Painting himself into a corner. Marrone interviewing for Jacksonville O.C. job

[CuseOnly]

Aren't buy outs usually on the teams side? In other words of a coach wants to leave before contract end, he can buy himself out of it.

Or, it could be that the team "owes" him 12 mil on his contract but will pay him $X mil to be on his merry way to leave now.

How many of us here would have beleived that he had an "opt out" clause. Yep, nobody...everyone including the media was dumbfounded by it.

Goes to show, none of us knows a thing about what is negotiated.

Maybe what was negotiated was baloney sandwiches for life along with the $4 mil. You don't know.

 

[Dr. Bill]

I'm sorry, but when you equal Bill Parcells and Doug Marrone you lose me.

You mentioned Doug…leaves a job when he doesn't get his way…as if that was a bad thing…I just mentioned that Parcells does the same thing. I am not saying Maronne is an equal coach as Parcells….all I am saying is that if you think you are good and worthy of a top job, then ask for what you want…and if they don't give it you………and you are not happy…then leave…..Implied in all this discussion is that somehow Marrone has not earned the right via his record, to demand anything….and on that one…I disagree. Many people never get what they want because they are afraid to ask.

 

[samspann1]

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/writer...ruth-of-firing-season-odds-against-no-1-seeds

Read.

Tells me there is more to the story and to the contract than we are reading and hearing.

Done with this conversation.

Where did Kirwan mention Marrone?

 

[rrlbees]

Pushing $4 mil across to your opponent isn't losing the $4 million? Can't wait to hear the explanation on how this isn't losing the $4 mil. Last time I pushed a few thousand dollars across a hold'em table, I am pretty sure I lost it. I didn't get it back either. I am dense enough to have a few thousand to lose and a dense enough to have earned it in the first place. Dense enough to be in the top 7-8% of all income earners in the US. But go ahead.

Not how you used lose originally. He doesn't lose the $4m. He has it. But gives it back the following hand.

This coming season, he's getting $4m, coaching or not. Either as salary or the opt out. So he's whole either way.

But the following season if he's not a HC, he's getting something much much less. If he is a head coach, he'll get probably the $4m.

So like I said, IF he doesn't get a HC job by the following season, and let's for fun say he gets an OC gig even the season coming up, at say the ave of $1m it'll look like this:

Upcoming season 4 (no coaching)/5 (OC)

Next season 1 (OC) instead of $4m

So even without any kind of extension he makes $8m the next 2 years as Bills HC but $6m if he's an OC the next two years.

Thus he is down a minimum of $2m if he doesn't get a HC job. More if you keep going to years 3 and 4. It gets worse if he doesn't even get a good OC gig. He gambled and lost if he doesn't get a HC job. That's the point.

 

[CuseOnly]

Not how you used lose originally. He doesn't lose the $4m. He has it. But gives it back the following hand.

This coming season, he's getting $4m, coaching or not. Either as salary or the opt out. So he's whole either way.

But the following season if he's not a HC, he's getting something much much less. If he is a head coach, he'll get probably the $4m.

So like I said, IF he doesn't get a HC job by the following season, and let's for fun say he gets an OC gig even the season coming up, at say the ave of $1m it'll look like this:

Upcoming season 4 (no coaching)/5 (OC)

Next season 1 (OC) instead of $4m

So even without any kind of extension he makes $8m the next 2 years as Bills HC but $6m if he's an OC the next two years.

Thus he is down a minimum of $2m if he doesn't get a HC job. More if you keep going to years 3 and 4. It gets worse if he doesn't even get a good OC gig. He gambled and lost if he doesn't get a HC job. That's the point.

Was there any discussion of "the following hand"? Not by me.

As a matter of fact, I said he had a year to decide what he wanted to do. I also said that if he took a lesser job until he "decided" what he wanted to do, he could. And be farther ahead in your scenario.

For you, or anyone else for that matter to judge why or for how much $$ is I guess that is what internet chat boards are for an your right to do.

I respectfully disagree with you. And am tired of typing, I have enough of that to do tomorrow at work.

Good day (evening) sir Bees.

 

[CuseOnly]

Where did Kirwan mention Marrone?

He didn't.

"Al Davis refused to pay Mike Shanahan or Lane Kiffin the remaining money on their deals and, to my knowledge, went to his grave without ever paying off the deals. Most NFL head coaches have 'offset' language in their contracts that states if the coach is fired and he takes another job in the NFL as a head coach or assistant, the former team can recoup that portion of his new contract."

Gimme a fact aside from your cherry picking garbage that Statesman1 already called you out on or go to sleep.

Have you presented anything at all other than questions? Let's hear it boss...waiting. Can you contribute anything to the discussion???

 

[rrlbees]

Or, it could be that the team "owes" him 12 mil on his contract but will pay him $X mil to be on his merry way to leave now. How many of us here would have beleived that he had an "opt out" clause. Yep, nobody...everyone including the media was dumbfounded by it. Goes to show, none of us knows a thing about what is negotiated. Maybe what was negotiated was baloney sandwiches for life along with the $4 mil. You don't know.

Never heard of that kind of buy out. Heard many times if coaches bring paid after they left unless they get another equal paying job sometimes. SU paid P and GRob after they were let go.

 

[samspann1]

He didn't.

Ok.

 

[CuseOnly]

Never heard of that kind of buy out. Heard many times if coaches bring paid after they left unless they get another equal paying job sometimes. SU paid P and GRob after they were let go.

Never heard of an "opt out" clause Marrone had before this week either did you.

 

[rrlbees]

Was there any discussion of "the following hand"? Not by me.

By me in the very beginning. That was the whole point till you went in circles. It's why I also said if he had a extension for even the same oY, he could be giving up up to $12m.

 

[CuseOnly]

Ok.[/QUO

How do I block this guy, he offers nothing?

 

[rrlbees]

Never heard of an "opt out" clause Marrone had before this week either did you.

Can you show me one? An NFL coach who got bought out to leave at less than the contract. Don't mean for cause either.

 

[CuseOnly]

Can you show me one? An NFL coach who got bought out to leave at less than the contract. Don't mean for cause either.

From the article I posted earlier. Would be cheaper to fight forever than pay them.

"Al Davis refused to pay Mike Shanahan or Lane Kiffin the remaining money on their deals and, to my knowledge, went to his grave without ever paying off the deals. Most NFL head coaches have 'offset' language in their contracts that states if the coach is fired and he takes another job in the NFL as a head coach or assistant, the former team can recoup that portion of his new contract."

It is better to fight until they get other jobs than to pay the contracts off. If you wait or fight, you pay less.

People forget this is a legal battle and will continue to be. Big company against an employee or a small company.

 

[xc84]

What would Marrone's buyout have been? You stated upthread that by exercising his opt out clause, "he left on his own terms with money instead of being FIRED with possibly a much smaller buyout." He walked with $4M. Pray tell, what would the "much smaller" buyout have been?

What buyout? He didn't get an extension and there is no reliable reason to believe he would have received one.

 

[samspann1]

What buyout? He didn't get an extension and there is no reliable reason to believe he would have received one.

Supposedly, he was offered an extension.

Regarding the buyout, there was no buyout - I was quoting someone else's post. Either he exercised the opt out, and pocketed $4M, or coached under his existing contract (in which case, if fired, he would have received the remainder due under that contract, which was 2-years at $4M per).

 

[rrlbees]

From the article I posted earlier. Would be cheaper to fight forever than pay them. "Al Davis refused to pay Mike Shanahan or Lane Kiffin the remaining money on their deals and, to my knowledge, went to his grave without ever paying off the deals. Most NFL head coaches have 'offset' language in their contracts that states if the coach is fired and he takes another job in the NFL as a head coach or assistant, the former team can recoup that portion of his new contract." It is better to fight until they get other jobs than to pay the contracts off. If you wait or fight, you pay less. People forget this is a legal battle and will continue to be. Big company against an employee or a small company.

Well that supports what I said. They get paid what their contract calls for. Unless they get another job. You're using an example of a guy that just didn't pay. But that's not the contractual deal. So can you find me one, just one, where there is a buy out. Coach has a contract for $4m, gets fired and the team only has to pay $2m. Thanks.

 

[CuseOnly]

Well that supports what I said. They get paid what their contract calls for. Unless they get another job. You're using an example of a guy that just didn't pay. But that's not the contractual deal. So can you find me one, just one, where there is a buy out. Coach has a contract for $4m, gets fired and the team only has to pay $2m. Thanks.

Nope. I think that not paying trumps anything. Unless the coach doesn't want to work until the legal proceedings conclude.

Thanks.

 

[rrlbees]

Nope. I think that not paying trumps anything. Unless the coach doesn't want to work until the legal proceedings conclude. Thanks.

Yea, an owner not paying his bills is the same as having a buy out you claimed. lol.

 

[CuseOnly]

Yea, an owner not paying his bills is the same as having a buy out you claimed. lol.

I never claimed a buyout, I said that nobody here or anyone else knew the terms of the contract. And to my knowledge rrlbees doesn't, do you?

Baloney sandwiches or "opt out" clauses or otherwise. Maybe he negotiated a vacation in the carribean but you don't know do you.

 

[dinosaurbbq]

From the article I posted earlier. Would be cheaper to fight forever than pay them.

"Al Davis refused to pay Mike Shanahan or Lane Kiffin the remaining money on their deals and, to my knowledge, went to his grave without ever paying off the deals. Most NFL head coaches have 'offset' language in their contracts that states if the coach is fired and he takes another job in the NFL as a head coach or assistant, the former team can recoup that portion of his new contract."

It is better to fight until they get other jobs than to pay the contracts off. If you wait or fight, you pay less.

People forget this is a legal battle and will continue to be. Big company against an employee or a small company.

You are not a lawyer sir. Such contracts always say that the party that prevails in a breach of contract claim to enforce the contract gets their atty fees and costs as well. Yes, there can be an offset for wages earned in place of the contract, but not always and that depends on the state. Thus, The team isn't best off refusing to pay and holding out on a debt it clearly owes just to see the atty fees increase dramatically. Also, I doubt highly Al Davis got out of the debt by just not paying it. You get sued, they get a trial date and they win and take your money.

 

[rrlbees]

I never claimed a buyout, I said that nobody here or anyone else knew the terms of the contract. And to my knowledge rrlbees doesn't, do you? Baloney sandwiches or "opt out" clauses or otherwise. Maybe he negotiated a vacation in the carribean but you don't know do you.

Your words.

"There is usually a buyout on contracts in case there is a lack of performance, differing of philosophy, or some other such nonsense that would necessitate a termination."

Show me one. You tried to equate an owner not fulfilling his contractual obligations as being the same.

 

[dinosaurbbq]

Nope. I think that not paying trumps anything. Unless the coach doesn't want to work until the legal proceedings conclude.

Thanks.

If the owner gets spiteful by not paying, the coach gets spiteful by not getting a job. Typically, they negotiate it down and the coach goes and gets another job

 

[xc84]

Supposedly, he was offered an extension.

Regarding the buyout, there was no buyout - I was quoting someone else's post. Either he exercised the opt out, and pocketed $4M, or coached under his existing contract (in which case, if fired, he would have received the remainder due under that contract, which was 2-years at $4M per).

No. He was paid for his first 2 years. He was then given the opt-out $4M. He was essentially paid 3/4 of the $16M.

 

[rrlbees]

No. He was paid for his first 2 years. He was then given the opt-out $4M. He was essentially paid 3/4 of the $16M.

That's what he said. Remainder due.

 

[xc84]

That's what he said. Remainder due.

Ok...I misread. the post My bad. So this represents a $4M difference related to what the Bills would pay. We'll have to wait 2 years to know the actual difference between what Marrone would earn with the Bills over 4 years and what he will earn in total over 4 years.