Printable View
I don't want to deflect from the real story, the ONLY story that should be getting attention right now, and that's Tanner Holmes being railroaded by a desperate coach, but the money to buy out and hire a new coach is available, with TJoe's approval. It has been there since the Trump video.
considering Hud has 3 years left on contract (1x1x1.25mil), + 1 mil for new coach=4.25mil for starters. No expert but is that correct?
Another manic football season.
If Holmes issue provides cause, and it might, the numbers go out the window.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ragin' Caleb
If not, we pay the buyout.
Are you suggesting shortly or post season?Quote:
Originally Posted by cajun4life
Holmes + Artigue? A pattern to establish cause?Quote:
Originally Posted by ManAboutTown
Holmes and Artigue are the tip of the iceberg, I'm afraid.Quote:
Originally Posted by charliek
I keep hearing that. So why is he still there? What's the holdup? A loss to ULM? If so, I'm buying some warhawk gear. (Joking, ____ them.)Quote:
Originally Posted by ManAboutTown
Not directed necessarily at you MAT, but there's alot of arm chair lawyering going on around here.Quote:
Originally Posted by ManAboutTown
Just because a case can be stated for cause, doesn't mean that it will be accepted as such.
I'd imagine that you'll have to add some dollars to the defense fund for wrongful termination.
Just because a claim for wrongful termination may not in the end be meritorious, in my experience that's never prevented a litigant from raising it.
Think of this this way, if you were being paid a million per year and were terminated for "cause" (and thus being offered zero on your guaranteed buyout) you can't convince me you'd walk away from that without a fight.
Just being the devil's notary on all this.
It's foolish to think otherwise.
Ain't nothing gonna make me wish we lost to that team in anything. Ever.Quote:
Originally Posted by charliek
If it is was it is, it already is.
Hud’s current contract was signed in 2012, and amended in 2014 and 2015. I don’t think there is a third amendment, but I could be wrong. I have an email out to the university about it.
The 2012 contract was set to end on December 31, 2016, with a base salary of $175,000 plus $575,000 from the athletic foundation. The original contract had termination payments.
The first amendment extended the term to December 31, 2019, and increased the foundation’s pay to $775,000 (so $200,000 raise and a 1 year extension). The first amendment got rid of the original contracts termination without cause section and rewrote it.
The second amendment (2015) extended the term to December 31, 2020. Thus, the second amendment only extended, but did not effect his salary nor without cause termination pay schedule.
The without cause termination section that is controlling is from the first amendment, which states that if Hudspeth is fired at any time in 2017, termination without cause payment is $1.5 million.
Come on, baw. Someone has to rah rah rally the troops, and I'm just the guy to do it!Quote:
Originally Posted by zephyr