The reason Fitz cannot fire JON now

[PURPLE Book Cat]

Is his contract.

Fitz committed to NU for life and NU committed to Fitz for life after the Citrus Bowl. He (and his agent) wisely included adequate provisions in his contract that accounted for bad stretches of seasons, like this. I think that given NU’s history it was clearly the right move for the school (and for Fitz) and still is.

However, at 90%+ of other programs, any AD would be negligent if they did not seek a replacement for the head coach after a stretch of seasons like this. Because Fitz’s contract would painfully punish the school if the AD tried to fire him, it gets the AD off the hook for negligence in oversight of the football program.

But (absent any clauses that Fitz has in his contract expressly preventing the school from meddling in the football hiring practices, which if Fitz has, the program may very well be screwed) does not prevent the AD from meddling in the hiring of other football coaches. To do so competently, the AD is going to need to establish an objectively reasonable set of criteria and mandate that Fitz has to follow them to find a competent defensive coordinator. If Fitz doesn’t (again not privy to the contractual exclusions that may be baked in), then Fitz could be let go for cause (basically a “PIP”) - which likely would dramatically impact the buyout for Fitz.

I hope it never comes to that. I hope that Fitz acts independently of any mandate to replace the lack of defensive leadership competence as soon as practicable. But I believe that Fitz’s loyalties will cloud objective judgment and action for what is right for the football program. Thus, the AD must proceed with something similar to the above because of Fitz’s contract.

The above cannot take place in a matter of days or weeks. It is likely that the AD has already started some similar process in preparation for imposing it on Fitz at the end of the season. There could be a “promotion from within,” but I just don’t believe that Fitz would fire a friend in the season. It has to happen at the end of the season, with the AD creating the “for cause” situation so Fitz doesn’t need to be the one to fire his friend.

 

[phatcat]

Although it is probably not enforceable if they just suck, it would be terribly negligent for NU not to have some provision where you have to do what your boss reasonably asks you to do. Gragg should be able to use this

 

[CatManTrue]

Is his contract.

Fitz committed to NU for life and NU committed to Fitz for life after the Citrus Bowl. He (and his agent) wisely included adequate provisions in his contract that accounted for bad stretches of seasons, like this. I think that given NU’s history it was clearly the right move for the school (and for Fitz) and still is.

However, at 90%+ of other programs, any AD would be negligent if they did not seek a replacement for the head coach after a stretch of seasons like this. Because Fitz’s contract would painfully punish the school if the AD tried to fire him, it gets the AD off the hook for negligence in oversight of the football program.

But (absent any clauses that Fitz has in his contract expressly preventing the school from meddling in the football hiring practices, which if Fitz has, the program may very well be screwed) does not prevent the AD from meddling in the hiring of other football coaches. To do so competently, the AD is going to need to establish an objectively reasonable set of criteria and mandate that Fitz has to follow them to find a competent defensive coordinator. If Fitz doesn’t (again not privy to the contractual exclusions that may be baked in), then Fitz could be let go for cause (basically a “PIP”) - which likely would dramatically impact the buyout for Fitz.

I hope it never comes to that. I hope that Fitz acts independently of any mandate to replace the lack of defensive leadership competence as soon as practicable. But I believe that Fitz’s loyalties will cloud objective judgment and action for what is right for the football program. Thus, the AD must proceed with something similar to the above because of Fitz’s contract.

The above cannot take place in a matter of days or weeks. It is likely that the AD has already started some similar process in preparation for imposing it on Fitz at the end of the season. There could be a “promotion from within,” but I just don’t believe that Fitz would fire a friend in the season. It has to happen at the end of the season, with the AD creating the “for cause” situation so Fitz doesn’t need to be the one to fire his friend.

TLDR.

But honestly, You lost me at “Fitz cannot fire JON”.

 

[IMC Cat]

He (and his agent) wisely included adequate provisions in his contract that accounted for bad stretches of seasons, like this.

Do you have evidence or this? I doubt there's anything specifically written in his contract about concurrent miserable seasons. It's more an understanding that our fanbase is the most tolerant towards losing in Power 5

 

[hdhntr1]

Is his contract.

Fitz committed to NU for life and NU committed to Fitz for life after the Citrus Bowl. He (and his agent) wisely included adequate provisions in his contract that accounted for bad stretches of seasons, like this. I think that given NU’s history it was clearly the right move for the school (and for Fitz) and still is.

However, at 90%+ of other programs, any AD would be negligent if they did not seek a replacement for the head coach after a stretch of seasons like this. Because Fitz’s contract would painfully punish the school if the AD tried to fire him, it gets the AD off the hook for negligence in oversight of the football program.

But (absent any clauses that Fitz has in his contract expressly preventing the school from meddling in the football hiring practices, which if Fitz has, the program may very well be screwed) does not prevent the AD from meddling in the hiring of other football coaches. To do so competently, the AD is going to need to establish an objectively reasonable set of criteria and mandate that Fitz has to follow them to find a competent defensive coordinator. If Fitz doesn’t (again not privy to the contractual exclusions that may be baked in), then Fitz could be let go for cause (basically a “PIP”) - which likely would dramatically impact the buyout for Fitz.

I hope it never comes to that. I hope that Fitz acts independently of any mandate to replace the lack of defensive leadership competence as soon as practicable. But I believe that Fitz’s loyalties will cloud objective judgment and action for what is right for the football program. Thus, the AD must proceed with something similar to the above because of Fitz’s contract.

The above cannot take place in a matter of days or weeks. It is likely that the AD has already started some similar process in preparation for imposing it on Fitz at the end of the season. There could be a “promotion from within,” but I just don’t believe that Fitz would fire a friend in the season. It has to happen at the end of the season, with the AD creating the “for cause” situation so Fitz doesn’t need to be the one to fire his friend.

Even as bad as it is, I don't think even remarkably poor performance can be classified as cause

 

[FeralFelidae]

Is his contract.

Fitz committed to NU for life and NU committed to Fitz for life after the Citrus Bowl. He (and his agent) wisely included adequate provisions in his contract that accounted for bad stretches of seasons, like this. I think that given NU’s history it was clearly the right move for the school (and for Fitz) and still is.

However, at 90%+ of other programs, any AD would be negligent if they did not seek a replacement for the head coach after a stretch of seasons like this. Because Fitz’s contract would painfully punish the school if the AD tried to fire him, it gets the AD off the hook for negligence in oversight of the football program.

But (absent any clauses that Fitz has in his contract expressly preventing the school from meddling in the football hiring practices, which if Fitz has, the program may very well be screwed) does not prevent the AD from meddling in the hiring of other football coaches. To do so competently, the AD is going to need to establish an objectively reasonable set of criteria and mandate that Fitz has to follow them to find a competent defensive coordinator. If Fitz doesn’t (again not privy to the contractual exclusions that may be baked in), then Fitz could be let go for cause (basically a “PIP”) - which likely would dramatically impact the buyout for Fitz.

I hope it never comes to that. I hope that Fitz acts independently of any mandate to replace the lack of defensive leadership competence as soon as practicable. But I believe that Fitz’s loyalties will cloud objective judgment and action for what is right for the football program. Thus, the AD must proceed with something similar to the above because of Fitz’s contract.

The above cannot take place in a matter of days or weeks. It is likely that the AD has already started some similar process in preparation for imposing it on Fitz at the end of the season. There could be a “promotion from within,” but I just don’t believe that Fitz would fire a friend in the season. It has to happen at the end of the season, with the AD creating the “for cause” situation so Fitz doesn’t need to be the one to fire his friend.

I read your entire post but I still don't understand why Fitz "cannot" fire JON.

 

[peatymeanis]

Is his contract.

Fitz committed to NU for life and NU committed to Fitz for life after the Citrus Bowl. He (and his agent) wisely included adequate provisions in his contract that accounted for bad stretches of seasons, like this. I think that given NU’s history it was clearly the right move for the school (and for Fitz) and still is.

However, at 90%+ of other programs, any AD would be negligent if they did not seek a replacement for the head coach after a stretch of seasons like this. Because Fitz’s contract would painfully punish the school if the AD tried to fire him, it gets the AD off the hook for negligence in oversight of the football program.

But (absent any clauses that Fitz has in his contract expressly preventing the school from meddling in the football hiring practices, which if Fitz has, the program may very well be screwed) does not prevent the AD from meddling in the hiring of other football coaches. To do so competently, the AD is going to need to establish an objectively reasonable set of criteria and mandate that Fitz has to follow them to find a competent defensive coordinator. If Fitz doesn’t (again not privy to the contractual exclusions that may be baked in), then Fitz could be let go for cause (basically a “PIP”) - which likely would dramatically impact the buyout for Fitz.

I hope it never comes to that. I hope that Fitz acts independently of any mandate to replace the lack of defensive leadership competence as soon as practicable. But I believe that Fitz’s loyalties will cloud objective judgment and action for what is right for the football program. Thus, the AD must proceed with something similar to the above because of Fitz’s contract.

The above cannot take place in a matter of days or weeks. It is likely that the AD has already started some similar process in preparation for imposing it on Fitz at the end of the season. There could be a “promotion from within,” but I just don’t believe that Fitz would fire a friend in the season. It has to happen at the end of the season, with the AD creating the “for cause” situation so Fitz doesn’t need to be the one to fire his friend.

That's a lot of assumptions and conjecture. We have no idea what Fitz's contract looks like but 'for cause' clauses are primarily written to address serious personal conduct issues, not poor on field performance or disagreement with the AD over staff personnel. If Fitz's agent didn't get him some airtight 'for cause' language in the contract given the previous NU administration's willingness to give Fitz whatever he wanted, the agent should be fired.

Also, the real decision maker over what happens with Fitz and his senior staff is Pat Ryan, not Gragg. When Mr. Ryan is sufficiently sickened by what he's watching, that's when the change will be forced onto Fitz and not a second earlier.

 

[hdhntr1]

I read your entire post but I still don't understand why Fitz "cannot" fire JON.

It isn't whether he can fire him. It is about firing him now, mid season

 

[FeralFelidae]

It isn't whether he can fire him. It is about firing him now, mid season

The title of the thread says that Fitz cannot fire him. I still don't understand why Fitz cannot fire him if that's something he wishes to do.

 

[PURPLE Book Cat]

The title of the thread says that Fitz cannot fire him. I still don't understand why Fitz cannot fire him if that's something he wishes to do.

Because the AD likely needs to be involved in the process to either give Fitz cover or as part of a “PIP” plan or similar.

 

[FeralFelidae]

Because the AD likely needs to be involved in the process to either give Fitz cover or as part of a “PIP” plan or similar.

If Fitz, not the AD, but Fitz, as your title says, wants to fire him, I don't see why he needs cover from the AD or a PIP plan.

 

[phatcat]

They already have just cause to fire JON.

JON: "Why are you firing me?"
Gragg: "Just 'cause we don't like you"

 

[Ryanfield124]

That's a lot of assumptions and conjecture. We have no idea what Fitz's contract looks like but 'for cause' clauses are primarily written to address serious personal conduct issues, not poor on field performance or disagreement with the AD over staff personnel. If Fitz's agent didn't get him some airtight 'for cause' language in the contract given the previous NU administration's willingness to give Fitz whatever he wanted, the agent should be fired.

Also, the real decision maker over what happens with Fitz and his senior staff is Pat Ryan, not Gragg. When Mr. Ryan is sufficiently sickened by what he's watching, that's when the change will be forced onto Fitz and not a second earlier.

Can I get a job at AON insurance then? Must pay in the top 5% and I only need to do my job once every four years. Sounds like a good gig.

 

[StreamCat]

That's a lot of assumptions and conjecture.

I’m baffled how this has happened. Here of all places.

 

[CatManTrue]

If Fitz, not the AD, but Fitz, as your title says, wants to fire him, I don't see why he needs cover from the AD or a PIP plan.

His post is ridiculous. No assistant’s contract is structured to require a PIP prior to termination. That is a courtesy given to most private white collar employees, in order to give them a few months’ heads up to find another job before being termed.

I guaranasstee you that Fitz has full hiring and firing power. No PIP required- your record is your PIP. Welcome to the B1G!

 

[EvanstonCat]

Is his contract.

Fitz committed to NU for life and NU committed to Fitz for life after the Citrus Bowl. He (and his agent) wisely included adequate provisions in his contract that accounted for bad stretches of seasons, like this. I think that given NU’s history it was clearly the right move for the school (and for Fitz) and still is.

However, at 90%+ of other programs, any AD would be negligent if they did not seek a replacement for the head coach after a stretch of seasons like this. Because Fitz’s contract would painfully punish the school if the AD tried to fire him, it gets the AD off the hook for negligence in oversight of the football program.

But (absent any clauses that Fitz has in his contract expressly preventing the school from meddling in the football hiring practices, which if Fitz has, the program may very well be screwed) does not prevent the AD from meddling in the hiring of other football coaches. To do so competently, the AD is going to need to establish an objectively reasonable set of criteria and mandate that Fitz has to follow them to find a competent defensive coordinator. If Fitz doesn’t (again not privy to the contractual exclusions that may be baked in), then Fitz could be let go for cause (basically a “PIP”) - which likely would dramatically impact the buyout for Fitz.

I hope it never comes to that. I hope that Fitz acts independently of any mandate to replace the lack of defensive leadership competence as soon as practicable. But I believe that Fitz’s loyalties will cloud objective judgment and action for what is right for the football program. Thus, the AD must proceed with something similar to the above because of Fitz’s contract.

The above cannot take place in a matter of days or weeks. It is likely that the AD has already started some similar process in preparation for imposing it on Fitz at the end of the season. There could be a “promotion from within,” but I just don’t believe that Fitz would fire a friend in the season. It has to happen at the end of the season, with the AD creating the “for cause” situation so Fitz doesn’t need to be the one to fire his friend.

None of this explains why Fitz can't fire JON. He can if he wants to. He certainly has reason to. It's a want thing. Not a can't thing.