I would wait until year 4 to be thinking about an extension personally.
Most coaches contracts are renegotiated typically with two years remaining on their current contracts for two reasons. One being the body of work is there to conclude whether the team is heading in right direction or not. The second reason is if you are coaching in the final year of your contract without negotiations you are seen as a lame duck coach. In other words no recruit is signing with you.
The other approach is to go the ND route and sign him for the next millennium after one good season. Money well spent IME.
When/if he strings together 10 win seasons, I'll advocate for one. Until said time occurs any talk is foolish. He has not earned an extension.
It's very early yet to tell if ND's current coach is going to work out, but they signed Weiss to a long term deal worth a ton of dough, and that was definitely NOT money well spent. Although I enjoyed it greatly, if I were on the ND board of trustees, I would want a head to roll for that.
And you want Michigan to follow that example? After back to back losing seasons for the first time in almost 50 years?
I definitely hope RR works out and wins tons of Big Ten and National championships, but he's got to beat a team that's not in the MAC before I am ready to crown him the next Yost. I definitely agree with the post that says you extend with 2 years to go. I think that is very likely some of the reason for the 6 year deal. It gives him time to prove himself without ever becoming a lame duck coach and hurting recruiting.
Psst, hey buddy, it was sarcasm. Thought the millennium thing might tip it off.
All of the people jumping up to award a lifetime achievement award just because we beat a bad MAC team and scored a lot of points was making me crazy.
I agree. In this thread reality is missing in more than a few posts. If we keep winning and the recruits start pouring in then it is something a little more worthy of debate.
"The other approach is to go the ND route and sign him for the next millennium after one good season. Money well spent IME."
you, sir, are in error. such an outstanding move, the ultimate sign of brilliance, comes only from a clear beacon of leadership as our previous athletic director.
after all, it wasn't that long ago that our basketball program embodied medocrity. look at where we are now! thank you bill martin!
releases its findings.
has already released its findings. UM has determined what its punishment should be, its now up to the NCAA to determine if the punishment is adequete.
I love what I have seen so far. I do think the defense will be shaky the rest of the way, but I have seen some improvement. The offense is going to be flat out scary going forward. I have said all along, if RR gets through this year it is going to get fun. I fully expect to be at the top of the Big Ten competing for a championship next season. I actually like the way this year sets up now for a very good record.
This week has to be a win and then MSU is a huge, huge game. A win there and RR is safe imo. I could easily see a 9-3 or 10-2 type season IF we get past the next two.
It's way too early to talk about RR's contract status, either positively or negatively.
He will get his just reward in time, whatever that may be.
Let's wait until we get more results.
I clicked on this thread expecting a shitstorm. This is a nice change of pace, to be able to talk about a contract extension
I'm glad to see our fanbase constantly fast forwarding to futures of doom or glory depending on what happened last Saturday.... /s
I've thought about this and how it would permanently stop the talk about RR's Hot Seat, quiet the critics, and make WV's heads' explode but find myself stopping myself due to the fact that it's too early to tread there. I like what RR is doing and hope he's with us for a while (which would mean we'd be winning).
not asking for an extension now. Curious if you would give him an extension if the team went 9-3, which is what I proposed.
Well of course you wouldn't. You don't want him to be the coach right now.
Why must you talk down to everyone? "Adults", like I am not an adult.
Because he is a grumpy dick
It seems in both cases the violations you talk about are a cause of the compliance departments misunderstanding of the rules. After all, WVU continued the same practices after RR left so it's not like it was his evil intention to "over practice" by having QC staffers help with stretching.
Is Calipari's value really marred by his "major violations" at two university which will in all likelyhood be three universities in the near future.
This is way too premature. Just a month ago he was on the hot seat. If something happens and we only go 7-5, or even 6-6, he would be back on the hot seat. We started out 4-0 last year. Let's not get too cocky-our 2nd half of the year is much tougher than the 1st.
I understand the stance of it being early. We don't want to be Notre Dame ala Weis. But, I do think it would do 2 things for this program. Show confidence in RR, and help with recruiting. Kids want to play for one coach, not sign up for a program where they may or may not have the same coach throughout their career.
you want into a contract. You want to make it contingent on him wearing a maize wristband or NCAA sanctions that are < losing scholarships or whatever, fine. You can't be rational on this topic and no one should listen to you.
I'm not arguing for him to get an extension right now. I don't care either way. So you can stop right there with the "you're not rational!" argument.
Anyways, my point stands. Giving him an extension wouldn't "bind our hands legally" unless we want it to. If DB loved him as a coach and his only concern was harsh violations, he would simply draft around it. I draft these exact sort of contracts for a living, so yes I know what the hell I'm talking about.
and this is the type of thread we come up with
How is there no value? If DB thinks he's great for whatever reason he would give the extension and a pay raise. The value is in retaining an attractive employee and making his job easier re: recruiting and boost morale. It's not rocket science. Further, they are 95% of the way through the sanctions process and have a really good idea how they will end. If the issue still gave them heartburn they would draft around the risk - notwitstanding the foregoing, if employee is employed while the university experiences NCAA sanctions [THIS BIG] then employee may be terminated for Cause as defined in section [ ] of the Agreement and will not be eligible for any severance amounts.
The NCAA sanctions woudn't and shouldn't factor into the decision to extend his contract. That's all I've said and all I will say.
is an extremely common word in legal documents, especially employment contracts. It lets you say a bunch of stuff and promise things and then say yeah but if X happens then the above doesn't apply. I get the sense you haven't seen many transactional documents, merger agreements, severance agreements, employment agreements ERISA plans, etc. You are embarrassing yourself.
Yes, executives avoid issues in agreements all the time because the likelihood of a particular outcome is very remote. The goodwill lost in bringing up some issues and hostility it creates in negotiations is often not worth it for the company (here, the university). Lawyers bring up the risks (yes, all of them, no malpractice) and tell the client to make a business decision. Here, I agree sanctions are a big concern. They would use language similar to what I wrote above. It would be built into the definition of termination for Cause or inserted directly into the severance payments provisions. Just because you are a lawyer (if you are) doesn't mean you know anything about executive comp. It's obvious you don't.
is that I forgot the h? You got me. Now, address the rest of the argument.
You have been and continue to embarrass yourself in this thread. You made an idiotic point, I came back with a counterpoint from having, you know, actually drafted and negotiated these exact agreements.
Your counterpoint? "Nuh uh your probably not even a lawyer!"
My response is to offer up language I've used and seen used dozens of times to draft provisos and contingencies in employment agreements and to tell you the (blindingly obvious) benefits of providing highly compensated employees more money and giving them more job security (again, without debating whether this would be warranted by RR's performance).
Your counterpoint? "You misspelled notwithstanding."
Seriously, man. Don't you run a bar or something? I remember you saying that in the epic Michigan smoking ban thread. Maybe you have your law degree too but you don't appear to be a practicing executive compensation lawyer. Your performance in this exchange was utter fail.
3. Good memory. I do own bars and am an attorney who drafts performance contracts for entertainers on a regular basis.
Sitting in a fleabag bar he owns and drafting up contracts for strippers, local rap start wannabees and wedding bands/singers?
The only reason they don't have contracts is because they have you for an attorney ;) Sorry, I couldn't resist some fun little jabs. All in good fun, lawyer jokes are always funny right? We did find some common ground, because in that thread you were slingin' some sense my friend, no doubt. Here, not so much.... I am extremely familiar with contracts myself and typically handle my own negotiations for media and tech agreements working exclusively at start-ups and not having direct access to legal resources. Admittedly I'm not an attorney (did take classes at UM Law, but Real Estate Law and such doesn't really apply), but logic in this case doesn't necessarily warrant a degree. Please find the actual text in his contract that indicates Rich Rodriguez is currently in breech (kidding, had you going there, I know it is breach, you were going to jump all over that weren't you?) of his contract. Then please compare that to the actual charges, because, if I'm not mistaken, the only charge levied specifically at RR was disputed in the response from UM (failure to promote atmosphere of compliance, or something to that effect), which until ruled otherwise is still only a charge. Until the NCAA officially accepts or rejects M's response and self-imposed sanctions, he really cannot be in breach of his contract. Unless you think his contract reads that he is in breach merely because an accusation has been made, which no attorney anywhere would ever accept on either side. Would you?
Whatever clause may exist that could potentially result in RR's termination will certainly not be invoked no matter what the NCAA concludes. I would be fairly confident that the clause is worded in such a way as to leave it to the discretion of David Brandon and MSC in determining if any infraction is egregious enough to warrant dismissal. Even if they wanted to remove him 'for cause', which I doubt, they would find it tough sledding legally because they just participated in an in-depth investigation conducted by a third party and formulated a comprehensive response to the NCAA based on those findings that unquestionably characterized the infractions as minor, and specifically excepted the charges against the coach as inaccurate. To turn around and say, 'oh wait, we want to fire him, therefore we now think it IS is fault and he should be dismissed' is the legal equivalent to a witness stating, 'I know I said he was not guilty earlier, but now my goal has changed and I want to testify that he IS guilty.' I wouldn't want to be the attorney trying to make that case.
We actually do agree on that in some sense, but probably from different angles.
First off, no contract extension during this season makes sense. Though post-bowl game (assuming) 'discussions in earnest' would commence with some form of agreement reached with a variance based on the results of 2011. I agree RR would not want to enter negotiations now because he will be, Football Gods willing, in a much better position to negotiate after this year and/or next, assuming he gets the team where it needs to be. M, on the other hand, would be looking to open talks earlier rather than later and get some kind of MOU or something in place before RR completely 'arrives' just because he will be cheaper at that point. If RR were to win a MNC (again, purely conjecture for the sake of argument) before an extension, his stock goes through the roof and he will cost more to keep.
lol, you really do like to flash your ignorance at every available opportunity don't you? How you can possibly think you are speaking from some position of authority in terms of contract negotiations and then react to the word 'notwithstanding' is beyond me. It is clear that you have never sniffed a real contract in your whole life. I guess it shouldn't surprise me at all, given that your utter lack of knowledge with regard to the game of football hasn't prevented you from attempting to debate that either. Let's face it, the only thing you contribute to this board, or will ever contribute to this board, is anti-RR vitriole. It is all you know. Things must be tough for you these days if you are still trying to hang your hat on him getting ousted by NCAA sanctions. Keep reaching.
Also, not surprising that you would be intimately familiar with a film like 'My Cousin vinny', which no doubt is one of your faves.
I am not sure what you mean and frankly your response sounds a bit arrogant. I think there always is a potential benefit or risk of negotiating a contract. Say RR wanted security and UM could sign him up for 5 more years at 1 mil per year. You might say "no way, too risky" for UM but another person could say "yes, much risk but huge upside of getting 5 more years on the cheap for taking a risk that RR will turn things around." And you can draft in any other provisions you want. There may not be a need for an extension right now but there is always a potential benefit if the terms are right. As Morpheus would say "free your mind." You need a creative side to your thinking.
clouds your "analysis." As someone mentioned downthread, re-negotiating college fb head coaching contracts years before they expire is standard and very common. If it doesn't come in the next 1.5 years, its as good as a vote of no confidence. As I mentioned earlier (and you conveniently ignored) there are many benefits to doing so, most obviously in recruiting. And recruiting allows RR to perform better.
The people you are referring to think he should get an extension in the next 2.5 MONTHS (as long as he's brought back, no matter how the season goes). 1.5 years from now is a long ways away.
IANAL, but I know the difference between "factual" and "tactical". Jesus christ, dude. Misusing "factual" in a argument over legal terms and legal skill on the internet sort of disqualifies you from life in general.
"Now, if RR were the hottest coach in the nation, fielding calls from coast to coast, then we'd have an interest in reworking his deal."
Seriously, divorce yourself from your seriously malformed ego for a second and reread the condescending, ingorant drivel you're typing. The way he's been treated by "fans" like you, the scenario you're painting as "perfect" is too late. As soon as he gets a decent offer, he'd be gone.
You lock up a commodity when you know it's valuable. Period. Waiting to renegotiate until everyone else joins the party just ends up costing you even more. Renegotiating doesn't have to mean you're throwing the bank at him, it could just mean you want to lock him up further into the future.
WV sat on him and while they did renegotiate his contract, they then didn't come through on many of the terms and in general held a smug attitude that he wouldn't go elsewhere, assuming that they had him in the bag. Ask them how that worked out for them.
I don't think anyone reasonably expects a contract extension until after this season at the earliest, but not getting into at least deeply meaningful talks in the off-season would definitely put him at risk to leave and who could blame him?
and I have been for a long time before he came here; so the fan in me would obviously like to lock him up in a long term deal.
But looking at it logically, I would STILL want to lock him up following a successful season for the exact explanation you just gave.
premature. Particularly given all of the controversy due to his record and practice gate.
That said, the only way I see RR's contract extended is if he wins it all. And I am not talking about the Big Ten.
Wait, so you think that if we don't win a National Championship by 2013, Rich Rod should be fired? If so, holy crap, am I glad you're not in charge of that decision! I'm hoping I misread your post...
not the next few. Of course RR will be extended if the team consistently shows improvement in the next few years. But based on only this year, at the end of the year, the only way I see Bandon giving an extension would be a NC (kind of like what happened with Steve Fisher). Based on the last 2 years, and given the problems RR has had in Ann Arbor, I don't think that is unreasonable.
Why would the OP be asking about contract extensions that would occur in 2011 or 2012 now? I thought it was reasonable to assume that he was basing it to the results we are seeing this season, and limiting it to this year.
That's an idiotic thing to say. The goal is to win Championships and if he is making progress towards a Conference Championship, he will get an extension - before he wins it. Not renewing the contract if he doesn't win a National Championship - that's just a stupid comment.
Judging my your handle, I'm guessing I know where you stand. For a second, think about this as a business person. Blue Durham was being facetious; his point was that neither one of those things are going to happen this year. We all hope so in the future. You've been here way too long to make a comment like that.
Bo should have never gotten a contract extension since he never won it all.
won a NC. Should they have fired him?
The question was what would it take for a contract extension THIS YEAR. He's saying it would take a NC to get an extension THIS YEAR. Not that he'll never get one if he hasn't won a NC by the end of his contract. Yeesh.
Why in the hell would we be talking about contract extensions in 2011 or beyond based on 4 games in 2010? And references to Bo? Bo didn't have 2 consecutive losing seasons and NCAA issues to start his career in Ann Arbor. The situations are different.
RR competes regularly for the Big Ten from now on, of course he will be in Ann Arbor for as long as he wants (read: that means contract extensions). But not this year.
...this is certainly a departure from the weekly "fire RichRod" and/or "next week is a trap game" topics.
I really don't think a contract extension is necessary unless we somehow win the Big Ten or end up with 10 or more wins. Honestly I believe that Rich Rod is here for the long hall and I'm happy for that. That being said, I think the University can probably just relax on Rich Rod's contract atleast until after next season. GO BLUE!!
David Brandon would have to be pretty hard up to pursue an extension for Rod.
Unless we win the big ten or something, I'd rather wait and see what happens next year.
We don't want another year of uncertainty. If Brandon thinks RR is worth retaining for 2011, he should extend his contract. It's SOP for your coach to always have a few extra years on the back end. We can afford any buyout that might be necessary.
But he would have a few extra years. He's under contract til 2013.
This isn't like pro sports. Every college coach has 4-5 extra years on his contract. If you let a coach go to year four of a six-year deal, that's a de facto vote of no confidence - and will be used against us in recruiting.
What Lloyd Carr had (and I'd bet a lot of other coaches have) was a rolling contract, in which his deal was automatically extended by a year everytime a season ended. I expect RR to get something like that if he's retained. I'd be very surprised if nothing were done to his contract.
I don't think Lloyd got his rolling year till 1997. If even 2012 was his last year, he'd probably have to do an extension. With a year after that, he's hardly a lame duck. And after 4-0, 7-5 and 3-5 in the Big Ten is hardly someone you want to tack on a lot of extra years to. So his original point, unless winning 10 games (which might be a bit high...I certainly think 9 could be overachieving, and a good 8 might be worth an extension), I don't know that bringing him back in 2011 automatically means an extension. Because the alternative is if the season doesn't merit on extension, and you're not sure, you should get rid of him. And I'd like to think 7-5 or 8-4 deserves another swing at it, even if one wouldn't want to nominate him "coach for life."
I don't think you understand how this works. Nowadays, every college coach has a bunch of extra years on his deal.. It's considered important for recruiting. If your coach only has two years left on his deal, you're hanging him out to dry. There is no downside to extending a coach's deal, other than that it makes the buyout a little more expensive. That's not a concern for us.
How cheap Michigan is. They've been nickel and diming their athletic department employees for decades. Money does matter. If you have any stats on how many coaches who are on their first contract have more than 2 years oft on their deal, I'd be glad to look at them. Since you're in the know.
His contract should extend at least 4 years in the future so every freshman recruit knows he will be there for their senior year.
When Drew Sharp says it's time, then it's time.
I'm for RR getting an extension and more money. It's easy to see not only how far this team has come but also how they've represented the University of Michigan with nothing but class. RR doesn't make any excuses and the results on offense speak for itself. Once the defense comes around and we get more depth there this team is going to compete each year for a Big Ten and BCS title.
I like your optimism, but I think you might be a little too optimistic/ early. I mean, I'm all for RR being the coach and succeeding, but I think you're going a little overboard here. On several occasions hes made hints that pass blame on to Lloyd for "leaving the cupboards bare". Michigan also was cited for major NCAA violations under his watch (not necessarily his fault blah blah blah, but I don't know that it
"represents the university well"). You also mention that his results on offense "speak for itself". While the offense put up good numbers last year, and through 4 games they've look outstanding this year, we did just play 4 teams, 2 with poor defenses and 2 with questionable defenses.
Also, as another poster pointed out, his value has probably taken a slight hit due to the negative attention hes recieved over the last couple years. If you do extend, to help with recruiting, I don't know how much more money we'd be paying him. I'd be surprised if $/yr went up substantially from what we're paying him now.
So, I like where we're heading, but like many other posters point out, I think it would be smart to wait how we do in the b10 before extending.
when we are preseason number 1 and things are rolling. I think RR will be a MMan for a decade after that.
Some of the detractors of RR, who wanted him gone after this season, are changing their tune and now are willing to wait until Denard is gone before firing RR.
I believe every day RR learns what it means to be the head coach at Michigan. Every day he becomes aware that coaching here is different than most places. This isn't your next job.....it's your final destination.
It's taken some time but he's definitely weaving himself into the fabric of the University of Michigan. While he weaves himself in, he's (hopefully) realizing that he won't have to negotiate any more contracts, so to speak. Our past football coaches have all been rewarded handsomely for doing the job that's expected of them: bringing success on the field, representing the school with dignity, and producing Michigan Men.
I believe RR understands that. If all goes as planned, he'll never have to ask for another dime because he knows that stuff will take care of itself (as it has in the past).
I think people are just being premature on both sides of this. First, although I agree that a contract extension would go a long way with recruiting, but as we all know with Charlie Weis, a contract extension doesn't mean that you WILL be the coach, only that the University is obligated to pay you for the number of years that they have promised. The best thing for RR to do is to win. The sniping will stop and he will be just like any other head coach at a premier institution.
I also think that those who believe that there should be some concrete measurement of number of wins in order to keep the job are also wrong. Dave Brandon had said in the past that there was no specific number of wins that were needed, he just needed to see continued improvement in the team in areas that RR has direct control over. RR can't be held responsible for injuries to his players. He can, in some circumstances, be held responsible for athletes who have clearinghouse issues and transfers. This reflects poorly on the University.
Lastly, I think the magnitude of the University's response will be inversely correlated to the number of wins the team has. High number of wins =little repercussion. Just keep winning, it cures all ills.
I'm still not convinced, and I wouldn't extend his contract just yet.
1. We started out 4-0 last year.
2. Our defense doesn't look much better
3. Without Denard we would be 2-2 right now.
4. The NCAA still looms
10-2 RR gets a new contract
9-3 RR keeps his job.
8-4 It's a toss up
7-5 RR packs his bags
"Without Denard we would be 2-2 right now."
First of all, what do you mean "we?"
Secondly, you don't know that Forcier and/or Gardner couldn't have helped win the first four.
Third, why do you expect Michigan to apologize for having Denard on their team? Most of the other elite programs that recruited Denard refused to give him a chance to play QB. It was RR and Michigan who gave him the chance to fulfill his goals and play QB, not the other teams.
So-called "fans" who make statments like yours about "their" team should be forced to wear a scarlet "L" tattoo on their foreheads for the duration of football season.
Without Mallet Arkansas would be X-Y. Without Player P, team D, would be X-Y. you are looking at a well-oiled offense structured to take very good advantage of an incredible player, so that is a strike against RR? Really? And, as previously mentioned, the other QBs look like they would be fully capable of running this offense to Ws, albeit it may need to be re-focused a bit for their particular talents and DG needs a bit of seasoning, but he is further along this year than Denard was last year.
... but there is a time and a place for that.
I have to say when I saw that POS offense that Saban has at Alabama I wouldn't trade RichRod for any coach in America right now.
Great post, RR has the best job in college football. He knows this is a destination not a stepping stone. Michigan will take care of him as long as he does not embarrass the program, which he has not done. I believe it will be evident next year that RR has not forgotten how to coach just because he is in the Big 10, football is football no matter the conference and he is a top 5 coach. He is a good fit for us and we are a good fit for him we will be Big 10 champs next year. If you think I don't have a clue check our schedule next year. The schedule is one of the reasons the Haters want him gone this year and No Class Harbaugh here. I am not a fan of the Domers but what that coach did with his timeout at the end of the game was a no class act by an overblown fool. BTW your choice of beer is of course exellent, do you enjoy Founders brews at the moment I am enjoying a Dirty Bastard.
His record is 11-16, after starting this year 4-0. We have one of the worst defenses in the Big Ten and have yet to enter conference play. Our special teams are groveling at the bottom of the statistics list. A bunch of recent recruits have just left the program. We started 4-0 last year and ended the year 5-7. Then there is this little issue with the NCAA.
Let's give him a ten year deal just like ND did with Weis, or appoint him crown prince like USC did with Kiffin.
Let's wait a year or two and see how things turn out. I can't believe we are having this discussion.
point of order: RR's record is 12-16. And the issue with the NCAA is little, worst case scenario.
I am not saying give him 10 years. But the guy has been through hell, some self inflicted, some not. It would be nice to give the guy a vote of confidence. And if you don't think this team is going to be really good next year and the year after then so be it. Can I remind you that we start 1 senior on offense, and return all of our receivers, backs and quarterbacks.
You're looking at this backwards. The best thing for Michigan is to avoid having a lame-duck coach. All college coaches have lots of extra years on their contracts. No AD will ever let his coach's contract come close to expiring, because that sends a message to the world that the coach is a lame duck - and thus recruits should steer clear. Giving a coach an extension is SOP. It doesn't make him bulletproof. Tommy Amaker had a ton of years left on his contract when we fired him.
Part of the reason our program fell apart in the first place is that Carr's last couple of recruiting classes were weaker than usual. Uncertainty over the future of the program almost certainty was a factor there. If RR goes into next year with two years on his deal, a recruit will ask, "Are you going to be here as long as I'm here?" If he can't answer that affirmatively, do you think he'll land that recruit?
A good athletic director is either 100% committed to his coach or fires him. You can't do it halfway.
Juries still out overall.
are you William Clay Ford?
If I understand this correctly, Rich Rodriguez has a 6 year deal. He'd currently in the third year of that. The recruiting cycle takes two years. Programs negotiate with coaches two (at least) years out.
Right now Coach Rodrigez is 12 - 16 overall with a winning record against Notre Dame. However, in the Big Ten he's 3 - 13. Now IANRR and IANBD, but I think that both sides would like to sit down with the coach being above 0.0500 in conference. For that to happen, he has to win 5 games this year and sweep the conference -- including the championship -- next year. Wouldn't that be great!! However, as things stand, that's seems more a schoolboy daydream. Not to be a bummer, but would you want to sit down with your boss with a sub 0.500 recoed in what you do?
What to do? The offense seems to be coming together. If Michigan wins 14 of conference games over the next two years, obviously extend. What if the next two years the conference record is so-so and the NCAA is a little harsher on us than we were on ourselves? Give one year to see how it goes with normally aged personnel?
There is no way this thread should have 94 replies.