Coach Gregg Marshall Investigation

[OregonShocker]

Could GM be dragging this out to ensure his staff stays?

If he's being let go (which I assume is why he's cleared out his desk) I don't think it's HIM who's dragging it out; it's the attorneys.

[Stickboy46]

If I know Gregg Marshall, he would want to stay in our conference so he can beat the hell out of us for 10 years.

ECU?

Gonna replace Jank at SMU

[pinstripers]

Louisville or Kentucky?

Not Duke?

[Good News]

“We almost certainly know he would have taken the Texas job if offered”.

Really? Do we? If you’re making that statement then you must know Marshall personally or have 1 degree of separation to someone who does. If that’s the case then you should be able to find out exactly what’s going on with this current situation.

Man. Looks like somebody’s got a case of the Mondays. WstateU help me out again!!!
Okay, I’ll play. Point by point from your post:

1. “Really?”

Yes. I used the word “almost” as a qualifier there, maybe you missed it. It is “never”’s tricky little shifty-eyed pal – look it up in the dictionary. However, I could have been way more certain in my wording because (1) it was widely reported that Marshall would accept the UT job at the time, (2) if it ever surfaces as a topic now it is reported and widely believed, (3) if you were around back then, the tone from the people who know/matter on this board – i.e. those who write the checks and/or are plugged in - was VERY different than with every other job opening (A&M, UCLA, NC State, etc.), and (4) I just happened to be hearing the same thing from the other side from a person I trust that was very plugged in to the UT athletic department and had been for decades since they were an athlete there.

Maybe you’ve never been pursued for a job, but there is a very common intermediate step where the top target gives a strong indication that – all else being satisfactory – there is strong interest and a deal if the compensation works. That’s what seemed to have happened.

I will stand down and modify my thinking on the topic if several of the credible boosters on this board tell me otherwise, but it will still be hard to reconcile with my source telling me it was a “done deal” – to the extent that I still bust his chops by calling him Done Deal every time I see him.

2. “Do we?”

Yes. See above. Are you one of those people that says “Seriously?” frequently in conversation because you can’t think of anything else? You must be a conversation whiz at the dinner table.

3. “If you’re making that statement then you must know Marshall”

Why? I get the sarcasm but not the logic. I said “almost”, and it was widely reported. If I said “we almost certainly know that Trump and Fauci don’t like each other on a personal basis” would you assume I knew one or both of them? Or someone in the White House? If so that’s a very entertaining world you live in, although I guess it would balance out the dinner table boredom of “Seriously?”. Did your wife warn the kids to not provoke you with stories about what they learned in history class and get a “Oh really?!? So you must know Napoleon, Marie Curie, and William the Conqueror firsthand!” in response?

4. “If that’s the case then you should be able to find out about the current situation”

And again, why? And again, I get the sarcasm but not the logic? To continue my first analogy, if I actually did hypothetically know firsthand that Trump and Fauci don’t like each other, would you assume that I would know Trump’s current thinking on if/when he should concede? Or to go back to the dinner table analogy – “Okay, Mr. ‘I know Napoleon personally… what exactly happened at Waterloo? OH SO YOU DON’T KNOW HIM DO YOU?!!?!”

We’re on an internet message board. Speculation is the lifeblood of it. Furthermore, I reread my original post and don’t know how I could have been more clear that I was speculating – without opinion and for the sake of discussion – and used more qualifying language.

In other words… got dam boy. You’re like that guy sitting by himself at the bar listening to someone else at another table telling a joke and yelling “B**S*** That never happened!!!” right after the punch line.

ShockerNet is gonna ShockerNet though. Reminds me of when I knew Turge was gone because I had literally been told by someone who wrote 2 comma checks to A&M, family name on buildings, direct line to the AD, the whole 9 yards. ShockerNet told me I was full of ****. Whatever.

As far as the topic goes, I know – FIRSTHAND!!! – from previous corporate experience and dealing with HR that when separation agreements occur because of downsizing or other reasons, employees over 40 are a protected class and are given much longer than people under 40 to accept their severance agreements.

Are there any labor lawyers or other attorneys out there that know if what I’m referring to is state law or federal law? I just remember young people telling me they had a few days to sign and accept the agreement and older employees telling me they had several weeks (from the same downsizings), and HR explaining to me that my older employees were a protected class and that meant additional considerations in letting them go. The topic of where the law came from never came up, although my intuition tells me since those situations were for global and national companies it was federal and not state. Then again it could be state law and a national or global company has to implement it correctly at that level.

My point in all this is that Marshall would obviously be in that protected class because of age. And if he has weeks or months to consider signing under federal law (in the absence of explicit language in his contract, which I don’t think could violate federal law anyway), then it could easily be a situation where he has decided on the path of maximum pain for everyone. Goodman’s credibility, success of the team, and general You **** Me I **** You.

Not to mention that if he does have several weeks to consider and shows intent to use them, it creates a pretty big negotiating chip to incentivize the university to increase payout and shorten the timeline so it doesn’t bleed over into the season.

I’m curious about from thoughts from the lawyers out there – I know we have a few of them.

If all of this is the case, it makes you wonder how big of a circus it would have turned into if ******* hadn’t been scooped/rushed to break his story ahead of what I believe was his original timeline around National Letter of Intent signing day and the season opener. We could have been the only program ever to play college basketball without actually knowing who the official coach was. (Which may technically still happen).

Pie n eye – I regret the personal attack, I just get tired of people saying stuff on this board that they probably wouldn’t say in person to a stranger stating a personal qualified opinion.

It didn’t used to be that way in the old days before we started making tournament runs and attracted a lot more posters.

I dislike the amount of personal attacks on here, and I decided to respond in kind to make a point.

Best of luck to you and all.

Peace and Chicken Grease,

Good News

[BOBB]

Man. Looks like somebody’s got a case of the Mondays. WstateU help me out again!!!
Okay, I’ll play. Point by point from your post:

1. “Really?”

Yes. I used the word “almost” as a qualifier there, maybe you missed it. It is “never”’s tricky little shifty-eyed pal – look it up in the dictionary. However, I could have been way more certain in my wording because (1) it was widely reported that Marshall would accept the UT job at the time, (2) if it ever surfaces as a topic now it is reported and widely believed, (3) if you were around back then, the tone from the people who know/matter on this board – i.e. those who write the checks and/or are plugged in - was VERY different than with every other job opening (A&M, UCLA, NC State, etc.), and (4) I just happened to be hearing the same thing from the other side from a person I trust that was very plugged in to the UT athletic department and had been for decades since they were an athlete there.

Maybe you’ve never been pursued for a job, but there is a very common intermediate step where the top target gives a strong indication that – all else being satisfactory – there is strong interest and a deal if the compensation works. That’s what seemed to have happened.

I will stand down and modify my thinking on the topic if several of the credible boosters on this board tell me otherwise, but it will still be hard to reconcile with my source telling me it was a “done deal” – to the extent that I still bust his chops by calling him Done Deal every time I see him.

2. “Do we?”

Yes. See above. Are you one of those people that says “Seriously?” frequently in conversation because you can’t think of anything else? You must be a conversation whiz at the dinner table.

3. “If you’re making that statement then you must know Marshall”

Why? I get the sarcasm but not the logic. I said “almost”, and it was widely reported. If I said “we almost certainly know that Trump and Fauci don’t like each other on a personal basis” would you assume I knew one or both of them? Or someone in the White House? If so that’s a very entertaining world you live in, although I guess it would balance out the dinner table boredom of “Seriously?”. Did your wife warn the kids to not provoke you with stories about what they learned in history class and get a “Oh really?!? So you must know Napoleon, Marie Curie, and William the Conqueror firsthand!” in response?

4. “If that’s the case then you should be able to find out about the current situation”

And again, why? And again, I get the sarcasm but not the logic? To continue my first analogy, if I actually did hypothetically know firsthand that Trump and Fauci don’t like each other, would you assume that I would know Trump’s current thinking on if/when he should concede? Or to go back to the dinner table analogy – “Okay, Mr. ‘I know Napoleon personally… what exactly happened at Waterloo? OH SO YOU DON’T KNOW HIM DO YOU?!!?!”

We’re on an internet message board. Speculation is the lifeblood of it. Furthermore, I reread my original post and don’t know how I could have been more clear that I was speculating – without opinion and for the sake of discussion – and used more qualifying language.

In other words… got dam boy. You’re like that guy sitting by himself at the bar listening to someone else at another table telling a joke and yelling “B**S*** That never happened!!!” right after the punch line.

ShockerNet is gonna ShockerNet though. Reminds me of when I knew Turge was gone because I had literally been told by someone who wrote 2 comma checks to A&M, family name on buildings, direct line to the AD, the whole 9 yards. ShockerNet told me I was full of ****. Whatever.

As far as the topic goes, I know – FIRSTHAND!!! – from previous corporate experience and dealing with HR that when separation agreements occur because of downsizing or other reasons, employees over 40 are a protected class and are given much longer than people under 40 to accept their severance agreements.

Are there any labor lawyers or other attorneys out there that know if what I’m referring to is state law or federal law? I just remember young people telling me they had a few days to sign and accept the agreement and older employees telling me they had several weeks (from the same downsizings), and HR explaining to me that my older employees were a protected class and that meant additional considerations in letting them go. The topic of where the law came from never came up, although my intuition tells me since those situations were for global and national companies it was federal and not state. Then again it could be state law and a national or global company has to implement it correctly at that level.

My point in all this is that Marshall would obviously be in that protected class because of age. And if he has weeks or months to consider signing under federal law (in the absence of explicit language in his contract, which I don’t think could violate federal law anyway), then it could easily be a situation where he has decided on the path of maximum pain for everyone. Goodman’s credibility, success of the team, and general You **** Me I **** You.

Not to mention that if he does have several weeks to consider and shows intent to use them, it creates a pretty big negotiating chip to incentivize the university to increase payout and shorten the timeline so it doesn’t bleed over into the season.

I’m curious about from thoughts from the lawyers out there – I know we have a few of them.

If all of this is the case, it makes you wonder how big of a circus it would have turned into if ******* hadn’t been scooped/rushed to break his story ahead of what I believe was his original timeline around National Letter of Intent signing day and the season opener. We could have been the only program ever to play college basketball without actually knowing who the official coach was. (Which may technically still happen).

Pie n eye – I regret the personal attack, I just get tired of people saying stuff on this board that they probably wouldn’t say in person to a stranger stating a personal qualified opinion.

It didn’t used to be that way in the old days before we started making tournament runs and attracted a lot more posters.

I dislike the amount of personal attacks on here, and I decided to respond in kind to make a point.

Best of luck to you and all.

Peace and Chicken Grease,

Good News

TL;DR

[Good News]

I agree with a lot of what is written, but also concur that the Texas job is not the gold mine some people think. It's a football school 1st, 2nd and 3rd. The boosters run the school, not the basketball coach. 3G would be way down on the pecking order there.

I agree with all of that, but it is absolutely a siren song for any coach not in a top 10 basketball job. Unparalleled resources for a public P5 institution (3rd largest endowment behind Harvard and Yale, ahead of Stanford and Princeton). And by definition - like most careers - the guys that succeed in coaching fundamentally believe that "I'm different" and "I can succeed where others failed",

The quality of life and resources in Austin are too good to pass up, which is why Shaka left a great situation where he could have easily become a HOFer and changed many lives. Instead, he grabbed the brass ring and found that he would get fired if (1) he didn't sign 4 and 5 star recruits, and (2) didn't make the tournament every single year and the second weekend more often than not.

[Shocker Mama]

Are there any labor lawyers or other attorneys out there that know if what I’m referring to is state law or federal law? I just remember young people telling me they had a few days to sign and accept the agreement and older employees telling me they had several weeks (from the same downsizings), and HR explaining to me that my older employees were a protected class and that meant additional considerations in letting them go. The topic of where the law came from never came up, although my intuition tells me since those situations were for global and national companies it was federal and not state. Then again it could be state law and a national or global company has to implement it correctly at that level.


The Older Workers Benefit Protection Act, which is a federal statute, provides that, if the employer offers a severance payment in exchange for a release of claims, an employee who is age forty or older must be given twenty-one days to consider the agreement (although he does not have to actually take the twenty-one days), and then seven additional days to renege on the agreement after he has signed it.

[Stickboy46]

[wichshock65]

I guess the next questipn to Taylor is if Marshall still has any **** in his office.

[Ted Lasso's Neighbor]

Are there any labor lawyers or other attorneys out there that know if what I’m referring to is state law or federal law? I just remember young people telling me they had a few days to sign and accept the agreement and older employees telling me they had several weeks (from the same downsizings), and HR explaining to me that my older employees were a protected class and that meant additional considerations in letting them go. The topic of where the law came from never came up, although my intuition tells me since those situations were for global and national companies it was federal and not state. Then again it could be state law and a national or global company has to implement it correctly at that level.


The Older Workers Benefit Protection Act, which is a federal statute, provides that, if the employer offers a severance payment in exchange for a release of claims, an employee who is age forty or older must be given twenty-one days to consider the agreement (although he does not have to actually take the twenty-one days), and then seven additional days to renege on the agreement after he has signed it.

A great example of how it works is Todd Butler's separation agreement. He was fired on May 26, 2019, which was noted in his agreement as the 'separation date'. Sections 6 and 7 detailed the release of claims, and Section 27 stated he had until June 17, 2019, to sign and return the agreement, and then had 7 days after he returned it to revoke it. He ended up returning the agreement on June 13, 2019.

Edited to add if there is a group termination, such as an assistant coach who's over 40 is also let go, then the number of days jumps from 21 to 45.

Butler's agreement can be found at https://openrecords.wichita.edu/view...log/entry/652/ (bottom of page).

[C0|dB|00ded]

Man. Looks like somebody’s got a case of the Mondays. WstateU help me out again!!!
Okay, I’ll play. Point by point from your post:

1. “Really?”

Yes. I used the word “almost” as a qualifier there, maybe you missed it. It is “never”’s tricky little shifty-eyed pal – look it up in the dictionary. However, I could have been way more certain in my wording because (1) it was widely reported that Marshall would accept the UT job at the time, (2) if it ever surfaces as a topic now it is reported and widely believed, (3) if you were around back then, the tone from the people who know/matter on this board – i.e. those who write the checks and/or are plugged in - was VERY different than with every other job opening (A&M, UCLA, NC State, etc.), and (4) I just happened to be hearing the same thing from the other side from a person I trust that was very plugged in to the UT athletic department and had been for decades since they were an athlete there.

Maybe you’ve never been pursued for a job, but there is a very common intermediate step where the top target gives a strong indication that – all else being satisfactory – there is strong interest and a deal if the compensation works. That’s what seemed to have happened.

I will stand down and modify my thinking on the topic if several of the credible boosters on this board tell me otherwise, but it will still be hard to reconcile with my source telling me it was a “done deal” – to the extent that I still bust his chops by calling him Done Deal every time I see him.

2. “Do we?”

Yes. See above. Are you one of those people that says “Seriously?” frequently in conversation because you can’t think of anything else? You must be a conversation whiz at the dinner table.

3. “If you’re making that statement then you must know Marshall”

Why? I get the sarcasm but not the logic. I said “almost”, and it was widely reported. If I said “we almost certainly know that Trump and Fauci don’t like each other on a personal basis” would you assume I knew one or both of them? Or someone in the White House? If so that’s a very entertaining world you live in, although I guess it would balance out the dinner table boredom of “Seriously?”. Did your wife warn the kids to not provoke you with stories about what they learned in history class and get a “Oh really?!? So you must know Napoleon, Marie Curie, and William the Conqueror firsthand!” in response?

4. “If that’s the case then you should be able to find out about the current situation”

And again, why? And again, I get the sarcasm but not the logic? To continue my first analogy, if I actually did hypothetically know firsthand that Trump and Fauci don’t like each other, would you assume that I would know Trump’s current thinking on if/when he should concede? Or to go back to the dinner table analogy – “Okay, Mr. ‘I know Napoleon personally… what exactly happened at Waterloo? OH SO YOU DON’T KNOW HIM DO YOU?!!?!”

We’re on an internet message board. Speculation is the lifeblood of it. Furthermore, I reread my original post and don’t know how I could have been more clear that I was speculating – without opinion and for the sake of discussion – and used more qualifying language.

In other words… got dam boy. You’re like that guy sitting by himself at the bar listening to someone else at another table telling a joke and yelling “B**S*** That never happened!!!” right after the punch line.

ShockerNet is gonna ShockerNet though. Reminds me of when I knew Turge was gone because I had literally been told by someone who wrote 2 comma checks to A&M, family name on buildings, direct line to the AD, the whole 9 yards. ShockerNet told me I was full of ****. Whatever.

As far as the topic goes, I know – FIRSTHAND!!! – from previous corporate experience and dealing with HR that when separation agreements occur because of downsizing or other reasons, employees over 40 are a protected class and are given much longer than people under 40 to accept their severance agreements.

Are there any labor lawyers or other attorneys out there that know if what I’m referring to is state law or federal law? I just remember young people telling me they had a few days to sign and accept the agreement and older employees telling me they had several weeks (from the same downsizings), and HR explaining to me that my older employees were a protected class and that meant additional considerations in letting them go. The topic of where the law came from never came up, although my intuition tells me since those situations were for global and national companies it was federal and not state. Then again it could be state law and a national or global company has to implement it correctly at that level.

My point in all this is that Marshall would obviously be in that protected class because of age. And if he has weeks or months to consider signing under federal law (in the absence of explicit language in his contract, which I don’t think could violate federal law anyway), then it could easily be a situation where he has decided on the path of maximum pain for everyone. Goodman’s credibility, success of the team, and general You **** Me I **** You.

Not to mention that if he does have several weeks to consider and shows intent to use them, it creates a pretty big negotiating chip to incentivize the university to increase payout and shorten the timeline so it doesn’t bleed over into the season.

I’m curious about from thoughts from the lawyers out there – I know we have a few of them.

If all of this is the case, it makes you wonder how big of a circus it would have turned into if ******* hadn’t been scooped/rushed to break his story ahead of what I believe was his original timeline around National Letter of Intent signing day and the season opener. We could have been the only program ever to play college basketball without actually knowing who the official coach was. (Which may technically still happen).

Pie n eye – I regret the personal attack, I just get tired of people saying stuff on this board that they probably wouldn’t say in person to a stranger stating a personal qualified opinion.

It didn’t used to be that way in the old days before we started making tournament runs and attracted a lot more posters.

I dislike the amount of personal attacks on here, and I decided to respond in kind to make a point.

Best of luck to you and all.

Peace and Chicken Grease,

Good News

It's nice to see someone on this board more long-winded than myself.

Preach on brother!

[Ted Lasso's Neighbor]

I guess the next questipn to Taylor is if Marshall still has any **** in his office.

Also - does he still have a parking spot :)

[Ashockalypse]

We just need to get Coach back on the floor and cookin on all cylinders, winning games, then all y’all that are woke and better than us can come on in and join us for the big win. Come on people, this is a call for unity!

[C0|dB|00ded]

His stock is way too high for ECU, even though that's very close to home. We're talkin' tech stock here, not transportation industry.

If the marketplace continues to value Marshall at solid BCS-level quality and we dump him... how stupid and self-righteous does that make us?

[Kung Wu]

If the marketplace continues to value Marshall at solid BCS-level quality and we dump him... how stupid and self-righteous does that make us?

We need to start selling cows.