Hmm

Donate To GopherHole




The wheels are falling off. We lost our first game (will probably lose the rest too) and now our coach is going to a helmet school. Glad we got to enjoy the PSU win. ;)

Back to reality, can we just enjoy the season?
 


GopherPete said:
The wheels are falling off. We lost our first game (will probably lose the rest too) and now our coach is going to a helmet school. Glad we got to enjoy the PSU win. ;)

Back to reality, can we just enjoy the season?
Click to expand...

Never said any of that. Simply shared an article that stated there is someone that said P.J. showed interest in the FSU job. I am still enjoying the PSU win. You can blame the team for putting any damper on that with their loss to Iowa though. PSU was two weeks ago. I’m not going to be sitting at the Badger game thinking “man what a game that was against Penn State”.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Weird to see PJ with a full head of hair, and it was only 4-5 years ago.
 

Wild guess: PJ showed "interest" in it, as a way of increasing leverage in the negotiation. Heck, it could've just been PJ's agent "letting that on".

Brohm did the same thing, with Louisville, when he got extended. It's not personal, it's just business.
 

If a coach is gonna take an ACC job and wants to compete for the CFP every year, I'm not sure the same division as Clemson is where you want to be. Dabo Swinney is young and Clemson is an ACC version of Ohio State in the ACC Atlantic.
 





Can't stop rumors and unnamed sources but I would be absolutely shocked at this point if Fleck was a candidate for the FSU job. The FSU job was open when he elected to sign his extension. If he was seriously interested in going there why would he sign an extension here and cost his potential new school an extra 6 million dollars to hire him? Makes no sense at all.

On top of all that, why give up a great situation here to go coach at a place that canned their last coach in under 2 years?
 

They are still paying the last coach. Not sure it’s much of a consideration in the opportunity. Won’t happen to me anyway.
 



His agent probably inquired about it for leverage reasons. Since he signed an extension with a $10 million buyout, that’s likely as far as it went.
 

PitinoFan said:
His agent probably inquired about it for leverage reasons. Since he signed an extension with a $10 million buyout, that’s likely as far as it went.
Click to expand...

Another article on Tomahawk Nation mentions Fleck and seems to think his $10 million buyout doesn't kick in until December. Anyone know if that's true? Would seem odd since the extension was approved by the regents and made official last week and also not sure why we would write that into the contract that he would basically have November to bail for a lower buyout.
 

WriterGoph said:
Another article on Tomahawk Nation mentions Fleck and seems to think his $10 million buyout doesn't kick in until December. Anyone know if that's true? Would seem odd since the extension was approved by the regents and made official last week and also not sure why we would write that into the contract that he would basically have November to bail for a lower buyout.
Click to expand...

That would be really odd.

'Here's your new contract. Buyout doesn't kick in until this little "hiring / firing period ends during late November". Then it applies through Jan 1 of the following season. So either get hired now, before December, or just wait until after next December!'
 

WriterGoph said:
Another article on Tomahawk Nation mentions Fleck and seems to think his $10 million buyout doesn't kick in until December. Anyone know if that's true? Would seem odd since the extension was approved by the regents and made official last week and also not sure why we would write that into the contract that he would basically have November to bail for a lower buyout.
Click to expand...

One story I saw said new buyout went into play on November 15th. But I really don't think any of this matters. FSU people grasping at straws, if Fleck was truly interested in going there he wouldn't have signed the extension.
 

I truly cannot understand why anyone would take the FSU job unless they got a monster deal or were woefully underqualified. Taggart went 5-7 (3-5) in year 1 at FSU. Fleck went 5-7 (2-7) in year 1 at Minnesota, arguably slightly worse. Taggart went 4-5 (3-4) in year 2 before he was fired on Nov 3rd. On Nov 3rd last year, Fleck was 4-5 (1-5). Would Fleck have been fired by the FSU AD in this case? Yeah, he probably would have, but look at what happened instead. Taggart probably thought he was safe for a little longer with an $18 million (!) buyout, so I don't know what sum of money you could attach to your buyout at FSU to make you feel like you'll have a fair shake through at least 3 years.
 

I'm pretty sure he will be on the wishlists of articles from writers and fans of many helmet schools. Previous blue-blood programs always act this way toward successful coaches of non-blue-blood programs, and always will. We (The U) does the same to lower-tier programs (such as the MAC).

The U is compensating PJ extremely well and giving him resources and respect. If the success continues, I expect more of both. He is building a legacy and an unmistakable identity in a place conducive to both. The fanbase loves him. I doubt you risk all of that compensation and comfort and stability unless an absolutely ridiculous offer were to be made. But, you never know.
 

WriterGoph said:
Another article on Tomahawk Nation mentions Fleck and seems to think his $10 million buyout doesn't kick in until December. Anyone know if that's true? Would seem odd since the extension was approved by the regents and made official last week and also not sure why we would write that into the contract that he would basically have November to bail for a lower buyout.
Click to expand...

This is not accurate. I took a look at the contract (which was signed by Fleck
on November 5), and there is no date stipulation at all. That being the case, it would go into affect when all parties had signed, which presumably would have been when the regents met on Friday, November 15.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom