Incentive details on Fleck's contract

BleedGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 11, 2008
Messages
60,580
Reaction score
15,660
Points
113
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Go Gophers!!
 

Those seem kinda in line with what we've seen before I belive.
 

Well, I am sorry but no extra bonus for WINNING the national championship? Just being there is good enough? This is not ELITE! Same old losing attitude at Minnesota.

Just kidding. Although it is odd that they don't specify winning. Also the bonuses for II a and II b are way too low. If Felck* gets the Gophers in the National Championship game, he deserves a couple of million.

Just carrying on the Gopherhole tradition of misspelling names.
 

Well, I am sorry but no extra bonus for WINNING the national championship? Just being there is good enough? This is not ELITE! Same old losing attitude at Minnesota.

Just kidding. Although it is odd that they don't specify winning. Also the bonuses for II a and II b are way too low. If Felck* gets the Gophers in the National Championship game, he deserves a couple of million.

Just carrying on the Gopherhole tradition of misspelling names.

The Natty win is such a foregone conclusion ... they don't bother to mention it.

And he'll get that couple mil in a new contract from us, or someone if he gets there ;)
 

Big champion should be around 500,000 and Natty 10,000,000.
 


Thank god no incentives for using RTB and Elite. We would surpass the national debt by the end of fall camp.
 

Big champion should be around 500,000 and Natty 10,000,000.

I was thinking the same thing - I actually thought they were a little low.

Plus they should specify that if he wins 5 B1G Championships or 3 Rose Bowls or 1 Natty or punches out the Head Football Coach at Wisconsin at mid-field after they go for 2 with a large lead that the U will build a statue of Fleck in front of TCF Bank Stadium! :)

I would have a lot more respect for Brew had he punched Bielema at mid-field in 2010. Granted, it probably would have gotten him fired on the spot (as opposed to the following week), but can you imagine? He would still be a legend around here!
 

I was thinking the same thing - I actually thought they were a little low.

Plus they should specify that if he wins 5 B1G Championships or 3 Rose Bowls or 1 Natty or punches out the Head Football Coach at Wisconsin at mid-field after they go for 2 with a large lead that the U will build a statue of Fleck in front of TCF Bank Stadium! :)

Brew seems to have blocked most Gopher fans on Twitter. He could have made left a positive legacy so easily.
 




Well, I am sorry but no extra bonus for WINNING the national championship? Just being there is good enough? This is not ELITE! Same old losing attitude at Minnesota.

Just kidding. Although it is odd that they don't specify winning. Also the bonuses for II a and II b are way too low. If Felck* gets the Gophers in the National Championship game, he deserves a couple of million.

Just carrying on the Gopherhole tradition of misspelling names.

I thought that was Sid's tradition to mess up names?
 

I thought he would get a big bonus if he somehow got to 6 wins this year?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 






A couple of notes on Fleck's contract - courtesy of an article in the Strib. 1st:

The first page of Fleck’s contract features some new language for Gophers deals: The first official duty of a coach in regard to his players now reads Fleck must make an “effort to develop their character.”

Questions - how do they determine whether the coach "made an effort to develop character," and how do they determine whether that effort was successful? What is the character-developing yardstick?

Next, can we guess the genesis of this provision:

A new clause was added to the list of reasons the university can fire a football coach with cause: “Coach’s refusal to obey and/or carry out any reasonable assignment or directive from the [athletic] director …”

Who decides what constitutes a "reasonable" assignment or directive - the AD? The Prexy? (The EOAA....?) Bottom line- the AD is making it plain to the Coach who the boss is.
 

A couple of notes on Fleck's contract - courtesy of an article in the Strib. 1st:

The first page of Fleck’s contract features some new language for Gophers deals: The first official duty of a coach in regard to his players now reads Fleck must make an “effort to develop their character.”

Questions - how do they determine whether the coach "made an effort to develop character," and how do they determine whether that effort was successful? What is the character-developing yardstick?

Next, can we guess the genesis of this provision:

A new clause was added to the list of reasons the university can fire a football coach with cause: “Coach’s refusal to obey and/or carry out any reasonable assignment or directive from the [athletic] director …”

Who decides what constitutes a "reasonable" assignment or directive - the AD? The Prexy? (The EOAA....?) Bottom line- the AD is making it plain to the Coach who the boss is.

I think the character thing is straight up PR.... hey look we got this in the contract.

Outside of the stuff that gets you fired for cause anyway, I don't think anything new would qualify under that...
 

A couple of notes on Fleck's contract - courtesy of an article in the Strib. 1st:

The first page of Fleck’s contract features some new language for Gophers deals: The first official duty of a coach in regard to his players now reads Fleck must make an “effort to develop their character.”

Questions - how do they determine whether the coach "made an effort to develop character," and how do they determine whether that effort was successful? What is the character-developing yardstick?

Next, can we guess the genesis of this provision:

A new clause was added to the list of reasons the university can fire a football coach with cause: “Coach’s refusal to obey and/or carry out any reasonable assignment or directive from the [athletic] director …”

Who decides what constitutes a "reasonable" assignment or directive - the AD? The Prexy? (The EOAA....?) Bottom line- the AD is making it plain to the Coach who the boss is.

Coyle and Kaler decide. They likely won't do anything unless there is a significant incident. If there is a significant incident, they can fire him regardless of the status of that incident on the grounds that he didn't make a sufficient effort to develop their character.

Coyle and Kaler also decide what is a reasonable assignment and directive. "Reasonable" is broad enough to justify firing him if he refuses to obey just about any assignment and makes him responsible for resisting anything unethical Coyle encourages him to do.

Both of those are generally meaningless to the operation of the football team but could be used to justify firing Fleck if they want to. If they were serious about this, they would have put in specific and measurable clauses and goals that he has to meet. They may also be doing that on the site but that's not the intention of those lines in the contract.
 

A couple of notes on Fleck's contract - courtesy of an article in the Strib. 1st:

The first page of Fleck’s contract features some new language for Gophers deals: The first official duty of a coach in regard to his players now reads Fleck must make an “effort to develop their character.”

Questions - how do they determine whether the coach "made an effort to develop character," and how do they determine whether that effort was successful? What is the character-developing yardstick?

Next, can we guess the genesis of this provision:

A new clause was added to the list of reasons the university can fire a football coach with cause: “Coach’s refusal to obey and/or carry out any reasonable assignment or directive from the [athletic] director …”

Who decides what constitutes a "reasonable" assignment or directive - the AD? The Prexy? (The EOAA....?) Bottom line- the AD is making it plain to the Coach who the boss is.

Don't you know that our EOAA overlords will determine this? C'mon SON. :cool:
 

A couple of notes on Fleck's contract - courtesy of an article in the Strib. 1st:

The first page of Fleck’s contract features some new language for Gophers deals: The first official duty of a coach in regard to his players now reads Fleck must make an “effort to develop their character.”

Questions - how do they determine whether the coach "made an effort to develop character," and how do they determine whether that effort was successful? What is the character-developing yardstick?

Next, can we guess the genesis of this provision:

A new clause was added to the list of reasons the university can fire a football coach with cause: “Coach’s refusal to obey and/or carry out any reasonable assignment or directive from the [athletic] director …”

Who decides what constitutes a "reasonable" assignment or directive - the AD? The Prexy? (The EOAA....?) Bottom line- the AD is making it plain to the Coach who the boss is.

The answer to the first series of questions is likely implementing things like the bball team has done - sensitivity training, signs/posters emphasizing treating women with respect, etc. Something I'm still rather shocked Claeys did not do (I thought I read he didn't) after the bball incident last year. Just like a typical company would do. No one can say it changes anything definitively, but if there is an issue it's something you can point to and say "see, we tried". You'll note the contract has no statement about whether he was successful. And honestly, no matter what he does you can only change people who are willing to change and will put the effort into changing.

The last question - yes it will be Coyle and Kaler, but courts could get involved if there's a discrepancy. But it's again the same as any other job. When's the last time you've seen a job description that didn't say "and other duties as assigned"? If push came to shove it would be whether a typical college coach considered it "reasonable" or not. If it's attending speaking engagements or coaches' conferences or whatever it's probably yes. If it's take this toothbrush and clean Prexy Kaler's home toilet, probably not.

The thing is, regardless what's in there the chances of them firing "with cause" where they wouldn't pay out his buyout is so slim it's laughable. Unless a coach does something so bad it's just appalling (Penn State type stuff) they wouldn't do that because it sends a bad message to the next coach. They likely could have with Claeys. Of course, his buyout was small enough the court costs would have probably cost more than paying out, so it wouldn't have made sense...
 




Top Bottom