Ok. In your original post it wasn't clear to me that in referring to the "guaranteed money at the outset " that you were referring to the buyout amount.
PSN reporting Stallings not accepting any buy outs
- Thread starter jrnPitt
- Start date
Pitt is going to lose far more money keeping stallings. If he's here the pete will make this season that just ended's crowds look like sellouts. The disgust with stallings is so deep it's guaranteed to be that way the entire non-conference schedule, Pitt would probably have to be in the upper half of the ACC come mid February for the Pete to even be half filled. He's gone, Pitt is not going to sit back and lose 3/4 of their season ticket holders.
That was more because thom now was having an issue with calling it a "buyout" vs. a guarantee with or without performance.
Have no knowledge of Stallings contract but should be available because we are a public institution. That said, contracts are guaranteed for the coach except for obvious reasons. What people are getting confused with I believe is coaches put a clause in their contract that will allow them to buy out the remaining years so they can leave for other jobs (whatever the reason). I never understood why universities did this. Either your guy is all in or not. So when Dixon, Graham and Chryst left they were free to as long as they paid the negotiated buyout. If Pitt would have fired any of them, unless there was a clause for performance and that's rare, we would have owed them the money left on the contract. The only negotiation that would take place would be a lump sum, keep the compensation the same during the years left, or spread it longer which helps so you are not paying two head coaches simultaneously. There could also be a clause of what happens if the coach gets another job and if Pitt would be able to deduct the amount the coach would make in a year offset at his new job. Hope this clarifies a few things.
Neither of those things are true.
For instance, Dixon's buyout (if fired by Pitt) was 50% of his remaining Pitt compensation. The same is true for Sean Miller at Arizona and vs. their total compensation it is a much lower percentage.
If you want to act like an authority on something, you might want to have some clue as to what you're talking about. Buyout clauses usually work both ways. 100% of guaranteed compensation buyouts like the one High Octane got from ASU are rare, or at least were a few years ago. Hope that clarifies a few things.
"Kevin is just too expensive to fire right now. Please have patience with us while he mails in one more season out of spite. Next year, we'll have an extra $2 million, and that should finally be exactly enough to solve all of our problems. Thanks for your commitment to us and to athletic excellence! #H2P!"
--- Message from Heather Lyke that some of you goofballs seem to be expecting this week.
--- Message from Heather Lyke that some of you goofballs seem to be expecting this week.
Last edited:
We owe him 2.4 million for 4 years, 9.6 million total. The ONLY hope we have for some leverage is that the language in the contract allows us the reassign him to other duties within the department to get the remaining money, but with as stupid as Scott Barnes apparently is, I highly doubt it. It could be a lump sum payment which really sucks. In the past for contracts we’ve had to eat like angus Beranato, we were at least able to spread it out over the remaining years of the contract.
Last edited:
So - What do you hear?
Does he stay or does he go? Who is being considered if a change is made? How soon can we see complete resolution?
Stallings himself is expecting to be fired so I don’t think it’s if it’s more like when. The question is how bad of a bath do we take on the buyout.
Barnes and his buddy Turner strolled right into the chicken coop. Gallagher and the BOT let them ransack the place. Unbelievable.
I'm surprised that some of you think that Barnes is stupid. He knew exactly what he was doing. Pitt should threaten to drag Barnes' name and that consultant's name through the mud. Then they will get the settlement.
If true, Gallagher and the BOT must be held accountable. Of course, who holds those folks accountable? Probably no one. Barnes and Turner should be sued, but how could Pitt win if they keep Gallagher and the BOT in place and they approved the contract?
Seriously, anyone who defends Gallagher, if this is true, is a moron. Yes, you let your AD do his job, but you do not allow fraud and complete negligence. That is what this would be and it likely means bankrupting Pitt basketball and putting it in a hole we may never get out of.
Don't see any basis for a suit against Barnes unless he hid his past relationship with the principal at the search firm from Gallagher or otherwise engaged in some fraudulent activity here.....same for the search firm itself. It would be interesting to know what Pitt and the search firm knew about the prospects of Stallings being fired by Vandy and whether that knowledge was widely shared among the Pitt decision makers at the time of the hire. Hiding that fact could potentially be deemed fraud, particularly given that, as I understand it, Pitt paid Vandy for their release of Stallings. Was Pitt fraudlently duped into paying this buyout? This whole situation smacks of sloppy, negligent due diligence by Gallagher and Pitt and simple out right stupidity by Pitt. Last time I checked, Pitt's stupidity is likely to be a pretty strong defense against any action they might assert here against Barnes or the search firm short of proof that Barnes and/or the search firm committed fraud and Pitt reasonably relied on fraudulent representations made by Barnes or the search firm at the time of the hire.
You almost have this right!
PITT fans and boosters will be forced to pay for the buyout or basketball revenue shortfall for many years to come!
Other coaches and PITT athletic programs namely football / HCPN will be forced to pay for the buyout or basketball revenue shortfall with lower comp increases, and less costly and competent assistants and coordinators!
This is how PITT operates!
At a U like PITT the athletic budget is a Zero Sum Game meaning a large expenditure in one program requires a decrease in spending elsewhere.
This "screw-up" / buyout will have long term consequences whether they get rid of Stalling or keep him and ride out the remainder of his contract.
As we all know money for PITT sports isn't readily available like other U's!
"it's five o'clock somewhere"
Signed: Mr Buffett
Go PITT & CSU Rams!
Last edited:
The basis of fraud would be that Barnes knowingly used Pitt dollars to hire a search firm, paying his buddy off, with no intention of actually performing a search. Kevin Stallings was the plant and the fraud was that Pitt paid for a search that never happened and Barnes/Turner never intended to happen. Very, very hard to prove and expect a judgement, but you wouldn't really be doing it with the expectation of winning, just ruining Barnes and Turner. Of course, Gallagher/BOT still had final approval authority, so the contract (if it really is $2.4M a year guaranteed for all years) is 100% on them. Gallagher should be fired immediately.
Agreed Druid that it's a fairly obvious decision to most....what takes guts IMO is for the leadership at Pitt to publicly admit they made a huge mistake. Gallagher doesn't want to own up to agreeing to such a dumb hire and right now, Lyke gets a free pass because Stallings isn't her guy. As soon as she fires Stallings and makes her own hire, she's on the clock. I'm just betting that kicking the can down the road is the easy way out. We shall see.
Beyond a longshot.....Gallagher knew about the past relationship among the actors(hell it was widely known before the hiring was announced).....just accepted/believed the fact that those relationships didn't taint the search or the recommendation of what he believed to be a credible HCing candidate.
Almost no chance of winning judgment, obviously, but not frivolous and not really the point of pursuing it. However, there is a vast difference between knowing there was a prior relationship and whether Pitt/Gallagher knew they were paying, but no real search was being performed.
I don’t think Barnes really cared as much about Stallings as any of you are claiming. They had never worked together.
The only thing that would be questionable legally would be if Turner or Barnes actually got a kickback from the hiring, and I highly doubt that happened.
It’s just well-paid idiots taking care of their own, which is not illegal.
Of course.
if we pay Stallings 2.4 mil a year-
The myth we hired him to lower expenses is shattered
I would reassign him to laundry duty then if that language is in there. That is actually pretty decent leverage. There are all sorts of legitimate sounding positions you could create to force him to the table.
If we get stuck paying the whole thing, I absolutely would make him perform some duty.
exactly. Stallings had no interest in making this work. He was in it for the paycheck, and Barnes was complicit in that. And it worked since Barnes had no plans for sticking around here to face the fire on it. How anyone can think Stallings was a legitimate hire and deserves more time is beyond me..
My understanding is that the buyout goes down significantly after next season. Whoever Stallings agent is did a great job, and Barnes really didn't help us here.
He also WAY over hyped freaken Duquesne this year too.
I mean ya they were winning games & stuff (this season), but it's not like they were Mississippi Valley State only winning 2-3 games a year before hiring Dambrot. They've won 14-17 games a year before. Now, they've really collapsed.
Barnes, PITT attorneys, Leadership Team, Gallagher, and anyone else who was supposed to do their "due dilligence, review the Stalling hiring transaction which rises to the level of Leadership Team oversight, or atleast to someone other than a new first year unproven AD!
When you're a top executive, and you delegate important transactions with no review, you get what you get which in this case is a financial and PR disaster for PITT!
It was a PITT organizational failure one of many when it comes to PITT sports!
"it's five o'clock somewhere"
Signed: Mr Buffett
Go PITT & CSU Rams!
Last edited:
In fairness, not only them, but the whole Pgh media did. I said multiple times during the year they were beating up on terrible teams and they were not that good. For them it was a step in right direction but people went way overboard with it.
That would mean an approximate difference of $5 million based on current salary estimates.
True...a lot went way over board but they seemed to post like 3 articles a day (lol) on Duquesne for a while.
It could be illegal, but the chance they could prove it without a paper trail is low. It is fraud even if there was no kickback, if Barnes used University funds to hire his buddy's search firm, even though there was no expectation to perform OR if the search firm did not perform their duties as contracted and never intended.
I don't claim Barnes "cared" about Stallings, but I do think he hired a search firm and there was no search. Stallings was the guy he/the firm agreed on and that was that. The rest was just a pay off for a friend.
That hasn't been posted. That would be a completely different scenario and then there is no chance Pitt fires him this year. Still an awful contract, but a completely different scenario.
I have never claimed to know the buyout. I applied logic based on the reports and what is common in the industry, for Pitt, and with Barnes. If Pitt's BOT didn't execute logically, I can't predict anything. Of course, you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about, Phil.
I know that football and basketball are different, but Dana Holgorsen's contract from Oliver Luck was fully-guaranteed. It pissed a lot of fans off who wanted him fired, but then he came back with a 10 win season the year his extension was being negotiated.
So if Stallings got a fully guaranteed contract, he wouldn't be the first...although I'm not sure why you give a guy like that such a peach.
So if Stallings got a fully guaranteed contract, he wouldn't be the first...although I'm not sure why you give a guy like that such a peach.
This is his 2nd year, right?
So until next year he has a full-guaranteed contract.
I don’t know how you can argue they didn’t conduct a search. Even if Barnes tells them “pick Stallings,” that is still a search. This isn’t like hiring a fake construction firm or something. All they have to do is say “hire X” even if it took 30 seconds of work.
There are plenty of legitimate reasons to hire a third party to basically confirm a decision you’ve already made.
It would depend what the contract service was for and what Barnes told his BOT it was for. What we know publically is Barnes claimed there would be a national search. What has been said privately is that there was no search, at all. You wouldn't expect to ever win.
