Typically will settle. See: Baylor and Art BrilesWhat happens when coaches are fired. Do schools get to negotiate down the remainder of the contract? Or do coaches normally get their full remaining amounts per the contract?
Why wouldn’t UCLA pay the full buyout? Why have a buyout if it’s negotiable even in a hostile environment.i understand negotiating if both parties agree to separate or if a few schools were written in the contract.
Why wouldn’t UCLA pay the full buyout? Why have a buyout if it’s negotiable even in a hostile environment.i understand negotiating if both parties agree to separate or if a few schools were written in the contract.
Because if it becomes clear the coach wants to leave and keeping him is no longer an option due to the harm done you cut your loses and move on to keep everybody somewhat happy.
It is getting close to the stage where if UCLA can't afford the buyout that TCU would not want to keep Dixon.
What did it say? Won’t come up now.
Typically will settle. See: Baylor and Art Briles
Donati has zero reason to budge.
Why would UCLA spend that much money just to win an NIT in a couple years?
For folks asking about "why negotiate," I've dealt with this in my line of work and things like Non-Compete clauses, clawbacks, and buyout penalties in employment contracts are hotly debated in legal circles, in both voluntary and involuntary termination situations.
As an example, Jamie could go to court and say it wasn't reasonable to ask him to pay an $8mm voluntary contract termination penalty when in his three years at TCU he probably only earned about $9.5-10mm in total compensation. An employer asking for 80-90% of your pay back as a penalty could be considered extreme and annulled by a court, or via forced arbitration which TCU likely wouldn't fair well in.
This has happened multiple times in my career, for some reasons most states legal systems look upon employment contracts with a nebulous "reasonability standard" that almost never favors the employer.
Without knowing Texas law explicitly, my guess is if Jamie wanted to fight legally to lower the buyout he would likely succeed.
Little to lose? Yeah, just any momentum that the basketball program has had in the last 20+ years.
Sends a great message to any potential coaches too...especially the younger ones. 'Stay here for life or we'll try to ruin your career. Now just sign on this line and we're all set!'
I think we saw some of this last night. He looked like he cared but I’m sure the players sensed something was up and their minds really weren’t in the game.Dixon staying due to UCLA being unwilling or unable to pay his buyout seems like the worst result for all parties