Lavin's Future in Doubt at SJU

[GardenCity62]

Hard to be impressed the way the new administration is handling the situation.

 

[paultzman]

Andy Katz talked to Lavin and posted this today.

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=12555140

Nooooooo

What's the video say? Can't watch it for some reason

says he spoke to lav and he is very confident he will remain coach. 2 million dollar buyout clause is one of the reasons why. and just referenced how he was confident in his status following the SDSU game

This has not been disclosed before. As I mentioned earlier in the season, the school is not likely to eat $2 million plus pay another coach. They will view this as no harm to give him one more season to prove himself, and any extension would not have such a generous buyout.

I find it hard to believe the University can't get doners to put up money for Lavin's buyout and a healthy package for a new coach.

I don't know anyone who would fork over more money for a coach for the sole purpose of dumping Lavin one year sooner. If they are committed to play almost his entire salary for next season, why shouldn't they take a wait and see attitude. After all, the school gave Roberts a 6th year to show he wasn't the guy.

Beast, agree with your thoughts regarding the finances. That is a lot of change, especially when you are effectively paying twice in a situation like this, so it is certainly the school's/donors' prerogative to take that approach if they so choose.

However procuring coaching talent is not a zero sum game. In this particular instance, SJU's opportunity cost is that there is a particularly attractive and realistic cast of alternatives available this year. So while at that money I would not begrudge the school for taking a "wait and see" or "no harm no foul" approach, they are not guaranteed to be in the same position 12 months from now. $2mm richer, but maybe scrambling for who they are going to pay for the next five years.

Maybe $2mm now + a coach they love is going to be money better spent over the next 10 years than saving the $2mm and flushing another $5+mm and 5 years on a less than ideal candidate? I don't know, and these things can't be entirely predicted, just really hope these are the granular assessments being made by the decision makers. You are certainly way more tuned into these issues at SJU than I am so would be interested in your thoughts.

Those are all very good points. Keep in mind that a contract is basically an agreement between two parties, and can be amended with mutual consent. So, there is nothing wrong with SJU sitting down with Lavin and offering to part ways if he would take a $1 million buyout. Not likely, but again, nothing to prohibit that.

I think that's how it ends. The school won't part with $2mil, and after some haggling Lavin takes less and calls it a day. They'll settle this. At least that's how I see it turning out if the powers that be don't emerge from their papal conclave and offer coach Lavin an extension.

Likely our "amateur" conclave forgot to order the matches.

 

[beast of the east]

Andy Katz talked to Lavin and posted this today.

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=12555140

Nooooooo

What's the video say? Can't watch it for some reason

says he spoke to lav and he is very confident he will remain coach. 2 million dollar buyout clause is one of the reasons why. and just referenced how he was confident in his status following the SDSU game

This has not been disclosed before. As I mentioned earlier in the season, the school is not likely to eat $2 million plus pay another coach. They will view this as no harm to give him one more season to prove himself, and any extension would not have such a generous buyout.

I find it hard to believe the University can't get doners to put up money for Lavin's buyout and a healthy package for a new coach.

I find it hard to believe they didn't start these discussions earlier in order to come to a decision by season's end. Ridiculous.

Because you can't discuss a coaching situation with a coach under contract. That's why everyone waits till the guys they want to go after are out of the tournament.

 

[fuchsia]

Am I the only person on this board considering the possibility that people known to us and claiming to be insiders are feeding info to Zach that is posed to make Lavin look at risk, trying to make the rumors parents to the facts?

 

[paultzman]

Am I the only person on this board considering the possibility that people known to us and claiming to be insiders are feeding info to Zach that is posed to make Lavin look at risk, trying to make the rumors parents to the facts?

Not the case. He may not like SL, but he has independent sources other than this "nut house", me included in that abode.

 

[kranmars]

Andy Katz talked to Lavin and posted this today.

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=12555140

Nooooooo

What's the video say? Can't watch it for some reason

says he spoke to lav and he is very confident he will remain coach. 2 million dollar buyout clause is one of the reasons why. and just referenced how he was confident in his status following the SDSU game

This has not been disclosed before. As I mentioned earlier in the season, the school is not likely to eat $2 million plus pay another coach. They will view this as no harm to give him one more season to prove himself, and any extension would not have such a generous buyout.

I find it hard to believe the University can't get doners to put up money for Lavin's buyout and a healthy package for a new coach.

I don't know anyone who would fork over more money for a coach for the sole purpose of dumping Lavin one year sooner. If they are committed to play almost his entire salary for next season, why shouldn't they take a wait and see attitude. After all, the school gave Roberts a 6th year to show he wasn't the guy.

So the school will let Lavin coach with no contractual safety net. That shows zero stability and business sense. All that does is kick the can to next year, where we will find ourselves in the same position, most likely coming off a season without an NCAA tournament.

You're correct, but I think they would posture that way if Lavin wouldn't go for an extension with a low buyout or vesting. I think the idea of vesting makes sense with incentives that lock him in with more financial guarantees based on the team performing reasonably well next year and him setting a solid foundation for following years.

If that is the case, then why bother playing. That doesn't work with coaching. What exactly would be the school's stock number for Lavin to reach in order for the incentives to kick in? That method of thinking is a non-starter for me.

Then just give Lavin a regular extension and be done with it. Even though I am against that, it makes moee sense than an incentive laden deal.

 

[SJU85]

Am I the only person on this board considering the possibility that people known to us and claiming to be insiders are feeding info to Zach that is posed to make Lavin look at risk, trying to make the rumors parents to the facts?

There are people who are presently or use to be Posters on this Board who have been "sources" for various media in the past, so no, it is not out of the realm of possibility. However, the fact that there has been no talk of extension from the Administration ads fuel to the fire.

 

[johnnycomelately]

once again, i'd have to ask, how would you expect them to have handled this? it appears as if march and the tournament performance, or lack thereof, is part of the decision making criteria. So should they have announced a decision a few hours after Friday nights game/ what if they had won?

The are apparently evaluating-hard to do on the fly and not being sure of what your alternatives are. i think we'd all agree that the decision is not a clear cut one.

 

[ErickTheRed]

He gets a 3yr extension same money that gives him a season to right ship then 3 to see if he can accomplish something. so by 2019 we will have a new coach or a graying Lav to head the ship.

 

[johnnycomelately]

if you are bringing him back, no less than a 3-year extension will cut it. incoming recruits, or proposed recruits for next year will want to know that his commitment parallels their career length at the school.

 

[GardenCity62]

An efficient company,three weeks ago today after the Marquette game would have realized the NCAA bid was assured.
Was that enough to extend?
Yes - make offer
No - make list of potential candidates in the event team blows up in Big East and NCAA. Contact coaches as their season ends.

 

[beast of the east]

Andy Katz talked to Lavin and posted this today.

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=12555140

Nooooooo

What's the video say? Can't watch it for some reason

says he spoke to lav and he is very confident he will remain coach. 2 million dollar buyout clause is one of the reasons why. and just referenced how he was confident in his status following the SDSU game

This has not been disclosed before. As I mentioned earlier in the season, the school is not likely to eat $2 million plus pay another coach. They will view this as no harm to give him one more season to prove himself, and any extension would not have such a generous buyout.

I find it hard to believe the University can't get doners to put up money for Lavin's buyout and a healthy package for a new coach.

I don't know anyone who would fork over more money for a coach for the sole purpose of dumping Lavin one year sooner. If they are committed to play almost his entire salary for next season, why shouldn't they take a wait and see attitude. After all, the school gave Roberts a 6th year to show he wasn't the guy.

So the school will let Lavin coach with no contractual safety net. That shows zero stability and business sense. All that does is kick the can to next year, where we will find ourselves in the same position, most likely coming off a season without an NCAA tournament.

You're correct, but I think they would posture that way if Lavin wouldn't go for an extension with a low buyout or vesting. I think the idea of vesting makes sense with incentives that lock him in with more financial guarantees based on the team performing reasonably well next year and him setting a solid foundation for following years.

If that is the case, then why bother playing. That doesn't work with coaching. What exactly would be the school's stock number for Lavin to reach in order for the incentives to kick in? That method of thinking is a non-starter for me.

Then just give Lavin a regular extension and be done with it. Even though I am against that, it makes moee sense than an incentive laden deal.

Why? Afterr 5 years Lavin still has much to prove, and the moemnt he proves it, the contract can lock in at full value with a 1 year salary buyout - what he has now.

 

[kranmars]

Andy Katz talked to Lavin and posted this today.

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=12555140

Nooooooo

What's the video say? Can't watch it for some reason

says he spoke to lav and he is very confident he will remain coach. 2 million dollar buyout clause is one of the reasons why. and just referenced how he was confident in his status following the SDSU game

This has not been disclosed before. As I mentioned earlier in the season, the school is not likely to eat $2 million plus pay another coach. They will view this as no harm to give him one more season to prove himself, and any extension would not have such a generous buyout.

I find it hard to believe the University can't get doners to put up money for Lavin's buyout and a healthy package for a new coach.

I don't know anyone who would fork over more money for a coach for the sole purpose of dumping Lavin one year sooner. If they are committed to play almost his entire salary for next season, why shouldn't they take a wait and see attitude. After all, the school gave Roberts a 6th year to show he wasn't the guy.

So the school will let Lavin coach with no contractual safety net. That shows zero stability and business sense. All that does is kick the can to next year, where we will find ourselves in the same position, most likely coming off a season without an NCAA tournament.

You're correct, but I think they would posture that way if Lavin wouldn't go for an extension with a low buyout or vesting. I think the idea of vesting makes sense with incentives that lock him in with more financial guarantees based on the team performing reasonably well next year and him setting a solid foundation for following years.

If that is the case, then why bother playing. That doesn't work with coaching. What exactly would be the school's stock number for Lavin to reach in order for the incentives to kick in? That method of thinking is a non-starter for me.

Then just give Lavin a regular extension and be done with it. Even though I am against that, it makes moee sense than an incentive laden deal.

Why? Afterr 5 years Lavin still has much to prove, and the moemnt he proves it, the contract can lock in at full value with a 1 year salary buyout - what he has now.

Forget it. We will never agree on this.

 

[maineqb]

Extension

http://www.sportingnews.com/ncaa-ba...g-st-johns-contract-red-storm-ncaa-tournament

 

[Jack Williams]

Extension

http://www.sportingnews.com/ncaa-ba...g-st-johns-contract-red-storm-ncaa-tournament

Damn. Ok. Get Diallo then Lavin!

 

[beast of the east]

Andy Katz talked to Lavin and posted this today.

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=12555140

Nooooooo

What's the video say? Can't watch it for some reason

says he spoke to lav and he is very confident he will remain coach. 2 million dollar buyout clause is one of the reasons why. and just referenced how he was confident in his status following the SDSU game

This has not been disclosed before. As I mentioned earlier in the season, the school is not likely to eat $2 million plus pay another coach. They will view this as no harm to give him one more season to prove himself, and any extension would not have such a generous buyout.

I find it hard to believe the University can't get doners to put up money for Lavin's buyout and a healthy package for a new coach.

I don't know anyone who would fork over more money for a coach for the sole purpose of dumping Lavin one year sooner. If they are committed to play almost his entire salary for next season, why shouldn't they take a wait and see attitude. After all, the school gave Roberts a 6th year to show he wasn't the guy.

So the school will let Lavin coach with no contractual safety net. That shows zero stability and business sense. All that does is kick the can to next year, where we will find ourselves in the same position, most likely coming off a season without an NCAA tournament.

You're correct, but I think they would posture that way if Lavin wouldn't go for an extension with a low buyout or vesting. I think the idea of vesting makes sense with incentives that lock him in with more financial guarantees based on the team performing reasonably well next year and him setting a solid foundation for following years.

If that is the case, then why bother playing. That doesn't work with coaching. What exactly would be the school's stock number for Lavin to reach in order for the incentives to kick in? That method of thinking is a non-starter for me.

Then just give Lavin a regular extension and be done with it. Even though I am against that, it makes moee sense than an incentive laden deal.

Why? Afterr 5 years Lavin still has much to prove, and the moemnt he proves it, the contract can lock in at full value with a 1 year salary buyout - what he has now.

Forget it. We will never agree on this.

We chat to exchange ideas, and hopefully gain a little perspective, not to convince each other of our viewpoint, correct? Divergent opinions are important also. We've lost our sense of civil discourse, but it's nice when we reclaim it.

 

[Knight]

Extension

http://www.sportingnews.com/ncaa-ba...g-st-johns-contract-red-storm-ncaa-tournament

Damn. Ok. Get Diallo then Lavin!

Where do I get my grain of salt?

 

[sirvoo]

if he was going to get extended why would the administration leave any doubt and allow a week's worth of speculation to surface around the media? are they trying to make his new contract more affordable? whatever it is these people value, it sure doesn't help our perception and prospects moving forward

 

[kranmars]

They are saying that media outlets have said his future is in doubt, but it a possible extension may be done by next week.

That clears it up.

 

[kranmars]

Andy Katz talked to Lavin and posted this today.

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=12555140

Nooooooo

What's the video say? Can't watch it for some reason

says he spoke to lav and he is very confident he will remain coach. 2 million dollar buyout clause is one of the reasons why. and just referenced how he was confident in his status following the SDSU game

This has not been disclosed before. As I mentioned earlier in the season, the school is not likely to eat $2 million plus pay another coach. They will view this as no harm to give him one more season to prove himself, and any extension would not have such a generous buyout.

I find it hard to believe the University can't get doners to put up money for Lavin's buyout and a healthy package for a new coach.

I don't know anyone who would fork over more money for a coach for the sole purpose of dumping Lavin one year sooner. If they are committed to play almost his entire salary for next season, why shouldn't they take a wait and see attitude. After all, the school gave Roberts a 6th year to show he wasn't the guy.

So the school will let Lavin coach with no contractual safety net. That shows zero stability and business sense. All that does is kick the can to next year, where we will find ourselves in the same position, most likely coming off a season without an NCAA tournament.

You're correct, but I think they would posture that way if Lavin wouldn't go for an extension with a low buyout or vesting. I think the idea of vesting makes sense with incentives that lock him in with more financial guarantees based on the team performing reasonably well next year and him setting a solid foundation for following years.

If that is the case, then why bother playing. That doesn't work with coaching. What exactly would be the school's stock number for Lavin to reach in order for the incentives to kick in? That method of thinking is a non-starter for me.

Then just give Lavin a regular extension and be done with it. Even though I am against that, it makes moee sense than an incentive laden deal.

Why? Afterr 5 years Lavin still has much to prove, and the moemnt he proves it, the contract can lock in at full value with a 1 year salary buyout - what he has now.

Forget it. We will never agree on this.

We chat to exchange ideas, and hopefully gain a little perspective, not to convince each other of our viewpoint, correct? Divergent opinions are important also. We've lost our sense of civil discourse, but it's nice when we reclaim it.

I wasn't trying to be uncivil. I just didn't want us to go back and forth saying the same thing in 100 different ways.