So why is miller not coaching? | Syracusefan.com

So why is miller not coaching?

upperdeck

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
27,927
Like
28,973
if he did it nothing they do this year matters anyway. if he didnt they why not coach. not coaching doesnt really change the results of this season. It actually makes it look like the school knows he is done and wouldnt they realize a postseason ban anyway or at the worst the season will never have happened after penalties?
 
if he did it nothing they do this year matters anyway. if he didnt they why not coach. not coaching doesnt really change the results of this season. It actually makes it look like the school knows he is done and wouldnt they realize a postseason ban anyway or at the worst the season will never have happened after penalties?
i can see the school holding miller out . . . but go ahead and play ayton; really have nothing to lose there
 
if he did it nothing they do this year matters anyway. if he didnt they why not coach. not coaching doesnt really change the results of this season. It actually makes it look like the school knows he is done and wouldnt they realize a postseason ban anyway or at the worst the season will never have happened after penalties?

The season or games never happened if you had ineligible players

As I asked in another thread, can you vacate wins because of an ineligible coach? Don't know the answer for sure, but I suspect not.
 
lack of institutional control has to apply to the coach doesnt it?
 
miller . everything you always wanted in a coach . and less.
 
Last edited:
lack of institutional control has to apply to the coach doesnt it?

They will get punished going forward, but I don't know if you can retroactively go back and take wins away if the issue is only with the coach and not the players.
 
The season or games never happened if you had ineligible players

As I asked in another thread, can you vacate wins because of an ineligible coach? Don't know the answer for sure, but I suspect not.


There is no such concept as ineligibility for coaches. They can be suspended, but not ineligible in the absence of a formal suspension.
 
Last edited:
Because the U of A is going to s-can him, but this game is occurring before they've made the final decision.
 
Last edited:
if he did it nothing they do this year matters anyway. if he didnt they why not coach. not coaching doesnt really change the results of this season. It actually makes it look like the school knows he is done and wouldnt they realize a postseason ban anyway or at the worst the season will never have happened after penalties?
Coaches aren't ineligible, just players.
AU has to pull him now, because the reports are that they have him on tape as a cheat
 
so he arranged for a payment to the player. yet the player still plays. I don't understand how he played. It is baffling to me they play the dude and we hold out Fab in the NCAAs just in case.
 
so he arranged for a payment to the player. yet the player still plays. I don't understand how he played. It is baffling to me they play the dude and we hold out Fab in the NCAAs just in case.

Because I don't think the wiretap confirmed that a payment actually occurred. Probably was an internal review to confirm no payment was actually made. But since the intent is still a crime is probably why Miller is still in hot water and is not coaching.
 
Id have the players play and the coaches coach. This idea that games won’t count or wins vacated is a joke. Come tourney time when teams lose to a team with ineligble players, they’re not going to replay the tourney.
 
so he arranged for a payment to the player. yet the player still plays. I don't understand how he played. It is baffling to me they play the dude and we hold out Fab in the NCAAs just in case.
Fab was held out becasue his eligibilty going forward in the 2nd semester was in question. If the AU kid is found to be ineligible because of a bribe, all the games he played in are forfit antways so why not play him if he turns out ok?
 
If Arizona was smart they have Miller come back and coach the rest of the season.
Hope they flame out and then fire him for performance.
It would save them 5.2 million.
 
If Arizona was smart they have Miller come back and coach the rest of the season.
Hope they flame out and then fire him for performance.
It would save them 5.2 million.
Whoever his agent is. Is a freaking genius.
 
Miller: Who you gonna believe, me or your lying ears.
 
Some lawyer at UofA is going to be looking for a job soon. And maybe whoever approved it, too. I mean, who agrees to a contract like that?

The term makes perfect sense to me. It's the price the university has to pay for Miller following their orders and then being the fall guy when things go bad, effectively ending his career.

When Miller takes on the job, there is an undocumented understanding of what "needs to be done" at the program (i.e. payments as necessary), and that there is an expectation that the staff do it from administration.

Miller's lawyer realizes that this expectation from the administration, not only creates an increased opportunity for Miller to be fired for cause but also hurt his ability to get back into coaching if he gets caught. So he creates this clause which Arizona agrees to.
 
The term makes perfect sense to me. It's the price the university has to pay for Miller following their orders and then being the fall guy when things go bad, effectively ending his career.

When Miller takes on the job, there is an undocumented understanding of what "needs to be done" at the program (i.e. payments as necessary), and that there is an expectation that the staff do it from administration.

Miller's lawyer realizes that this expectation from the administration, not only creates an increased opportunity for Miller to be fired for cause but also hurt his ability to get back into coaching if he gets caught. So he creates this clause which Arizona agrees to.
Maybe. All I know is that anyone who works for me that has to sign an employment contract gets nothing if fired for cause. Even if it limits my pool of potential employees.
 
Some lawyer at UofA is going to be looking for a job soon. And maybe whoever approved it, too. I mean, who agrees to a contract like that?
A desperate school.
 
The term makes perfect sense to me. It's the price the university has to pay for Miller following their orders and then being the fall guy when things go bad, effectively ending his career.

When Miller takes on the job, there is an undocumented understanding of what "needs to be done" at the program (i.e. payments as necessary), and that there is an expectation that the staff do it from administration.

Miller's lawyer realizes that this expectation from the administration, not only creates an increased opportunity for Miller to be fired for cause but also hurt his ability to get back into coaching if he gets caught. So he creates this clause which Arizona agrees to.
I agree but say Sean Miller got a DUI and hurt someone. At almost all places of employment that is reason for terminate with cause.

The guy's contract gets him double the money for termination for cause that he would get if he was fired for performance.
The lawyers at Arizona screwed this big time. They could have put in what you said as partial language but they didn't.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
167,127
Messages
4,681,571
Members
5,900
Latest member
DizzyNY

Online statistics

Members online
43
Guests online
1,694
Total visitors
1,737


Top Bottom