Interesting GM Buy-out Language

[brandon.daniels]

Texas Tech is also expected to pay North Texas $750,000 to buy out the remainder of McCasland’s contract since he left before July 1, 2023.

The buyout was $1.5 million, but the contract Between McCasland and North Texas shows that amount is reduced by 50 percent if Wren Baker is no longer the UNT athletics director or employed by UNT. West Virginia hired Baker in late November to be its athletics director. The buyout is due in 60 days.

 

UNT’s Grant McCasland signs six-year contract, becomes 19th Texas Tech men’s basketball coach (msn.com)

[NorthTexasWeLove]

[Hunter Green]

What difference does it make whether Wren is here or not? GM still is/was our BB coach.

[El Paso Eagle]

There are all kinds of clauses in contracts. Some protect the schools some protect the coaches.

[Hunter Green]

2 minutes ago, El Paso Eagle said:

There are all kinds of clauses in contracts. Some protect the schools some protect the coaches.

Understood. But why would UNT sign such a clause knowing someone is going to recruit GM sooner or later. If they want him bad enough, then let them  pay up!

[CMJ]

I guess when Mac got here Baker and they really clicked and GM was hedging his bets to skip town easier if/when Baker left.

Edited April 5, 2023 by CMJ

[MeanGreenTeeth]

4 minutes ago, Hunter Green said:

Understood. But why would UNT sign such a clause knowing someone is going to recruit GM sooner or later. If they want him bad enough, then let them  pay up!

Because Wren negotiated the contract and 1) why would he care what happens after he leaves and 2) it disincentivized UNT from ever firing Wren (if they had wanted to) since it gimps the buyout clauses of the coaches... so yeah take from that what you will. 

[Cr1028]

39 minutes ago, Hunter Green said:

Understood. But why would UNT sign such a clause knowing someone is going to recruit GM sooner or later. If they want him bad enough, then let them  pay up!

They had the same thing In Littrell’s contract.

[El Paso Eagle]

51 minutes ago, Hunter Green said:

Understood. But why would UNT sign such a clause knowing someone is going to recruit GM sooner or later. If they want him bad enough, then let them  pay up!

If a school's not willing to work with a coach and the coach isn't willing to work with the school, there would probably be a lot of contracts that were never agreed to. It is definitely a risk versus rewards situation, but also both sides have to find things they can agree on and things they understand are beneficial for the other side.

[GMG_Dallas]

1 hour ago, MeanGreenTeeth said:

Because Wren negotiated the contract and 1) why would he care what happens after he leaves and 2) it disincentivized UNT from ever firing Wren (if they had wanted to) since it gimps the buyout clauses of the coaches... so yeah take from that what you will. 

Bingo. That type of language was to protect Wren.

The only clause I'd really like to see us include moving forward is what VCU does; require a home-and-home be scheduled with the HC's new school should he depart. VCU traveled to Alabama in 11-12 a few years after Anthony Grant went to Alabama. They hosted Alabama in 12-13. VCU hosted Texas in 17-18, 3 or 4 seasons after Smart went to UT then traveled to UT in 18-19. They hosted and beat #23 LSU in 19-20, a couple years after Will Wade went to LSU. VCU now gets a home-and-home with Penn State. Can we do the same?

[outoftown]

I get from a coaches perspective that he likes this, because usually the AD who hired you is the first line of defense against getting fired. And Mac had some leverage when negotiating the last time. However SL had essentially the same clause. And I will say what I said at the time: I get that coaches and ADs like them, as it benefits them both, but it is the regents job to say no to that because it is a clear conflict of interest. If this is the AD negotiating the contract with the coach, then both negotiating parties benefit from that clause at the detriment of the school.

It wasn't that crazy problematic this time (other than NT missing out on a bigger buyout), but imagine WB would have gotten a job closer to Denton. Chances are good he would have poached the succesful coaches (who would then have poached players) and would have been able to do it for almost nothing.

Its better to pay bigger bonuses than to allow this.

Edited April 7, 2023 by outoftown

[Matt from A700]

Should have been a Denton home game involved in the buyout.