Yes they do. Every time.
-
You do not need to register if you are not going to pay the yearly fee to post. If you register please click here or log in go to "settings" then "my account" then "User Upgrades" and you can renew.
HuskerMax readers can save 50% on Omaha Steaks .
Chip Kelly to Ohio State as OC
- Thread starter HuskrNew
- Start date
I know it’s not your responsibility to prove your opinions on a discussion board but you have been pretty insistent that coaches pay their own buy out fees when getting hired away. Could you site an example? Everything I’m aware of is the hiring school paying it.
I haven’t heard anyone say unlimited transfers is a good think. I usually see multiple transfers as an indication of issues unless they are upwards or based on coaching changes.
But opinions on good and bad vary by individual optics and by the players situation. Being fair and non restrictive seems like a reasonable path.
What makes you believe these are rash decisions that aren’t supported by their parents? You can’t logically support this argument path.
I never once said coaches paid their buyouts. Ever. Stop with that nonsense. I said, when coaches leave, there are large buyouts, millions. Makes no difference who pays it. It gets paid. It’s still on them, and under their name.
Money mostly, as the majority couldn’t afford it.
How else would I interpret this as you saying the coaches pay it?
It’s under their name, isn’t it? I mean, it’s their name on the contract, so they are responsible for that liability. So, the coaches buyouts are paid. The hiring school/NFL team generally, pays those buyouts. Pat Sullivan, in 1970, or 1971, was hired by LSU, and had told his current team he was leaving. However, LSU wasn’t paying the buyout, and he couldn’t afford it, so he tucked tail and wanted to stay with his current team. I think nowadays, those buyouts are part of the new contract from hiring team. Point being, which apparently, you’re missing is, these coaches pay millions to leave, a heavy penalty. You’re 100% wrong trying to compare a kid leaving, and a coach. Different stratosphere brotha.
Last edited:
Seriously? You are the one that argued the coaches large buyout as punishment as a comparison to kids leaving and coaches.
WTH are you talking about? I’ve said time and time over, you can’t compare a coach leaving, with a student athlete leaving at will. The coach has a huge penalty, and the student athlete has no penalty. The player should have to sit a year. It would stop this nonsense. Have another beer.
Last edited:
Again that is simply not the truth. The coach is not penalized. He is rewarded. Almost every single one of them leave for better opportunities with zero penalty out of their pocket. And yet the athlete, who receives nothing but a scholarship from the college, you believe should be penalized with a loss of a year. This argument is insanity.
If the coach doesn't pay it, how is that a penalty for the coach?
So the 1 of 85 on a football team should have to sit a year for transferring, but the head coach shouldn't have any recourse for leaving? That's your stance?
Who gives a flip who pays it? it gets paid, that’s a HUGE penalty. Spin it however you want to fit your narrative, but the facts remain, there is a heavy price THAT GETS PAID, when a coach leaves. That’s the truth.
