Deleted member 747671
D
Guest
Right. And Lovie was able to get McGee, at the time a huge get. The last couple years, openings have been filled with low level replacements.It wasn't a 5 year failure when it was "fresh".
Right. And Lovie was able to get McGee, at the time a huge get. The last couple years, openings have been filled with low level replacements.It wasn't a 5 year failure when it was "fresh".
I don't see ASH jumping to a HC immediately....He's going to have to do some trench work to get back on the radar......since money doesn't seem to be an issue, why not a few years at Illinois..hopefully to get back on the radar as an "up and coming" type story.Apparently Ash will be paid no matter what in 2021: $800K by UT, $900K by Rutgers
In 2022: $2.6M by Rutgers
So whatever he makes in his new contract will just be an offset to those numbers, which hurts our chances I think, given money won’t be an issue- he’s going to make the same no matter what the next two years- we’d have to give him a three year deal with a lot in the third year for it to make a difference to him.
So if he chooses the best career move that could give him another shot at HC, we might not be that- but it could come down to trust in BB and funds to hire his own staff that might be the draw to come here
Of course he knows they are important, but he doesn't get to draft his assistants. They have to agree to come hereYeah, it's way too early to be tossing red flag talk out there. I'll be comfortable with whomever BB brings in. I think he knows how important these hires are.
I tend to agree. Glad to see that we're circling back around to Ash. You'd have to figure the conversation has certainly occurred between BB and Chris. Hope it proved to be productive! Here's a short excerpt from a September 2020 article pertaining to Ash's Texas defense.I don't see ASH jumping to a HC immediately....He's going to have to do some trench work to get back on the radar......since money doesn't seem to be an issue, why not a few years at Illinois..hopefully to get back on the radar as an "up and coming" type story.
Just wondering, why wouldn't us or anyone else push to backload his contract in a win-win type of deal? For example, if we were planning to pay 750k/yr. why not offer a 3 yr. deal of $0 for years 1 and 2 with $2.25M in year 3.Apparently Ash will be paid no matter what in 2021: $800K by UT, $900K by Rutgers
In 2022: $2.6M by Rutgers
So whatever he makes in his new contract will just be an offset to those numbers, which hurts our chances I think, given money won’t be an issue- he’s going to make the same no matter what the next two years- we’d have to give him a three year deal with a lot in the third year for it to make a difference to him.
So if he chooses the best career move that could give him another shot at HC, we might not be that- but it could come down to trust in BB and funds to hire his own staff that might be the draw to come here
I agree- I meant he might pick the highest profile job to position himself as a HC as his next step- like Michigan, where he would have a lot of talent - but JH might not be long for that jobI don't see ASH jumping to a HC immediately....He's going to have to do some trench work to get back on the radar......since money doesn't seem to be an issue, why not a few years at Illinois..hopefully to get back on the radar as an "up and coming" type story.
Others would know more than me- but Rutgers could sue him if we did that- he agreed to the offset in his contract with Rutgers so if you intentionally structure a future deal to avoid the offset that sounds like grounds for suit. But I do think it means he would take less money than normal, it just can’t be blatant- like he was making $800k at Texas, when in reality he likely would have commanded well over $1M if he didn’t have the offsetJust wondering, why wouldn't us or anyone else push to backload his contract in a win-win type of deal? For example, if we were planning to pay 750k/yr. why not offer a 3 yr. deal of $0 for years 1 and 2 with $2.25M in year 3.
I wonder how common that is for an assistant. I know we did something like that with Lovie to offset the Tampa money. I also wonder what the buyout offset language is. Like stuff about him actively looking for employment snd being paid market value. Something like that.Just wondering, why wouldn't us or anyone else push to backload his contract in a win-win type of deal? For example, if we were planning to pay 750k/yr. why not offer a 3 yr. deal of $0 for years 1 and 2 with $2.25M in year 3.
One of the reasons guys like Ash become so sought after as coordinators is paradoxically their lack of appeal as head coaches.I agree- I meant he might pick the highest profile job to position himself as a HC as his next step
Correct. The legal mumbo jumbo of this is that parties to a contract have an implied duty of good faith and fair dealing.Others would know more than me- but Rutgers could sue him if we did that- he agreed to the offset in his contract with Rutgers so if you intentionally structure a future deal to avoid the offset that sounds like grounds for suit. But I do think it means he would take less money than normal, it just can’t be blatant- like he was making $800k at Texas, when in reality he likely would have commanded well over $1M if he didn’t have the offset
Not all contracts have the offset. I have no idea about the details, but no one will pay him more than $1.7M to be a DC. He may as well get on TV, or take a nice vacation. If there is no offset, then an extra $1M might be a good thing. No idea how much he values money. Or, maybe the challenge of getting a once proud defense back in shape may be a cool project.Apparently Ash will be paid no matter what in 2021: $800K by UT, $900K by Rutgers
In 2022: $2.6M by Rutgers
So whatever he makes in his new contract will just be an offset to those numbers, which hurts our chances I think, given money won’t be an issue- he’s going to make the same no matter what the next two years- we’d have to give him a three year deal with a lot in the third year for it to make a difference to him.
So if he chooses the best career move that could give him another shot at HC, we might not be that- but it could come down to trust in BB and funds to hire his own staff that might be the draw to come here
Well, yeah. I would think he had a list of guys he was gonna consider, but not like, If this guy says no, I have to settle for this guy or that guy. Having 4 or 5 candidates of equal footing, so to speak. Whether you worked with them before or not. Sure, there might be more of a comfort factor with some, but all being equal in abilities and knowledge.Of course he knows they are important, but he doesn't get to draft his assistants. They have to agree to come here
I agree. Ash may not see us as a prime spot to enhance his chances of becoming a HC in the future. He could find that elsewhere, with a more stable program. JMOYou are what your record says you are. Were bottom of the barrel.
If a coach chooses to go somewhere else, its not because of BB, its because were Illinois. Until we change history, it is what it is
I would venture to guess we are the single least likely Power Five school to have a coaching change in the next three years.I agree. Ash may not see us as a prime spot to enhance his chances of becoming a HC in the future. He could find that elsewhere, with a more stable program. JMO
I would venture to guess we are the single least likely Power Five school to have a coaching change in the next three years.
EDIT: Eh, okay, I'll give you Clemson. And maybe Ohio State.
But between risk of the coach getting fired, retiring (Saban), moving up (Matt Campbell), moving to the NFL (Lincoln Riley), etc, we are currently one of the most stable situations in the nation.
I don't actually think much of this comes down to "good faith". I think it's more clearly laid out in these contracts. My guess is that if we had to change things we didn't correctly understand timing, etc.Correct. The legal mumbo jumbo of this is that parties to a contract have an implied duty of good faith and fair dealing.
We did get pretty aggressive with this in Lovie's initial contract. And some months later there was an amendment that didn't change the total length or dollars, but just moved some money around such that the Bucs were on the hook for, if I recall correctly, $1 million less. It certainly had the smell of something that was a confidential settlement in lieu of pursuing legal action, which would be needlessly costly for both parties.
Sometimes the contracts contain an affirmative duty to mitigate, sometimes they don't.I don't actually think much of this comes down to "good faith". I think it's more clearly laid out in these contracts. My guess is that if we had to change things we didn't correctly understand timing, etc.
Rutgers is public. Guessing the contract could be seen. Same with Texas.
He needs to be a better head coach than he was at Washington and Southern Cal.Sarkisian to Texas announced.....$$$$
I agree with all that 100% and was thinking along same. This is the type of position that Fickell was waiting for and a great AD had Fickell and the cash lined up before he canned the current staff. With Freeman? That'd make too much sense.Just a thought on Texas. Their bottomless money pit would be a way to square the circle of "how do we get Luke Fickell and Marcus Freeman on the same staff?"
That would be a better hire than Sark, IMO.
It's kinda unbelievable how silent everything has been, including the coaching search proper.Wow. Been an hour and a half since the last post. Nobody dug up some random Twitter account saying Bo Pelini expected to join Illinois coaching staff?