OT: Kiffin gets USC sued over coach hire
The Titans have sued USC for tortious interference with contract because USC hired the Titans' RB coach as their OC.
... a USC alum, no less.
"I'm not here to make friends. I'm here to make horrible mistakes."
On the bright side, USC shouldn't have difficulty paying off any damages, as they have 30 planned scholarships coming off the books.
... Really is the gift that keeps on giving.
...is the Lindsey Lohan of college football (minus the early career success).
I'm pretty sure he decided to steal his OC after watching Mean Girls.
I would trade my RB coach for his wife.
too harsh
the chances that hayden shit cans him at the end of the year if he keeps bringing negative press to USC???
For our sake, I hope none. I really enjoy having him at usc just for entertainment value.
Considering the pending sanctions when Kiffin took the job (and the fact that a couple of others had already passed on it), my guess is he has a stong buyout clause, i.e. a guarantee of a certain number of years to get through the sanctions and if he is fired earlier they owe most if not all of the remaining years on the contract. If its is a 5-year deal at $4 million per year, that would be $16 million remaining at the end of this season (and that does not count likely 1-year buyouts for OCs and top assistants). Hayden might want to get rid of Kiffin, but it will be expensive.
not Hayden Fry.....c'mon men.
than Lane Kiffin.
*other than Dantonio.
Tressel
This, very much so.
How big of a jump is NFL RB coach to college OC?
I owe Al Davis an apology for thinking he was crazy for the way he fired Lane Kiffin !
Al was spot on !
Al Davis is looking smarter everyday with that firing. I also thought that the old dude was losing it, but i was wrong or maybe Kiffin is realy that bad.
...the elements the Titans must prove against USC are the following:
(1) The existence of a valid contract between the Titans and the RB coach;
(2) USC's knowledge of that contract;
(3) USC's intentional acts designed to induce a breach or disruption of the contractual relationship;
(4) Actual breach or disruption of the contractual relationship; and
(5) Resulting damage.
(Reeves v. Hanlon (2004) 33 Cal. 4th 1140.)
EDIT: Just noticed the complaint was filed in Davidson County (my erstwhile county of residence), so the Reeves elements may be slightly different. I wouldn't expect a radical change.
The hardest part is proving the amount of damages. The only way Kiffin and USC can reasonably argue they did not know they would likely be inducing Pola to break an existing contract is if he told them (i.e. lied to them) and said he did not have one. And the Titans are suing both Pola and USC, so if he lied he is screwed legally. How to calculate the damages, who knows. My guess is this will settle for a couple hundred thousand plus legal fees at some point. This is just the Titans being royally pissed off about the timing and finding a way to make their point.
I think this is a publicity stunt by the Titans since their team is mediocre. What better way to build a fanbase than to kick the one guy that is hated in Tenn more than RR is hated in WV. I can see this being like a USFL lawsuit where they win, but damages are $1.
For everyone else Kiffin truly is the gift that keeps on giving.
I don't know about a publicity stunt- what USC and Kiffin did here is fucking absurd, and is definitely a tortious act if what I've read is true. The thing will be damages, as another poster said. There's no fucking way that they can rationally say they didn't think he was under contract with Tennesse. And, as was pointed out, if so, then they can get the rb coach-turned-oc, because he certainly knew.
Damages, though...man, that'd be interesting. I imagine you'd need some pretty esoteric accounting to show it, such as "offense gained x less yards; running backs did y less on the ground, which led to z less wins, which led to a less revenues," etc. That would definitely be very difficult to prove and rise to the level of Daubert for expert opinion in Federal court. (I'm assuming this is in Federal Court; if not, it should end up there at some point, right? Diversity jurisdiction. Because RB coach is now domiciled in CA, pretty much, and USC is a private institution domiciled in CA, really- there's no way he could get a fair trial in state court in TN, and I'd say it's pretty clear his domicile has changed since he's now SC's offensive coordinator, otherwise no lawsuit...and the Titans are most assuredly either a Tennessee corporation or a Delaware corporation. Thus, I would imagine it ends up in the US District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee if it continues.)
Also, the standard will be whatever the prevailing precedent in Tennessee is, as if USC continues with this, they will remove it to Federal court, which is their right, and then it will be up to the Federal court to interpret the state law in Tennessee for tortious interference.
There is absolutely no way USC or Kiffen can say they didn't know the guy was unbder contract since the Titans just hired him this year. A quick minute of internet research can find that fact.
the jury pool.
...please! I am in love with the fact that I get more more in depth legal reporting on Mgoblog regarding college football contracts than I can find in the newspaper on Supreme Court rulings. Huzzah for Michigan Law!
Anyone know what the USC fan base really thinks about Lane Kiffin? It seems that the rest of the country thinks he is a complete moron. I hope he takes them down even farther before he finally gets dumped.
He is the only person that can make Al Davis seem sane....
My brother in law likes Lane, or he's too stubborn to admit USC did something dumb when they hired him (he insisted it was a good hire when it happened).
However, if Lane doesn't win early, he's going to be on the super hot seat out here quickly. I hope he makes them look bad.
On a side note, I have a bet with said BIL over how long RR stays at UM. He wins if RR makes it less than 4 years total. If RR coaches the first game of 2012, I win. I'm pretty confident.
And the first game of 2012 will be the Rose Bowl.
Totally.
I'm pretty sure that wouldn't count, but I'm also pretty sure that if RR coaches us to the Rose Bowl in 2011 his job is pretty safe.
coaches in any new year's day game -- you're safe; start spending that money.
...out here in Los Angeles is both pretty devoted and disinclined to acknowledge the negatives surrounding both the former program and their puzzling new leader. Pete Carroll was in no way responsible for the Reggie Bush thing, which was political anyway, and Bush came from a difficult situation, and the good things always get overlooked, and Kiffin has powerful enemies in the national media... etc. etc. etc.
All you really need to do is go to one USC home game, tap a keg on the front steps of the Public Diplomacy Building (no joke!), or visit OJ's Heisman at Heritage Hall, and it all kind of makes sense. Even for a Michigan Alum, the atmosphere is intimidating. And disturbing.
Anyone know what the USC fan base really thinks about Lane Kiffin? It seems that the rest of the country thinks he is a complete moron. I hope he takes them down even farther before he finally gets dumped.
He is the only person that can make Al Davis seem sane....
Per the article:
"The lawsuit also accuses USC and Kiffin of violating Pola's contract that required him to have written permission to discuss a job with anyone other than the Titans."
How do USC and Kiffin violate Pola's contract? This has nothing to do with the tortious interference claim, but USC is not a party to Pola's contract with the Titans. I think Pola was the one that violated it by not obtaining written permission...
I think Pola is also a defendant in the suit. If not, they could easily amend the complaint to add him (he is the appropriate defendant for that claim). But you are right, it would be hard (impossible?) to sue Kiffin and USC for Pola's failure to obtain permission as required under the contract.
won goodwill from all Volunteer fans...
More butt-hurt whining from the state of Tennessee. Frankly, I'm stunned.
Pola got offered a better job and he took it. Just like every football coach ever, he was already under contract somewhere else (that is why you put buyout clauses in the guy's contract if you want to keep him). This lawsuit is a ridiculous waste of the court's time and pretty much the height of gayness.
Home girl's like 6'4"!
But I'm pretty sure I looked at that picture a split-second (or ten) too long.
Not a bad lookin' fella.
I wonder if the wife is sick of this putz?
Do you think she slaps him in the back of the head everytime this stuff comes out?
should be on her when she scrapes her teeth on Lane's Kiffin.
He is reportedly making $4 million per year and likely has at least a 5 year contract. She is being well compensated for putting up with him.
so now everytime you hire an asst coach, you have to be ready to be hit with a lawsuit by the other school?
as much as i dislike usc and kiffin, i hope they win this one. i think it would set a bad precident going forward. buyout clauses are one thing, but this...
Can you point to the other school involved, please?
Pro coaching contracts are likely significantly different.
follow Kiffin? Reeks of a phony
About how many people, other than Michael Douglas, could you say both his father and his wife are far more interesting?
@umchicago: Don't think this applies more broadly, problem was Kiffin didn't get the Titans consent to talk to RB coach first, that's why you always see media outlets quote the GM of team a saying they haven't been contacted by team b about talking to coach z.
Related but seperate, threads featuring legal precedents more frequently than troll behavior - one of the many reasons I love mgoblog.
On Monday, Tennessee Football Inc., the company that owns the Titans, filed a suit accusing Kiffin and USC of violating Pola's contract.
Kiffin, in New York on Tuesday for a Pac-10 media event, says Pola's hiring "was done no differently than any we did at SC or Tennessee. I didn't anticipate this. No one would have."
http://sports.espn.go.com/los-angeles/ncf/news/story?id=5415290
Sad part about this, is that Kiffin is trying to play innocent. Sorry Lane, no one is going to believe that lame act.