Multi Year Contracts

bobcatgrad2005 · Post by **bobcatgrad2005** » Tue Oct 24, 2006 6:35 am

Oct 23, 11:28 PM EDT

UM's Selvig, Tinkle sign multi-year contracts

MISSOULA (AP) -- University of Montana women's basketball coach Robin Selvig and men's basketball coach Wayne Tinkle have signed multiyear contracts with the school, making them the first to make use of a new state Board of Regents policy allowing the extended agreements, UM Athletics Director Jim O'Day said Monday.

The regents voted 4-3 last month to authorize UM and Montana State University to offer up to three-year contracts to head football and basketball coaches. MSU has not yet taken advantage of the new policy, sports information director Tom Schulz said Monday.

Selvig and Tinkle's new contracts are for three years each; they're retroactive to July 1 and run through June 30, 2009.

Selvig is in his 28th year as head women's basketball coach at UM, while Tinkle is starting his first season as the head coach and his seventh overall in the men's basketball program.

Advertisement

Selvig and Tinkle are both UM grads, and both played basketball for the Grizzlies.

UM football coach Bobby Hauck also has been offered a three-year deal but will focus on the football season before making a decision on the proposed agreement, the university said in a news release.

The contract for the football coach runs from Jan. 1, 2007, through Dec. 31, 2009.

Contracts for the three head coaches call for a base salary, as well as various performance incentives determined by academic and athletic achievements by their respective teams. Also taken into account are incentives for assistant coaches in each of the three revenue-generating sports.

"This is a historic day for Grizzly athletics, as well as the state of Montana," O'Day said. "This shows our commitment to both Robin and Wayne, and is well-deserved. This positive statement gives our coaches the stability and support we feel is important for them to move forward in their programs."

O'Day added that multiyear contracts were "a long time coming" and show that UM and the state stand behind their coaches.

"It also means that competing schools will no longer be able to hold this over our heads in the recruiting battles," he said.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/M/ ... 3-23-28-11

Now I have heard that Kramer's contract for this year, which was supposed to be renewed July 1, is STILL not complete. First, that's pretty embarassing for MSU athletics. Second, if its still not done, why not make use of the new multi-year opportunity. They are nuts if they think he doesn't deserve it. 2 BSC Coach of the Year awards (possibly headed towards3). Winning records for the past 4 seasons, and sell out crowds.

Come on Mr. Fields, lets sign on the dotted line!!!!

4everacatfan · Post by **4everacatfan** » Tue Oct 24, 2006 7:50 am

I can understand Feilds waiting on Basketball since this is Huse's first year and Binford because we want to see what she can do with her own people but Kramer should be offerd a multi - year deal unless the Cats completely implode on themselves down the stretch. I am glad that we are offering these and I hope to see both Huse and Binford get one this coming spring.

mslacat · Post by **mslacat** » Tue Oct 24, 2006 8:11 am

4everacatfan wrote:I can understand Feilds waiting on Basketball since this is Huse's first year and Binford because we want to see what she can do with her own people but Kramer should be offerd a multi - year deal unless the Cats completely implode on themselves down the stretch. I am glad that we are offering these and I hope to see both Huse and Binford get one this coming spring.

Actually I think Huse and Binford are prime canidates for 3 year contracts. You have to give a new coach at least 3 years to turn a program around, and get his system installed. By giving him or her 3 year contract you are giving that coach a clear picture of what is expected. Now granted if one of those coaches pulls a Kennedy and starts dateing a player, hopefully we have a clause to handle that. I would think a long term coach who has his/her team stuck in the middle of the pack that we would have to look out for.

Cat Pride · Post by **Cat Pride** » Tue Oct 24, 2006 8:27 am

mslacat wrote:Actually I think Huse and Binford are prime canidates for 3 year contracts. You have to give a new coach at least 3 years to turn a program around, and get his system installed. By giving him or her 3 year contract you are giving that coach a clear picture of what is expected. Now granted if one of those coaches pulls a Kennedy and starts dateing a player, hopefully we have a clause to handle that. I would think a long term coach who has his/her team stuck in the middle of the pack that we would have to look out for.

Couldnt agree more. Sign Brad and Tricia to 3-year contracts. Even though TBB didnt win much last year, she is going about things the right way. She is what college athletics is about... the wins will come.

Pony up Peter!

KillintheGriz · Post by **KillintheGriz** » Tue Oct 24, 2006 8:51 am

bobcatgrad2005 wrote:Oct 23, 11:28 PM EDT

Now I have heard that Kramer's contract for this year, which was supposed to be renewed July 1, is STILL not complete. First, that's pretty embarassing for MSU athletics. Second, if its still not done, why not make use of the new multi-year opportunity. They are nuts if they think he doesn't deserve it. 2 BSC Coach of the Year awards (possibly headed towards3). Winning records for the past 4 seasons, and sell out crowds.

Come on Mr. Fields, lets sign on the dotted line!!!!

Hauck or Walsh will get coach of the year this year. I bet Hauck is waiting to sign to see if there is a chance he moves up. His comment in the paper this weekend typifies the griz football program (from memory) "We were working on a blowout and let them back in". This comment was referencing the griz up 20 points in the 2nd half. 20 points is not a blowout. I listened to the Griz pregam radio broadcast before the NAU-UM game. Hauck was on for about 30-45 minutes. It was a complete and utter barf fest. The interviewer was kissing Hauck's @ss. After listening to this interview it made me appreciate more what a CLASS ACT we have in KRAMER. Kramer is humble.

Cat Pride · Post by **Cat Pride** » Tue Oct 24, 2006 9:17 am

KillintheGriz wrote:Hauck or Walsh will get coach of the year this year.

Give me a break, Hauck maybe, maaaybeeee... no way Walsh. If Kramer wins out, there isnt a more deserving coach in the country for coach of the year honors. This team was in total disarray, and he reeled them in, and is in the midst of leading us to a conference championship. I honestly think that even if he finishes at 7-4 and second to the Griz, Kramer is my vote for coach of the year.

The Griz did as expected, and the Cats (picked 3rd or 4th in conference with most preseason polls) overacheived, replaced their entire receiver corp and the greatest player in school history, then battled through adversity and injury to get to where they are today.

Not to suck up too much, or become a Kramer apologist, but Kramer's hand is what guided this team out of the nasty storm early in the season.

DaGriz · Post by **DaGriz** » Tue Oct 24, 2006 9:23 am

I listened to the Griz pregam radio broadcast before the NAU-UM game. Hauck was on for about 30-45 minutes. It was a complete and utter barf fest. The interviewer was kissing Hauck's @ss. After listening to this interview it made me appreciate more what a CLASS ACT we have in KRAMER. Kramer is humble.

I watched Kramers coaches show last week on Altitude, if you want to talk a@@ kissing, that was first class. What do you expect in small town athletics? One to three media outlets covering the only two big sports programs in the state. They aren't going to say anything to piss off the coaches and get on their bad side. This isn't ESPN where they can just move onto the next coach if the coach gets pissed and refuses interviews. They have to deal with these coaches on a weekly basis all year.

badasscat · Post by **badasscat** » Tue Oct 24, 2006 9:32 am

I see absolutely no problem with Fields and the University not jumping in right away and extending contracts, (which none of us know if the coaches are in negotiations or not). With all of the bad press the MSU athletics program has been getting over the past 8 months, and the fact that this is the first time in over a decade that they are in the black. Do you blame them if they take a little time to mull this over. I understand that by extending the current coaches contracts that it sends a message that they have faith in them, but come on it's only been a month. I have no doubt that all of our coaches will have multi-year contracts soon.

On a side note MSLACAT McArthy dated a player not Kennedy.

4everacatfan · Post by **4everacatfan** » Tue Oct 24, 2006 9:45 am

badasscat wrote:I see absolutely no problem with Fields and the University not jumping in right away and extending contracts, (which none of us know if the coaches are in negotiations or not). With all of the bad press the MSU athletics program has been getting over the past 8 months, and the fact that this is the first time in over a decade that they are in the black. Do you blame them if they take a little time to mull this over. I understand that by extending the current coaches contracts that it sends a message that they have faith in them, but come on it's only been a month. I have no doubt that all of our coaches will have multi-year contracts soon.

On a side note MSLACAT McCafferty dated a player not Kennedy.

McArthy (SP) dated a player maybe Kennedy too, but I would think if they had a clause in there about moral behavior that is fine I also liked the idea of academic incentives that tells me they are encouraging these coaches to make sure these players graduate. I would also hope they would hold the coaches to accountable if their players were not meeting annual academic progress as well. I do agree that Huse and Binford are good candidates for three year contracts but I also understand if Fields does not just rush in and give them right away.

Go Scats Go · Post by **Go Scats Go** » Tue Oct 24, 2006 10:28 am

KillintheGriz wrote:
bobcatgrad2005 wrote:Oct 23, 11:28 PM EDT

Now I have heard that Kramer's contract for this year, which was supposed to be renewed July 1, is STILL not complete. First, that's pretty embarassing for MSU athletics. Second, if its still not done, why not make use of the new multi-year opportunity. They are nuts if they think he doesn't deserve it. 2 BSC Coach of the Year awards (possibly headed towards3). Winning records for the past 4 seasons, and sell out crowds.

Come on Mr. Fields, lets sign on the dotted line!!!!
Hauck or Walsh will get coach of the year this year. I bet Hauck is waiting to sign to see if there is a chance he moves up. His comment in the paper this weekend typifies the griz football program (from memory) "We were working on a blowout and let them back in". This comment was referencing the griz up 20 points in the 2nd half. 20 points is not a blowout. I listened to the Griz pregam radio broadcast before the NAU-UM game. Hauck was on for about 30-45 minutes. It was a complete and utter barf fest. The interviewer was kissing Hauck's @ss. After listening to this interview it made me appreciate more what a CLASS ACT we have in KRAMER. Kramer is humble.

I guess if you hate Hauck so bad, this question would have to be answered.

Why are you listening?

BTW You had better look a little harder if you think Kramer is all class. His record for signing quality players is shakey at best.

mslacat · Post by **mslacat** » Tue Oct 24, 2006 10:54 am

Damn I don't know what my problem, is but I seem to always call McCarthy, Kennedy

Sorry Mr. Kennedy.

I don't know about Moral clauses, but I think there should be language about abiding by NCAA rules, Graduation Incentives and penalties, and representing the best interests of Montana State University.

JahGriz · Post by **JahGriz** » Tue Oct 24, 2006 11:55 am

"Working on a blowout" not

We were blowing them out.

Platinumcat · Post by **Platinumcat** » Tue Oct 24, 2006 12:45 pm

JahGriz wrote:"Working on a blowout" not

We were blowing them out.

Changed that for ya'

Weltercat · Post by **Weltercat** » Tue Oct 24, 2006 1:02 pm

KillintheGriz wrote:
bobcatgrad2005 wrote:Oct 23, 11:28 PM EDT

Now I have heard that Kramer's contract for this year, which was supposed to be renewed July 1, is STILL not complete. First, that's pretty embarassing for MSU athletics. Second, if its still not done, why not make use of the new multi-year opportunity. They are nuts if they think he doesn't deserve it. 2 BSC Coach of the Year awards (possibly headed towards3). Winning records for the past 4 seasons, and sell out crowds.

Come on Mr. Fields, lets sign on the dotted line!!!!
Hauck or Walsh will get coach of the year this year. I bet Hauck is waiting to sign to see if there is a chance he moves up. His comment in the paper this weekend typifies the griz football program (from memory) "We were working on a blowout and let them back in". This comment was referencing the griz up 20 points in the 2nd half. 20 points is not a blowout. I listened to the Griz pregam radio broadcast before the NAU-UM game. Hauck was on for about 30-45 minutes. It was a complete and utter barf fest. The interviewer was kissing Hauck's @ss. After listening to this interview it made me appreciate more what a CLASS ACT we have in KRAMER. Kramer is humble.

I'm not sure about coach of the year but I do think that Coach Hauck is looking to move to greener pastures otherwise he would have signed the deal.

bcats · Post by **bcats** » Tue Oct 24, 2006 2:54 pm

I think MSU can wait before singing anyone to 3 year contracts. Kramer is the only one with any tenure and if after the season the Cats are 8-3 heading to the playoffs then he would be deserving. If they falter his job has maybe lost its security. I called for his job earlier this year and said if things get turned around I would eat crow. It looks like I can get the salt ready but lets wait and see. Cats are playing well and will win out. Kramer isn't going anywhere so offer the contract after the season.

Helcat72 · Post by **Helcat72** » Wed Oct 25, 2006 3:13 pm

bcats wrote:I think MSU can wait before singing anyone to 3 year contracts. Kramer is the only one with any tenure and if after the season the Cats are 8-3 heading to the playoffs then he would be deserving. If they falter his job has maybe lost its security. I called for his job earlier this year and said if things get turned around I would eat crow. It looks like I can get the salt ready but lets wait and see. Cats are playing well and will win out. Kramer isn't going anywhere so offer the contract after the season.

I just found out today that the State of Montana pulled a real doozy with these long term contracts. I new they were too good to be true. It seems that the new contracts have a clause in them that says if a coach opts out of his contract early, he has to repay the amount of money he has earned since he signed the contract. In other words, if a coach signs a three year contract for $120,000/yr, and then decides to move on to another job after year two, he would have to repay $240,000. The contracts are heavily slanted toward the State of Montana. Most multiple year contracts have a buy out clause that allows the tenure of the contract to be bought out for a relatively small percentage of the yearly total. This is why only Selvig and Tinkle have signed them. Tinkle just got there, and Selvig wants to stay until he retires.

bcats · Post by **bcats** » Wed Oct 25, 2006 3:22 pm

The new contracts are pretty much for guys that want to be there forever or for ne guys initially coming in. Kramer might not want to sign if he want to try D-1.

tetoncat · Post by **tetoncat** » Wed Oct 25, 2006 4:18 pm

Good move on States part. They coaches leave because they are moving up to much more money. When they do that they can probably afford to buy out the contract or the school they are going to will buy out the contract in order to get them. you hear of this all the time where the new school is buying out a contract so it must be fairly standard language.

AlphaGriz1 · Post by **AlphaGriz1** » Wed Oct 25, 2006 4:24 pm

I don't think it matters if they have 1 or 3 year contracts one way or the other. If a coach wants to leave he will.

GrizinWashington · Post by **GrizinWashington** » Wed Oct 25, 2006 4:42 pm

Helcat72 wrote:
bcats wrote:I think MSU can wait before singing anyone to 3 year contracts. Kramer is the only one with any tenure and if after the season the Cats are 8-3 heading to the playoffs then he would be deserving. If they falter his job has maybe lost its security. I called for his job earlier this year and said if things get turned around I would eat crow. It looks like I can get the salt ready but lets wait and see. Cats are playing well and will win out. Kramer isn't going anywhere so offer the contract after the season.
I just found out today that the State of Montana pulled a real doozy with these long term contracts. I new they were too good to be true. It seems that the new contracts have a clause in them that says if a coach opts out of his contract early, he has to repay the amount of money he has earned since he signed the contract. In other words, if a coach signs a three year contract for $120,000/yr, and then decides to move on to another job after year two, he would have to repay $240,000. The contracts are heavily slanted toward the State of Montana. Most multiple year contracts have a buy out clause that allows the tenure of the contract to be bought out for a relatively small percentage of the yearly total. This is why only Selvig and Tinkle have signed them. Tinkle just got there, and Selvig wants to stay until he retires.

Are you certain about that buyout? Not saying you're wrong, just that I've heard that the buyout clauses if coaches want to leave are substantially less than what you indicate above.

Multi Year Contracts

Multi Year Contracts

Re: Multi Year Contracts

Re: Multi Year Contracts

Re: Multi Year Contracts

Re: Multi Year Contracts