Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

The News Journal is reporting that a single donor provided the more than $1 million to buy out KC's contract.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l91ISfcuzDw[/youtube]

"Ziady said major concerns about the “direction of the program” led him to dismiss Keeler, who was under contract through 2017 and earned a lucrative buyout. Neither he nor the university would provide an amount, but several sources have told The News Journal it came from a single outside donor and may have exceeded $1 million. UD President Patrick Harker said the buyout was paid by the university."


We know it wasn't 93...he's too cheap for that...but 1 million dollars is a lot of hate.

If you had a million dollars, would you use it to fire a coach?






In a related note, I am willing to be bought out of my postings here at CS.com for a mere $250,000. dback and jellybean can start passing around the collection plate and I encourage everyone to contribute.

I don't think any booster should have that power. If the AD and president caved in to THAT, THEY ought to be canned for incompetence and corruption. That's nothing short of a bribe.

SuperHornet wrote:I don't think any booster should have that power. If the AD and president caved in to THAT, THEY ought to be canned for incompetence and corruption. That's nothing short of a bribe.

It doesn't say that.

What usually happens is that the school wants to fire a coach, but may need some help with the buyout. The call up Mr. Big Money Booster and say "Hey you know how you keep bitching about the coach? Well we are going to fire him and need help with the buyout. We are ready to pull the trigger when you pony up for the buyout".

SuperHornet wrote:I don't think any booster should have that power. If the AD and president caved in to THAT, THEY ought to be canned for incompetence and corruption. That's nothing short of a bribe.

...

Harker probably had this planned before hiring Z-daddy and it was probably going to be announced at the end of the season...but 93's check bounced.

Cluck U wrote: We know it wasn't 93...he's too cheap for that...but 1 million dollars is a lot of hate.


In a related note, I am willing to be bought out of my postings here at CS.com for a mere $250,000. dback and jellybean can start passing around the collection plate and I encourage everyone to contribute.

It could be 93. What the AD doesn't know is that he would simply "return" (rescind) the offer.

You make a pretty good argument, Frank. The whole thing still has the feel of a bribe to me, but it COULD have happened as you describe.

The problem is, for me, that's almost as bad since THAT has the feel of turning the athletic department into a prostitute.

It was Andy.

SuperHornet wrote:You make a pretty good argument, Frank. The whole thing still has the feel of a bribe to me, but it COULD have happened as you describe.

The problem is, for me, that's almost as bad since THAT has the feel of turning the athletic department into a prostitute.

Athletic departments don't just fire the coach or make decisions like this based on the whims of people with money. I know for a fact UM got big money offers to fire Hauck and buyout his contract in the first three years he was here, but they obviously ignored it.

UD wanted to make this change. It's really no different than raising money for a stadium expansion. Just highly less public.

bluehenbillk wrote:It was Andy.

uofmman1122 wrote:Athletic departments don't just fire the coach or make decisions like this based on the whims of people with money. I know for a fact UM got big money offers to fire Hauck and buyout his contract in the first three years he was here, but they obviously ignored it.

UD wanted to make this change. It's really no different than raising money for a stadium expansion. Just highly less public.

That's the point. They're not SUPPOSED to. It destroys the integrity of athletics. But IF it's true, heads have GOT to roll.

SuperHornet wrote:

bluehenbillk wrote:It was Andy.

uofmman1122 wrote:Athletic departments don't just fire the coach or make decisions like this based on the whims of people with money. I know for a fact UM got big money offers to fire Hauck and buyout his contract in the first three years he was here, but they obviously ignored it.

UD wanted to make this change. It's really no different than raising money for a stadium expansion. Just highly less public.

That's the point. They're not SUPPOSED to. It destroys the integrity of athletics. But IF it's true, heads have GOT to roll.

So for integrity's sake you'd expect them to keep a declining coach that can't coach consistently well enough to save his job (obviously)?

No one will get in trouble for this. It was either this, or divert the $1,000,000 to cover his contract buyout from other places in the university budget.

Like I said, I think this was something UD wanted regardless of whether they got the money or not, and if they could get the money, why wouldn't they??

I'd take the million dollars and give it to a rival school that wants to get rid of the struggling coach to keep said coach.

Cluck U wrote:
If you had a million dollars, would you use it to fire a coach?

If I had $1M to throw at a coach I assume I have plenty more millions sitting in the bank. If that were the case, yes I'd throw money around to get a shitty coach axed.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hfdEtnzz3Uc[/youtube]