Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 80 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
 An insiders prespective... 
Author Message
True Bobcat Fan

Joined: Fri Feb 16, 2018 5:50 pm
Posts: 376
Reply with quote
Post Re: An insiders prespective...
TheRevSWT wrote:
I gotta ask... What is the point of going to law school if not to be a lawyer?

Unless it's just love of education... And I'm not hating on that. If I win the lottery, I could totally go to school for the rest of my days.


Many points to it: obtaining the knowledge, having a desire to practice law only to then change your mind before finishing school, being offered a better opportunity while in law school, completing law school and practicing only to then pursue another career, being disbarred.


Thu Nov 08, 2018 2:40 pm
Profile
BF.com Elite Sponsor

Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 7:21 pm
Posts: 7372
Location: Austin
Reply with quote
Post Re: An insiders prespective...
run faster wrote:

This is yet another logical fallacy by you.

You claimed that Withers can be fired with cause (hence, not be paid on what his contract stipulates) for poor win/loss performance. That's entirely false. The contract clearly states that win/loss is not considered "with cause" in terms of him not being owed the 50% of his remaining salary as the contract stipulates.

Are you still standing by your claim about that?



It is literally....in....the...contract.


Quote:
Section 1.04 Evaluation The Director of Athletics will evaluate the Coach's performance periodically, but no less often than annually. The standards of evaluation include:

b. The Football Team's competitiveness and performance on the field;



At-will clause that gives Texas State "with cause" provisions since THE CONTRACT IS REEVALUATED EVERY YEAR (theoretically allowing Texas State to walk away with paying "0")......


Quote:
Section 3.01 Term and Extensions. This contract will begin January 6, 2016, and will terminate January 5, 2021. At the end of each year of this contract, if it is satisfied with the Coach's performance, Texas State will present and recommend an extension of this contract to the President and the Chancellor of the Texas State University System. The parties will negotiate and agree on the length of each such extension, with the understanding that any extension plus the years remaining on the contract will not exceed five years. Texas State will use its best efforts to secure approval for each extension




Swear, it's like arguing with a toddler with RunFaster and Saul. If you went to law school, you sure as heck didn't learn to read and interpret a contract. It's moronic to think a University lawyer would not have foreseen a way to find an out of a contract with the amount of money at stake with someone winning 10% of games. They had practice in this specific type of scenario with Brad Wright. :roll: :roll: :roll:

And before you post the buyout clause, learn about if/then provisions in contract law (because you apparently missed that during class).....the buyout clause is a "then" type of provision that would be triggered only if the contract was terminated WITHOUT CAUSE. Performance evals are with cause. Are you learning yet?


Last edited by Bobcat.taxman on Thu Nov 08, 2018 3:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Thu Nov 08, 2018 3:40 pm
Profile
True Bobcat Fan
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 10:40 am
Posts: 5976
Reply with quote
Post Re: An insiders prespective...
if nothing else, you have to admire taxi's school pride. to think that texas state was able to identify and hire the only lawyer in the nation who would be able to write an athletic department coaching contract where the coach can be fired without a buyout, because w/l is specifically identified as for-cause.

_________________
1 down
2 to go


Thu Nov 08, 2018 3:46 pm
Profile
BF.com Elite Sponsor

Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 7:21 pm
Posts: 7372
Location: Austin
Reply with quote
Post Re: An insiders prespective...
Saul Goodman wrote:
if nothing else, you have to admire taxi's school pride. to think that texas state was able to identify and hire the only lawyer in the nation who would be able to write an athletic department coaching contract where the coach can be fired without a buyout, because w/l is specifically identified as for-cause.



Image


Thu Nov 08, 2018 3:57 pm
Profile
Online
BF.com Elite Sponsor
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 03, 2003 8:34 pm
Posts: 14921
Location: Ten minutes north of Lake Travis
Reply with quote
Post Re: An insiders prespective...
Bobcat.taxman wrote:
Quote:
Section 1.04 Evaluation The Director of Athletics will evaluate the Coach's performance periodically, but no less often than annually. The standards of evaluation include:

b. The Football Team's competitiveness and performance on the field;



At-will clause that gives Texas State "with cause" provisions since THE CONTRACT IS REEVALUATED EVERY YEAR (theoretically allowing Texas State to walk away with paying "0")......


taxman, you are 100% missing this part of the contract:

Quote:
3.05b As provided in the Rules and Regulations of the Board of Regents, The Texas State University System (Chapter V, Section 1.13), texas State may terminate this contract for cause without penalty and the Coach is not entitled to prior notice or reasons for non-renewal. "Cause" includes failure to perform the duties in sections 1.04, with the exception of 1.04(b), and 3.06 of this contract or otherwise for conduct constituting lewdness, moral turpitude, or any violation of the ethical policies in chapter VIII of the System rules and regulations.


This means that he CANNOT be fired for cause based on the W/L record.

Further, the contract can be re-evaluated each year, but that doesn't mean that it is null and void, unless both parties agree to amend it. If I were to guess (I'm no lawyer), that is put in to allow the possibility of an extension or raises, but that is purely a guess. I can say with relative certainty that it is not so the university could terminate a coach for whatever reason they want because NO COACH IN THE WORLD would sign such a contract, as that would mean the contract is worthless.

_________________
Image


Thu Nov 08, 2018 4:09 pm
Profile
Online
BF.com Elite Sponsor
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 03, 2003 8:34 pm
Posts: 14921
Location: Ten minutes north of Lake Travis
Reply with quote
Post Re: An insiders prespective...
Oh, two thoughts popped up in typing that out.

1. Please say that the "lewdness, moral turpitude" part was thrown in because of Matsakis and isn't a general clause in all coach's contracts. Because... well, to me, that is just hilarious.

2. If I read that contract correctly, they are saying that coaches can't be fired for cause based on NCAA violations. That doesn't seem right, does it?

_________________
Image


Thu Nov 08, 2018 4:12 pm
Profile
True Bobcat Fan

Joined: Fri Feb 16, 2018 5:50 pm
Posts: 376
Reply with quote
Post Re: An insiders prespective...
Bobcat.taxman wrote:

And before you post the buyout clause, learn about if/then provisions in contract law (because you apparently missed that during class).....the buyout clause is a "then" type of provision that would be triggered only if the contract was terminated WITHOUT CAUSE. Performance evals are with cause. Are you learning yet?


I don't know if you are really this stupid or if you're simply trying to save face and present an argument so those who don't take the time to read the contract think you may be correct. Either way, it proves you as a fool.

Here is the part which claims that Withers CAN be fired WITH CAUSE without any due compensation like you claim:

Image

However, it's imperative that you read the part that states " . . . with the exception of 1.04(b)."
In other words, your argument is correct EXCEPT for him being fired due to 1.04(b). So that prompts you to read what 1.04(b) is. That leads you to this:

Image

In other words, he can be fired with cause and not be compensated for numerous reasons EXCEPT for his lack of competitiveness and performance on the field.

It doesn't get any clearer than this, stupid. It spells it out in very plain, easy to understand, English.

As Saul said, do you think any head coach would sign a contract that states what you claim it does?

How about this: Choose somebody who we both trust on here. I will email them from my work email (not Gmail, Yahoo, etc. account) so that they can verify who I am. You do the same. After that, I will send you $5000 if anyone affiliated in a high position with the university regarding this (President, AD, general counsel) agrees with your claim that Withers can be fired with cause due to a poor win/loss record and not be owed any compensation contractually. On the other hand, if they agree that according to the contract he would be owed the 50% remaining of his contract after being fired for poor on-field performance, you have to send me $500.

I mean, if you're so sure of this, you should absolutely take $5000 in free money with only the risk of having to pay $500 if you lose, right? You get to pick the person who verifies our identities.


Last edited by run faster on Thu Nov 08, 2018 4:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Thu Nov 08, 2018 4:16 pm
Profile
True Bobcat Fan

Joined: Fri Feb 16, 2018 5:50 pm
Posts: 376
Reply with quote
Post Re: An insiders prespective...
TheRevSWT wrote:
2. If I read that contract correctly, they are saying that coaches can't be fired for cause based on NCAA violations. That doesn't seem right, does it?



You're reading it incorrectly.

It's important that you identify the commas both before and after the clause reading ". . . with the exception of 1.04(b)."

The paragraph reads that Withers can be fired with cause and not owed money if he fails to perform the duties in 1.04 (with the exception of 1.04(b)) and if he fails to perform the duties in 3.06. The part about 3.06 isn't part of the exception clause, which is why the part about 1.04(b) has a comma both before and after. Simply remove the info within those commas and read the sentence. Then, add the exception of 1.04(b) as a new sentence after. It will make it easier to read for you.

That's why I harp so much on here about the lack of reading comprehension.


Thu Nov 08, 2018 4:28 pm
Profile
Online
BF.com Elite Sponsor
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 03, 2003 8:34 pm
Posts: 14921
Location: Ten minutes north of Lake Travis
Reply with quote
Post Re: An insiders prespective...
Yeah, I figured I had to be reading that incorrectly.

_________________
Image


Thu Nov 08, 2018 4:32 pm
Profile
True Bobcat Fan
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 14, 2017 8:52 am
Posts: 430
Reply with quote
Post Re: An insiders prespective...
Oh how's this thread going?!

Image


Thu Nov 08, 2018 11:18 pm
Profile
BF.com Elite Sponsor

Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2005 6:34 pm
Posts: 2896
Location: The Lair
Reply with quote
Post Re: An insiders prespective...
LSU Bobcat wrote:
Oh how's this thread going?!

Image


just like all the other threads :shock: :evil:

_________________
RALPH, THE SWIMMING PIG, LIVES IN MY HEART!
Bobcat Club member
Blind Salamander member


Fri Nov 09, 2018 9:52 am
Profile
BF.com Elite Sponsor

Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 7:21 pm
Posts: 7372
Location: Austin
Reply with quote
Post Re: An insiders prespective...
LSU Bobcat wrote:
Oh how's this thread going?!

Image




By now we all expect most threads to devolve into this as soon as RunFaster and Saul start commenting on pretty much anything. 8) :lol:


Fri Nov 09, 2018 10:10 am
Profile
BF.com Elite Sponsor

Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 7:21 pm
Posts: 7372
Location: Austin
Reply with quote
Post Re: An insiders prespective...
run faster wrote:

How about this: Choose somebody who we both trust on here. I will email them from my work email (not Gmail, Yahoo, etc. account) so that they can verify who I am. You do the same. After that, I will send you $5000 if anyone affiliated in a high position with the university regarding this (President, AD, general counsel) agrees with your claim that Withers can be fired with cause due to a poor win/loss record and not be owed any compensation contractually. On the other hand, if they agree that according to the contract he would be owed the 50% remaining of his contract after being fired for poor on-field performance, you have to send me $500.

I mean, if you're so sure of this, you should absolutely take $5000 in free money with only the risk of having to pay $500 if you lose, right? You get to pick the person who verifies our identities.




The fact that you are going to these lengths to TRY and find ANYONE who will interpret things your way tells me pretty much everything about your knowledge on law and contracts. Anyone that goes straight to gambling on something they are clearly wrong tells me that they don't really think clearly on things and go more on "I feel".

Also, since again you're not that good at contract law (despite claiming to be an attorney), that part in parenthesis that you are STILL reading wrong is part of the if/then clause I mentioned and that is why it is specifically excluded.....because evaluating performance is a subjective endeavor and you can't specifically nail down what a good win/loss record would be. That's why it was specifically excluded from the broader definitions of what "cause" would be. Dear Lord Baby Jesus, you didn't learn anything in law school, did you? :roll: :roll:


Fri Nov 09, 2018 10:19 am
Profile
Bobcat Wannabe

Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2013 10:56 am
Posts: 5
Reply with quote
Post Re: An insiders prespective...
Bobcat.taxman wrote:
run faster wrote:

This is yet another logical fallacy by you.

You claimed that Withers can be fired with cause (hence, not be paid on what his contract stipulates) for poor win/loss performance. That's entirely false. The contract clearly states that win/loss is not considered "with cause" in terms of him not being owed the 50% of his remaining salary as the contract stipulates.

Are you still standing by your claim about that?



It is literally....in....the...contract.


Quote:
Section 1.04 Evaluation The Director of Athletics will evaluate the Coach's performance periodically, but no less often than annually. The standards of evaluation include:

b. The Football Team's competitiveness and performance on the field;



At-will clause that gives Texas State "with cause" provisions since THE CONTRACT IS REEVALUATED EVERY YEAR (theoretically allowing Texas State to walk away with paying "0")......


Quote:
Section 3.01 Term and Extensions. This contract will begin January 6, 2016, and will terminate January 5, 2021. At the end of each year of this contract, if it is satisfied with the Coach's performance, Texas State will present and recommend an extension of this contract to the President and the Chancellor of the Texas State University System. The parties will negotiate and agree on the length of each such extension, with the understanding that any extension plus the years remaining on the contract will not exceed five years. Texas State will use its best efforts to secure approval for each extension




Swear, it's like arguing with a toddler with RunFaster and Saul. If you went to law school, you sure as heck didn't learn to read and interpret a contract. It's moronic to think a University lawyer would not have foreseen a way to find an out of a contract with the amount of money at stake with someone winning 10% of games. They had practice in this specific type of scenario with Brad Wright. :roll: :roll: :roll:

And before you post the buyout clause, learn about if/then provisions in contract law (because you apparently missed that during class).....the buyout clause is a "then" type of provision that would be triggered only if the contract was terminated WITHOUT CAUSE. Performance evals are with cause. Are you learning yet?


Taxman, I went to law school and am a transactional attorney. You are wrong.

The section you cite regarding an annual review is an asinine provision that imposes a duty on Tx St to at least consider extending Withers contract after each contract year. The term is for five years unless Sections 3.03, 3.04, 3.05, or 3.06 are triggered. The extension language is in regards to anything after five years.

Withers cannot be terminated for cause due to win/loss record. The school can only choose not to extend his contract based upon win/loss record.

Regarding putting Tx St's general counsel office on a pedestal, this is no offense to the drafting attorney but this contract is garbage from Tx St's perspective. Far too many errors and ambiguities which is what leads to litigation when contracting parties get adversarial. This contract should be much tighter.


Fri Nov 09, 2018 10:43 am
Profile
True Bobcat Fan
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 10:40 am
Posts: 5976
Reply with quote
Post Re: An insiders prespective...
love watching an uber driver argue contract law.

Image

_________________
1 down
2 to go


Fri Nov 09, 2018 10:57 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 80 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 28 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
All Rights Reserved, BobcatFans LLC
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group