Housewright cited for aggravated DUI

[TomCat88]

The amount of time this is taking is not abnormal or surprising. Good lawyers will stretch the process out and give a judge something to differentiate between his client and others in similar situations. Moving these guys directly to trial is neither in their best interest nor societies best interests.

I don't think the court process is abnormal, the question remains though is how MSU handling it normal?

Ah well it's football time, and there will be no new news on this for a few months I suspect so I'm gonna dip out, I've said my peace. Go Cats!

It's most certainly not normal for a D1 football team to extend the employment of coordinators involved in criminal activities.

Was that even a serious question?

Go cats!

You are absolutely right about that. However, being accused doesn't mean you were involved in a criminal activity. If MSU has a policy that says anyone arrested/accused of criminal activity is terminated, then it would be able to do that. I think if a school did that it would have to stipulate which criminal activities would be subject to termination. Many policy clauses are reactionary, so organizations are often caught in situations like this by not having the foresight to include something that would've allowed it to take immediate action and satisfy any negative public perception. They may have wanted to put in a clause that their attorneys found to be improper, so that has to be taken into consideration, too. Sometimes these things seem really black and white, but often their more complicated than they appear.

[seataccat]

The amount of time this is taking is not abnormal or surprising. Good lawyers will stretch the process out and give a judge something to differentiate between his client and others in similar situations. Moving these guys directly to trial is neither in their best interest nor societies best interests.

I don't think the court process is abnormal, the question remains though is how MSU handling it normal?

Ah well it's football time, and there will be no new news on this for a few months I suspect so I'm gonna dip out, I've said my peace. Go Cats!

It's most certainly not normal for a D1 football team to extend the employment of coordinators involved in criminal activities.

Was that even a serious question?

Go cats!

The Griz troll again!

Huh? Do you disagree with what I said? Hard to have a conversation here. Why?

I'm smelling the old grizinwashington clutching his pearls. It's cute that you're so butt hurt about what's going on in Bozeman these days.

You also disagree with what I posted? Why?

Because you're a little bitch. I would have a shred of respect for you if you'd just go back to bragging about your UM business degree and how much money you make. You could be the same sanctimonious dickinwasington.

[Justwinbaby]

The amount of time this is taking is not abnormal or surprising. Good lawyers will stretch the process out and give a judge something to differentiate between his client and others in similar situations. Moving these guys directly to trial is neither in their best interest nor societies best interests.

I don't think the court process is abnormal, the question remains though is how MSU handling it normal?

Ah well it's football time, and there will be no new news on this for a few months I suspect so I'm gonna dip out, I've said my peace. Go Cats!

It's most certainly not normal for a D1 football team to extend the employment of coordinators involved in criminal activities.

Was that even a serious question?

Go cats!

The Griz troll again!

Huh? Do you disagree with what I said? Hard to have a conversation here. Why?

I'm smelling the old grizinwashington clutching his pearls. It's cute that you're so butt hurt about what's going on in Bozeman these days.

You also disagree with what I posted? Why?

Because you're a little bitch. I would have a shred of respect for you if you'd just go back to bragging about your UM business degree and how much money you make. You could be the same sanctimonious dickinwasington.

Sheesh. That's harsh. So, you do, if fact, disagree? Hard to tell from your post.

[Justwinbaby]

The amount of time this is taking is not abnormal or surprising. Good lawyers will stretch the process out and give a judge something to differentiate between his client and others in similar situations. Moving these guys directly to trial is neither in their best interest nor societies best interests.

I don't think the court process is abnormal, the question remains though is how MSU handling it normal?

Ah well it's football time, and there will be no new news on this for a few months I suspect so I'm gonna dip out, I've said my peace. Go Cats!

It's most certainly not normal for a D1 football team to extend the employment of coordinators involved in criminal activities.

Was that even a serious question?

Go cats!

You are absolutely right about that. However, being accused doesn't mean you were involved in a criminal activity. If MSU has a policy that says anyone arrested/accused of criminal activity is terminated, then it would be able to do that. I think if a school did that it would have to stipulate which criminal activities would be subject to termination. Many policy clauses are reactionary, so organizations are often caught in situations like this by not having the foresight to include something that would've allowed it to take immediate action and satisfy any negative public perception. They may have wanted to put in a clause that their attorneys found to be improper, so that has to be taken into consideration, too. Sometimes these things seem really black and white, but often their more complicated than they appear.

So, you are arguing it is normal for D1 football teams to extend the employment of coordinators accused of crimes? But, the caveat is the school must state which crimes in their contracts in advance?

Seems cumbersome. Why not just apply some very common sense here. No employment extensions until resolved? Seems that wouldn't even need to be in a contract etc.

[TomCat88]

The amount of time this is taking is not abnormal or surprising. Good lawyers will stretch the process out and give a judge something to differentiate between his client and others in similar situations. Moving these guys directly to trial is neither in their best interest nor societies best interests.

I don't think the court process is abnormal, the question remains though is how MSU handling it normal?

Ah well it's football time, and there will be no new news on this for a few months I suspect so I'm gonna dip out, I've said my peace. Go Cats!

It's most certainly not normal for a D1 football team to extend the employment of coordinators involved in criminal activities.

Was that even a serious question?

Go cats!

You are absolutely right about that. However, being accused doesn't mean you were involved in a criminal activity. If MSU has a policy that says anyone arrested/accused of criminal activity is terminated, then it would be able to do that. I think if a school did that it would have to stipulate which criminal activities would be subject to termination. Many policy clauses are reactionary, so organizations are often caught in situations like this by not having the foresight to include something that would've allowed it to take immediate action and satisfy any negative public perception. They may have wanted to put in a clause that their attorneys found to be improper, so that has to be taken into consideration, too. Sometimes these things seem really black and white, but often their more complicated than they appear.

So, you are arguing it is normal for D1 football teams to extend the employment of coordinators accused of crimes? But, the caveat is the school must state which crimes in their contracts in advance?

Seems cumbersome. Why not just apply some very common sense here. No employment extensions until resolved? Seems that wouldn't even need to be in a contract etc.

I wouldn’t know regarding coordinators. I don’t see anything about it in a search. Do you? If so, link some examples. I know of a head coach (Stiegelmeier(sp?)) that was retained after getting a DUI.

I’ve worked with lawyers on policies several times when I thought it would be very simple to add a common sense clause it was pointed out why that couldn’t be done, so that’s why I’m saying it may be more complicated than it seems.

[Justwinbaby]

The amount of time this is taking is not abnormal or surprising. Good lawyers will stretch the process out and give a judge something to differentiate between his client and others in similar situations. Moving these guys directly to trial is neither in their best interest nor societies best interests.

I don't think the court process is abnormal, the question remains though is how MSU handling it normal?

Ah well it's football time, and there will be no new news on this for a few months I suspect so I'm gonna dip out, I've said my peace. Go Cats!

It's most certainly not normal for a D1 football team to extend the employment of coordinators involved in criminal activities.

Was that even a serious question?

Go cats!

You are absolutely right about that. However, being accused doesn't mean you were involved in a criminal activity. If MSU has a policy that says anyone arrested/accused of criminal activity is terminated, then it would be able to do that. I think if a school did that it would have to stipulate which criminal activities would be subject to termination. Many policy clauses are reactionary, so organizations are often caught in situations like this by not having the foresight to include something that would've allowed it to take immediate action and satisfy any negative public perception. They may have wanted to put in a clause that their attorneys found to be improper, so that has to be taken into consideration, too. Sometimes these things seem really black and white, but often their more complicated than they appear.

So, you are arguing it is normal for D1 football teams to extend the employment of coordinators accused of crimes? But, the caveat is the school must state which crimes in their contracts in advance?

Seems cumbersome. Why not just apply some very common sense here. No employment extensions until resolved? Seems that wouldn't even need to be in a contract etc.

I wouldn’t know regarding coordinators. I don’t see anything about it in a search. Do you? If so, link some examples. I know of a head coach (Stiegelmeier(sp?)) that was retained after getting a DUI.

I’ve worked with lawyers on policies several times when I thought it would be very simple to add a common sense clause it was pointed out why that couldn’t be done, so that’s why I’m saying it may be more complicated than it seems.

Doubt a search will turn anything up. Truth is the vast majority of coaches who get DUIs are terminated. I bet there are zero examples of any coach getting extended during proceedings.

But, if you find one other than our 2, please let us know.

[TomCat88]

The amount of time this is taking is not abnormal or surprising. Good lawyers will stretch the process out and give a judge something to differentiate between his client and others in similar situations. Moving these guys directly to trial is neither in their best interest nor societies best interests.

I don't think the court process is abnormal, the question remains though is how MSU handling it normal?

Ah well it's football time, and there will be no new news on this for a few months I suspect so I'm gonna dip out, I've said my peace. Go Cats!

It's most certainly not normal for a D1 football team to extend the employment of coordinators involved in criminal activities.

Was that even a serious question?

Go cats!

You are absolutely right about that. However, being accused doesn't mean you were involved in a criminal activity. If MSU has a policy that says anyone arrested/accused of criminal activity is terminated, then it would be able to do that. I think if a school did that it would have to stipulate which criminal activities would be subject to termination. Many policy clauses are reactionary, so organizations are often caught in situations like this by not having the foresight to include something that would've allowed it to take immediate action and satisfy any negative public perception. They may have wanted to put in a clause that their attorneys found to be improper, so that has to be taken into consideration, too. Sometimes these things seem really black and white, but often their more complicated than they appear.

So, you are arguing it is normal for D1 football teams to extend the employment of coordinators accused of crimes? But, the caveat is the school must state which crimes in their contracts in advance?

Seems cumbersome. Why not just apply some very common sense here. No employment extensions until resolved? Seems that wouldn't even need to be in a contract etc.

I wouldn’t know regarding coordinators. I don’t see anything about it in a search. Do you? If so, link some examples. I know of a head coach (Stiegelmeier(sp?)) that was retained after getting a DUI.

I’ve worked with lawyers on policies several times when I thought it would be very simple to add a common sense clause it was pointed out why that couldn’t be done, so that’s why I’m saying it may be more complicated than it seems.

Doubt a search will turn anything up. Truth is the vast majority of coaches who get DUIs are terminated. I bet there are zero examples of any coach getting extended during proceedings.

But, if you find one other than our 2, please let us know.

Just the opposite. The vast majority don’t get terminated. Even head coaches. There are very few professions in the USA where someone gets fired for a DUI. Most of the time the employer doesn’t even know about it. Those are just facts. Coaches that do end up out of a job surrounding a DUI usually resign.

There are many legal implications to an employer firing someone. Employers are often taken to court for wrongful termination and end up handing out huge compensation. So much that their hands are tied in cases where you’d think it’s automatic.

[Cataholic]

The amount of time this is taking is not abnormal or surprising. Good lawyers will stretch the process out and give a judge something to differentiate between his client and others in similar situations. Moving these guys directly to trial is neither in their best interest nor societies best interests.

I don't think the court process is abnormal, the question remains though is how MSU handling it normal?

Ah well it's football time, and there will be no new news on this for a few months I suspect so I'm gonna dip out, I've said my peace. Go Cats!

It's most certainly not normal for a D1 football team to extend the employment of coordinators involved in criminal activities.

Was that even a serious question?

Go cats!

You are absolutely right about that. However, being accused doesn't mean you were involved in a criminal activity. If MSU has a policy that says anyone arrested/accused of criminal activity is terminated, then it would be able to do that. I think if a school did that it would have to stipulate which criminal activities would be subject to termination. Many policy clauses are reactionary, so organizations are often caught in situations like this by not having the foresight to include something that would've allowed it to take immediate action and satisfy any negative public perception. They may have wanted to put in a clause that their attorneys found to be improper, so that has to be taken into consideration, too. Sometimes these things seem really black and white, but often their more complicated than they appear.

So, you are arguing it is normal for D1 football teams to extend the employment of coordinators accused of crimes? But, the caveat is the school must state which crimes in their contracts in advance?

Seems cumbersome. Why not just apply some very common sense here. No employment extensions until resolved? Seems that wouldn't even need to be in a contract etc.

I wouldn’t know regarding coordinators. I don’t see anything about it in a search. Do you? If so, link some examples. I know of a head coach (Stiegelmeier(sp?)) that was retained after getting a DUI.

I’ve worked with lawyers on policies several times when I thought it would be very simple to add a common sense clause it was pointed out why that couldn’t be done, so that’s why I’m saying it may be more complicated than it seems.

Doubt a search will turn anything up. Truth is the vast majority of coaches who get DUIs are terminated. I bet there are zero examples of any coach getting extended during proceedings.

But, if you find one other than our 2, please let us know.

In the interest of full disclosure, what is your fixation with this topic? What are you trying to accomplish? We have had a lot to discuss regarding the Cats yet you have posted on only one single subject. If you are a Cat fan, you seem to be a very odd one who is fixated on an issue that the university cannot discuss due to personnel policies. It has become that you are a Gris fan who is just trying to drum up some drama. Your efforts are transparent and it shows how pathetic the Gris fan base has become. Seriously, don’t you have anything better to do?

[MSU01]

In the interest of full disclosure, what is your fixation with this topic? What are you trying to accomplish? We have had a lot to discuss regarding the Cats yet you have posted on only one single subject. If you are a Cat fan, you seem to be a very odd one who is fixated on an issue that the university cannot discuss due to personnel policies. It has become that you are a Gris fan who is just trying to drum up some drama. Your efforts are transparent and it shows how pathetic the Gris fan base has become. Seriously, don’t you have anything better to do?

"Justwinbaby" is the same person who posts as "cat4lyf". What the intent is, likely nothing other than to rile up Bobcat fans. If that's the case, they've been quite successful and I'll freely admit to having been roped into engaging a few times.

[Cataholic]

In the interest of full disclosure, what is your fixation with this topic? What are you trying to accomplish? We have had a lot to discuss regarding the Cats yet you have posted on only one single subject. If you are a Cat fan, you seem to be a very odd one who is fixated on an issue that the university cannot discuss due to personnel policies. It has become that you are a Gris fan who is just trying to drum up some drama. Your efforts are transparent and it shows how pathetic the Gris fan base has become. Seriously, don’t you have anything better to do?

"Justwinbaby" is the same person who posts as "cat4lyf". What the intent is, likely nothing other than to rile up Bobcat fans. If that's the case, they've been quite successful and I'll freely admit to having been roped into engaging a few times.

I don’t know…. Just posting a response is not really getting riled up. I think we should all remind him how pathetic a loser he is when he posts such garbage.

I am not sure cat4lyf is a Gris fan. KMAX said he checked. I just ignore him. But justwinbaby is clearly a troll. What a loser.

[tetoncat]

I just block them both

[Justwinbaby]

The amount of time this is taking is not abnormal or surprising. Good lawyers will stretch the process out and give a judge something to differentiate between his client and others in similar situations. Moving these guys directly to trial is neither in their best interest nor societies best interests.

I don't think the court process is abnormal, the question remains though is how MSU handling it normal?

Ah well it's football time, and there will be no new news on this for a few months I suspect so I'm gonna dip out, I've said my peace. Go Cats!

It's most certainly not normal for a D1 football team to extend the employment of coordinators involved in criminal activities.

Was that even a serious question?

Go cats!

You are absolutely right about that. However, being accused doesn't mean you were involved in a criminal activity. If MSU has a policy that says anyone arrested/accused of criminal activity is terminated, then it would be able to do that. I think if a school did that it would have to stipulate which criminal activities would be subject to termination. Many policy clauses are reactionary, so organizations are often caught in situations like this by not having the foresight to include something that would've allowed it to take immediate action and satisfy any negative public perception. They may have wanted to put in a clause that their attorneys found to be improper, so that has to be taken into consideration, too. Sometimes these things seem really black and white, but often their more complicated than they appear.

So, you are arguing it is normal for D1 football teams to extend the employment of coordinators accused of crimes? But, the caveat is the school must state which crimes in their contracts in advance?

Seems cumbersome. Why not just apply some very common sense here. No employment extensions until resolved? Seems that wouldn't even need to be in a contract etc.

I wouldn’t know regarding coordinators. I don’t see anything about it in a search. Do you? If so, link some examples. I know of a head coach (Stiegelmeier(sp?)) that was retained after getting a DUI.

I’ve worked with lawyers on policies several times when I thought it would be very simple to add a common sense clause it was pointed out why that couldn’t be done, so that’s why I’m saying it may be more complicated than it seems.

Doubt a search will turn anything up. Truth is the vast majority of coaches who get DUIs are terminated. I bet there are zero examples of any coach getting extended during proceedings.

But, if you find one other than our 2, please let us know.

Just the opposite. The vast majority don’t get terminated. Even head coaches. There are very few professions in the USA where someone gets fired for a DUI. Most of the time the employer doesn’t even know about it. Those are just facts. Coaches that do end up out of a job surrounding a DUI usually resign.

There are many legal implications to an employer firing someone. Employers are often taken to court for wrongful termination and end up handing out huge compensation. So much that their hands are tied in cases where you’d think it’s automatic.

Did you find a single example of a coach having their employment extended during ongoing criminal proceedings?

[TomCat88]

The amount of time this is taking is not abnormal or surprising. Good lawyers will stretch the process out and give a judge something to differentiate between his client and others in similar situations. Moving these guys directly to trial is neither in their best interest nor societies best interests.

I don't think the court process is abnormal, the question remains though is how MSU handling it normal?

Ah well it's football time, and there will be no new news on this for a few months I suspect so I'm gonna dip out, I've said my peace. Go Cats!

It's most certainly not normal for a D1 football team to extend the employment of coordinators involved in criminal activities.

Was that even a serious question?

Go cats!

You are absolutely right about that. However, being accused doesn't mean you were involved in a criminal activity. If MSU has a policy that says anyone arrested/accused of criminal activity is terminated, then it would be able to do that. I think if a school did that it would have to stipulate which criminal activities would be subject to termination. Many policy clauses are reactionary, so organizations are often caught in situations like this by not having the foresight to include something that would've allowed it to take immediate action and satisfy any negative public perception. They may have wanted to put in a clause that their attorneys found to be improper, so that has to be taken into consideration, too. Sometimes these things seem really black and white, but often their more complicated than they appear.

So, you are arguing it is normal for D1 football teams to extend the employment of coordinators accused of crimes? But, the caveat is the school must state which crimes in their contracts in advance?

Seems cumbersome. Why not just apply some very common sense here. No employment extensions until resolved? Seems that wouldn't even need to be in a contract etc.

I wouldn’t know regarding coordinators. I don’t see anything about it in a search. Do you? If so, link some examples. I know of a head coach (Stiegelmeier(sp?)) that was retained after getting a DUI.

I’ve worked with lawyers on policies several times when I thought it would be very simple to add a common sense clause it was pointed out why that couldn’t be done, so that’s why I’m saying it may be more complicated than it seems.

Doubt a search will turn anything up. Truth is the vast majority of coaches who get DUIs are terminated. I bet there are zero examples of any coach getting extended during proceedings.

But, if you find one other than our 2, please let us know.

Just the opposite. The vast majority don’t get terminated. Even head coaches. There are very few professions in the USA where someone gets fired for a DUI. Most of the time the employer doesn’t even know about it. Those are just facts. Coaches that do end up out of a job surrounding a DUI usually resign.

There are many legal implications to an employer firing someone. Employers are often taken to court for wrongful termination and end up handing out huge compensation. So much that their hands are tied in cases where you’d think it’s automatic.

Did you find a single example of a coach having their employment extended during ongoing criminal proceedings?

Yes, multiple. Some from right here in Montana. I’ll email you because I don’t feel comfortable talking about it publicly.

It’s also worth noting:
The length of time it takes for a DUI charge to be processed and the nature of most coaching contracts (year to year) makes it almost impossible for a coach to stay employed unless their contract is extended. Since hardly any coaches get fired for DUI, the sheer numbers make it highly unlikely that extending a contract during legal proceedings doesn’t happen.

[tetoncat]

He was suspended a game, waiting court date, and then MSU will handle further. Also we know Vigen would be able to do play calling until comfortable someone else can. Team didn't look distracted to me.

[catatac]

The amount of time this is taking is not abnormal or surprising. Good lawyers will stretch the process out and give a judge something to differentiate between his client and others in similar situations. Moving these guys directly to trial is neither in their best interest nor societies best interests.

I don't think the court process is abnormal, the question remains though is how MSU handling it normal?

Ah well it's football time, and there will be no new news on this for a few months I suspect so I'm gonna dip out, I've said my peace. Go Cats!

It's most certainly not normal for a D1 football team to extend the employment of coordinators involved in criminal activities.

Was that even a serious question?

Go cats!

You are absolutely right about that. However, being accused doesn't mean you were involved in a criminal activity. If MSU has a policy that says anyone arrested/accused of criminal activity is terminated, then it would be able to do that. I think if a school did that it would have to stipulate which criminal activities would be subject to termination. Many policy clauses are reactionary, so organizations are often caught in situations like this by not having the foresight to include something that would've allowed it to take immediate action and satisfy any negative public perception. They may have wanted to put in a clause that their attorneys found to be improper, so that has to be taken into consideration, too. Sometimes these things seem really black and white, but often their more complicated than they appear.

So, you are arguing it is normal for D1 football teams to extend the employment of coordinators accused of crimes? But, the caveat is the school must state which crimes in their contracts in advance?

Seems cumbersome. Why not just apply some very common sense here. No employment extensions until resolved? Seems that wouldn't even need to be in a contract etc.

I wouldn’t know regarding coordinators. I don’t see anything about it in a search. Do you? If so, link some examples. I know of a head coach (Stiegelmeier(sp?)) that was retained after getting a DUI.

I’ve worked with lawyers on policies several times when I thought it would be very simple to add a common sense clause it was pointed out why that couldn’t be done, so that’s why I’m saying it may be more complicated than it seems.

Doubt a search will turn anything up. Truth is the vast majority of coaches who get DUIs are terminated. I bet there are zero examples of any coach getting extended during proceedings.

But, if you find one other than our 2, please let us know.

Just the opposite. The vast majority don’t get terminated. Even head coaches. There are very few professions in the USA where someone gets fired for a DUI. Most of the time the employer doesn’t even know about it. Those are just facts. Coaches that do end up out of a job surrounding a DUI usually resign.

There are many legal implications to an employer firing someone. Employers are often taken to court for wrongful termination and end up handing out huge compensation. So much that their hands are tied in cases where you’d think it’s automatic.

Did you find a single example of a coach having their employment extended during ongoing criminal proceedings?

Yes, multiple. Some from right here in Montana. I’ll email you because I don’t feel comfortable talking about it publicly.

It’s also worth noting:
The length of time it takes for a DUI charge to be processed and the nature of most coaching contracts (year to year) makes it almost impossible for a coach to stay employed unless their contract is extended. Since hardly any coaches get fired for DUI, the sheer numbers make it highly unlikely that extending a contract during legal proceedings doesn’t happen.

Bwahahaha... justwinbaby getting torched by Tom. Please go away Griz troll.

[TomCat88]

I don't think the court process is abnormal, the question remains though is how MSU handling it normal?

Ah well it's football time, and there will be no new news on this for a few months I suspect so I'm gonna dip out, I've said my peace. Go Cats!

It's most certainly not normal for a D1 football team to extend the employment of coordinators involved in criminal activities.

Was that even a serious question?

Go cats!

You are absolutely right about that. However, being accused doesn't mean you were involved in a criminal activity. If MSU has a policy that says anyone arrested/accused of criminal activity is terminated, then it would be able to do that. I think if a school did that it would have to stipulate which criminal activities would be subject to termination. Many policy clauses are reactionary, so organizations are often caught in situations like this by not having the foresight to include something that would've allowed it to take immediate action and satisfy any negative public perception. They may have wanted to put in a clause that their attorneys found to be improper, so that has to be taken into consideration, too. Sometimes these things seem really black and white, but often their more complicated than they appear.

So, you are arguing it is normal for D1 football teams to extend the employment of coordinators accused of crimes? But, the caveat is the school must state which crimes in their contracts in advance?

Seems cumbersome. Why not just apply some very common sense here. No employment extensions until resolved? Seems that wouldn't even need to be in a contract etc.

I wouldn’t know regarding coordinators. I don’t see anything about it in a search. Do you? If so, link some examples. I know of a head coach (Stiegelmeier(sp?)) that was retained after getting a DUI.

I’ve worked with lawyers on policies several times when I thought it would be very simple to add a common sense clause it was pointed out why that couldn’t be done, so that’s why I’m saying it may be more complicated than it seems.

Doubt a search will turn anything up. Truth is the vast majority of coaches who get DUIs are terminated. I bet there are zero examples of any coach getting extended during proceedings.

But, if you find one other than our 2, please let us know.

Just the opposite. The vast majority don’t get terminated. Even head coaches. There are very few professions in the USA where someone gets fired for a DUI. Most of the time the employer doesn’t even know about it. Those are just facts. Coaches that do end up out of a job surrounding a DUI usually resign.

There are many legal implications to an employer firing someone. Employers are often taken to court for wrongful termination and end up handing out huge compensation. So much that their hands are tied in cases where you’d think it’s automatic.

Did you find a single example of a coach having their employment extended during ongoing criminal proceedings?

Yes, multiple. Some from right here in Montana. I’ll email you because I don’t feel comfortable talking about it publicly.

It’s also worth noting:
The length of time it takes for a DUI charge to be processed and the nature of most coaching contracts (year to year) makes it almost impossible for a coach to stay employed unless their contract is extended. Since hardly any coaches get fired for DUI, the sheer numbers make it highly unlikely that extending a contract during legal proceedings doesn’t happen.

Bwahahaha... justwinbaby getting torched by Tom. Please go away Griz troll.

I can see the frustration that people have but the issue of DUIs is complex well beyond what my understanding is. That said even my shallow knowledge reveals that complexity. Having worked in state government and dealt with and interpreted local, state and federal rules, regulations, policies, laws I have this feeble background into this. I’m certainly no expert but I know enough to know that much.

DUIs are bad. The legal and insurance penalties are harsh. Drinking and driving is bad for everyone. Affects a lot of people. Even if their isn’t an accident or injury or fatalities.

[kennethnoisewater]

The amount of time this is taking is not abnormal or surprising. Good lawyers will stretch the process out and give a judge something to differentiate between his client and others in similar situations. Moving these guys directly to trial is neither in their best interest nor societies best interests.

I don't think the court process is abnormal, the question remains though is how MSU handling it normal?

Ah well it's football time, and there will be no new news on this for a few months I suspect so I'm gonna dip out, I've said my peace. Go Cats!

It's most certainly not normal for a D1 football team to extend the employment of coordinators involved in criminal activities.

Was that even a serious question?

Go cats!

You are absolutely right about that. However, being accused doesn't mean you were involved in a criminal activity. If MSU has a policy that says anyone arrested/accused of criminal activity is terminated, then it would be able to do that. I think if a school did that it would have to stipulate which criminal activities would be subject to termination. Many policy clauses are reactionary, so organizations are often caught in situations like this by not having the foresight to include something that would've allowed it to take immediate action and satisfy any negative public perception. They may have wanted to put in a clause that their attorneys found to be improper, so that has to be taken into consideration, too. Sometimes these things seem really black and white, but often their more complicated than they appear.

So, you are arguing it is normal for D1 football teams to extend the employment of coordinators accused of crimes? But, the caveat is the school must state which crimes in their contracts in advance?

Seems cumbersome. Why not just apply some very common sense here. No employment extensions until resolved? Seems that wouldn't even need to be in a contract etc.

I wouldn’t know regarding coordinators. I don’t see anything about it in a search. Do you? If so, link some examples. I know of a head coach (Stiegelmeier(sp?)) that was retained after getting a DUI.

I’ve worked with lawyers on policies several times when I thought it would be very simple to add a common sense clause it was pointed out why that couldn’t be done, so that’s why I’m saying it may be more complicated than it seems.

Doubt a search will turn anything up. Truth is the vast majority of coaches who get DUIs are terminated. I bet there are zero examples of any coach getting extended during proceedings.

But, if you find one other than our 2, please let us know.

I'm sure someone else has mentioned this, but Blaine Taylor coached 3 seasons in Missoula after getting a DUI. Unless he had already signed a 3-year contract in the 1995 off-season he may have had his employment extended.

[Justwinbaby]

I don't think the court process is abnormal, the question remains though is how MSU handling it normal?

Ah well it's football time, and there will be no new news on this for a few months I suspect so I'm gonna dip out, I've said my peace. Go Cats!

It's most certainly not normal for a D1 football team to extend the employment of coordinators involved in criminal activities.

Was that even a serious question?

Go cats!

You are absolutely right about that. However, being accused doesn't mean you were involved in a criminal activity. If MSU has a policy that says anyone arrested/accused of criminal activity is terminated, then it would be able to do that. I think if a school did that it would have to stipulate which criminal activities would be subject to termination. Many policy clauses are reactionary, so organizations are often caught in situations like this by not having the foresight to include something that would've allowed it to take immediate action and satisfy any negative public perception. They may have wanted to put in a clause that their attorneys found to be improper, so that has to be taken into consideration, too. Sometimes these things seem really black and white, but often their more complicated than they appear.

So, you are arguing it is normal for D1 football teams to extend the employment of coordinators accused of crimes? But, the caveat is the school must state which crimes in their contracts in advance?

Seems cumbersome. Why not just apply some very common sense here. No employment extensions until resolved? Seems that wouldn't even need to be in a contract etc.

I wouldn’t know regarding coordinators. I don’t see anything about it in a search. Do you? If so, link some examples. I know of a head coach (Stiegelmeier(sp?)) that was retained after getting a DUI.

I’ve worked with lawyers on policies several times when I thought it would be very simple to add a common sense clause it was pointed out why that couldn’t be done, so that’s why I’m saying it may be more complicated than it seems.

Doubt a search will turn anything up. Truth is the vast majority of coaches who get DUIs are terminated. I bet there are zero examples of any coach getting extended during proceedings.

But, if you find one other than our 2, please let us know.

Just the opposite. The vast majority don’t get terminated. Even head coaches. There are very few professions in the USA where someone gets fired for a DUI. Most of the time the employer doesn’t even know about it. Those are just facts. Coaches that do end up out of a job surrounding a DUI usually resign.

There are many legal implications to an employer firing someone. Employers are often taken to court for wrongful termination and end up handing out huge compensation. So much that their hands are tied in cases where you’d think it’s automatic.

Did you find a single example of a coach having their employment extended during ongoing criminal proceedings?

Yes, multiple. Some from right here in Montana. I’ll email you because I don’t feel comfortable talking about it publicly.

It’s also worth noting:
The length of time it takes for a DUI charge to be processed and the nature of most coaching contracts (year to year) makes it almost impossible for a coach to stay employed unless their contract is extended. Since hardly any coaches get fired for DUI, the sheer numbers make it highly unlikely that extending a contract during legal proceedings doesn’t happen.

Bwahahaha... justwinbaby getting torched by Tom. Please go away Griz troll.

Torched? Sheesh...this place is rough.