A Satterfield story

[zipp]

The only basis for comparison is the initial contracts of their predecessors. As I said, I think Grissom is appalled that a “sports coach” makes any more than a professor. If Vince NQ is really part of the CS, they (he) would have constrained him more. Since you have no evidence that he will hold the line on salaries, and have argued that he did NOT hold the line on buyouts, this would seem to be one of those examples of your arguing without facts that you were asking for.

I'm glad to admit I argue that "Vince" is full of rhetoric. And when it comes to money, I can prove he's running out of it. The only way to reconcile the two is that his rhetoric will run out when the money does. And until it does, he's got a license to spend it.

Maybe this is Gruesome's way of accelerating things...

 

[zipp]

This was in Pitino contract..applies to Sypher, Katina, and assistant coaches. 3 opportunities to fire him and not pay a dime:The "morality clause" in Pitino's contract states that the school can fire him for just cause for "Disparaging media publicity of a material nature that damages the good name and reputation of Employer of the University, if such publicity is caused by Employee's willful misconduct that could objectively be anticipated to bring Employee into public disrepute or scandal, or which tends to greatly offend the public."

In what conduct did he engage that was "objectively anticipated to bring Employee into public disrepute or scandal"? As a matter of fact, it was under wraps until Sypher tried to extort him. Why/how would you anticipate someone would break the law to make your behavior public?

Pitino engaged in nothing that involved strippers.

You needed facts, not hate, to fire him with cause...

 

[Thecycle27]

The key phrase "willful misconduct" can Louisville prove willful misconduct? While all these things happened at Louisville it will be difficult to prove he was willfully negligent. On one hand I agree with Zipp, but he has 3 situation under his watch that damaged the Louisville. I don't think I would want to go into a jury trial with that track record. I think a jury would look at the results and say he was negligent. He hired his assistants, he knew enough about Bowen to avoid him, but willing took the risk when he knew they had to stay straight, and left the program unsupervised during the summers.

For the life on me I can't believe he hasn't settled. I think he is playing high stakes poker with a pair of 3's.

 

[beantowncard]

I think he is playing high stakes poker with a pair of 3's.

Thats Rick.....

 

[beantowncard]

In what conduct did he engage that was "objectively anticipated to bring Employee into public disrepute or scandal"? As a matter of fact, it was under wraps until Sypher tried to extort him. Why/how would you anticipate someone would break the law to make your behavior public?

Pitino engaged in nothing that involved strippers.

You needed facts, not hate, to fire him with cause...

The university’s argument would probably be that he willfully failed to take precautions once he had two strikes (Sypher and strippergate). I don’t know how strong that argument is. If Pitino is successful in getting a jury to see each case in isolation and assessing them separately, he’s got a shot. If OTOH, the jury sees them cumulatively and as part of a pattern, there is plenty of evidence that the university has been brought into disrepute. They might ask, why, after 2 incidents, he did not excercise more control? Jury selection will be key. The university will want to eliminate analytical types who want to get into the minutiae of everything. Pitino will want to eliminate people with a high moral standard, targeting religious people, etc. it will be fascinating.

 

[zipp]

The university’s argument would probably be that he willfully failed to take precautions once he had two strikes (Sypher and strippergate). I don’t know how strong that argument is. If Pitino is successful in getting a jury to see each case in isolation and assessing them separately, he’s got a shot. If OTOH, the jury sees them cumulatively and as part of a pattern, there is plenty of evidence that the university has been brought into disrepute. They might ask, why, after 2 incidents, he did not excercise more control? Jury selection will be key. The university will want to eliminate analytical types who want to get into the minutiae of everything. Pitino will want to eliminate people with a high moral standard, targeting religious people, etc. it will be fascinating.

Not taking precautions is not the same thing as engaging in offensive behavior. That's what cardsp is alleging.

The problem with a pattern-of-behavior argument is the time frame. Pitino will argue with evidence that his behavior was actually DEFENDED by U of L as late as 2017. In that regard, such behavior was condoned or even encouraged...