Dan Wetzel has the details on Harbaugh's contractual demands
Dan Wetzel, who appears to have very good sources within Schembechler Hall and/or related circles, has the details of what the sticking points are with Harbaugh's contract (emphasis added):
Specifically, sources said Harbaugh is seeking language that would grant him immunity from termination from any finding or sanction that could arise from multiple current NCAA investigations into the football program.
Harbaugh is also seeking a delay in the start date of the new contract to maintain a lower buyout that NFL teams would have to pay Michigan to hire him away. The buyout in his current contract dropped from $2.25 million to $1.5 million on January 11. Michigan is seeking that to rise to about $4 million in a new deal. Harbaugh has sought to have the new deal not start until Feb. 15, thus maintaining the lower, and more favorable, buyout number until after the NFL hiring cycle has concluded.
Harbaugh is seeking a matrix of fines be spelled out if there are any future NCAA violations as well as prohibiting the school’s athletic director from firing him “for cause” and instead having that decision, should it ever arise, rest in a three-member arbitration panel, sources said.
Seems pretty clear that Harbaugh doesn't trust Manuel (or, perhaps, any future AD) to be the decider of Harbaugh's fate.
Harbaugh has sought to have his contract grant him immunity from termination for any violation stemming from those cases. It additionally spells out any penalty he may face should the NCAA rule him responsible in any future case. That would include specific fine amounts for any Level I or Level II violation.
He is also seeking to have any decision involving “for cause” termination — whether for NCAA violations or anything else — to be determined by a three-member arbitration panel rather than the school’s athletic director, a role currently held by Warde Manuel. Traditionally, for-cause termination of a coach would be determined by his direct supervisor. The athletic director would still be able to fire him for performance-related issues.
The arbitration panel is a system used by the university's president. It is common in university executive contracts, but not with coaches, according to numerous college administrators.
January 16th, 2024 at 12:05 PM ^
On the one hand, yes, Warde should have stopped both - and I blame him in part for what happened. But I also think Harbaugh should have stopped it too: "I'm not responsible for the guys I want to hire" is a bad organizational attitude. That's not to say that JH should be running background checks personally. But as the head honcho, he should have made sure this stuff was managed.
January 16th, 2024 at 12:29 PM ^
Neither Warde nor Harbaugh should have stopped a Stallions hire. He had a fine resume and had presumably proven himself while a dedicated intern/volunteer whatever his title was before he was hired. There is no pre-hiring process that is going to catch everyone, and that is particularly true when someone is breaking a rule in a way that’s never been broken before. To hold it against either is basically accepting the B1G’s argument.
Shemmy is a different story, and is a combination of Harbaugh’s blind spot towards anything Schembechler and the AD’s continued failure to operate like the large organization it actually is. Nepotism is normalized, not just in the football program but throughout college athletics in general, so such a hiring wouldn’t be looked at twice. Warde, as a creature of college athletics, wasn’t going to change that any more than Harbaugh, nor would any subsequent AD or head coach. Both coach and AD should have egg on their face, but as neither believe they do, it would be unfair to factor it into any sort of negotiation.
January 16th, 2024 at 1:11 PM ^
I see where you're coming from. My point here is just that we shouldn't make Harbaugh "co-AD" or whatever.
For Shemy - I wasn't taking the nepotism angle as much as "do your homework on a guy before you hire him." It seems like nobody kicked the tires there.
On Stallions - he seems like a Very Weird Guy. Again, it feels like nobody kicked the tires, which is far more my concern.
January 16th, 2024 at 2:04 PM ^
I don’t think a head footbal coach should be AD. Way too much responsibility to be good at both.
But I am seriously questioning whether Warde should be the AD.
January 16th, 2024 at 3:16 PM ^
Stalions seems extremely obviously a Weird Guy that needed to be on a short leash. Skirting a somewhat grey area of the sport was his literal job, if Harbaugh or a delegate did not lay out *extremely* carefully what rules Stalions was expected to follow, that’s a miss by the program.
January 16th, 2024 at 11:22 AM ^
Some of it doesn't seem unreasonable and easy to overcome. But...some if it...I mean come on the university isn't going to say "no matter what happens your contract will not be effected".
January 16th, 2024 at 11:38 AM ^
Why would he need verbiage added to keep the buyout low for NFL teams if he were staying at U of M for 10 more years?
January 16th, 2024 at 3:18 PM ^
Because he wants Michigan to “show him the love” while treating Michigan as his side piece every January.
January 16th, 2024 at 12:23 PM ^
But that isn't what this or any report says is being asked for .
January 16th, 2024 at 11:22 AM ^
"Specifically, sources said Harbaugh is seeking language that would grant him immunity from termination from any finding or sanction that could arise from multiple current NCAA investigations into the football program."
This is the bigger deal than the NFL buyout stuff, and is something Michigan can't/won't agree to.
January 16th, 2024 at 11:31 AM ^
yeah, forget the NCAA stuff for a second. Jim is asking the university to say they couldn’t fire him for pulling a Gary Moeller, they couldn’t fire him for pulling a Mel Tugger, etc. He is basically asking for a contract that puts him on par with the university president and I don’t think any school would ever agree to that.
Imo this is a poison pill designed to designed to put the whole thing off until after the NFL hire
January 16th, 2024 at 11:35 AM ^
"current investigations"
We're talking burgers and sign stealing
January 16th, 2024 at 11:38 AM ^
Exactly.. if the wording is “current”.. it’s the NOA with burgergate and anything that a future NOA regarding Advance Scouting would reveal.
January 16th, 2024 at 11:54 AM ^
That is true, but imagine for a moment that Michigan and Harbaugh sign this contract and then the NCAA hits Harbaugh with a show-cause in a month. That would mean that Michigan is obligated to fire Harbaugh, or else terminate their membership in the NCAA, which is a complete non-starter. At that point you've paid Harbaugh $125 million to not coach a single down.
Now, it seems extremely unlikely that Harbaugh gets a show-cause for the current investigations, but this is the NCAA we're talking about. No one knows what they're going to do.
Essentially, these provisions are not betting on Harbaugh so much as they're betting on the NCAA. And that's a very foolish thing to do.
January 16th, 2024 at 11:40 AM ^
That’s not what he’s asking for.
he’s asking for known facts and ncaa head hunting. Drunk driving , murder etc would all remain. However, not by warde but by arbitration panel.
this is not difficult unless you want it to be. Warde wants it to be.
January 16th, 2024 at 12:11 PM ^
he's asking for immunity for everything currently under investigation, and asking for a paneled arbitration for any potential future issues. It's the former that's likely a non-starter for Michigan.
one doesn't have to stretch the imagination too far to envision a scenario wherein sometime in the next 3-6months, the NCAA issues its NoA in the Scouting investigation, then decides to consider the two NoA's as part of a larger pattern of non-compliance, hits Harbaugh with an LOIC, and a multi-year show-cause. At which point you'd have a guy under contract for 10yrs for a total of $120million, and he's not allowed in the building, and you have no recourse.
if i'm TPTB at michigan, that's absolutely a non-starter.
January 16th, 2024 at 3:20 PM ^
We don’t even have a Notice of Allegations for Signgate yet, let alone any idea what types of punishments the NCAA will propose. Insane to give a guarantee of no termination in that area of uncertainty
January 16th, 2024 at 12:05 PM ^
That's not at all what any of it means. Read it again.
January 16th, 2024 at 11:31 AM ^
Michigan absolutely can give it to him. Whether they should depends on whether Michigan leadership truly believes that the investigations are overzealous and or unwarranted, and that Harbaugh/Michigan have been treated unfairly, or if they actually think they’re legitimate. If it’s the former, Michigan should agree to that term. If it’s the latter, they shouldn’t.
I think most posters here, myself included, think it’s the former, and would find Harbaugh’s demand a reasonable one given the context of what has happened in the last year, and one that Michigan should consent to.
January 16th, 2024 at 11:41 AM ^
this has less to do with Michigan's characterizations of potential NCAA action, and more to do with the fact that there is indeed potential for the NCAA to take what most of us would consider irrationally harsh action, and then there's the possibility/likelihood that Michigan's appeal of those actions would fail.
in this light, Harbaugh's demand appears rather unreasonable, imo. I get why he's making it, I just can't believe he thinks any employer would agree to it given the relevant knowns and unknowns.
January 16th, 2024 at 12:00 PM ^
There’s absolutely that potential, I agree. But if Michigan wants Harbaugh as its coach, they should take on that risk, as opposed to shifting it to Harbaugh. His performance should have earned him that privilege. I’m not saying it’s a small give, and it isn’t one you give to just anyone. But Harbaugh has earned it, unless Michigan believes Harbaugh actually was coordinating paying Stallions under the table, or flagrantly disregarding any sort of recruiting rules. If you believe in Harbaugh, you let him know that contractually you have his back 100%, as opposed to using trumped up allegations as a back-door way to get rid of him by deciding not to fight them.
January 16th, 2024 at 12:14 PM ^
imo it'd be highly irresponsible for the university to assume $125million in that risk.
i think the most generous consideration they can/should make in this scenario is to say they'll guarantee the salary through whatever year such punishment might occur in, but that'd be the end of the contractual relationship. Harbaugh's ask, if Wetzel's reporting is accurate, is simply unreasonable, imo.
January 16th, 2024 at 3:21 PM ^
I think a prenegotiated buyout that’s not a $0 “firing for cause” but less than the buyout if we can him for going 3-9 would be reasonable. Say 1-1.5 times his base salary.
January 16th, 2024 at 12:09 PM ^
I agree and I'll go a step further: he knows it's unreasonable and that's the point. He doesn't want to be here and doesn't want to look like the bad guy in all of this. Draw the ire of the fans to the admin, not him.
January 16th, 2024 at 12:19 PM ^
This, along with the three past years of looking at the NFL, and the proposed delay in a buy out - shows exactly where we stand with Harbaugh. Not sure why everyone refuses to see this…
January 16th, 2024 at 11:35 AM ^
If Harbaugh wants to blatantly break the rules with intent it is, but you have to believe that he's talking about cheesburger-gate and stretch-gate and Connor Stalions type BS. That should be easily solved with some modifying language. In principle the University should have his back. If we don't then we'll doom ourselves to whatever roll of the dice happens after him.
At this point watching all of the illegal bidding wars going on for players I'm starting to think we should get involved in the blatant cheating. I'm just thankful that Miami has a bigger bankroll than OSU.
January 16th, 2024 at 12:06 PM ^
Yea that is a bit of a weird ask and on-brand with Harbaugh. While it certainly is not standard language and I see why it is giving them some pause, they also pay very good lawyers a lot of money to figure things like this out. Santa should make it clear that this a priority and needs to get done.
January 16th, 2024 at 12:24 PM ^
Won't then, because they certainly can.
January 16th, 2024 at 1:23 PM ^
I realize this isn't a contractual quote, but to me, the "any that COULD arise" is the issue. If he says "contract survives no matter what the NCAA does for any of the following activities" and itemizes the things he thinks they're going after him for, then maybe. But it's always theoretically possible that Stalions funded his activities by blackmailing Harbaugh over sexts, and the university shouldn't exonerate him for that.
January 16th, 2024 at 11:24 AM ^
Michigan should add spelunking as a varsity sport. It's expertise in caving is unmatched.
January 16th, 2024 at 11:30 AM ^
True story: A guy I worked with about 15 years ago was a CPA at one the national CPA firms in Tampa that handled the Yankees. He had a copy of Jeter's contract and in it, it specifically stated that among many other dangerous things (like motorcycle riding), spelunking was prohibited.
January 16th, 2024 at 11:24 AM ^
That buyout thing. I don't know about that. That's like marrying someone but saying if someone better comes along....And is that just this year? If so, he's very interested in what else is out there.
January 16th, 2024 at 11:27 AM ^
Honestly, that's the one that I would fight him hardest about.
January 16th, 2024 at 11:29 AM ^
I mean right...fuck go to the NFL already, he certainly makes it seem like Michigan is the runner up.
January 16th, 2024 at 11:30 AM ^
Yes, that is clearly his plan. But he needs an offer from an NFL team that he likes.
January 16th, 2024 at 11:35 AM ^
Jim has not wanted to be here since we made him restructure the contract after the Covid season. That’s just the reality of the situation. Everything about this negotiation suggests he’s not going to be taking it very seriously until the NFL hiring season is over
January 16th, 2024 at 11:38 AM ^
I think the Covid paycut was a big deal and I also think that even if he has gotten over that (although a Harbaugh never forgets) he's still probably thinking "Why the fuck would I want to deal with the NCAA if I don't have to?"
January 16th, 2024 at 12:26 PM ^
I think the three person panel is more of an FU to Warde after the reduced salary thing in 2020. In essence, I’m not going to let you make any more decisions about my future. I think any animus towards Warde stems from that.
January 17th, 2024 at 10:11 AM ^
I think you have to factor in that Baker has taken over the ncaa presidency recently, and will likely be much different than past presidents (I hope). I find it hard to believe he took the job with the intent to ride it out until the ncaa died, which basically was its trajectory. The fact that he publicly floated the idea of a tiered system with revenue sharing tells me that he thinks there is a way for the ncaa to not only remain relevant, but to actually lead in change (might be overly optimistic again). If I'm Baker, I'd want like-minded people to stay in college. Not only is Harbaugh like-minded, but he's great for college football as a whole. You've already lost your most famous coach in Saban, your next best coach lets players drink and drive to the death, you hope Coach Prime can take the next 3 steps, but that might be years down the road. I would think Baker wants Harbaugh to stay at UM as much as anybody. I would be disappointed if there was not some contact between he and UM in terms of, not promising UM anything in terms of sanctions to an incomplete investigation yet, but in terms of what could possibly satisfy all parties to get Harbaugh to come back. That's just good business. If nothing else, the ncaa has usually understood good business.
January 16th, 2024 at 12:13 PM ^
I also found the revelation about the buyout to be the more interesting part of Wetzel's story. Harbaugh's purported attempt to manipulate his buyout implies a lot about his future plans. On one hand, playing games with the buyout suggests that Harbaugh has very serious NFL aspirations. He's not just taking interviews to be polite but because he wants to an NFL position. On the other hand, he's actually negotiating with Michigan. But if he really wanted an NFL position, why bother negotiating over the timing of the buyout? His favorable buyout applies unless he signs a new contract. If he is really determined to go the NFL, he just has to leave the new contract unsigned.
January 16th, 2024 at 12:53 PM ^
Wendy is spot on in her analogy here. I’ll take it a step further and say we’re getting dangerously close to a contract hostage situation here. The whole “immunity” thing is essentially avoiding responsibility for what could have huge implications on the program, not just Harbaugh. JH’s own mentor said “No man, no coach is more important than the team”. Folks saying they would take Harbaugh sitting out future games because of infractions are not taking the players’ best interests into account.
If the $$ is there, if the support has been made providing more resources for NIL, and the contract has been updated indicating long-term intent, the precedent set by allowing your coach to be unfirable should make everyone feel a little uneasy. We all want Harbaugh at Michigan but this is way more than a request for a “bear hug”.
January 16th, 2024 at 2:06 PM ^
Open relationships don’t tend to be stable ones.
January 16th, 2024 at 3:24 PM ^
Yup. If we give him the immunity clause, he needs to give an equal level of commitment, and even a $4 million buyout absolutely ain’t it.
January 16th, 2024 at 11:24 AM ^
Aren't Wetzel, Bacon, etc just re-reporting what we've known for months at this point? Nothing has changed, the sticking points are the language about the immunity / firing-for-cause stuff.
January 16th, 2024 at 11:27 AM ^
There are new specifics here that clear some things up.
January 16th, 2024 at 11:45 AM ^
It's interesting that Wetzel's sources magically appeared after SignGate. He probably could have used some of that inside perspective before embracing the hysterics.
January 16th, 2024 at 12:21 PM ^
Uhm, he was one of the reasonable voices from the get go. Tell me you’ve never read his pieces without telling me you’ve never read his pieces…
January 16th, 2024 at 12:28 PM ^
He had the one good piece early on (the "either everyone is guilty, or no one is" one), but two weeks ago he was still saying that Michigan broke a rule and got caught:
“Everybody does it” is not a reasonable excuse for what Stalions was doing. The advanced scouting rule exists. Michigan got caught. If the NCAA wants to apply additional penalties beyond Harbaugh's suspension then so be it.
That's surrounded by finger-wagging against others' hysterics, but he's still assuming the same guilt.
January 16th, 2024 at 12:36 PM ^
You linked something that says Stalions had little to nothing to do with our winning and that people are overreacting to it. He also said at the top:
Former-Michigan staffer Connor Stalions ran a brazen advanced scouting operation that violated NCAA rules (certainly in spirit) in an effort to gain the Wolverines an unfair edge in competition.
The "certainly in spirit" is concession that it might not be an actual violation by the letter of the law.
January 16th, 2024 at 1:48 PM ^
Yes, as I wrote: it's surrounded by finger-wagging at others' hysterics. Everyone with an ounce of critical thinking knows that that "advanced scouting operation" (lol) didn't contribute to Michigan's success.
He doesn't deserve credit for being mealy-mouthed about whether there was a rule violation. His insiders could help set him straight on that.