Consuming The Paul Hewitt Contract
by Winfield Featherston on Feb 15, 2011 8:51 AM EST
in Georgia Tech Basketball
Email
PrintFirst, if you want to read through all 37 pages of Hewitt's contract , you can read it below.
Paul Hewitt Contract - Georgia Tech basketball
If you don't want to read it all, highlights after The Jump.
2.C It is the intention of the Parties to create an automatic "rollover" provision
so that the Term of this Agreement will always have six (6) years remaining after the
automatic rollover occurs. Commencing April 15, 2005 and on April 15th of each year
thereafter, the Term of this Agreement shall be automatically extended by one (1)
additional year so that, on April 15th of each year, the Term of this Agreement shall be six
(6) years unless the Association determines that an extension rollover not be made and
notifies Hewitt of its decision in writing not less than thirty (30) days prior to April 15th
in any year during the Term. In the event the Association timely notifies Hewitt in
writing that such extension rollover should not be made in accordance with the
immediately preceding sentence, then this Agreement shall be deemed terminated by the
Association without cause (as hereinafter defined) and Association shall compensate
Hewitt in accordance with the terms of Section 10 of this Agreement.
4.A-B Salary Compensation
For 2010-11 and subsequent Contract Years, the Minimum Compensation shall be in an
amount negotiated between Hewitt and Association, but in no event less than $1,375,000
per Contract Year.
4.F Exemplary Performance Highlights
- Hewitt receives $30,000 or 1/12th of his base salary if Tech wins the ACC regular season
- Hewitt receives $40,000 or 1/13th of his base salary if Tech wins the ACC tournament
- $30,000 bonus if Tech makes the NCAA Tournament
- $10,000 for each game Tech wins in the 1st or 2nd Round of the NCAA Tournament
- $25,000 for each game Tech wins in the 3rd or 4th Round of the NCAA Tournament
- $40,000 if Tech wins the National Semifinal
- $80,000 if Tech wins the National Championship
10. Termination
The contract may get terminated for the following reasons:
1. For Cause: Conviction of a crime that exceeds $1,000 or 1 year in prison, failure to perform duties stated in the contract, or violating NCAA code
2. Without Cause: For some reason that isn't defined under "For Cause"
3. For Good Reason: David Braine leaves Georgia Tech and Paul Hewitt decides to leave Tech within 2 years of Braine leaving OR Paul Hewitt goes to the NBA
4. Upon the death of Paul Hewitt - self-defined
5. Upon the disability of Paul Hewitt - self-defined
6. Voluntary resignation - self- defined
7.Other Resignation
26 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Not even death can save you
10.g.(4) The Association owes the minimum compensation ($1.375 million / year) even if Hewitts dies. The money would be paid to his estate. That said, the contract does condition this section upon the ability of the Association to procure insurance.
10.e & 10.g.(6) If Hewitt left GT for another college’s mens basketball head coach’s job, he’d owe the Association 1/2 of his compensation, or about $4.125 million. So if Hewitt wanted to leave, either he or his future employer would have to fork over some dough.
It looks like Hewitt and the Athletic Association are wedded to each other until either Hewitt takes a job in the NBA or he decides to change careers and no longer be a college mens basketball head coach. Say, do the Hawks need a new coach?
by Dive Keep and Pitch on Feb 15, 2011 9:33 AM EST reply actions
Here's the out...
“failure to perform duties stated in the contract”
Without reading it, there’s an out in the contract somewhere based on this statement alone provided Blaine laid out specifics and those are easily identifiable/proven. I’d have to think that the complete and utter lack of any offensive system and the failure to acquire the right people to develop one would fall under “failure to perform duties” as a head coach.
However, the fact that no matter the situation someone has to pay big bucks to get rid of or attain Hewitt severely hinders things.
"You could spend the next fifteen seconds of your life watching a man and a tiger scream together, or you could be an idiot."
Fact.
I don’t think firing for wins/losses count to fire without buyout
Better to have died a small boy than to drop this football - John HeismanFromTheRumbleSeat
by Winfield Featherston on Feb 15, 2011 12:35 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
No so much wins/losses
But the duty of the head coach is to do whatever it takes to put the best product on the floor in an attempt to win as many games as possible. I can’t say that he is doing that. Can you?
"You could spend the next fifteen seconds of your life watching a man and a tiger scream together, or you could be an idiot."
Fact.
3(m)
“Evaluate individual and team strengths and develop strategies for skill improvement”. Fail.
If you read through the entire contract there are several instances where you could conceivably build a case for failure to perform. Bottom line is that if Tech wants to get nasty and drag in lawyers to force a settlement they can probably find something – a minor Institute infraction that wasn’t punished, for example. It’s all negotiation at that point.
The school is in a pretty weak negotiating position
With the Hewitt having the option of forcing binding arbitration, the Institute would have a hard time litigating him into an unfavorable settlement.
A minor infraction isn’t going to get it done, but if he goes all Mike Leach on a player with a concussion or starts teaching a jim harrick, jr. type coaching class, then we might have something to work with.
The best thing going in the school’s favor is that the contract provides for the payments to be made over seven years (so if you offered him 3 or 4 million up front, he’d be more likely to take it).
by Joe Hamilton's Chauffeur on Feb 15, 2011 5:27 PM EST up reply actions
Cogent Answer
You are right. Dragging in the lawyers does not improve Tech’s position. Only some egregious action on Hewitt’s part gives Tech negotiating room to get out of paying extra millions.
by Atlanta's original team on Feb 16, 2011 7:54 AM EST up reply actions
Agreed
Don’t confuse incompetence with negligence. If Hewitt is genuinely trying, and I have heard nothing to say that he isn’t, then it is really hard to say that he isn’t fullfilling his duties in the contract. His methods may not be as effective or efficient as you might like, but that doesn’t change the fact that he is doing what is required of him.
by Dive Keep and Pitch on Feb 16, 2011 8:53 AM EST up reply actions
True
But the inverse could also be said and not be any less true. Just because it looks like he is trying doesn’t mean that he is. Of course, neither course could be proven because only he knows if he’s giving it his best.
But let’s say that in his mind he is “giving it his best”. How comfortable does that make you feel when it’s plainly clear to any casual observer that we have no f’ing clue what we’re doing offensively? And, if he truly believes that his best, then at what point does this start trickling upstream to D-Rad? Shouldn’t some of the blame fall on him for not helping Hewitt identify and understand the problem? Is D-Rad’s only concern footballsince that’s the true money maker? Sure, there’s too much money involved with changing Hewitt, but I have to believe they can find dunding to help him get the people he needs to improve. Is D-Rad telling us that we are so broke that we can’t find another hot-shot up-and-coming offensive mind such as this guy?
"You could spend the next fifteen seconds of your life watching a man and a tiger scream together, or you could be an idiot."
Fact.
Not much of an out...
His duties under the contract are pretty vague, which would probably go against Tech in court, since the Institute probably wrote the thing and is the employer. And you can’t just find some ticky tack violation of his duties that Tech overlooked at some point and violate the whole contract, it just doesn’t work that way in general (unless there is something funny about GA contract law).
Really the only way he’s going to violate the duties is if he does something dumb (like U[sic]GA’s former AD), or one of his assistants commits a major violation that Hewitt should have caught.
There just aren’t really any good outs for Tech unless Hewitt screws up. Yes you could lawyer up, but Hewitt obviously had better representation than Tech when this was signed. (That or Dave Braine just ignored counsel.) Its a classic contract where one side, Tech, didn’t seem to even consider what would happen if things went south.
I hope Radakovich uses a better lawyer, and listens, whenever Tech finds the pot of money to buy out Hewitt and they hire someone else.
by iamafirehazard on Feb 16, 2011 12:33 AM EST up reply actions
Replying here to above comments
I agree Joe and FireHazard, it is a weak position to be in. My point though is simply that there are probably enough vague outlines of duty within the contract to allow Tech to build a case for firing Hewitt with cause. The threat of a legal battle itself sometimes is enough to force a settlement, but as stated, that’s a precarious position that Tech would be in and possibly not worth it in the long run.
Until then, a strong combination of football, baseball, and alcohol will be our numbing agent.
"You could spend the next fifteen seconds of your life watching a man and a tiger scream together, or you could be an idiot."
Fact.
That's the spirit
and I will keep doing mindless polls about former NBA players . . .
by Atlanta's original team on Feb 16, 2011 5:41 PM EST up reply actions
I was thinking about this yesterday
I’m no laywer, so forgive me if I’m off on this stuff, but if GT fires Hewitt with cause, then the only thing that Hewitt can do is sue GT. Firing a person in itself is not a lawsuit. Once Hewitt sues GT, GT becomes the defendent and it’s on Hewitt to prove there were no grounds for firing him with cause, not the other way around. At that point it becomes very difficult for his side to do that because the vagueness of the contract is then an advantage for GT.
Case in point is Al Davis firing Lane Kiffin with cause. Kiffin’s only recourse was to sue Davis and the Raiders which he lost and got nothing. Do I honestly think GT should go through with something like this? Probably not, because all-in-all Hewitt has been a great coach to represent the school. No infractions, no incidents off the court from players or himself, and an all around great person. Also, neither side would look good by the end of it all and I’m not sure that’s the reputation we want. But, if they wanted out I’m sure they could find a way.
That’s all I got on this matter so I’ll move one now.
"You could spend the next fifteen seconds of your life watching a man and a tiger scream together, or you could be an idiot."
Fact.
Forget Hewitt doing anything for which he can be fired.
I don’t want him as coach, but he is a good person with a ton of integrity. We made a mistake with the rollover contract, so now we have to live with the mistake.
That is very adult of you
and also the way the real world works.
by Atlanta's original team on Feb 16, 2011 7:55 AM EST up reply actions
The Paul Hewitt HYPNOFACE was in full effect when this contract was written up.
But it’s somewhat amusing to note that he’s only earned $110k in bonuses since 2004, according to the rules of the contract.
Because my years of marching band have made me an authority on football.
Better to have died a small boy than to drop this football - John HeismanFromTheRumbleSeat
by Winfield Featherston on Feb 16, 2011 9:20 AM EST up reply actions
Oh, he's used it for other things too.
It’s just that it’s use hasn’t been documented until recently.
Because my years of marching band have made me an authority on football.
by MagnaCarterGT on Feb 16, 2011 2:19 PM EST up reply actions
Off topic a bit, but relevant
Why are we not recruiting this guy? He wants to major in architecture!!!
http://www.newsobserver.com/2011/02/16/992309/best-kept-secret-gaining-notice.html
What is everyone's take on this news story? About possible new BB coach?
Hope this isn’t too unwieldy to past in your browser.
by Atlanta's original team on Feb 16, 2011 5:47 PM EST reply actions
Here is Bradley's full list
I like the Mizzou idea.
Better to have died a small boy than to drop this football - John HeismanFromTheRumbleSeat
by Winfield Featherston on Feb 16, 2011 9:57 PM EST up reply actions
Anybody you like on this list?
Anybody who scares you to death?
by Atlanta's original team on Feb 17, 2011 7:41 AM EST up reply actions
have you watched Dayton games?
Brian Gregory probably has 1-2 more chances to luck up into a higher-level job, but his teams consistently can’t shoot, and when they’re not forcing steals, they’re ineffective. I’d hope GT does better.
Rumble in the Garden - St. John's blog with thunderous undertones, new to SB Nation | And follow on Twitter
I didn't even read the thing because I've got HW to do but...
why can’t we just dump him “without cause?” Seems pretty simple to me (obviously its not).
Paul Johnson: not giving a crap about what you have to say since 1987.
That forces the buyout
With Cause means we don’t have to pay the buyout of $8+ mil.
"You could spend the next fifteen seconds of your life watching a man and a tiger scream together, or you could be an idiot."
Fact.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
SHOP THE FROM THE RUMBLE SEAT STORE
