Especially when the relationship crash and burns so quickly.
So, maybe Pitt is trying not to pay the full $9.4 million buyout to Kevin Stallings as previously reported.
In a meeting Thursday in which Stallings was terminated, 93.7 The Fan has learned the Pitt administration offered two paths for Stallings’ impending departure. He could:
- Accept a reduced buyout of $4.8M, which works out to about half the sum of the buyout language in his contract.
OR
- Not accept the $4.8M reduced buyout offer and be met with a “for cause” termination for his actions at Louisville, thus forfeiting the totality of his buyout.
Multiple sources confirmed to 93.7 The Fan that Stallings was unwilling to accept either condition — and a previously reported $7.5M reduced buyout was never formally offered at the meeting to him — so his exact conditions in terms of separation from the University of Pittsburgh remain in flux.
I don’t know.
Having trouble buying this scenario. And frankly a leak like this is designed to put pressure on Pitt.
Maybe it’s true and Pitt is playing hardball with Stallings. Maybe it is a negotiating point, and Stallings people leaked it to put pressure on Pitt with negative publicity of Pitt being cheap to get the buyout number up.
For those gnashing their teeth on perception of Pitt and how it could hurt Pitt with perspective coaches.
Chill.
It has as much impact on that as a school being truculent with the release of a transfer to go to another school does on recruiting. It really doesn’t matter.
Kids being recruited aren’t thinking about, “Hey, if I go to school X and things go wrong, that school/coach could screw me if I want to leave.”
And a new coach is not thinking he is going to fail and get screwed out of his buyout in a few years.
You know who is really upset over this? Pitt fans who are going to assume that the school, AD, someone with Pitt is screwing up and hurting the “brand.” Again.
This will get worked out in due course. It will not be the factor in Pitt’s coaching search people will blow it out to be. It’s a glitch. That’s all.
Sounds like a smart, level-headed, thorough assessment of what is and what might be. Lawyer??
Hope they dig deep happens and I think it may…for God’s sake they agreed to pay KS well. For that matter, JD was paid well and other than what I think was a Scott Barnes total bungle, I think they tried to get Pitt basketball back on a better track.
I think this hire will make it all very clear. Not saying a big hire guarantees anything, but how it looks will matter.
Most people, when buying a boat, buy one that is in great shape. Some, however, look specifically for the one with incredible bones and want in fact to do the fix up themselves. Pitt has great bones: The Pete, the Zoo, and the ACC. The problem is, by the time you take away the coaches who are not looking for a fixer upper, the pool will have shrunk considerably. Lets hope there is a gem out there that wants to take on the challenge that is Pitt!
Please, make it official and take Gottfried off the choice list…
I doubt any of the 4 schools associated with the FBI investigation will have a candidate interviewing at Pitt, including Miller. Nor should they.
But do you really need a consulting firm to find ANY of the guys people are talking about?
Any list of present coaches should have already been put together prior to firing a present coach. You should have also had a list of 3 of 4 quality assistant coaches that have potential to be elevated to head coach status.
Hire a young coach that can develop into something, what the hell do you have to lose?
We have nothing but a real circus, like I said we would.
From an article on 11-4-2014
5 of his players were cited for alcohol violations or failed drug tests.
Just what Pitt does not need going forward.
None of those things listed above will likely constitute a breach of contract on Stallings part. Coaches yell at players sometimes. Sometimes they do it on camera, but I can assure you that they ALL do it in practice. Howland tore Zavaskis a new one on more than one occasion on national TV. The record is irrelevant, as is attendance, and his family moving is a non-starter. I’m Sure Stallings lawyers read the fine print or they would have taken 4.8M if it was offered. He didn’t come here to build a national champion; he came here to get paid. I’m sure the contract reflects that.
It sure smells like Pitt is squirming to get out from under this on the cheap – the courts will sort it all out. That’s part of the problem. As a coach, do you really want to sign a contract with a school that is so quick to throw you under the bus regarding what THEY signed up for? There’s a good chance the next couple of years won’t yield many wins; is Pitt going to throw you out for that? Is it worth the risk? You would have to have a crazy-good contract just to mitigate the risk, but what good is that if the other party won’t honor it. And what about the money? Now that Stallings contract is tied up with the lawyers, what is Pitt willing to spend? Do they hedge? Right now, any hire you make has to be done under the auspices that you may have to pay Stallings every dime. Is any of this being factored in? I have no idea, but it’s all relevant. I would have preferred to keep it out of court. Take what the boosters cobbled together, pad that with what you can afford, and spread the rest out in an annuity of some sorts if possible.
I have no faith in the process because Pitt has done virtually nothing over the last 30 years to instill much confidence. I hope to be pleasantly surprised, but the Pitt policy over the last 30 years has been to pinch pennies and fabricate an image. The problem is that you can’t polish a turd, and the ACC has exposed that. Granted, Pitt has attempted to chrome plate the turd as much as possible, but it’s starting to flake of and it isn’t fooling anyone.
Lyke may or may not have much to say in the decision. In the past, AD’s have often been little more than puppets. We excoriate them on a regular basis, but many of the decisions when it comes to money are mostly out of their control. Pitt will try to hire a “good person” but that’s part of the problem – good people don’t always get the results you want. Pitt got lucky with Dixon – he was the perfect face for Pitt basketball. But when his on-court fortunes changed, people wanted his head. I don’t recall him becoming less of a nice guy, but he wasn’t winning as many games and had the ACC shoved up his butt. His fate was inevitable.
The one saving grace in all of this might be a combination of the Peterson Event’s center and the ACC itself. Something tells me if Pitt was still playing the Field House, all of this would be a non issue. Howland would have never come, Dixon would have never followed, and Pitt would have remained mired in basketball mediocrity with some rebooted version of Paul Evans or Ralph Willard. The ACC may not have come calling. But Pitt caught lightening in a bottle with the Pete. They had a good coach and an improving team when they opened the doors. Low attendance at the Pete is a new problem for Pitt – virtually unnoticed the Field House, failure is now a spectacle. Pitt fans, used to drinking Miller Light, had a taste of the good stuff. They don’t want to go back to cheap booze. And while the Big East might have been willing to look the other way, the ACC will not. So I’m holding out a glimmer of hope that Pitt, for the first time in almost 35 years, breaks with tradition and digs deep on this hire. It might hurt, but now might be the time to endure some temporary pain to put this ugly, frustrating, unfortunate chapter in the past and get things back on course.