Jump to content

David Beaty

cdain3

By cdain3
in Football

 Share

Recommended Posts

Landomatic

Landomatic 3813

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, Jhawk said:

Yeah but venebles didn't literally lead an entire program, not 10 years removed from a BCS win, down to a depth that even charlie weis couldn't get to after kicking 20 players off the team.  You think he is a good recruiter but look at our roster situation.  The guy couldn't manage a roster to save his life and then when it looked like his job was in jeopardy he literally quit recruiting.  At one point something like 22% of our roster was WRs.

Some are talking about how he got kids to aggy.  I hate aggy as much as anyone but the fact is that aggy was, and is, right up there with the highest AD budget in america a few years and their facilities were/are likely top 10.  He was there when texas was sliding out of the mack era.  I've been around since about 2011 and you guys were bitching about your talent a ton back then.  You didn't have the record, you didn't have talent,you had a stale old fart instead of a young, up and coming, coach (at the time), and A&M had just moved to the SEC.  Texas kids were going to be SEC branded without leaving home.  Say what you want about A&M but the fact is, they had everything going for them that UT didn't at that time.  Donald Duck could have out recruited UT in favor of A&M at that point in history.

It's not really sour grapes on my part if you look at the evidence and the situation at the time beaty was at A&M and say that he didn't have shit to do with it.  I can also just as easily say that the talent he recruited there likely didn't contribute to the team's record until 2014 (his 3rd and final year).  They went 8-5 that year.  So those 5* kids he might have gotten didn't really get them shit did it?  Just like he missed on 90% of everyone he brought to KU.  The 10% that did hit he had nothing to do with.

Dude, why do you think he was hired as a head coach, even at somewhere as shitty as Kansas, in the first place?  They thought he seemed like a neat guy?    No, he was really good as a recruiter and position coach and was widely thought in the football world to be an up and comer.  They thought he had upper management written all over him.  Didn't pan out, but that doesn't change that he was good at his job, in the stat of Texas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rhinotx

Rhinotx 499

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Burt Macklin said:

Fuckity fuck fuck fuck. This is not a national title-level coaching staff. If Anwar is right (huge if), this is a big red flag on Herman. 

If he dropped say Meh for Beaty Herman probably figures it would just be a one and done. At least with Meh you know hes not going anywhere. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LTtxfan

LTtxfan 49052

Posted
Posted (edited)
52 minutes ago, Machinator said:

 

If true, Bring Back in what capacity..... Hmm??

Still seems like a smokescreen for recruiting purposes till after NSD2..... also easier to get their next job if they are hired away from Texas verses hired after being released??

Edited by LTtxfan
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Machinator

Machinator 32098

Posted
Posted

As discussed on the recruiting board, there are a few possibilities here. Quoting Katfid:

"1.) $9.95ers don't know shit.  Never have; never will.

2.) Herman is doing his annual roundup of figuring out where there are leaks in his staff and plugging those leaks.

3.) Herman is "floating" to the college football world that everyone has a job offer (even though they don't actually), so that they're more attractive to another school.  This helps his guys get jobs, and it helps him keep/develop a rep as a coach who isn't going to fire coaches and helps his assistants obtain other jobs."

 

  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Machinator

Machinator 32098

Posted
Posted

Two other things:

  • Herman can still retain coaches in different (reduced) capacities, though that sounds like wishcasting
  • It's quite possible we don't see movement until after the February signing day. Last year, the plan was to announce the Herb Hand hire after NSD2, but Auburn let the news leak early, forcing our hand.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SydneyCarton

SydneyCarton 47936

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Machinator said:

As discussed on the recruiting board, there are a few possibilities here. Quoting Katfid:

"1.) $9.95ers don't know shit.  Never have; never will.

2.) Herman is doing his annual roundup of figuring out where there are leaks in his staff and plugging those leaks.

3.) Herman is "floating" to the college football world that everyone has a job offer (even though they don't actually), so that they're more attractive to another school.  This helps his guys get jobs, and it helps him keep/develop a rep as a coach who isn't going to fire coaches and helps his assistants obtain other jobs."

 

Negged for mentioning the recruiting board you son of a bitch. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jebus

Jebus 1301

Posted
Posted
On 1/8/2019 at 8:34 AM, Jhawk said:

If you think he is going to give you a foothold in Texas recruiting you guys are in trouble. 1. You’re Texas. You don’t need Beaty to have a foothold in Texas recruiting. 2. Look at his recruiting at KU. He stopped recruiting Texas. 

The co-OC thing better just be for a pay increase.  Our offense got worse after he fired meachem and took the helm. Tough to do when meach leads you to a 21 yard outing.  

Good fucking luck. Friend text me last night “Clemson hires a WR coach and gets two championships and a loaded roster. We hire one and lose 90% of our games for 4 years and are left with no roster and no scholarships.”

pepper your anus. He will not add a damn thing. He might not be a net negative as an assistant but you won’t get your money’s worth out of him. 

Yeah but do you even alignment, bro?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...
LTtxfan

LTtxfan 49052

Posted
Posted (edited)

Kansas self investigating possible NCAA violation on Beaty..... keeps Texas from hiring him. 

Beaty now suing Kansas for the $3mill they owe... KU looking for a way not to pay

  "According to the suit, the school told Beaty the reason for not paying his $3 million buyout was “a self-initiated NCAA investigation being conducted — not by the NCAA — but by Kansas Athletics’ corporate counsel looking into impropriety involving a former assistant coach.  The lawsuit also alleges Kansas hindered Beaty's chances of getting another job by informing prospective employers he "is the subject of an NCAA investigation".

Fyi per article.... "Beaty’s buyout from Kansas does not “offset,” meaning that no matter what a future employer pays him, Kansas owes him the entire $3 million if his firing is without cause." 

https://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2019/3/12/18197132/david-beaty-kansas-lawsuit-buyout

Edited by LTtxfan
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WBT

WBT 20482

Posted
Posted

So to save $3 million, Kansas would put themselves on probation which could include recruiting limits, scholarship reductions, and a bowl ban...yeah that seems about right.  Who would notice?  I wonder what Lester thinks about this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Skipper

Skipper 6107

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, WBT said:

So to save $3 million, Kansas would put themselves on probation which could include recruiting limits, scholarship reductions, and a bowl ban...yeah that seems about right.  Who would notice?  I wonder what Lester thinks about this.

Seriously.  Only fucking Kansas.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
OrangEngr

OrangEngr 1034

Posted
Posted

Question for the surly lawyer mafia: does it matter at all that the actual decision to fire him was without cause contractually, and they only “discovered” the “cause” after the fact matter with regards to whether or not they have to pay his buyout?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tex Long

Tex Long 4356

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, OrangEngr said:

Question for the surly lawyer mafia: does it matter at all that the actual decision to fire him was without cause contractually, and they only “discovered” the “cause” after the fact matter with regards to whether or not they have to pay his buyout?

Depends on what the meaning of "is" is. /noCR

But, yeah, that was my first thought. I believe the real answer is it depends on who has more political power here, and I'm guessing it ain't Beaty. You prolly oughta ask MensaTom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nivek

Nivek 16875

Posted
Posted
So to save $3 million, Kansas would put themselves on probation which could include recruiting limits, scholarship reductions, and a bowl ban...yeah that seems about right.  Who would notice?  I wonder what Lester thinks about this.

Bowl ban? Hahaha
scholarship limits? Who could tell the difference?
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Katfid54

Katfid54 8594

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, OrangEngr said:

Question for the surly lawyer mafia: does it matter at all that the actual decision to fire him was without cause contractually, and they only “discovered” the “cause” after the fact matter with regards to whether or not they have to pay his buyout?

Depends on what the contract says.  If there's a clause that says him engaging in [prohibited] conduct results in him forfeiting his right to pay, then it probably wouldn't matter that he was fired without cause, assuming they can prove he engaged in the prohibited conduct.

But if the only place the contract talks about forfeiture of pay is the with/without cause section, that argument gets a lot harder.

Edited by Katfid54
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31349

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, OrangEngr said:

Question for the surly lawyer mafia: does it matter at all that the actual decision to fire him was without cause contractually, and they only “discovered” the “cause” after the fact matter with regards to whether or not they have to pay his buyout?

Great question.  If "cause" was discovered later, it could certainly be a ground to stop paying and maybe recover payments made.  I don't think the issue of cause is "frozen" as of the date of termination.  However, later-discovered cause is always going to be iffy as a matter of proof.  If the "cause" actually cost the university money or other compensable damages, it might offset any payout due under the contract.  https://www.reedsmith.com/en/perspectives/1996/10/aftershock--afteracquired-evidence-employment-laws  It's a little different where the issue is termination for a discriminatory reason as opposed to simply a contractual matter. 

To katfid's point. firing for cause basically means the coach has breached the contract, ending the contract and the university's obligations under it.  Whereas firing without cause is essentially a breach by the university and obligates them to continue to perform/pay damages.  However, the termination provisions can provide their own remedies (full payment, partial payment, no payment, payment offset by future employment, etc. etc.), but the above is the general scenario.

Edited by TwiceHorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...