Mike Hopkins hired a new

[tbonezone]

JB won't talk about his contract. but if they offered him $50 per year to return he probably took it.

 

[AlpharettaCuse]

Again that doesn't mean they have to make him coach. It means they have the option to and if they don't there's a penalty. That is vastly different than having a contract in place to be head coach. In fact I'm honestly struggling with whether such an HCIW contract is even enforceable. I'd like to know what consideration the HCIW gives up.

Again, the contract spells out that they assistant must be made head coach by a certain date. There's no "option" not to. Not honoring the contract woud be the option. Of course the HCIW contract is enforceable. Why wouldn't it be? Why does the HCIW have to give up anything? In Fisher's case, he would have had to pay $5MM if he left early.

 

[AlpharettaCuse]

i'll slow down. any HCIW contract which bound the university to substantial penalties if not honored would also surely bind the HC candidate to said penalties if he left the university prior to succession.
that is the essence of the buy out clause. but it binds both parties of the agreement. not just the university.

Not necessarily. If the university didn't put that in the contract, it's non-issue. Like I said, many employment contracts are one-sided. Franklin didn't have to pay anything.

 

[AlpharettaCuse]

JB won't talk about his contract. but if they offered him $50 per year to return he probably took it.

Boeheim's contract isn't public? Gee...wonder why? Same reason Hop's isn't?

 

[tbonezone]

 

[PoppyHart]

Again, the contract spells out that they assistant must be made head coach by a certain date. There's no "option" not to. Not honoring the contract woud be the option. Of course the HCIW contract is enforceable. Why wouldn't it be? Why does the HCIW have to give up anything? In Fisher's case, he would have had to pay $5MM if he left early.

B/c it's NOT a contract unless there's a quid-pro-quo! Offer-Acceptance-Consideration are the elements. The last part, consideration, is the interesting part here. It doesn't mean there must be monetary penalties binding both parties, but rather both parties must be receiving value from the deal; otherwise it's just an empty promise.

I believe you could argue that the university benefited, or at least at the time of this "deal" thought they would benefit, from a PR/recruiting perspective, in that maintaining the continuity and outward appearance of the program was valuable, even if the transition/succession never occurred. This could imply, in my opinion, that the agreement was really a sham, however, and that there was no meeting of the minds that the transfer would ultimately take place. Additionally, t could also be argued that Hopkins was less likely to leave (and possibly turned down other genuine offers) in order to remain as assistant prior to the anticipated time of succession. So the University received tangible value in the form of his services over the last two years, and Hopkins would have been entitled to payment if he fulfilled his obligations through the end of next season.

 

[AlpharettaCuse]

I'll take this as evidence you still have no clue.

 

[AlpharettaCuse]

B/c it's NOT a contract unless there's a quid-pro-quo! Offer-Acceptance-Consideration are the elements. The last part, consideration, is the interesting part here. It doesn't mean there must be monetary penalties binding both parties, but rather both parties must be receiving value from the deal; otherwise it's just an empty promise.

I believe you could argue that the university benefited, or at least at the time of this "deal" thought they would benefit, from a PR/recruiting perspective, in that maintaining the continuity and outward appearance of the program was valuable, even if the transition/succession never occurred. This could imply, in my opinion, that the agreement was really a sham, however, and that there was no meeting of the minds that the transfer would ultimately take place. Additionally, t could also be argued that Hopkins was less likely to leave (and possibly turned down other genuine offers) in order to remain as assistant prior to the anticipated time of succession. So the University received tangible value in the form of his services over the last two years, and Hopkins would have been entitled to payment if he fulfilled his obligations through the end of next season.

"The agreements are set up so coaches will be paid a “penalty”, usually in the seven figures, if the coach-in-waiting is not the head coach by a certain date. Often times, a coach-in-waiting must stay in that role for five years waiting for their chance."

Consideration.

Set in stone, like JB said. Hopkins wouldn't have to pay an exit fee if Syracuse didn't make that a stipulation.

 

[Fly Rodder]

I'll take this as evidence you still have no clue.

Or being willfully obtuse.

 

[OrangePA]

I have zero inside sources but am going to definitively say no.

I wonder why they didn't match the deal - given that over the course of ten years two different SU administrations believed that he was the guy to replace Coach B.

 

[rrlbees]

show me the contract. as i said it's ridiculous to pay a penalty to retain somebody who is free to leave. no?
what would be the purpose of exposing yourself to such indemnity ?

he had a contract. why? because he had several other opportunities to leave and even more schools inquiring. su didn't want him to leave nor did jb. each time they bumped him in pay and eventually did the coach in waiting contract. solely because they didn't want him to leave and they wanted him to be the next coach. the contract was the carrot to keep him.

 

[cuseinseattle]

Like a fool I thought when Hop took the UW job this debate would end. I clearly miss judged the passion of certain individuals.

 

[AlpharettaCuse]

1. Like a fool I thought when Hop took the UW job this debate would end. I clearly miss judged the passion of certain individuals.

I can't believe there's even a debate. Hopkins' contract was common knowledge a long time ago, and Wildhack and JB cofirmed it. Boehiem literally used the words "set in stone", yet some still want to argue against facts. Amazing.

 

[cuseinseattle]

I can't believe there's even a debate. Hopkins' contract was common knowledge a long time ago, and Wildhack and JB cofirmed it. Boehiem literally used the words "set in stone", yet some still want to argue against facts. Amazing.

It's amazing. I mean have you read this thread? You should go back and do it. It's amazing.

 

[AlpharettaCuse]

It's amazing. I mean have you read this thread? You should go back and do it. It's amazing.

Lol. Pages 3-7 are my fault.

 

[Orangepace]

no university or corporation would agree to pay millions in penalties to retain somebody exclusively on their staff who in fact was free to leave at any time. just think about how stoopid that sounds.

show me the contract. as i said it's ridiculous to pay a penalty to retain somebody who is free to leave. no?
what would be the purpose of exposing yourself to such indemnity ?

This is simply not true... Happens in the corporate world more often than you think. Typically, it's done with more protection for the Corporation (ie.. Non-compete, and/or non-raid clauses), but I've seen it done in two separate instances when a Corporation was involved in leadership transition planning. In both instances, it was done in an effort to provide the appearance of stability to revenue sources, while a better suited replacement was sourced and put into place. The penalty is usually substantial enough to retain the "interim" employee, keeping them on the staff, but provides no assurances the full-time position will be theirs.

 

[AZOrange]

Again, the contract spells out that they assistant must be made head coach by a certain date. There's no "option" not to. Not honoring the contract woud be the option. Of course the HCIW contract is enforceable. Why wouldn't it be? Why does the HCIW have to give up anything? In Fisher's case, he would have had to pay $5MM if he left early.

Sure there is an option not to, they can simply elect to pay the penalty and not make him coach. It's really that simple.

And each party has to give/get something. Bargained for exchange (i.e. Consideration).

 

[AZOrange]

B/c it's NOT a contract unless there's a quid-pro-quo! Offer-Acceptance-Consideration are the elements. The last part, consideration, is the interesting part here. It doesn't mean there must be monetary penalties binding both parties, but rather both parties must be receiving value from the deal; otherwise it's just an empty promise.

I believe you could argue that the university benefited, or at least at the time of this "deal" thought they would benefit, from a PR/recruiting perspective, in that maintaining the continuity and outward appearance of the program was valuable, even if the transition/succession never occurred. This could imply, in my opinion, that the agreement was really a sham, however, and that there was no meeting of the minds that the transfer would ultimately take place. Additionally, t could also be argued that Hopkins was less likely to leave (and possibly turned down other genuine offers) in order to remain as assistant prior to the anticipated time of succession. So the University received tangible value in the form of his services over the last two years, and Hopkins would have been entitled to payment if he fulfilled his obligations through the end of next season.

Bingo.

 

[anomander]

None of that is true. I don't even know where to start. first, Hopkins interview with Washington was in Syracuse last FRIDAY. hop did have the guarantee that he would be the Head coach after next season. that was in writing. There were large penalties to the University if Hop wasn't the coach after next season. Let's remember, Hop was going to take the USC job just two years ago. He wanted that job badly. Hop considers the Washington job better. He got more years and more $$. Throw in that Hop didn't want to push JB out knowing that Jb wanted to stay. Throw in that the current A.D. inherited the Hop deal and Hop knew it. how much job security did Hop have with Wildhack? He got a whiff of that with the 4-5 record last year. Hop was very surprised at the reaction he got from Syracuse fans over that. He realized he didn't have as much good will as he thought he did. That is what it came down to. Hop wasn't forced out. In the end, he just got a better deal. The last guy had to miss the NCAA tournament 6 straight years to get fired. He went 4-5 here and people wanted someone different. What would you have done if you were Hop?

Yep. Dead on. Also there were some disagreements on recruiting decisions and the mess Hopkins thought he was going to inherit added to decision to leave.

I think people would have been more surprised if McNamara left with him, which was originally part of the plan. Syracuse obviously made a counter offer to get him to stay.

 

[AlpharettaCuse]

Sure there is an option not to, they can simply elect to pay the penalty and not make him coach. It's really that simple.

And each party has to give/get something. Bargained for exchange (i.e. Consideration).

Then they would be breaching the contract they agreed upon. As I mentioned, anyone has an option to not honor the contract. But the contract states they must make him the HC by X date.

The consideration would be Mike's service, of course. That's what Syracuse would be getting.

 

[AlpharettaCuse]

Bingo.

The consideration is Mike's service, obviously.

 

[AZOrange]

The consideration is Mike's service, obviously.

Technically his service is already being rendered for compensation though.

 

[AlpharettaCuse]

Technically his service is already being rendered for compensation though.

Right, that's why he's paid. That's the exchange you mentioned.

 

[AZOrange]

Right, that's why he's paid. That's the exchange you mentioned.

Hop was paid comp to be an assistant. BFE.

Supposedly SU then said we will pay you x if we don't make you coach by y date. I don't see what Hop gives up there for that promise.

It's all moot anyway. He gone.

 

[Forloveoforange]

A point made earlier is that Mike stopped recruiting this year. I didn't see anyone follow up on this, can we call it, accusation.