Official Jon Gruden Thread II (merged)

Status
Not open for further replies.
#9,003
#9,003
I think the only reason dooley is not already gone is the fact hart know how big recruiting is and he is waiting to have his guy in place
 
#9,005
#9,005
RagingOrange said:
Article XVII (B)

summary, damages incurred by breach of any part of the agreement by Coach.
Click to expand...

That's just Dooley's acknowledgement of the damages the school would be entitled to if he quit, i.e., what he owes the school if he leaves of his own accord. It doesn't relate to potential damages the school might suffer from a breach of one of the contract's provisions while he remains on the job.
 
#9,007
#9,007
orangesoda said:
I think the only reason dooley is not already gone is the fact hart know how big recruiting is and he is waiting to have his guy in place
Click to expand...

I agree and disagree, he knows how big recruiting is, but I think he would of made a statement supporting Dooley if there was any chance he would stay(for recruiting purposes). He hasn't and I think he believes our recruiting is being hurt by our progress under Dooley...
 
#9,008
#9,008
Wilson27 said:
Can you imagine what this turd Dooley tried to do to us? What if he had bolted for North Carolina after what Kiffin did? Never mind that he sucks and we would have been lucky to have been rid of him. It would have caused so much depression in our fan base.
Click to expand...

See "damages to the stability of the program" in the contract
 
#9,012
#9,012
Wilson27 said:
Can you imagine what this turd Dooley tried to do to us? What if he had bolted for North Carolina after what Kiffin did? Never mind that he sucks and we would have been lucky to have been rid of him. It would have caused so much depression in our fan base.
Click to expand...

Kiffin's excuse when he left was Usc was his dream job. Dooley's excuse though he will never admit it, if he left for the NC job will be his same excuse when he gets fired. He's in over his head here and he knows it.
 
#9,013
#9,013
CourtJester said:
That's just Dooley's acknowledgement of the damages the school would be entitled to if he quit, i.e., what he owes the school if he leaves of his own accord. It doesn't relate to potential damages the school might suffer from a breach of one of the contract's provisions while he remains on the job.
Click to expand...

Youre not wrong, but I think that simpleton contract leaves loopholes dont you think?

What of the damages to the school because he sought to quit, even though it did not happen and is now leaked as press fodder...damages, damages, such a multifunctional word in legaleeze...LOL
 
Last edited:
#9,014
#9,014
Dooley may owe UT for damages however I am considering seeking recourse for damages from him as I now need stronger reading glasses and my right index finger has incurred considerable wear and tear keeping up with this thread.:)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#9,015
#9,015
MedicT said:
Dooley may owe UT for damages however I am considering seeking recourse for damages from him as I now need stronger reading glasses and my right index finger has incurred considerable wear and tear keeping up with this thread.:)
Click to expand...

Legaleeze 101...like I said a good lawyer can twist anything...
 
#9,018
#9,018
MedicT said:
Dooley may owe UT for damages however I am considering seeking recourse for damages from him as I now need stronger reading glasses and my right index finger has incurred considerable wear and tear keeping up with this thread.:)
Click to expand...

I am going to hit him up for mental anguish and worsening of my hypertension.
 
#9,022
#9,022
RagingOrange said:
Youre not wrong, but I think that simpleton contract leaves loopholes dont you think?

What of the damages to the school because he sought to quit, even though it did not happen and is now leaked as press fodder...damages, damages, such a multifunctional word in legaleeze...LOL
Click to expand...

What makes you think it's a "simpleton" contract? Does that mean the University was represented by simpletons too? This isn't their first rodeo (nor Dooley's agent's), and the contract doesn't look bad or particularly unusual to me. As I said, UT may try to use the UNC issue as leverage in negotiating a buyout, but I doubt they'd try to go to the mat over a significantly reduced buyout unless something more significant comes out than has so far (the UNC issue and his throwing players under the bus). Now his alleged altercation with Hart yesterday might have the potential to be more dangerous to him, but we don't know the details, and it would have to have been horrendously bad to justify a termination without cause rather than a warning, etc.
 
New posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Advertisement





Back
Top