Gregory Gone

[olafberserker]

1 hour ago, Brad said:

No wonder it takes so long!

 

We need a national accounting firm to look into this ... and it's tax season

[Cmr3]

Is it to late to unfire Gregory? This is not looking to good for us. 

[Dave_Glaser]

12 minutes ago, Cmr3 said:

Is it to late to unfire Gregory? This is not looking to good for us. 

If we do end up with a P5 assistant, I sure hope we're not paying him much of anything and literally "buying time" to pay BG off.

[WWMJD]

On 3/18/2023 at 11:19 AM, Triple B said:

Hindsight's always 20/20 ...... especially here lately.

I get tired of the go around, but this is such a cop out. Many of us said these extensions were terrible ideas at the time. Extending losing coaches is not a good idea. Now with these buyouts looming, they look every bit as bad as those of us who called it at the time thought.

[zarnozdabull]

Question regarding the infamous extensions. 
Do they mean that we’re paying all these fired coaches for what were supposed to be the remainder of their extended contracts? As in we have to keep paying Scott and Gregory multiple years?

I remember when Woolard extended Skip, he was crucified. But if its a similar scenario, this situation would seem like that on steroids. 
 

[Outlaw]

17 minutes ago, zarnozdabull said:

Question regarding the infamous extensions. 
Do they mean that we’re paying all these fired coaches for what were supposed to be the remainder of their extended contracts? As in we have to keep paying Scott and Gregory multiple years?

I remember when Woolard extended Skip, he was crucified. But if its a similar scenario, this situation would seem like that on steroids. 
 

I am assuming all contracts are guaranteed  as it usually is the case.

[Triple B]

On 3/18/2023 at 12:19 PM, Triple B said:

Hindsight's always 20/20 ...... especially here lately.

 

3 hours ago, WWMJD said:

I get tired of the go around, but this is such a cop out. Many of us said these extensions were terrible ideas at the time. Extending losing coaches is not a good idea. Now with these buyouts looming, they look every bit as bad as those of us who called it at the time thought.

My response you Quoted has nothing whatsoever to do with the extensions ..... which, btw, had nothing to do with the coaches winning/losing.

[WWMJD]

5 minutes ago, Triple B said:

 

My response you Quoted has nothing whatsoever to do with the extensions ..... which, btw, had nothing to do with the coaches winning/losing.

If the extensions had "nothing to do with the coaches winning/losing," that's a fireable offense on its own (as I said at the time).

[Triple B]

1 minute ago, WWMJD said:

If the extensions had "nothing to do with the coaches winning/losing," that's a fireable offense on its own (as I said at the time).

I'm thinking that those who would be in charge of firing him had to approve the extensions and were totally aware of what the extensions were/weren't based on .....

[Outlaw]

1 hour ago, WWMJD said:

If the extensions had "nothing to do with the coaches winning/losing," that's a fireable offense on its own (as I said at the time).

100% spot on. An extension based on anything besides success on the field is dead on arrival. Just like JS and BG.