer without penalty because (arguable) he relied on the coach and/or system in choosing to come to the school and it is not the kid’s fault that the coach/system is changing. I like the out the NCAA came up with a year or two ago where a kid that graduates can transfer — I thought that that was a clever incentive to get the kids to graduate earlier.
By yellowblood
December 20, 2007 12:37 PM | Link to this
The NCAA will never do anything to stop Coaches from moving from one school to another in December or any other time nor should they. Just think if we had not fired Chan and hired Paul our Tickle Piles would have continued to be minimal. As it is we have a wonderful Tickle Pile almost every night.
By reseviourDAWG
December 20, 2007 12:57 PM | Link to this
Doug get used to playing second fiddle. UGA is the state’s flagship university and just so happens to have a pretty damn good football team.
By flag question
December 20, 2007 1:15 PM | Link to this
Does “state’s flagship university” get its name by flying the most flags?
By reseviourDAWG
December 20, 2007 1:26 PM | Link to this
Yes, they are SEC championship flags.
By Tech Rugby
December 20, 2007 1:48 PM | Link to this
To reseviourDAWG…at least we all know they are not National Championship Flags. If they were, then Tech would be the “Flagship” university.
By Zeb McCluskey
December 20, 2007 1:48 PM | Link to this
Good one reseviour.
By Matt
December 20, 2007 2:00 PM | Link to this
I didn’t realize UGA was a “perennial top-10 program”. Maybe top 20, but UGA is not at that upper echelon just because of one great year this year, fellas.
By reseviourDAWG
December 20, 2007 2:10 PM | Link to this
rugby, you wouldn’t know much about conference championships, but you are well informed on Humanitarian Bowl games. On top of that you know about as much as UGA about national championships
By reseviourDAWG
December 20, 2007 2:20 PM | Link to this
Matt I don’t know what your definition of success is but the DAWGS have won 70 games over the past seven years.
By spell check
December 20, 2007 2:31 PM | Link to this
reseviourDAWG, what’s a reseviour?
By Hoopie1
December 20, 2007 2:36 PM | Link to this
It’s amazing! Tony puts out a blog about the “coaching carosel”(ie:national CFB news) and very soon the same ole UGA/GT fools start spewing on each other. And you do it every day! Tony writes about CFB..not..UGA-GT. I understand that the AJC is located in Jaw-ga, but can’t you guys go find some other blog to go spew up on and leave this to CFB fans? You regurgitate the same stoopid statements every day.
By reseviourDAWG
December 20, 2007 2:42 PM | Link to this
spell check how would yoou spell there smart guy?
By reservoirDAWG
December 20, 2007 2:47 PM | Link to this
I stand corrected.
By War Eagle
December 20, 2007 2:49 PM | Link to this
Today`s sports world “money talks and BS walks”.Few exceptions, coaches honoring contracts is extinct.
By GT
December 20, 2007 2:55 PM | Link to this
The money makes the whole thing a different game. We talk about molding young men, but we can’t do it for less than a couple of million. One of the problems I am seeing in a lot of coaches like Gailey is their heart is not in it but the money is too good to quit. Somehow the coach left the school teaching morality and entered the Wall Street mode. He had to watch out for his family and do what was best for them. Why do we buy stuff like that. I would like to see a study on the kids of coaches in the modern definition and compare it to coaches of the past generations.
By spell check
December 20, 2007 2:55 PM | Link to this
Excuse me Hoopie1 (point well taken by the way) while I respond to reseviourDAWG. A lake where water is stored is called a reservoir. As for reseviour, still not sure what that is.
By scotch and guns
December 20, 2007 3:05 PM | Link to this
True, U[sic]GA is our state’s flagship. But it is the only flagship school in the country that is ranked lower (indeed, 24 spots lower) than another public school in the same state.
Georgia Tech is the pride of the fleet.
By reservoirDAWG
December 20, 2007 3:21 PM | Link to this
I take nothing away from GT’s academic standing. On the football field it is a different story.
By GaDawgs7
December 20, 2007 3:37 PM | Link to this
It seems to me that the way to stop it is just simply demand the contract be honored. If a coach is fired, the school must either pay a negotiated buyout, or pay for the remaining years on the contract. It seems that if you have a legally binding contract that you could pursue it in the courts, but probably the best route for schools is just the steep buyout clause to go to another school. SOMETHING should be done
By armybrat
December 20, 2007 3:41 PM | Link to this
If UGA counted National Championships the same way Tech does, UGA would have FIVE, count them 5.
By tech71
December 20, 2007 3:47 PM | Link to this
How do you stop coaches from moving?
Easy.
Completely change the way money is distributed. Share all TV and Bowl revenues between all schools in Division 1. Stop letting a school send all their intramural directors and swimming pool managers to their bowl game.
Restructure recruiting completely. Don’t let the coaches travel for recruiting. Don’t let them call the kids. Let full-time faculty meet with kids and show them the school.
College football and basketball are corrupt and need a total make-over.
Go to the Ivy League model if necessary. Give aid only to the kids who need it.
Another Idea:
Let the students run football and basketball. Let noone other than trainers and doctors be over 30 years old. One of the most vivid memories of my days at UVa was going to the gym the Monday after basketball season was over. I got to see 4-5 varsity bball players in a pickup game. The “defensive specialist”, who never shot much in ACC games was on fire. He was draining shots from all over. They were playing for fun.
Another cruel irony of the current business model, is kids are coerced into playing while hurt. It made me cry to see #22, Tashard Choice pull up and run out of bounds when his leg started to hurt when he was running a sweep. He will pay for this when he gets to be my age.
Whatever is done, get rid of the current corrupt system.
By War Eagle
December 20, 2007 3:50 PM | Link to this
GT, nice post, problem stems from schools like Notre Dame, Miami, FSU, Alabama who have accepted nothing but winning BIG in the past There is a distinguish mark in Jimmy Johnson, Lou Holtz, Bobby Bowden, Mal Moore(AD at Bama)compared to Joe Paterno,Woody Hayes, Shug Jordan, Bobby Dodd and Johnny Vaught
By Bob
December 20, 2007 4:05 PM | Link to this
Matt,
I would suggest that 4 Top Ten finishes out of last 5 years is getting pretty close to “perenial” top ten finisher. If the Dawgs win the Sugar that would be 5 of 6.
The way coaches move from one school to another can often be pretty messy, but Tony, your media friends deserve a lot of criticism too. I am not a huge friend of Les Miles, but the press has badgered him for weeks about the Michigan job and the way he handled it. Well, when he had no comment, he was called on the carpet. When he adamantly said he was not going, he was called insincere. Well, I have yet to see any apologies. What exactly are the magic words he is supposed to use when confronted with such a situation?
There is also a huge double standard when a college coach goes to the Pros as opposed to when a Pro Coach heads to a college. For months we heard the whining about how Saban left the Dolphins. Funny, we didn’t hear much when the Dolphins ripped him away from LSU. Petrino was disgusting in his dealings with Louisville but there was little gnashing of teeth about that when the Falcons hired him. But wo be unto us when Arkansas stole him away. Yeah, I know there are differences and Petrino was a scumbag. But we knew that before we hired the guy…we could have checked with Tommy Tuberville if we didn’t.
I feel bad for the WVU players who had challenge enough facing Oklahoma in the Fiesta Bowl. It has to be pretty bad to have your coach leave you before a BCS game. I know Rodriguez had issues with the AD and his departure was probably inevitable, but it sure seems that this could have waited till after 2 Janaury…especially since there is a recruiting freeze until then.
By lol armybrat
December 20, 2007 4:20 PM | Link to this
1927, you lost to us-you can’t count that one.
1968, 8-1-2, you’d honestly call that being national champions?
By Let's Be Honest
December 20, 2007 4:23 PM | Link to this
This is in response to one of the earlier posts regarding players’ motives, i.e. (A)I want to play for the coach who gets me ready for the NFL & (B)I want to play for the coach who gets me on TV the most… I, personally, don’t want these SA’s at TECH. I go to school here, will graduate from the Institute, and I have some standards on who I want to represent this place. A) As everyone knows, an injury that happens in a split second can end an athlete’s career. So go ahead; go to Alabama, go to U[sic]GA, get your BS(h*t) degree (that you probably didn’t even EARN the grades for). Then when something happens (God forbid) and your career is cut short, tell a prospective employer where you went to school (as a football player, mind you, they probably know what that means about your academic commitment), show them your transcript with your one B+ in underwater basket weaving—I’m sure they’ll be impressed and you will continue to earn that NFL salary…RIGHT.
If you have the grades to go to an upper echelon institution, then by God, why wouldn’t you? TECH may not always (or often, as of late) be a football powerhouse, but you can be proud of your team and your education. If anything ever happens to you (again, we pray it does not), you definitely have your education to fall back on, with your stint as a football player being icing on the cake to future employers. I am always impressed by TECH SA’s. They may get more easily accessible academic assistance than the general student population, but they are a lot busier than the rest of us anyway, so I don’t mind. We can all make time to get help we need outside of class—they definitely are not given an unfair advantage.* I know that TECH better prepares our young men for a career off the field.
*And before anyone makes any comments, I am friends with many football players and know what they go through on and off the field during the school year both at TECH and U[sic]GA—I am not making biased comments, I know for a FACT there is a difference at least between these two schools. B) I’m not sure about that many other southeastern schools, but I know TECH football games were on TV more this year than U[sic]GA’s. My Father is a rabid Georgia fan (yes, he actually went to school there) and we talk about football all the time, so anytime it wasn’t going to be on TV, I knew because he made a fuss about it…and the fact that TECH would be on TV (even playing Sanford)…so if someone makes a comment about TV time, I hope someone reminds them that TECH only had like one game that wasn’t on TV. Don’t be an idiot, do your research…if you WANT to be an idiot (ignorance is bliss), then please, by all means, go to U[sic]GA, Alabama, or Clemp-son…we don’t want you…Real Estate is expensive around here and we don’t need property values going down, k?
By Jack Sprat
December 20, 2007 5:05 PM | Link to this
Let’s be honest, obviously you didn’t go to the Institute or else your calculus class fried your brain. For more than 30 years I have worked for one of Atlanta’s major corporations and during that time we have hired a great many Techster athletes and you are obviously under the delusion that all those players sweat out the classes like the average joe students. We have had several former Tekkies that had a hard time handling basic math that we used in figuring freight weights, and freight rates. I guess calculus didn’t prepare them for add, subtract, multiply, and divide. I know that any athlete who wants a good education can motivate himself and get one at the Institute, but by the same token the kids who go to UGA, Bama, or Clemson and want to be doctors, biologists, etc can get an excellent education at those schools if they so desire. Teknerds aren’t any smarter than other college students they are just interested in different majors.
By Bob
December 20, 2007 5:11 PM | Link to this
Let’s be Honest,
Guy, maybe you should try to be honest like your moniker claims. *And before anyone makes any comments, I am friends with many football players and know what they go through on and off the field during the school year both at TECH and U[sic]GA—I am not making biased comments, I know for a FACT there is a difference at least between these two schools
You’re not biased but you continually use “U[sic]GA and Clemp-son. You need to get a life and take off your gold colored glasses.
By Illinois Jacket
December 20, 2007 5:26 PM | Link to this
A question that perhaps someone knows the answer to or has seen before. Why is it that you never seem to have an action brought by an aggrieved party for tortious inference with contract, i.e., why is it that the Falcons for example do not bring an action against the University of Arkansas for interfering with their contract rights with respect to their head coach. I can understand why when a coach decides he wants to leave you would not want to keep him, but what about some legal sanction for abetting someone in breaking a valid contract. Particularly as it appears there were real questions as to whether the Falcons had granted Arkansas the right to talk to their head coach. If there were more of these actions, it would appear to act as a deterent in raiding another organization’s coaching staff.
By Reality Check- armybrat
December 20, 2007 5:40 PM | Link to this
armybrat, If you were to count every NC that has ever been given by any polling group, UGA still loses 6-5. If you count ‘80 ‘68, ‘46, ‘42, ‘27 for five NC’s, then Tech still tops you with 6 NC’s with ‘90, ‘56,’52,’51,’28, and ‘17. Argue today armybrat, but the past just doesn’t fall UGA’s way other than head-to-head…Go win some more NC’s…
By Ed
December 20, 2007 7:00 PM | Link to this
The reason why a coach can skip out in say, year three of a five year contract is because: (1) As Tony mentioned, it is a seller’s market and the contract allows for early termination (with financial penalties); and (2) schools want contracts with buyouts because they want to be able to fire a coach any time for any reason, usually when the big boosters start grumbling after a 6-6 season in year three (better start winning, Spurrier).
The contracts contain buy-out clauses that punish either the school or the coach (more accurately, the coach’s new school) for breaking the contract. Also, since we don’t have indentured servitude in the U.S. anymore, any contract that forces someone to stay employed for X number of years against his will would have a hard time holding up in court. And of course, the universities do not benefit by having an unmotivated and disenchanted head coach remain on the job when his heart is elsewhere.
This has been going on forever. Bear Bryant left Kentucky and Texas A&M for the greener pastures of Alabama back in the 50s. Bobby Bowden left West Va. for Florida State back in the 70s. Of all the guys who play college football, only a relative handful have the talent, drive and ambition to become head coaches at big-time programs, so we are talking about highly ambitious people.
By Andy in Warner Robins
December 20, 2007 7:06 PM | Link to this
Reality Check—armybrat,
NC’s are mythical and strictly opinion. UGA kicking GT’s butt perennially on the field is fact.
By Ed
December 20, 2007 7:07 PM | Link to this
why is it that the Falcons for example do not bring an action against the University of Arkansas for interfering with their contract rights with respect to their head coach.
Illinois Jacket, see my comments above. I think the main reason is that the Falcons reserve the right to engage in tortious interference themselves! It seems to me that they all do it - NFL franchises and universities alike - so no one has clean hands. The Falcons sure didn’t have any problems pursuing Petrino when he was under contact with Louisville last year. There’s no honor amongst thieves.
I think NFL teams have an agreement among themselves not to approach other teams’ coaches without prior permission, but no such deal with college programs.
By I am a Lawyer
December 20, 2007 7:08 PM | Link to this
See disclaimer above.
Illinois Jacket asked a general question about tortious interference with a contract (and is not asking for legal advice). Tortious interference is different than breaching a contract. Both are based on state laws and the factors involved will differ to some degree from state to state. These are broad generalizations: Breach a contract and you generally are liable to pay to put the other party into the position as if you completed the contract. I believe in every state but Texas you do NOT recover attorneys’ fees if you win a breach of contract suit (and most everyone knows that attorneys’ fees in a lawsuit can eat you alive and frequently make it not worthwhile to sue). Likewise, most if not all college coaching contracts are going to have a buyout clause and you can bet that the language in the contract limits what the school can recover to the buyout amount (the buyout is counterbalanced by the guaranteed payments in case the coach is fired). Generally, tortious interference requires (i) a tort, (ii) a contract, (iii) the tort interferes with the contract, and (iv) proximately causes harm to the party with the contract. The problem that most people/schools will have is that there really isn’t a tort. The torts that probably trigger most tortious interference claims are defamation, assault and battery. Someone lies about you and you get fired. Somebody hurts or threatens to hurt someone who does business with someone else so they quit doing business with them. Tortious interference claims usually carry the advantage of recovering punitive damages while breach of contract claims do not. Other schools solely offering to hire your coach is not a tort. Courts generally are very strict in tortious interference cases becase they do not want to hurt competitiveness in the marketplace and because it is generally believed that there is nothing wrong inbreaching a contract so long as you pay the other party to make up for it. Courts for over a hundred years have held that breaking a contract is an economic decision and that there is nothing immoral to deciding that you will pay to get out of a contract.
By Ed
December 20, 2007 7:08 PM | Link to this
why is it that the Falcons for example do not bring an action against the University of Arkansas for interfering with their contract rights with respect to their head coach.
Illinois Jacket, see my comments above. I think the main reason is that the Falcons reserve the right to engage in tortious interference themselves! It seems to me that they all do it - NFL franchises and universities alike - so no one has clean hands. The Falcons sure didn’t have any problems pursuing Petrino when he was under contact with Louisville last year. There’s no honor amongst thieves.
I think NFL teams have an agreement among themselves not to approach other teams’ coaches without prior permission, but no such deal with college programs.
By Let's Be Honest
December 20, 2007 7:31 PM | Link to this
U[sic]GA is a TECH tradition, dumba**…and I’m a girl…we do exist.
I’m not dellusional either. The guys on our team that I know well are more academically inclined that many of my other regular students. I’m not saying there aren’t exceptions—as a whole, TECH athletes (as a whole) are better prepared for the real world.
And I didn’t go to the Institute (past-tense), I’m there NOW. Maybe things have changed in the last 30 years…have you worked with any recent TECH grads? Maybe I notice how hard the guys work because guys I grew up with and their friends who play ball for Georgia are so opposite in their academic dedication…maybe its because a TECH star athlete was someone who I thought was so awesome as a kid (he came from my hometown) and I came to find out he spent the whole summer before college trying to get his SAT score up so he could attend TECH and he BARELY squeaked by…its good to see that most of our current athletes are smarter…btw his name was Joe Burns, maybe you remember him? No offense to him-Great athlete, but no Einstein.
By dave
December 20, 2007 7:48 PM | Link to this
Look college presidents are literally speaking out of both sides of their mouth. When it comes to the “Big Dance” everyone wants to get into the NCAA Tournament. When it comes to football, they don’t want the NCAA to exist. They (Georgia and Oklahoma notably) beat them in court to control their TV destiny; they maintain the bowl system status quo instead of an NCAA championship; they will “steal” coaches from other schools and pro teams before their seasons are completed. Face it college fans, there is more honesty, equality and a much more level playing field in in he pros.
By War Eagle
December 20, 2007 8:30 PM | Link to this
This blog sounds like lawyers. It`s real do what right, if not SEE YOU…
By Ringleader
December 20, 2007 8:40 PM | Link to this
Sure, the NCAA can make an impact. By one simple rule. Any player that signed with a school while a head coach was there, is free to transfer to any school he chooses if that coach leaves, regardless if to take another job is by his choosing, or if he is fired. Except, the player cannot transfer to the school the coach went to. Period.
That would insure a coach would be locked in with the school he is at and also, before a school woould pull a quick trigger to replace him it would have to think about the consequences. You would also see the schools enforcing their contracts.
By Hairy Dog
December 20, 2007 10:48 PM | Link to this
“Ramblin Wrecker”, I must not tell a lie, I am holier than thou. All joking aside, I wouldn’t think twice about taking a better job, outside my company. Just like they wouldn’t think twice about canning my a* if they were reducing cost.
By Bob
December 20, 2007 11:48 PM | Link to this
Each player ought to be able to designate a couple of coaches (maybe head coach and a coordinator, or a coordinator and position coach) so that if any one of them leaves, the player can transfer and not have to sit out a year. Many times players attend a school because of relationships with coaches; if a coach who is important to a player leaves, the players should be able to leave that school and not be penalized (and they should be able to go to the coach’s new school if the coach was fired, but not if the coach breached a contract to leave).
By Tiidlwaav
December 21, 2007 2:07 AM | Link to this
Giving the NCAA more power will fix everything…yeah right.
By boots
December 21, 2007 3:58 AM | Link to this
Tony, good article & topic for discussion. Ramblin’ Wrecker, your posts were right on target, and the suggestion of moving the signing day back a month or two might work. Another suggestion would be to bar member schools from having negotiations with new coaches during certain periods. You aren’t stopping the coaches from talking to whoever they want, but you can stop the member schools. Don’t like it? Don’t belong to the NCAA. NFL teams do this, don’t they?
But isn’t the NCAA the same money-driven organization that pushes everyone else around when it feels like it? If you ask me, I will side with David v. Goliath. Let the coaches do what they will. However, what comes around goes around. Saban and Patrino will get theirs one day. That is just the way it works.
By WFC
December 21, 2007 8:27 AM | Link to this
True… this year is agony for us at GT. But the day will come when one of the “big boys”… S Cal, Texas, Penn State, FSU, Miami, etc. will poach on Richt and UGA will come to realize that they are a “second tier” program. That will be a fun day.
By Charlotte Jacket
December 28, 2007 10:39 PM | Link to this
To me, the obvious point is that we have too many teams going to bowl games every year (GT included for the 2007 season, and 2005, and 2003, and 2002, and 2001). If half of the D-I schools weren’t going bowling each season…
1- It would mean something to a coach AND the athletic department to go to a bowl, and then
2- Schools wouldn’t be firing bowl-eligible coaches.
Of course, we’ll have retirements and scandals that create movement, and Bama will still run off a coach with a 10-2 record, but make the post-season mean something, and people will hang around. A heavy winter coat and a bowling contest will not entice coaches to stay put.
But because that will never happen, why not just push the signing date back?