JUB: The Harbaugh contract isn't even finished yet
January 14th, 2024 at 7:10 PM ^
The only thing we know is that we don't know anything.
January 14th, 2024 at 7:17 PM ^
Exactly, why is this even news? Isn't it common knowledge at this point that there is a clause or two that Harbaugh wants in the contract that Michigan hasn't been willing to concede on yet? So that is an "unfinished contract" then, right?
January 14th, 2024 at 7:27 PM ^
Just came in to say the same thing. How could Harbaugh agree to a contract extension that keeps him from talking to NFL teams this off-season if he's talking to the Chargers (reportedly) tomorrow? It is a completely valid observation that doesn't mean anything really.
January 14th, 2024 at 7:28 PM ^
Let's pair this post with the earlier post asking if people blame Warde if Jim leaves. Many of the pro-Warde comments in that thread were asking "what's Warde supposed to do?" or "How is this Warde's fault?"
If there are clauses that either Jim wants in or doesn't want in, and Michigan isn't agreeing to it, then I think it's pretty clear they're not doing everything to keep him. No?!
January 14th, 2024 at 7:36 PM ^
I'm sure I'm in the minority here, but this contract thing is not on Warde.
January 14th, 2024 at 7:40 PM ^
No it's not.
It's M counsel advising otherwise.
January 14th, 2024 at 7:51 PM ^
Counsel just needs to advise Warde of the risk: i.e. you might have to pay two different head coaches in 2024 if you agree to delete that clause , Warde is perfectly free, to say to counsel, thanks for advising me of that risk, but it's a justifiable risk to keep Jim, and we're going forward, it's not like counsel says- you can't agree to it- they don't call the shots. So yes, it is on Warde.
January 14th, 2024 at 8:10 PM ^
We don't know what that risk is.
If the university could potentially be on the hook for the entire contract (125M-150M), that's probably a risk M is unwilling to embrace. Again, we don't know all the facts, but I have to believe some significant risk is involved in accepting certain provisions Harbaugh's requesting where M counsel is advising against it.
January 14th, 2024 at 8:41 PM ^
So you're suggesting that Jim might get a 10 year ban?
January 14th, 2024 at 9:32 PM ^
Not suggesting anything. Purely hypothetical.
NCAA is a wildly irrational organization and they're capable of doing a lot of nonsensical things.
January 15th, 2024 at 7:22 AM ^
There's no way this is about money or a guarantee of money. It's probably about talking to the NFL which is imo total bullshit if they're trying to stop him from ever considering another job.
January 15th, 2024 at 8:34 AM ^
We just won the national championship which should bring immense joy for several years, but not knowing if Harbaugh is going to return sorta sucks the joy out of it. Are we going to go through the RR/BH years again? I'd like Harbaugh back and for him to build a dynasty. The whole NFL agada sucks. It's like having a fiancé who wants to go on dates with other guys to make sure she loves you. Love me Jim Harbaugh! Godammit! You complete me!
January 14th, 2024 at 9:34 PM ^
That's not going to be Manuel's call. That's going to be a BoT decision. They are not going to allow Manuel to make decisions on potential tens of millions of dollars of UM obligations. That's not how organizations like this work, and you are just assuming that Manuel has that authority because it fits the "blame Warde" narrative you have assembled in your mind.
January 14th, 2024 at 9:58 PM ^
Logged in to ditto this.
I’ve been a transactional (real estate & business) attorney for almost 15 years. I’ve NEVER told a client straight-up, “No, you can’t do that.” I am not a deal killer. What I 100% do though, is make sure my clients 100% understand the various risks associated with their choices. I do this in writing—“papering the file”—of course, because if they say, “duly noted, full speed ahead” & things subsequently blow up in their face, they can’t plausibly wheel around & accuse me of not giving them sufficient warning.
TL;DR version of this:
Don’t blame the lawyers, as most aren’t the ones with ultimate decision making authority. Their main job is to highlight the associated risks with various courses of action, and then it’s the job of their clients to incorporate that information into their decision making process. If the client is risk tolerant enough, it should be VERY easy for them to say, “duly noted,” and then do the thing anyway.
January 14th, 2024 at 10:10 PM ^
Your tl;dr was basically as long as the "long" version. But I read the whole thing anyway.
January 14th, 2024 at 10:55 PM ^
Too long; Didn't reduce??
January 14th, 2024 at 9:18 PM ^
It's a shame really. I'd be making all kinds of concessions that could ultimately hurt the university just to keep Harbaugh here forever.
January 14th, 2024 at 7:37 PM ^
Correct. Hypothetical: Jim wants UM to guarantee the full contract, no buyouts, no "for cause" firings allowed.
That sounds great...up until the day that the NCAA says that they determined Jim lied about the covid recruiting thing and also, per their new rule, is fully responsible for Stalions' actions, and Harbaugh is banned from coaching.
I get that there's a sizable portion of the board here that thinks UM should agree to those terms, but clearly the President and Regents don't agree. It's not even up to Warde.
January 14th, 2024 at 7:53 PM ^
You know that the Regents don't agree, because?
January 14th, 2024 at 8:02 PM ^
Are they not involved in this process, and also more powerful than Warde in the decision making here?
I'll admit I don't know the exact process so perhaps I should not have included them. But last time we were all led to believe that Ono is the one who got the contract finalized, not Manuel, and I don't know why it would really be different this time. If Manuel was holding everything up, it's with the blessing of his superiors.
January 14th, 2024 at 9:41 PM ^
Regents and the President do get to approve contracts before they’re finalized. So it would make sense that they have a say in the major terms of that contract that impact the University.
It is standard in every contract, this goes for every contract of employment and not just football coaches, that there are clauses protecting the school/organization from financial loses when severing the contract in the event of the employee violating the terms. Those terms always include conduct deemed detrimental to the organization, which in the case of a football coach would include actions causing the program to face severe penalty from the NCAA. Again, these terms are present in every contract. It is what allowed MSU to get out of the deal with Mel Tucker. It is in Harbaugh’s CURRENT contract. Asking for that clause to be removed is very abnormal.
For Warde to go away from standard contract terms, that is certainly something he would need the approval of his superiors to do. And would certainly involve university legal council as well, and their advice would definitely be to NOT do that.
January 14th, 2024 at 7:55 PM ^
And if you believed that Jim lied when he said he didn't, then why are you even negotiating at all? You trust him or you don't.
January 14th, 2024 at 8:00 PM ^
It's not about trusting Jim. It's about trusting the NCAA.
January 14th, 2024 at 8:01 PM ^
Harbaugh's position is that he's disclosed everything to the university. And based on those existing facts, he wants provisions to protect him from for cause termination, in case the NCAA throws the book at him. Now, if there are new facts that rise to cause, he would seemingly be okay with accepting responsibility. Again, he's confident no new relevant facts will rise since he's told M everything.
This seems like a reasonable ask, but also seems like M counsel is advising against agreeing to those terms?
January 14th, 2024 at 8:03 PM ^
The NCAA can do whatever they want with the facts that are already disclosed.
January 14th, 2024 at 8:20 PM ^
Right. That's the protection Harbaugh wants which is understandable knowing how irrational the NCAA can behave.
Now, is M willing to accept provisions based on those facts? It's likely counsel is advising against it due to significant inherent risk.
Just my guess.
January 14th, 2024 at 8:24 PM ^
Yep. You and I see it the same way.
January 14th, 2024 at 9:40 PM ^
You are making lots of assumptions here without any basis. The holdup may well be the two sides agreeing on adequate safeguards against unforeseen events, but could well be nothing like that, such as guarantees for assistant coach and staff salaries, or facilities, or what access Harbaugh will have to NFL offers, or something we cannot guess at.
January 14th, 2024 at 9:52 PM ^
I think the assumptions are with some basis. Doesn't make it true, though.
January 14th, 2024 at 11:48 PM ^
Banned from coaching?? Do you mean a show cause? Harbaugh just won a national championship if he gets a show cause I would expect Michigan to stand by him and show cause.
I can't imagine a scenario where that actually happens. We already know that the NCAA has told B1G that there's no known connection between Harbaugh and CS which is what I would think for him to get a show cause.
I get that he can be held responsible for everything under the sun but I don't see it unless something new were to come up. I personally think they'll fine Michigan maybe some scholarships restrictions and at worse a suspension for Harbaugh of which he's already served most of not all.
Maybe I'm being naive....I just don't want him to ever leave under any scenario.
January 14th, 2024 at 7:38 PM ^
Warde’s responsibility is to the university. He’s not Jim’s agent. Maybe Jim is being unreasonable?
January 15th, 2024 at 12:12 PM ^
If not now, having brought a NC to Michigan, then when?
So what if Harbaugh is "being unreasonable"? You'd side with the suits after 3 straight over osu?
January 14th, 2024 at 7:49 PM ^
The University is a large and prestigious institution. To expect them to give any individual anything and everything they want, even if it is not in the best interests of the University, is unrealistic and unreasonable.
January 14th, 2024 at 7:58 PM ^
But the point is those of us that favor protecting Jim against further suspensions based on the known allegations, think it IS in the best interests of the University.
January 14th, 2024 at 8:13 PM ^
Risk/reward. Risk is that your school is on the hook for $125 million dollars over 10 years, and your coach can't coach for any of those years. (Ridiculous example, maybe he's not coaching for one of those years if the NCAA is extremely vindictive and goes above and beyond with punishment.) Are you telling me we don't have donors that can and will cover that easily?
Reward would be that the football team's success over the past three years has probably been worth an added value north of 500 Million dollars to the University as a whole. I am no financial expert, but have a good friend who an admin at Alabama who tells me they figure the last 15 years of football success has a value to the school of well over 2 Billion when you factor in increased donations, merchandise, all the other extras-and most importantly, a massive increase in applications.
This has allowed them to increase enrollment while at the same time raising the academic profile of each class, and therefore the school. Prestige, endowment, cash-all because Nick Saban is a great football coach.
Pay the man.
January 14th, 2024 at 9:59 PM ^
lol are you people dense and do you have any idea how the real world works? One of the largest donations in Michigan history was 150MM to fund cancer research. You think donors are lining up to save UM from its own stupidity?
January 15th, 2024 at 7:08 AM ^
We need an unsavory mortgage guy. Unfortunately, they all seem to emanate from East Lansing.
January 14th, 2024 at 7:50 PM ^
But if Michigan wants a clause that says we can fire our coach for cause (e.g., if he pulls a Mel Tugger) and JHs reps say we don’t want you to be able to fire for cause because of the whole NCAA then you have an impasse. A scenario where one party rolls over isn’t a negotiation and it’s foolish to think UM should approach it that way.
January 14th, 2024 at 8:53 PM ^
I think there is zero chance that Jim is seeking a contract that he can't be fired for any cause for past or future actions- that's illogical based upon the documented history of the man. But for actions already taken and accounted for? If the NCAA vindictively suspends him fo another 6-12 games? And he long ago turmed over all of his cell phone and computer records. The University is either comfortable with his integrity or they aren't- and yes I think it is a justified risk to honor Jim's contract in the event of such a vindictive action by the NCAA.
People bringing up Mel Tucker's actions and saying Jim wants to be protected from firing for that or any number of other egregious actions are being disingenuous.
January 14th, 2024 at 7:56 PM ^
It is Warde's job to keep coaches like Beilein, Harbaugh, Bakich etc. at Michigan. He is paid lots of money to keep coaches and make good hiring decisions. It doesn't really seem like we are in a good spot if Harbaugh leaves and with the state of the basketball program. He may be a good dude but there isn't a lot to point to in terms of his successes at Michigan.
January 14th, 2024 at 8:45 PM ^
Not only are you a broken record, but you’re just not smart.
January 14th, 2024 at 8:00 PM ^
I wouldn't want Warde's job here. He can't override the lawyers, and I'm sure the regents get involved at some point and have to act responsibly (i.e. not just tell the lawyers to go f themselves). And Warde has to appease everyone here -- not just Harbaugh. He has to make sure the university is to some extent protected because that's who employs him. It's not as simple as Warde unilaterally deciding what's in the contract.
January 14th, 2024 at 8:56 PM ^
The client can always "override the lawyers" though. The client is the decision-maker and the University is the client and it appears from reports that as is typically the case, the university has designated the AD to negotiate the terms of the contract.
January 14th, 2024 at 11:26 PM ^
You are incredibly opinionated and a strong decision maker, considering you have no accountability or ability when it comes to making this decision. Have you ever considered becoming an ESPN college football analyst?
January 15th, 2024 at 1:17 PM ^
As is typically the case, the regents must approve the contract and cannot delegate that authority to the AD.
January 14th, 2024 at 10:21 PM ^
Bluntly, the University shouldn’t do *everything* to keep Harbaugh. It’s entirely possible that Jim is making demands that Michigan can’t (or really shouldn’t) give him.
Like, if Jim is demanding a $50 million buyout if Michigan fires him for picking up a show cause penalty, no I don’t think Michigan should agree to that (not saying he is demanding that, just that there are clearly some things that Jim could plausibly ask for that Michigan *should* deny him).
January 14th, 2024 at 11:16 PM ^
I think there's a split in the fanbase that's not getting talked about. Many of us are of the opinion that we should do anything within reason to keep Harbaugh. As much as any team should ever do to keep any coach. And then there's a different part of the fanbase that thinks we should do literally anything to keep him.
January 15th, 2024 at 1:19 PM ^
The you can Venn diagram that split with the split between those who think Warde Manuel has unlimited power and thus must accept unlimited blame, and those who understand how universities work.
January 14th, 2024 at 11:39 PM ^
There are obviously sticking points but I don't know why everyone seems to think we know what the sticking points are.
January 14th, 2024 at 7:46 PM ^
It's almost like they're...wait for it...negotiating!