Rich Rodriguez (official thread of last laughs)

[LightningRod]

OK, so you link a Detroit paper account of these emails, and that paper chose to remove the part about Pastilong and his department not being in the loop with respect to the emails addressing RR's agent's cry for change. In that same AP report that was also omitted by your Detroit paper, Pastilong was vilified By RR's agent for running an assistant AD out of WV. The assistant AD however refuted the agent's assertions and instead stated that the move to Missouri was a promotion and that he and Pastilong parted company on very good terms. But hey, if you like to float redacted news articles to support your position, have at it.

 

[NFBuck]

Remember when he was crying on the sidelines during the USF game? That was great.

 

[Steve19]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R91L7LhH-wg]YouTube - Monty Python and the Holy Grail - Bring out your dead!!![/ame]

 

[NastyDogg72]

I know you think RR is a shithead, but there's no way I'm gonna believe that he stewed in his own juices for months on wanting a culture change then blammo! emailed the president of the university to dime out his boss.

I'd hazard a guess that, being that the FOIA requires some heavy specifics when you request info, the only thing we've seen are the emails sent to the president because that's what was specifically requested.

I think it's pretty hard to dispute that the relationship between RR and the athletic department was deteriorating. Assign blame for the broken relationship in whatever way makes you happiest, but undeniably, it was bad. As suggested before, why would WVU handle their ex-coaches' buyouts so differently if there wasn't some kind of difference in the relationship?

HTM, you and I have agreed on some things in regards to this situation. Believe me that is hard to admit you being a fan of TSUN, but I do have a different take on your question as to why the buyouts have been handled differently.

The following facts I think you would admit as such

1. Beilen had not just courted another suitor the year before and signed an extension

2. Beilen received permission from the AD at WVU to speak with officials from TSUN, RR did not. I think this simple fact is playing more into it than anything else.

3. Beilen did not in his introductory press conference in AA vow to fight the buyout due to a breach of contract on the part of WVU.

Beilen simply handled the whole process better on his end than RR. There some other small things that are contributing to it but none of them on their own would cause much static. The more and more that goes on with this the more that the true driving force behind all of these problems comes to light in my opinion. In a previous post I stated I felt that RR's agent Brown was the root of all of this. I grow more convinced of this by the minute. The question to me on the emails is not who they were sent to, but who sent them. Why in the hell is the agent sending emails to the president of the university? You did your job you got RR the contract now let him handle his business. So much of what is going on with this traces right back to his doorstep. This to me is an agent trying to make a name for himself and considers himself bigger than the client. He is making a mess and WVU and RR are left to clean it up.

 

[buck e]

That's because you see a head coach you already hate. You couldn't be more transparent about that if you tried.

No argument here. But you can see his agent laying the groundwork for his departure... any reasonable person can see that.

 

[billmac91]

Remember when he was crying on the sidelines during the USF game? That was great.

 

[HailToMichigan]

HTM, you and I have agreed on some things in regards to this situation. Believe me that is hard to admit you being a fan of TSUN, but I do have a different take on your question as to why the buyouts have been handled differently.

The following facts I think you would admit as such

1. Beilen had not just courted another suitor the year before and signed an extension

2. Beilen received permission from the AD at WVU to speak with officials from TSUN, RR did not. I think this simple fact is playing more into it than anything else.

3. Beilen did not in his introductory press conference in AA vow to fight the buyout due to a breach of contract on the part of WVU.

Beilen simply handled the whole process better on his end than RR. There some other small things that are contributing to it but none of them on their own would cause much static. The more and more that goes on with this the more that the true driving force behind all of these problems comes to light in my opinion. In a previous post I stated I felt that RR's agent Brown was the root of all of this. I grow more convinced of this by the minute. The question to me on the emails is not who they were sent to, but who sent them. Why in the hell is the agent sending emails to the president of the university? You did your job you got RR the contract now let him handle his business. So much of what is going on with this traces right back to his doorstep. This to me is an agent trying to make a name for himself and considers himself bigger than the client. He is making a mess and WVU and RR are left to clean it up.

All of those are pretty solid unarguable facts. I'd still throw in the long-deteriorating relationship as a factor but everything you listed pretty clearly played a role too.

Interestingly (both because I normally harbor a great distrust for agents and because I'm the one defending RR) I'm cutting RR less slack than you on the Mike Brown thing. I figure the agent speaks for the client unless the client tells the agent to shut up. I notice Calvin Magee hasn't come out and tried to settle down the "bombshell" that Brown put out there with the race stuff, for example. I think in the case of the emails, RR was dealing directly with the AD and left the dealings with the president to the agent - none of us can correctly guess how much communication there was between agent and coach but I have to assume the agent spoke for the coach unless I hear otherwise. I'd obviously like to wholeheartedly believe the race stuff, for example, is just an agent running amok, but I don't think it's that easily dismissed.

I do think it would be a lot easier, and in everyone's best interest, to settle the lawsuit without agents or FOIA requests.

 

[NastyDogg72]

All of those are pretty solid unarguable facts. I'd still throw in the long-deteriorating relationship as a factor but everything you listed pretty clearly played a role too.

Interestingly (both because I normally harbor a great distrust for agents and because I'm the one defending RR) I'm cutting RR less slack than you on the Mike Brown thing. I figure the agent speaks for the client unless the client tells the agent to shut up. I notice Calvin Magee hasn't come out and tried to settle down the "bombshell" that Brown put out there with the race stuff, for example. I think in the case of the emails, RR was dealing directly with the AD and left the dealings with the president to the agent - none of us can correctly guess how much communication there was between agent and coach but I have to assume the agent spoke for the coach unless I hear otherwise. I'd obviously like to wholeheartedly believe the race stuff, for example, is just an agent running amok, but I don't think it's that easily dismissed.

I do think it would be a lot easier, and in everyone's best interest, to settle the lawsuit without agents or FOIA requests.

HTM, good points. As far as the agent goes I guess I am just of the train of thought that coaches are hired to coach football, now there are certainly political and PR responsibilities that go with their positions but I look at them in some way like the CEO of a corporation, many of the decisions they make are based upon the trusted advice from those they put in place around them. RR hired his agent to help him with the "business" end of college football and it just seems to me the advice he is giving is causing more harm than good. Now in the end does the responsibility fall on RR for how he acts on that advice? Absolutely, but I think Brown is just as much at fault for the advice given as RR is for how he uses it. I think most people would be surprised at how the dynamics of this whole situation would change if Mike Brown was eliminated from the equation.

 

[HoltWVU75]

boils down to Rich is a control freak...wanted total control of the football program without any oversight....and the school said no...so he took his ball and left......

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

Excerpt from a PM I just got from a BP member whom I trust very much:

I have a copy of RR's amended signed contract and he is screwed, First off, there is an integration clause in the contract that provides that any amendments to the agreement must be in writing and signed by the parties. The second problem he has is that the contract provides that each party must first give the other party written notice of any perceived breach before any action may be taken under the contract in order to allow the alleged offending party an opportunity to correct the alleged violations. RR did not do this.

 

[buck e]

boils down to Rich is a control freak...wanted total control of the football program without any oversight....and the school said no...so he took his ball and left......

Yep. Heard something along the lines that Rodriguez wanted a separate department set up for just the football program.

 

[methomps]

Excerpt from a PM I just got from a BP member whom I trust very much:

I'm not up on my West Virginia law, but no-oral modification agreements are generally not enforceable ("The hand that pens a writing may not gag the mouths of the assenting parties.")

As to the written notice of breach, I wonder if email is sufficient.

 

[sandgk]

A Second Resignation Letter filed by Rodriguez: ESPN
A second report on the same here: Detroit Free Press
The new resignation letter was obtained by AP.

I'm interested by the take methomps has on this, given the no hand that pens a writing may gag the mouths of assenting parties.

Anyway - gist of the claims:

More than two weeks after he was sued over a $4 million buyout clause in his contract at West Virginia, Rich Rodriguez turned in a second resignation letter, claiming university president Mike Garrison reneged on a deal to reduce and possibly eliminate that clause.

Unsurprisingly - WVU claims completely the converse.

Jeffrey Wakefield, the school's attorney in the case, denied Friday that such a promise was made.
The letter obtained by The Associated Press and bearing Rodriguez's name is an indication of the tack his legal defense will take when he files a response to that lawsuit in U.S. District Court. The deadline is Feb. 4.
Rodriguez resigned with a one-sentence letter on Dec. 18 to take the coaching job at Michigan, touching off a bitter public dispute in which each side has accused the other of lying. The latest letter is dated Jan. 10.
"President Garrison made no agreement to reduce or eliminate the buyout clause," Wakefield told the AP. "The agreement between Mr. Rodriguez and the university is that which is set forth in the contract, and the terms of the contact are clear and unambiguous.
"And it's important to note," he added, "that Mr. Rodriguez had the benefit of counsel representing him as well as a financial agent throughout the negotiations leading up to the signing of the contract."

Now, just color me naive, but why would you sign a contract that contained a clause which was completely unacceptable to you?

Well here is RR's explanation:

Rodriguez ultimately signed the new contract with WVU on Aug. 24, 2007.
Though the university has acknowledged it planned to reduce his buyout clause to $2 million in 2008, the Jan. 10 letter claims that Garrison told Rodriguez "he did not believe in buyouts" and might eliminate it entirely.
"He knew I did not want to sign it with the large buyout but assured me that as soon as he took office he would address it," the letter says. "I told him the $4 million buyout was unfair and Garrison agreed but said the Board of Governors would not change it at the time due to publicity concerns."
E-mails from Garrison chief of staff Craig Walker show the university was still working on Rodriguez's demands as of Dec. 13, 2007, and the administration has told the AP it did not change its position after that date.
Rodriguez's letter, however, claims that he was told on Dec. 15 in a private meeting with Garrison that the university had done all it could and would not honor his outstanding requests.

So boiling this down to it's core.

Everything WVU says it was going to do contractually in re a buy-out it has in writing.

Everything RR claims WVU would do to address his concerns about the buy-out he has as verbal reportage - which is contested in detail by contrary statements from WVU.

One of these two sides is lying. One of these two sides is stupid.

The only issue left to decide is whether the stupid and the lying are one and the same.

 

[LightningRod]

Who said contract law was boring.

....

Rodriguez began the letter with his recollection of a discussion at that contract-signing meeting in his Puskar Center office.

"Mike Garrison stated that he did not believe in buyouts and that if I wanted to leave ... 'the buyout would be reduced to 2 million or eliminated altogether,' " Rodriguez wrote. "He knew I did not want to sign it with the large buyout but assured me that as soon as he took office [in September] he would address it."

Rodriguez wrote that he also felt duped into that $4 million buyout when originally signing a term sheet Dec. 8, 2006, when the extension was first reached to prevent him from jumping to Alabama. He said that university officials told him then that the donors who funded his new deal demanded such a hefty price tag, and he said he later discovered the donors hadn't asked for it.

Wakefield, however, said Garrison made no such statement Aug. 24 about changing the buyout terms.

"The university's stance is to deny such an agreement and comment was made," Wakefield said.

Rodriguez signed extensions June 24, 2006, and again last August, but it's a clause in his original deal, signed Dec. 21, 2002, that plays a vital role here. That contract carries what is called an integration clause, meaning that no other contracts or agreements are binding unless signed by both parties. University lawyers specified that clause in the lawsuit they filed Dec. 27 seeking the full $4 million buyout from Rodriguez.

Paul Haagen, co-director of the Duke law school's Center for Sports Law and Policy, said a verbal contract normally carries as much clout as a written one -- except where an integration clause exists.

"If it does [exist] here, the written agreement is the final agreement and the verbal agreement cannot be introduced," Haagen said. Although, he added, Rodriguez's side could argue for fraud: "Essentially, 'Did they trick him into signing?' "

Even if Rodriguez's lawyers can prove Garrison made the remark, other factors come into play.

"Does [Garrison] have the authority to bind or control the university? That's not self-evident. Was he expressing a view or an opinion, or was he making a commitment?" Haagen said. A judge could force Garrison to keep his word if it was indeed a promise and if Rodriguez relied on that basis, he added.

 

[OH10]

Just so I have this straight (and I'm going off of newspaper articles, so I may not):

RichRod signed a new contract December 2006 with a buyout clause. The written contract contained an integration clause. He claims, at the time the agreement was signed, he was assured that the buyout would be substantially reduced and/or eliminated by a guy who may or may not have had the authority to bind the university.

Sounds like a simple application of the parol evidence rule to me. If the verbal statements were made at or before the contract was put in writing, and they contradict the written terms, the verbal statements are meaningless.

In addition, if the verbal statements came after the contract was signed, it could be a valid modification ONLY if RichRod gave consideration - and it sounds like he did not.

In other words, RichRod is screwed unless he can prove fraud - which is extremely difficult.