• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Danny Manning replacement search thread

A waste of a 151 page thread, Manning will be back next year. We are so screwed folks.
 
lets just remember that DonaldRoss has said that Wes Miller will have multiple final4 appearances in the next 10 years .....at UNC!!!!! That tells you everything you need to know about the reality he lives in.
 
bigboy8 said:
SOURCES, Manning aint goin anywhere, said it from day 1.
Click to expand...

No you haven't. You have said something different almost every single day. The money for the buyout is there. He will be back. Don't worry, it's a done deal, he is gone. He will be back.
 
PhDeac said:
“Danny either wants that incentive money included in a buyout OR leave him alone to finish "earning" them.”

That makes sense.
Click to expand...

That's not how coaching incentives work. Say for example you put in a $1 million dollar retention bonus for each year coming back and $50K for each tournament appearance. A coach is not entitled to the retention bonus or tournament appearance incentives if they were fired and unable to achieve those goals. You MUST achieve the goals to be entitled to the money. Manning could sue in an attempt to collect incentive money, but he would lose. Wake Forest has no duty to keep him employed to achieve incentives. Incentive money is not guaranteed money.
 
The last thing Manning should want to do is sue Wake. That would end his future possibility of becoming a HC at a P6 school. Who would want to give a chance to a failed coach who sues his employer?
 
Funny how the people with Manning gone sources have gotten really quiet. Makes you wonder.
 
RJKarl said:
The last thing Manning should want to do is sue Wake. That would end his future possibility of becoming a HC at a P6 school. Who would want to give a chance to a failed coach who sues his employer?
Click to expand...

Um, Manning isn't ever going to become a HC at another P6 school anyway.
 
RacerDeac said:
Um, Manning isn't ever going to become a HC at another P6 school anyway.
Click to expand...

Exactly. If Manning wants to stay in coaching, he will always have an assistant's job at Kansas. If he wants to head coach again, it will be at a lower level.

Even if WF and Manning are at impasse over exactly what is owed, that issue wouldn't mature into a lawsuit until WF failed to make a payment to Manning which the contract (as interpreted by Manning) dictated was owed. If it's an incentive payment which Manning claims WF deprived him of the right to satisfy, that payment wouldn't be due for at least a year. If Manning is fired, that's a lot of time for tempers to dissipate and settlement to get reached. So, even if WF terminates Manning, and there is a lingering dispute, doubt it would ever result in a lawsuit. So, there is a long way to go between the current conflict and the initiation of a suit.
 
netflixnchildres said:
That's not how coaching incentives work. Say for example you put in a $1 million dollar retention bonus for each year coming back and $50K for each tournament appearance. A coach is not entitled to the retention bonus or tournament appearance incentives if they were fired and unable to achieve those goals. You MUST achieve the goals to be entitled to the money. Manning could sue in an attempt to collect incentive money, but he would lose. Wake Forest has no duty to keep him employed to achieve incentives. Incentive money is not guaranteed money.
Click to expand...
Right.
Ph was quoting me and I realized that I wasn't very clear with my writing of that sentence. (Imma bout to go edit it)
I'm in total agreement with you; in fact, that's my entire supposition. I think Sportsnut's source saying that negotiations stalled could be entirely explained by Manning (or his agent most likely) stubbornly insisting that he's MET some if not all of the incentives.
Currie is possibly telling him, "no, dumbass, you ain't met em" and thus that's where we are.
It really depends on what the fuck Wellman agreed to; that man could've written anything.
End of the day, we're probably going to wind up right where you predicted: in court.
 
shogun6066 said:
Right.
Ph was quoting me and I realized that I wasn't very clear with my writing of that sentence. (Imma bout to go edit it)
I'm in total agreement with you; in fact, that's my entire supposition. I think Sportsnut's source saying that negotiations stalled could be entirely explained by Manning (or his agent most likely) stubbornly insisting that he's MET some if not all of the incentives.
Currie is possibly telling him, "no, dumbass, you ain't met em" and thus that's where we are.
It really depends on what the fuck Wellman agreed to; that man could've written anything.
End of the day, we're probably going to wind up right where you predicted: in court.
Click to expand...

If it ends up in court, the terms of the contract would become public. That would make interesting reading.
 
shogun6066 said:
Right.
Ph was quoting me and I realized that I wasn't very clear with my writing of that sentence. (Imma bout to go edit it)
I'm in total agreement with you; in fact, that's my entire supposition. I think Sportsnut's source saying that negotiations stalled could be entirely explained by Manning (or his agent most likely) stubbornly insisting that he's MET some if not all of the incentives.
Currie is possibly telling him, "no, dumbass, you ain't met em" and thus that's where we are.
It really depends on what the fuck Wellman agreed to; that man could've written anything.
End of the day, we're probably going to wind up right where you predicted: in court.
Click to expand...


It wont go to court if Wake wont want to show in open court the stupidity of the extension.
 
Deaconblue said:
If it ends up in court, the terms of the contract would become public. That would make interesting reading.
Click to expand...
Wouldn't it be? Especially if one of my hunches is right and some of these "incentives" are Wellman "blue hair" red meat 'Culture Crap'.
 
bigboy8 said:
Funny how the people with Manning gone sources have gotten really quiet. Makes you wonder.
Click to expand...

Big boy- just for fun I looked at your history on this topic. In the last 4 weeks you’ve been all over the place. Here are a few of my favorites:
2/13 buyout money definitely available
2/22 big donors flipping against Manning
2/25 relax. Decision made. Nothing to worry about.
2/26 reiterated money raised
2/29 anyone else nervous?
3/4 DG never said money not there. Where there is smoke there is fire.
3/6 bad feeling
3/8 source says don’t be surprised if he’s back. Worried.
3/10 definitely returning.

Sounds to me like you are just like everyone else. You have a source that is shaky at best. You desperately want him gone but because of last year you fear the worst. You may be right about him coming back but you staying it as fact lacks credibility.
 
Here is a good article on Steve Alford's contract (as well as the contract itself) that was published they day he was fired at UCLA. It has a walk-through of what he was owed, when, etc. Ultimately, though the contract spelled out that he would get base salary, talent fee, and deferred compensation paid-out monthly through the end of the contract term, it is my understanding that UCLA/Alford ended up settling on a lump sum buyout amount.

https://www.bruinsnation.com/fire-alford/2018/12/30/18161908/ucla-bruins-basketball-the-truth-about-the-steve-alford-buyout
 
Bob Niedbala said:
The blowback you keep getting on Miller stems from the fact you keep doubling down on your claims we should have hired Miller 10 years ago, when he was an assistant at High Point with 2 years of coaching experience. Clearly you’re not serious about that it’s the most ridiculous thing conceivable. .
Click to expand...

Clearly I am serious and was serious. And history has shown it seriously would have been a better decision than we implemented. Just as not hanging ourself with the neuse of the Joel would have been a better decision.

I'm sorry that these views were viewed as not credible. It turns out they were dead on. Uncredible views often turn out to have been the proper path. The last 10 years show that this would have been a better path.

Now let's make the best decision in 2020. Dump the Joel now. Beg Wes or Pat to take the job. Rebuild for 2030.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top